Grabat , Graphenano , battery technology

[CanisLupus]

I'm surprised that there has not previously been a thread started on this topic . http://grabat.es/en/[url] . The big...st could we charge that increased range ? ' .

 

[gt1]

"Battery technology breakthroughs" announced fairly frequently. I will believe the hype when I see a final product, interdependently tested. Battery is not a hard drive or CPU, don't expect the Moore Law speed of improvement. The progress in chemical energy storage is slow or non existant.

 

[alohart]

The progress in chemical energy storage is slow or non existant.

It has been slow but not non-existent. Lots of money is being spent all around the world investigating all sorts of battery technologies because significant upsides exist for proven improvements.

 

[jadnashuanh]

Nano tech for batteries seems to be viable, but also harder to manufacture. Time will tell...it will get better.

 

[gt1]

The progress in chemical energy storage is slow or non existant.

It has been slow but not non-existent. Lots of money is being spent all around the world investigating all sorts of battery technologies because significant upsides exist for proven improvements.

You're right about the batteries. I was thinking about the other type of the chemical energy storage- fuels. Our space rockets aren't essentially any better than they were 60 years ago, despite all this time and money spent. Chemistry is very different from electronics

 

[CanisLupus]

It seems that the critical point , at this time , is Energy Density with respect to volume . The indication from Grabat is that they are working on reducing the volume required per kWh of storage . I've sent an e-mail to them and will post again when I receive a response .

 

[bwilson4web]

. . . Our space rockets aren't essentially any better than they were 60 years ago, despite all this time and money spent. . . .

We are recovering a larger percentage for refurbishment and reuse. The 60 year old rockets were one time only.

Bob Wilson

 

[gt1]

The rocket technology is improved, but not the propulsion efficiency. We gained nothing in speed or distance from the same mass of the fuel.

 

[bwilson4web]

The rocket technology is improved, but not the propulsion efficiency. We gained nothing in speed or distance from the same mass of the fuel.

Specific impulse is a function of the combustion energy and there are limits. At Marshshall Space Flight Center, there is an early, unused, nuclear reactor powered rocket. Impressive performance IF you don't mind sterilizing any biology near the working reactor.

Solar powered, ion rockets are also impressive but only after being put in orbit.

There have been some work on aircraft launch, low-orbit rockets for small payloads.

Still, I agree that practical rocket, specific impulse remains modest. The H{2}/O{2} engines being pretty much the apex of chemical powered rocket engines.

Pure speculation on my part, I've long wondered if nuclear ICBMs might be a natural for nuclear powered rockets. Not because the reactor would be part of the nuclear detonation but it would be a 'foot note' in the subsequent explosion. Best of all, sitting in the silos, they would have pretty much infinite shelf-life.

Bob Wilson

 

[gt1]

Bob, you're right. A breakthrough in the battery tech is needed to for significant gains in the capacity. Until it happens (maybe never) we can only expect incremental improvements.

 

[CanisLupus]

I've been thinking about the advancements in battery technology with regard to charging . Sooner or later we will need what could be called 'LEVEL 4' . Perhaps the connector would require some type of levered clamping action in order to accommodate the large amount of power that they would carry .

 

[jadnashuanh]

The current CCS standards limit the maximum charge rate. Proposed updates are expected to increase that level. At some point, the connector may need to be changed to accommodate it. Until that happens, based on the circuits in the car, it won't try to pull more than it is capable of, regardless of what's available at the plug. So, until you end up with a new car with higher capacity, you don't need to worry about it. Since the standard has not been set, nobody's making one in that configuration, so it's a mute point of contention.

 

[CanisLupus]

My apologies , I meant 'We' as in we in the EV world . Not just we i3 owners . Mostly I was thinking out loud . As far as upgrades to existing EVs to keep up with advancements in technology , that remains to be determined . I hope that the improvements will be available to current owners of EVs like the 94Ah battery pack .