3 ms·

There's a check-list floating around here on HN with all the possible reasons why we won't be seeing this in production any time soon, but I can't seem to find

by neals 6y ago

There's a check-list floating around here on HN with all the possible reasons why we won't be seeing this in production any time soon, but I can't seem to find it. Hope some fellow HN'er posts it so we can stop being all excited.

7373737373 6y ago
---------------------------------------------------------------- Dear battery technology claimant, Thank you for your submission of proposed new revolutionary battery technology. Your new technology claims to be superior to existing lithium-ion technology and is just around the corner from taking over the world. Unfortunately your technology will likely fail, because: [ ] it is impractical to manufacture at scale. [ ] it will be too expensive for users. [ ] it suffers from too few recharge cycles. [ ] it is incapable of delivering current at sufficient levels. [ ] it lacks thermal stability at low or high temperatures. [ ] it lacks the energy density to make it sufficiently portable. [ ] it has too short of a lifetime. [ ] its charge rate is too slow. [ ] its materials are too toxic. [ ] it is too likely to catch fire or explode. [ ] it is too minimal of a step forward for anybody to care. [ ] this was already done 20 years ago and didn't work then. [ ] by this time it ships li-ion advances will match it. [ ] your claims are lies. ----------------------------------------------------------------
- mromanuk 6y ago
  I would love to see a timely spreadsheet with each breakthrough and how it went.
- C4stor 6y ago
  >Your new technology claims to be superior to existing lithium-ion To be fair, it doesn't. The article is explicit that it's only 20% as mass efficient s lithium-ion battery. On the other hand, it's also true that the vehicle aluminium mass is mostly dead weight, so exploiting it to serve as a battery doesn't seem insane. Except now, they need to know what to do when something hits it, breaks it, etc... So I'm not convinced this is a good idea for cars (or for anything), but at least, it goes in a direction that actually seems new instead of just doing "same but better". I could actually see that used as a support for solar panels so that they would litterally ship "batteries included".
  - azernik 6y ago
    Or even as a supplement to a conventional battery - being able to squeeze in 10% more energy capacity without expanding the battery could be a way to incrementally improve range. And also possibly provide a small backup power source in case of main battery failure.
  - Cthulhu_ 6y ago
    > To be fair, it doesn't Well yeah, there's no check in the checklist, nobody claimed that.
- JoeAltmaier 6y ago
  * this was already done 20 years ago and didn't work then.* This is a standard wet-blanket unhelpful remark that doesn't belong in the list.
  - jandrese 6y ago
    Maybe it should say "didn't explain why it will work now when it failed in the past"?
- immmmmm 6y ago
  good points! having worked a bit in a close field i'd add: [ ] is impossible to recycle
- darksaints 6y ago
  I've seen this checklist before and it is infuriatingly lazy, like taking the famous HN lowbrow dismissal and turning it into a meme, but actually taking the meme seriously. Lithium-Ion batteries are not the most superior battery. They might be the best we have for some use cases, but obviously not all, or they would have 100% market share. They haven't replaced disposable alkaline batteries. They haven't replaced AGP batteries. They haven't replaced Lead Acid batteries. They haven't replaced Lithium Iron Phosphate batteries. There are plenty of reasons why: cost, weight, safety, shelf life, etc. Since Lithium Ion doesn't have 100% market share, a useful comparison does not have to be with Lithium Ion in order for a battery technology to be a meaningful advance. And even if it did, sometimes an advance in just one area can be enough to overcome its disadvantages in other areas. Example: I use Lithium Iron Phosphate in my sailboat. Yes, it has lower energy density. Yes, it has lower power density. Yes, it is more expensive. Yes, it has shorter lifecycle. Yes, it has a slow charge rate. It has one solitary advantage over lithium ion, and that single advantage is the difference between life and death: it is more chemically stable and thermally stable, and less likely to result in fires. If you have a fire in your car, that sucks...but you can just open up your car door and walk 20 feet to safety. You hop on your cell phone and call AAA or a taxi or a friend. If you're on a sailboat in the middle of the ocean, you can't do that. Even if you've planned well, with a ditch kit, a liferaft, and an EPIRB, you are still potentially several hours or even days before someone can get to you to get you to safety. In the meantime, you're floating on an ocean with waves taller than your liferaft, with a limited supply of food and water, and you have a tiny plastic membrane separating you from a place where you would need constant energy to survive and where you are no longer the top of the food chain. So with all due respect, fuck lithium ion. And fuck this list. There is plenty of room for advances in battery technology, and we don't need religious charlatans from the Cult of Musk shitting on every single battery tech announcement.
  - _ph_ 6y ago
    The point isn't that Lithium Ion batteries are that great, but that most of the press articles are hyping something which at best is a few years in the future. There is a huge gap between even the best science and a technology which is ready for production and can be rolled out into large-scale manufacturing. Even if there are for-real samples around for people to play with, it could take years until they make it into a car. And then of course, there is some risk that the initial science isn't even good. That happens too.

