Electrical, Not Mechanical Separation, Finally Make the Liqu

[Bret Cahill]

One serendipitous breakthrough:

https://cleantechnica.com/2018/01/26/mit-group-may-solved-liquid-sodium-battery-conundrum/


Bret Cahill

 

[John Larkin]

On Fri, 26 Jan 2018 20:08:26 -0800 (PST), Bret Cahill
<bretcahill@aol.com> wrote:

One serendipitous breakthrough:

https://cleantechnica.com/2018/01/26/mit-group-may-solved-liquid-sodium-battery-conundrum/


Bret Cahill

About the 12,000th battery "breakthrough" this year so far.


--

John Larkin Highland Technology, Inc

lunatic fringe electronics

 

[Bret Cahill]

One serendipitous breakthrough:

https://cleantechnica.com/2018/01/26/mit-group-may-solved-liquid-sodium-battery-conundrum/

About the 12,000th battery "breakthrough" this year so far.

And it's not even February yet!

Actually this one probably does work economically, not in cells or small motor vehicles but ships and the grid.

But that isn't what's so remarkable. It seems like so many of these researchers have such a disorganized haphazard approach to these discoveries.

You'd think a lot more of the science would have been well settled back in the late 19th century.

But you'd be wrong.

 

[Cursitor Doom]

On Sat, 27 Jan 2018 18:12:00 -0800, Bret Cahill wrote:

But that isn't what's so remarkable. It seems like so many of these
researchers have such a disorganized haphazard approach to these
discoveries.

Some of the greatest inventors had shambolic workshops!

You'd think a lot more of the science would have been well settled back
in the late 19th century.

Eh? Before Thompson and Chadwick had even discovered the electron and
neutron? Before Bohr's first rudimentary atomic model??




--
This message may be freely reproduced without limit or charge only via
the Usenet protocol. Reproduction in whole or part through other
protocols, whether for profit or not, is conditional upon a charge of
GBP10.00 per reproduction. Publication in this manner via non-Usenet
protocols constitutes acceptance of this condition.

 

[Cursitor Doom]

On Sat, 27 Jan 2018 14:27:10 -0800, John Larkin wrote:

On Fri, 26 Jan 2018 20:08:26 -0800 (PST), Bret Cahill
bretcahill@aol.com> wrote:

One serendipitous breakthrough:

https://cleantechnica.com/2018/01/26/mit-group-may-solved-liquid-sodium-
battery-conundrum/


Bret Cahill

About the 12,000th battery "breakthrough" this year so far.

Well sooner or later someone *will* make that much-needed breakthrough in
battery technology - and they'll become stratospherically rich as a
result!





--
This message may be freely reproduced without limit or charge only via
the Usenet protocol. Reproduction in whole or part through other
protocols, whether for profit or not, is conditional upon a charge of
GBP10.00 per reproduction. Publication in this manner via non-Usenet
protocols constitutes acceptance of this condition.

 

[Bret Cahill]

One serendipitous breakthrough:

https://cleantechnica.com/2018/01/26/mit-group-may-solved-liquid-sodium-
battery-conundrum/


Bret Cahill

About the 12,000th battery "breakthrough" this year so far.

Well sooner or later someone *will* make that much-needed breakthrough in
battery technology - and they'll become stratospherically rich as a
result!

Not the same sodium battery but _someone_ is making _some_ money off of Na-Ion:

https://www.businesswire.com/news/home/20180122005819/en/Global-Sodium-ion-Batteries-Markets-Materials-Technologies-2022

 

[Bret Cahill]

https://cleantechnica.com/2018/01/26/mit-group-may-solved-liquid-sodium-battery-conundrum/

What's so interesting is that this isn't so much an engineering breakthrough as a _science_ breakthrough, and a major one at that, yet another victory of physical chemistry & materials over the mechanical.

Even if the battery they envision never becomes a commercial success the new science opens up a lot of opportunities for other researchers.

Goodenough's Li-Ion discovery followed the same route only he _deliberately_ developed the science first.


Bret Cahill

 

[default]

On Sat, 27 Jan 2018 18:12:00 -0800 (PST), Bret Cahill
<bretcahill@aol.com> wrote:

One serendipitous breakthrough:

https://cleantechnica.com/2018/01/26/mit-group-may-solved-liquid-sodium-battery-conundrum/

About the 12,000th battery "breakthrough" this year so far.

And it's not even February yet!

Actually this one probably does work economically, not in cells or small motor vehicles but ships and the grid.

But that isn't what's so remarkable. It seems like so many of these researchers have such a disorganized haphazard approach to these discoveries.

You'd think a lot more of the science would have been well settled back in the late 19th century.

But you'd be wrong.

I'm often amazed at how discoveries (maybe that's too strong and
should be observations) made in the 19th century do get turned into
useful devices when the technology catches up with the observation.

 

[default]

On Sun, 28 Jan 2018 14:35:17 -0000 (UTC), Cursitor Doom
<curd@notformail.com> wrote:

On Sat, 27 Jan 2018 14:27:10 -0800, John Larkin wrote:

On Fri, 26 Jan 2018 20:08:26 -0800 (PST), Bret Cahill
bretcahill@aol.com> wrote:

One serendipitous breakthrough:

https://cleantechnica.com/2018/01/26/mit-group-may-solved-liquid-sodium-
battery-conundrum/


Bret Cahill

About the 12,000th battery "breakthrough" this year so far.

Well sooner or later someone *will* make that much-needed breakthrough in
battery technology - and they'll become stratospherically rich as a
result!

A more likely scenario is that patent infringement lawsuits will last
for decades and their spouse will become wealthy, along with a lot of
lawyers and expert witnesses.

 

[Bret Cahill]

One serendipitous breakthrough:

https://cleantechnica.com/2018/01/26/mit-group-may-solved-liquid-sodium-battery-conundrum/

About the 12,000th battery "breakthrough" this year so far.

And it's not even February yet!

Actually this one probably does work economically, not in cells or small motor vehicles but ships and the grid.

But that isn't what's so remarkable. It seems like so many of these researchers have such a disorganized haphazard approach to these discoveries.

You'd think a lot more of the science would have been well settled back in the late 19th century.

But you'd be wrong.


I'm often amazed at how discoveries (maybe that's too strong and
should be observations) made in the 19th century do get turned into
useful devices when the technology catches up with the observation.

Lord Kelvin is responsible for the ink jet printer, George Boole for digital electronics . . .