3 ms·

What is the "revolutionary battery checklist" meme comment?

Escapado 5y ago
This one I presume: ---------------------------------------------------------------- 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. ----------------------------------------------------------------
- m_mueller 5y ago
  article actually seems to cover all this issues well (except maybe for ‘your claims are lies’), so I’m hopeful about this one.
  - xxs 5y ago
    >liquid-CO2 system has a round-trip efficiency of 75-80% You mean this part? Edit: this is pretty much theoretical Carno cycle and it has moving parts
    - m_mueller 5y ago
      I think even 60% efficiency would still be fine if the storage was cheap enough and scales well. Just build more solar cells or wind mills to compensate the inefficiency. Neither lithium-ion nor gravity based systems seem particularly scalable to me. So a good-enough system that’s scalable will be a winner in the long run I think.
    - jvanderbot 5y ago
      That's for heat conversion, no? This isn't about heat.

This one I presume: ---------------------------------------------------------------- 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. ----------------------------------------------------------------

m_mueller 5y ago
article actually seems to cover all this issues well (except maybe for ‘your claims are lies’), so I’m hopeful about this one.
- xxs 5y ago
  >liquid-CO2 system has a round-trip efficiency of 75-80% You mean this part? Edit: this is pretty much theoretical Carno cycle and it has moving parts
  - m_mueller 5y ago
    I think even 60% efficiency would still be fine if the storage was cheap enough and scales well. Just build more solar cells or wind mills to compensate the inefficiency. Neither lithium-ion nor gravity based systems seem particularly scalable to me. So a good-enough system that’s scalable will be a winner in the long run I think.
  - jvanderbot 5y ago
    That's for heat conversion, no? This isn't about heat.