26 ms·

I find it hard to take seriously an article that suggests we'll still be using the same battery chemistry some 28 years from now. The number of compounding inn

I find it hard to take seriously an article that suggests we'll still be using the same battery chemistry some 28 years from now. The number of compounding innovations likely to take place between now and then is certainly a lot based on historical precedent, and I think it's bonkers to not factor that in. If scarcity is really that much of an issue, even a less efficient chemistry could supplant lithium. But a more likely outcome is we'll use something novel that we can't foresee from this moment in time. And the future science journalists will write about how we don't have enough of that either.

actually_a_dog 4y ago
You know lithium ion batteries were developed in 1980, and practical versions didn't come out until almost 10 years later, right? Battery tech does not move quickly.
- switchbak 4y ago
  (Battery) tech moves a lot quicker when there's such a big profit incentive from even marginal gains. Cell phones, power tools, EVs, energy storage, are all big money makers that add huge incentives. That didn't exist anywhere near to that degree in 1980. You're also talking about a tech that was very early in its growth/learning curve. We have had many irons in this fire for a very long time, we have seen continuous incremental improvements, and I expect that to continue. Obviously lithium based chemistries are very well known and studied, and I expect them to hang around a very long time. But 28 years is an eternity in these circles, and if lithium scarcity becomes a big issue, yes I do expect that we'll invest a lot of research and money into finding workable alternatives.