by neals 6y ago

7373737373 6y ago

---------------------------------------------------------------- Dear battery technology claimant, Thank you for your submission of proposed new revolutionary battery technology. Your new technology claims to be superior to existing lithium-ion technology and is just around the corner from taking over the world. Unfortunately your technology will likely fail, because: [ ] it is impractical to manufacture at scale. [ ] it will be too expensive for users. [ ] it suffers from too few recharge cycles. [ ] it is incapable of delivering current at sufficient levels. [ ] it lacks thermal stability at low or high temperatures. [ ] it lacks the energy density to make it sufficiently portable. [ ] it has too short of a lifetime. [ ] its charge rate is too slow. [ ] its materials are too toxic. [ ] it is too likely to catch fire or explode. [ ] it is too minimal of a step forward for anybody to care. [ ] this was already done 20 years ago and didn't work then. [ ] by this time it ships li-ion advances will match it. [ ] your claims are lies. ----------------------------------------------------------------

mromanuk 6y ago
I would love to see a timely spreadsheet with each breakthrough and how it went.
C4stor 6y ago
>Your new technology claims to be superior to existing lithium-ion To be fair, it doesn't. The article is explicit that it's only 20% as mass efficient s lithium-ion battery. On the other hand, it's also true that the vehicle aluminium mass is mostly dead weight, so exploiting it to serve as a battery doesn't seem insane. Except now, they need to know what to do when something hits it, breaks it, etc... So I'm not convinced this is a good idea for cars (or for anything), but at least, it goes in a direction that actually seems new instead of just doing "same but better". I could actually see that used as a support for solar panels so that they would litterally ship "batteries included".
- azernik 6y ago
  Or even as a supplement to a conventional battery - being able to squeeze in 10% more energy capacity without expanding the battery could be a way to incrementally improve range. And also possibly provide a small backup power source in case of main battery failure.
- Cthulhu_ 6y ago
  > To be fair, it doesn't Well yeah, there's no check in the checklist, nobody claimed that.
JoeAltmaier 6y ago
* this was already done 20 years ago and didn't work then.* This is a standard wet-blanket unhelpful remark that doesn't belong in the list.
- jandrese 6y ago
  Maybe it should say "didn't explain why it will work now when it failed in the past"?
immmmmm 6y ago
good points! having worked a bit in a close field i'd add: [ ] is impossible to recycle
darksaints 6y ago
I've seen this checklist before and it is infuriatingly lazy, like taking the famous HN lowbrow dismissal and turning it into a meme, but actually taking the meme seriously. Lithium-Ion batteries are not the most superior battery. They might be the best we have for some use cases, but obviously not all, or they would have 100% market share. They haven't replaced disposable alkaline batteries. They haven't replaced AGP batteries. They haven't replaced Lead Acid batteries. They haven't replaced Lithium Iron Phosphate batteries. There are plenty of reasons why: cost, weight, safety, shelf life, etc. Since Lithium Ion doesn't have 100% market share, a useful comparison does not have to be with Lithium Ion in order for a battery technology to be a meaningful advance. And even if it did, sometimes an advance in just one area can be enough to overcome its disadvantages in other areas. Example: I use Lithium Iron Phosphate in my sailboat. Yes, it has lower energy density. Yes, it has lower power density. Yes, it is more expensive. Yes, it has shorter lifecycle. Yes, it has a slow charge rate. It has one solitary advantage over lithium ion, and that single advantage is the difference between life and death: it is more chemically stable and thermally stable, and less likely to result in fires. If you have a fire in your car, that sucks...but you can just open up your car door and walk 20 feet to safety. You hop on your cell phone and call AAA or a taxi or a friend. If you're on a sailboat in the middle of the ocean, you can't do that. Even if you've planned well, with a ditch kit, a liferaft, and an EPIRB, you are still potentially several hours or even days before someone can get to you to get you to safety. In the meantime, you're floating on an ocean with waves taller than your liferaft, with a limited supply of food and water, and you have a tiny plastic membrane separating you from a place where you would need constant energy to survive and where you are no longer the top of the food chain. So with all due respect, fuck lithium ion. And fuck this list. There is plenty of room for advances in battery technology, and we don't need religious charlatans from the Cult of Musk shitting on every single battery tech announcement.
- _ph_ 6y ago
  The point isn't that Lithium Ion batteries are that great, but that most of the press articles are hyping something which at best is a few years in the future. There is a huge gap between even the best science and a technology which is ready for production and can be rolled out into large-scale manufacturing. Even if there are for-real samples around for people to play with, it could take years until they make it into a car. And then of course, there is some risk that the initial science isn't even good. That happens too.