3 ms·

No. Just no. I don't know how freely I can talk about my research, but there's plenty going on with batteries.

thoughtsimple 14y ago
Just a note that this is from 2008. At least in the short term, he was right. Not much has happened in battery technology available to the public in the last 5 years.
- Xcelerate 14y ago
  I saw that it's from 2008. I'm not denying it's a hard problem, but to claim that improvement has stalled is short-sighted.
  - 001sky 14y ago
    Without any evidence -- even theoretical -- you are just posturing. The fundamentals of the post are not "short sighted", they describe a deep fundamental flaw that is (has been) historically perisistent. There is a difference between being "short sighted" and a lack of transparency. Until the "magic" ships.
    - cryptoz 14y ago
      > Until the "magic" ships. So, there is a better battery. And it's inevitable.
    - hosh 14y ago
      I'm not sure this is posturing. Or at least, it is certainly not "just" posturing. I'm not in research like this, so I just hear things fed off of Y(HN). I've heard of some interesting devices like the carbon nanotube based supercapacitors (was that what it was?). Who knows?
tomjen3 14y ago
In research, maybe. But what we care about is when that research will result in better batteries _that_ we can buy.
- alanctgardner2 14y ago
  The premise of the piece was that there's no new battery technology in the pipeline. Not on a particular timescale (he talks about lifetimes). The author believes batteries as a technology have reached peak energy density. If there's a research that suggests otherwise, that invalidates his whole point.
  - criley 14y ago
    I think the author is explicitly NOT stating that battery technology has reached it's peak, but rather the safe bet isn't on huge changes in a decade time frame. He's not commenting on the tech so much as the wisdom of ASSUMING it will be better in a certain time frame. He's saying, it's not wise to build a business on top of the idea that battery tech will progress predictably or at all. I disagree, because any business built on that will be the first to exploit it properly when it comes out, as a competitive advantage. But if they're wrong, they'll deal with the downside risk of, you know, being wrong.
ori_b 14y ago
Do you have any links to related papers that were published?
- neltnerb 14y ago
  [disclaimer, I work at one or more of the places commercializing these systems] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Flow_battery http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Flow_battery http://www.ted.com/talks/donald_sadoway_the_missing_link_to_renewable_energy.html http://www.ted.com/talks/donald_sadoway_the_missing_link_to_... http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sodium-ion_battery http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sodium-ion_battery http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sodium-sulfur_battery http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sodium-sulfur_battery Seeing how much progress is being made extremely rapidly on getting these types of technologies into the marketplace, the idea that the last five years have been stagnant is difficult to believe. Unless, of course, all battery research was stagnant under Bush? I suppose that's possible, and what we've seen is the standard 5-10 year research backlog starting to catch back up to a lack of funding for oil alternatives.

Just a note that this is from 2008. At least in the short term, he was right. Not much has happened in battery technology available to the public in the last 5 years.

Xcelerate 14y ago
I saw that it's from 2008. I'm not denying it's a hard problem, but to claim that improvement has stalled is short-sighted.
- 001sky 14y ago
  Without any evidence -- even theoretical -- you are just posturing. The fundamentals of the post are not "short sighted", they describe a deep fundamental flaw that is (has been) historically perisistent. There is a difference between being "short sighted" and a lack of transparency. Until the "magic" ships.
  - cryptoz 14y ago
    > Until the "magic" ships. So, there is a better battery. And it's inevitable.
  - hosh 14y ago
    I'm not sure this is posturing. Or at least, it is certainly not "just" posturing. I'm not in research like this, so I just hear things fed off of Y(HN). I've heard of some interesting devices like the carbon nanotube based supercapacitors (was that what it was?). Who knows?

tomjen3 14y ago

In research, maybe. But what we care about is when that research will result in better batteries _that_ we can buy.

alanctgardner2 14y ago
The premise of the piece was that there's no new battery technology in the pipeline. Not on a particular timescale (he talks about lifetimes). The author believes batteries as a technology have reached peak energy density. If there's a research that suggests otherwise, that invalidates his whole point.
- criley 14y ago
  I think the author is explicitly NOT stating that battery technology has reached it's peak, but rather the safe bet isn't on huge changes in a decade time frame. He's not commenting on the tech so much as the wisdom of ASSUMING it will be better in a certain time frame. He's saying, it's not wise to build a business on top of the idea that battery tech will progress predictably or at all. I disagree, because any business built on that will be the first to exploit it properly when it comes out, as a competitive advantage. But if they're wrong, they'll deal with the downside risk of, you know, being wrong.

ori_b 14y ago

Do you have any links to related papers that were published?

neltnerb 14y ago
[disclaimer, I work at one or more of the places commercializing these systems] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Flow_battery http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Flow_battery http://www.ted.com/talks/donald_sadoway_the_missing_link_to_renewable_energy.html http://www.ted.com/talks/donald_sadoway_the_missing_link_to_... http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sodium-ion_battery http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sodium-ion_battery http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sodium-sulfur_battery http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sodium-sulfur_battery Seeing how much progress is being made extremely rapidly on getting these types of technologies into the marketplace, the idea that the last five years have been stagnant is difficult to believe. Unless, of course, all battery research was stagnant under Bush? I suppose that's possible, and what we've seen is the standard 5-10 year research backlog starting to catch back up to a lack of funding for oil alternatives.