Save money now: 27 ways to lower your utility bills
In the current economic climate, its been a bit rough for those that want to go green on a budget. Not everyone can...
Read the rest of this articleEestor watch out! IBM is building a next gen battery too
The recent advent of electric and hybrid cars to mainstream consumers is driving an intense interest in battery technology. Eestor has secretively been working on an ultracapacitor battery it claims will eclipse current lithium-ion and lead-acid batteries. Though the company has built volumes of buzz by keeping the curtain low, IBM is stealing some thunder with its commitment to create a battery that will enable 500 miles of travel on single charge.
That’s right in line with claims Eestor has made for a long time, but IBM intends to research lithium-air technology with a project it’s calling the Battery 500. The reality is that gasoline and petroleum products still store far more energy than current battery technology, and IBM (like Eestor and many others) recognize that this is a pivotal business opportunity wrapped with some awesome green publicity.
In order to make 500 miles on a single battery charge possible, IBM will be tracking toward an energy density of 1500 to 2000 watt hours per kilogram. As a comparison, current Tesla cars have an energy density of about 150 watt hours per kilogram.
Lithium-air batteries have lots of potential because of their ability to use oxygen as part of the chemical reaction that generates electricity. It’s similar to how the combustion engine utilizes oxygen in the atmosphere to facilitate its explosions.
Things get even more interesting when IBM makes a point that nanotechnology is playing a significant role in how batteries function because most of the research is taking place at the atomic level. Lithium-air is currently a technology in its infancy and the Battery 500 project is aimed at solving some of its challenges.
Going back in history to a time with similar challenges, the first automobiles began to appear on the streets and more were powered by electricity than by gasoline, according to IBM. Soon though, the need for more cheaper fuel and longer travel distances drove the adoption of gasoline. Fast forward to today and we’re addressing the same problem only with slightly different tools. With companies like IBM pushing for innovation in this space, we may begin to see some visible progress and perhaps a little more competition with ninja secret companies like Eestor.
- Login to post comments
Advertisement
Follow us
Monthly archive
- June 2011 (1)
- May 2011 (16)
- April 2011 (18)
- March 2011 (31)
- February 2011 (29)
- January 2011 (30)
- December 2010 (17)
Comments
Sigh. To compare EEstor and this is ridiculous.
Assuming that EEstor is real, it will have about 2x the amount of energy of current lithium.
It will be able to recharge in about the same time as filling your gas tank. This and all lithium batteries will take a number of hours to re-charge. It will last for more than 1 million recharges, where the lithim battiers are under 1000. That means that eestor will last for 1000 x what the lithium will. It will have a fraction of the lose of energy that any battery has. AND it will costs a fraction of any lithium battery.
OTH, if EESTOR is not real, then IBM's lithium air will be important. It will hold around 1000 kw/kg, which would make it about 3 x EESTOR, and 10x the normal lithium battery. But it would still be expensive, limited in lifetime (several years), and take a while to recharge.
'Assuming that EEstor is real.'
Key point isn't it?
The only real comparison is that neither has a commercial product for sale.
If both concepts come to fruition, I wonder which technology between EESUs and Li-Air technology will "win". As mentioned beore, Li-air cuold possbly achieve a significantly higher energy density than an EESU, but the EESU can charge quickly, have a lifetime that would probably exceed the life of the vehicle, and supposedly costs much less per kwh than current li-ion. If Li-air can't achieve these feats then I am curious to see which technology will get the most market share in the end.
If this Li-Air technology can be made to be cost effectively, then there will be no "winner" necessarily. Both should be used as a hybrid energy storage system, because for electric vehicles both energy density and power density are important. Furthermore EEstor supercaps help to smooth out current draw from chemical batteries, which can improve their lifespan markedly.
If this Li-Air technology can be made cost effectively, then there will be no "winner" necessarily. Both should be used as a hybrid energy storage system, because for electric vehicles both energy density and power density are important. Furthermore EEstor supercaps help to smooth out current draw from chemical batteries, which can improve their lifespan markedly.
If both come to fruition, it's not even close. The super capacitor will mop the floor with any chemical battery.
The charge/discharge rate doesn't compare. The Eestor product would be made of non-toxic fully recyclable material and would NEVER degrade. It will also weigh a fraction of any comparable lithium battery.
