5 ms·
> Battery charging is limited by the cell chemistry. Yes, but superconductors don't have that limitation, do they? You just dump current into them.
by vagab0nd 3y ago
> Battery charging is limited by the cell chemistry.
Yes, but superconductors don't have that limitation, do they? You just dump current into them.
- jrockway 3y agoAre you thinking of supercapacitors?
- civilitty 3y agoHe's thinking of superconducting magnetic energy storage: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Superconducting_magnetic_energy_storage https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Superconducting_magnetic_energ... Currently they're only feasible as high quality power sources for fabs and other industrial uses because of the operating costs of cooling the superconductors.
- jacquesm 3y agoAlso used for grid stabilization.
- entropicdrifter 3y agoSo superconductor supercapacitors
- heisenzombie 3y agoMore like superinductors than supercapacitors - the energy is stored in a magnetic field (inductor) and not an electric field (capacitor)
- dfox 3y agoThere is a theory that with room temperature superconductors you could use an inductor for practical energy storage.
- bananapub 3y agowhat are the practicalities of storing enormous magnetic fields and then collapsing them to draw power? that seems...not obviously a good idea.
- dfox 3y agoWell, exactly. While there is a way of getting some of the stored energy as an controlled power, most of the failure modes of such a thing leads to uncontrolled release of the stored energy, manifested by the whole thing just somewhat instantaneously turning into very hot gas.
- nrdgrrrl 3y ago[dead]
- deleted 3y ago[deleted]
- mminer237 3y agoThey have low losses when storing power, but power has to be stored in the magnetic field. They have a limit on acceptable magnetic field strength called the critical field though, above which it stops being a superconductor and bad things™ happen. Current SMES systems have an energy density of about ¹⁄₅₀th of current Li-ion batteries.
- vagab0nd 3y agoYou are right about the energy density and limitations. I was more focused on the fast rate of storage and retrieval.
- therein 3y agoWe already have incredible supercapacitors. https://www.eaton.com/gb/en-gb/catalog/electronic-components/xl60-supercapacitor.html https://www.eaton.com/gb/en-gb/catalog/electronic-components... I have 4 at home and blows people's minds when you melt a wire with it. Incredible rapid current delivery.
- XorNot 3y agoThey don't store any meaningful amount of electricity (which is why they haven't supplanted Li-Ion batteries for power tools) and more importantly they have a cycle-life - they degrade from usage (source: my wife works for a supercapacitor manufacturer). You also get losses from practical usage - i.e. no one can build a 3V supercapacitor that has decent endurance (you can totally build one which will work, but you're rating it knowing that every cycle is damaging it).
- skykooler 3y agoWhy do cycles damage supercapacitors? My understanding is that in batteries this is caused by ions not returning to their original spot in the electrodes, but I thought only the electrons moved in capacitors?
- inportb 3y agoOverlooking the cell chemistry issue... ... you cannot just dump unlimited current through a superconductor. Once you exceed the critical current density, your superconductor becomes a regular conductor.
- mytailorisrich 3y agoAnd in any case whatever power source you're using cannot deliver infinite power.
- tmpX7dMeXU 3y agoWho said infinite power?
- qsdf38100 3y agoIt's implied by instant charging. The power would be the battery capacity divided by 0.
- deleted 3y ago[deleted]
- sharlos201068 3y agoNo one means literally zero time to charge. A couple seconds compared to minutes or hours is virtually instant for practical purposes.
- qsdf38100 3y agoLet me keep being pedantic and notice that a typical phone capacity of 10000 Joules divided by 2 seconds is still 5 kW of power, so not a trivial amount. I'd think 30 seconds (333 Watts) is more realistic.
- Denote6737 3y ago