5 ms·

You need lithium chemistry to be competitive and that requires nano level understanding of the anode/cathode crystal structure. That essentially requires quantu

You need lithium chemistry to be competitive and that requires nano level understanding of the anode/cathode crystal structure. That essentially requires quantum mechanics which wasn't even a thing during the two decades when steam, electric, and gas/diesel were fighting for supremacy. Not to mention the manufacturing tolerances required to get reasonable diffusion rates which is the major limiting factor for charge/discharge rates (and a large component of temperature sensitivity). You might make the case that steam power would have dominated until the 40s-60s if the Doble-style steam generator had been available in say 1890. By the time they figured out how to make useful steam cars gasoline had already won. For the curious: the Doble-style system uses a steam tube that flashes water instantly to steam - not unlike instant hot water heaters but for steam. They also used condensers so the steam was cooled by a radiator, condensed, and the water re-used. Often paired with a double or triple expansion piston and an aux piston to run an electric generator for accessories. In these cars you turned the key and within 10-30 seconds you can drive away. No need to warm up a boiler and no large tank that might explode. And no water loss so no need to fill up on water either. They could essentially burn almost anything flammable. Steam also has instant full torque at any speed similar to an EV. But it was all developed far too late to matter.

cornholio 3y ago
To put it in perspective, the inventor of the first lithium battery, John Goodenough, a work he later received the Nobel prize for, was a world renowned material scientist at the top of his game, who led some of the most advanced research labs at MIT and Oxford. This was not some scientific serendipity, a low hanging penicillin; practical lithium batteries had to be plucked from the bosom of physics using the best tools and knowledge available in the 70s. How many electron microscopes, X-Ray crystallography machines, mass spectrometers, computer aided simulations and design systems and other contemporaneous tools, methods and theories had to be used by Goodenough's team and then the thousands of researchers in the subsequent decades to get to the point we are today with lithium batteries? It just doesn't sound like something that was possible pre-1940, the period where the bulk of the ICE improvement happened. And you really need lithium chemistry for practical EVs; despite the enthusiast conspiracy theory, the General Motors EV1 was nothing more than an clunky, expensive curiosity that failed in the marketplace. The only way EVs could become practical reality (if barely) was that the ICE stop improving, hampered by emissions regulations, to the point where advances in lithium battery technology and economics could catch up. Such environmental concerns were pure fantasy more than a century ago. Another issues to consider is that, even if not used for road transport, ICE were essential for aviation, the history of aviation being, to a fist degree approximation, a history of high power density propulsion methods that made mechanical flight possible. Major improvement of road engines (for example turbocharging, fuel injection, VVT) came from aviation. Since electric aviation remains still a dream, it follows that any counterfactual road transport history must account for the existence of a highly competitive aviation ICE. When imagining these fun little scenarios, like what if the Roman Empire invented the steam engine or Victorians the microchip, we almost always tend to discount the highly contextual nature of scientific discovery and innovation. Previous scientific and technical progress alter the world in profound and subtle ways, transforming what was once considered a pipe dream - and not for lack of trying and visionaries - into reality.
plibblr 3y ago
On the quantum mechanics requirement - do you not think a dedicated team of experimenters could get quite a long way by systematic trial and error, without a deep theoretical understanding? To take a simplified example - did Thomas Edison have a deep understanding of what was happening in a lightbulb filament? Or did he just try 10,000 different ways to make a lightbulb until he converged on a good one? Good to know that steampunk could have been practical!
- xenadu02 3y ago
  It's not just about the discovery - though that won the Nobel Prize. You have to be able to reliably lay down sub-100nm thick layers of material. A tall order pre-1960s. You also need to develop separator films with the correctly sized pores with very few defects or the battery eats itself. Pores big enough for lithium to pass but nothing else. And a stable non-liquid electrolyte. No one could even conceive of such ideas in 1900 let alone attempt to make such things. They didn't even know where to start looking to grasp the problem, let alone any solutions to try.

cornholio 3y ago

To put it in perspective, the inventor of the first lithium battery, John Goodenough, a work he later received the Nobel prize for, was a world renowned material scientist at the top of his game, who led some of the most advanced research labs at MIT and Oxford. This was not some scientific serendipity, a low hanging penicillin; practical lithium batteries had to be plucked from the bosom of physics using the best tools and knowledge available in the 70s. How many electron microscopes, X-Ray crystallography machines, mass spectrometers, computer aided simulations and design systems and other contemporaneous tools, methods and theories had to be used by Goodenough's team and then the thousands of researchers in the subsequent decades to get to the point we are today with lithium batteries? It just doesn't sound like something that was possible pre-1940, the period where the bulk of the ICE improvement happened. And you really need lithium chemistry for practical EVs; despite the enthusiast conspiracy theory, the General Motors EV1 was nothing more than an clunky, expensive curiosity that failed in the marketplace. The only way EVs could become practical reality (if barely) was that the ICE stop improving, hampered by emissions regulations, to the point where advances in lithium battery technology and economics could catch up. Such environmental concerns were pure fantasy more than a century ago. Another issues to consider is that, even if not used for road transport, ICE were essential for aviation, the history of aviation being, to a fist degree approximation, a history of high power density propulsion methods that made mechanical flight possible. Major improvement of road engines (for example turbocharging, fuel injection, VVT) came from aviation. Since electric aviation remains still a dream, it follows that any counterfactual road transport history must account for the existence of a highly competitive aviation ICE. When imagining these fun little scenarios, like what if the Roman Empire invented the steam engine or Victorians the microchip, we almost always tend to discount the highly contextual nature of scientific discovery and innovation. Previous scientific and technical progress alter the world in profound and subtle ways, transforming what was once considered a pipe dream - and not for lack of trying and visionaries - into reality.

plibblr 3y ago

On the quantum mechanics requirement - do you not think a dedicated team of experimenters could get quite a long way by systematic trial and error, without a deep theoretical understanding? To take a simplified example - did Thomas Edison have a deep understanding of what was happening in a lightbulb filament? Or did he just try 10,000 different ways to make a lightbulb until he converged on a good one? Good to know that steampunk could have been practical!

xenadu02 3y ago
It's not just about the discovery - though that won the Nobel Prize. You have to be able to reliably lay down sub-100nm thick layers of material. A tall order pre-1960s. You also need to develop separator films with the correctly sized pores with very few defects or the battery eats itself. Pores big enough for lithium to pass but nothing else. And a stable non-liquid electrolyte. No one could even conceive of such ideas in 1900 let alone attempt to make such things. They didn't even know where to start looking to grasp the problem, let alone any solutions to try.