The fact is that a battery stores and discharges energy by means of a chemical reaction, greatly limited the charge/discharge rate - a super capacitor does not. I think given the choice between a very heavy battery with greater energy density which degrades over time, contains toxic chemicals and takes hours to charge vs. a super capacitor that can charge in minutes, contains fully recyclable (and very plentiful) materials, is relatively light and will last forever ... well, it's just not a fair fight.
Chemical batteries will go the way of the internal combustion engine - both very inefficient methods of energy transference.
AIST in Japan is also working on Li-Air technology.
Look here for some details:
http://www.greencarcongress.com/2009/07/aist-lithium-20090727.html
In everyday usage, you don't want to deep discharge your Lithium Air battery, so you try to stay within the middle 60% of its capacity. On days when you really drive 500 miles, you probably stop for lunch and 30-60 minutes of recharge to cover yourself.
However, with a capacitor, you can go from 100% to 1% without hurting your storage.
Either way It is nice to see a project like this going on. We all HOPE eestor is real but we need as many companies and bright minds working on new technologies in case it is not
If the High Energy Battery is expensive, but the High Power Battery is even more Expensive - why not create a Blended battery or energy source so that the high energy source is in the background - supplying power to the High Power battery to keep up with the average energy needs?
Long Recharge times not withstanding - Having an good EV at home for distances up to 250 miles range per charge routinely, and renting a PHEV for cross country Trips, seems to me to make more sense than waiting for each EV to have a 500 mile range!
Busses - could be made to be PHEV's too - such that they had 100 or 200 mile all EV range, and a Range Extender carried the Electrical Load - either after appropriate discharge - or simply maintained a delivery of 60% of the Average Peak Energy needs, by using a hyper clean, small Continuous running generator set at moderate but optimum load for efficiency. this is for things like both City Street Busses, City Highway Busses, and long-run Coaches like Greyhound!
School Busses - run for basically two cycles per day - morning and afternoon, with about 5 - 6 hours between. Quite a suitable time for grid or Solar Recharging (Or Both). Also - busses could be parked in solar garages - essentially solar panel covered carports that are designed to provide power to the Grid when no busses are using the available power.
Currently, solar panels aren't cost effective, without some sort of tax incentive, which pushes your cost for the panels onto other people. I'm for the technology. I don't think the time has come yet, but I'm not sure how much of the problem could be fixed by keeping the solar electricity as DC, instead of converting it to AC and back. I did see an interesting application that used thin-film panels as roofing shingles, which could also be viable or at least have significant geek appeal.
An issue with current hybrids is that nothing on the market is diesel, which is ideal for the task. Diesel engines love to run at constant RPM, are more energy efficient than gas, and suffer less wear. So far it's only used by trains and some buses.
I don't know that making city buses PHEV would be worthwhile. The batteries are expensive, and I think they typically drive much farther than the stored charge will take them. Once that is gone, they become dead weight burdening the system. I could be wrong.
IBM pursues research in a lot of technologies that never make it to market, and it was stated that this is in its infancy. If EEstor's claims are legitimate, then they are probably close enough to market to push companies away from this research. It sounds EESU would be revolutionizing the marketplace before lithium air batteries would have competitive, working lab samples.
There's also the unmentioned issue of energy density per size. It's an issue plaguing hydrogen fuel cells, and their mock Li-Air battery looked larger than the NiMH.
Some really good comments here. I have been following EEstor for a few years now and I would note one thing in regards to the solar panels is that despite any cost, I would have think that photovoltaic panels would be made drastically more worthwhile if EEstor is for real or the Lithium Air pans out due to being able to store energy for any usage. Still, I'd have to think the EEstor would win out due the lack of toxins and it's recyclability.
If anyone believes EESTor's claims, there is a company which claims 20x the energy density of EESTor. The company is Moe, Larry, and Curly Ultracapacitors (MLCU Inc). Moe Howard worked with Albert Einstein 50 years ago. MLCU Inc. is working under the radar. There is hype from a blogger with a bag over his head MLCU are working with NASA and Martians. MLCU is expected to demonstrate public their ultracapacitor end of year. We just don't know what year...Moe Howard was recently quoted the same year as EEStor is to demonstrate, 2004, 2005, 2006, 2007, 2008, 2009, 2010, etc. Nyuk, Nyuk, Nyuck!