Lithium batteries, not worth it...

[Joe]

On Sat, 15 Apr 2023 06:55:34 -0700
John Larkin <jjlarkin@highlandtechnology.com> wrote:

On 15 Apr 2023 02:27:25 GMT, rbowman <bowman@montana.com> wrote:


Someday. Maybe. Gaseous hydrogen storage presents many problems.
Carbon fiber vessels have helped somewhat. BMW played around with
liquid hydrogen although it was for an ICE dual fuel engine. Besides
the problem of it boiling off, what could go wrong with Joe Sixpack
filling his pickup with a -423 F liquid?

My neighborhood Shell station has a hydrogen fill-up thing. I\'ve never
seen it used.

Some years ago, TFL experimented with a few hydrogen-powered buses.
Obviously nothing useful came of it. But they thought that the use of
hydrogen was so safe that they sited the filling station twenty miles
from the centre of London.

--
Joe

 

[Ed P]

On 4/15/2023 4:30 AM, The Natural Philosopher wrote:>.

People working on \'renewable technology\' are completely wasting their
time and your money.
You make a lot of sense. Eventually the sun will burn out, no sun

means no wind so there goes two potential sources of energy. Why fiddle
with it?

It hasn\'t delivered anything in 20 years and it never will. Every single
great white hope turns out to be a business basket case.

Renewable energy was only ever a virtue signalling move by the EU to
sell German windmills to gullible governments. And get their electorates
to pay for it.

Again, thanks for pointing this out. Just as the airplane and
automobile never advanced, nor will other sources of energy.>

If you want to reduce emissions, its a bust. Its made no difference
whatsoever.

Our grandkids and great grandkids will be driving EVs, thank to the
effort made today.

I very much doubt it.

Horse and cart if the Greens get their way.
The horse shit can be burned for fuel. Another great benefit!

There is only one substitute for hydrocarbon fuel and that is nuclear
power. And its going to be massively hard to remodel industry to use
that, and its a dead cert there wont be enough lithium to make the EVS
from/ Zil lanes only for the Party apparatchiks. Everyone else gets to
cycle.

Lithium will become passe in a few years as other materials do a better
job. Besides cycling is a healthy thing to do.

Or bite the bullet and start manufacturing diesel.

Diesel what? Engines? Fuel? Or do you want more offspring of Vin
Diesel?>

The problem is all the engineering effort and tax payer money is going
into the dead end of \'renewables\' instead of working out how an all
nuclear electric society will work

They only blow up one very 10 or 20 years.

More important, they will help us with evolution.
https://www.science.org/doi/10.1126/sciadv.ade2537

 

[Peeler]

On Sat, 15 Apr 2023 13:25:43 +0100, Fredxx, the notorious, troll-feeding,
senile smartass, blathered again:

A leisure battery is over 1000.

Once again you do yourself no favours through showing your own ignorance
on the subject.

Once again, YOU certainly do yourself no favour feeding the trolling
sociopathic wanker, time and again, troll-feeding senile smartass!

 

[Peeler]

On Sat, 15 Apr 2023 13:27:51 +0100, Fredxx, the notorious, troll-feeding,
senile smartass, blathered again:

Quite, that\'s a guarantee. In practice the battery will last many time
the distance.

In practice the troll will last for as long as some demented senile smartass
like you keeps feeding him!

 

[Cindy Hamilton]

On 2023-04-15, Scott Lurndal <scott@slp53.sl.home> wrote:

John Larkin <jjlarkin@highlandtechnology.com> writes:
On Fri, 14 Apr 2023 15:14:20 -0700, T <T@invalid.invalid> wrote:

On 4/14/23 10:11, Frank wrote:
On 4/14/2023 12:04 PM, Ed P wrote:
On 4/14/2023 10:49 AM, Frank wrote:
On 4/13/2023 11:57 PM, Commander Kinsey wrote:
Are you greenies nuts?
https://www.ebay.co.uk/itm/385430139122
Nearly 3 grand for a battery with the same capacity of two deep
cycle lead acid batteries costing £150?

As it is EV\'s with lithium batteries weigh about about a half ton
more than ICE vehicles.  Would be interesting to see what they would
weigh with a lead battery.

One problem with price is demand.  Currently lead is a commodity and
most of it is available as recycle from depleted batteries.  Even if
price were equivalent there is probably more cost in manufacture of
lithium batteries needing additional materials and more complexity of
manufacture.


lithium batteries are just a passing phase of technology.

The future will be either graphene, aluminum or silicone anode.

https://www.technologyreview.com/2023/01/04/1066141/whats-next-for-batteries/
This year could be a breakout year for one alternative: lithium iron
phosphate (LFP), a low-cost cathode material sometimes used for
lithium-ion batteries.

Yes, there are a lot of technologies being looked into.  Something like
sodium would be much cheaper and not have the flammability concerns even
though only slightly heavier.

Natural gas fuel cells come to mind.

Fuel cells have been the thing of the future since 1838. Car makers
keep promising hydrogen fuel cell cars but don\'t deliver.

Seems to me that an NG fuel cell car would make more sense than
hydrogen. I suspect that fuel cells aren\'t very practical.

Natural gas is CH4. What happens to the C? It\'s turned into
CO2, of course - which just makes the problem worse.

CH4 + 2O2 -> CO2 + 2H2O

2C8H18 + 25O2 -> 16CO2 + 18H2O

The trick is: how much energy do we get out of CH4 compared to C8H18?

https://transportgeography.org/contents/chapter4/transportation-and-energy/combustibles-energy-content/

And, of course, storage and efficiency of combustion are factors.

--
Cindy Hamilton

 

[Bob F]

On 4/15/2023 8:34 AM, Scott Lurndal wrote:

Ed P <esp@snet.xxx> writes:
On 4/14/2023 6:14 PM, T wrote:

lithium batteries are just a passing phase of technology.

The future will be either graphene, aluminum or silicone anode.

https://www.technologyreview.com/2023/01/04/1066141/whats-next-for-batteries/
This year could be a breakout year for one alternative: lithium iron
phosphate (LFP), a low-cost cathode material sometimes used for
lithium-ion batteries.

Yes, there are a lot of technologies being looked into.  Something
like sodium would be much cheaper and not have the flammability
concerns even though only slightly heavier.

Natural gas fuel cells come to mind.

Also, gasoline engines continue to become
more efficient and less polluting.

Yes, been many advances. Fact is, not in our lifetime, but in the
future, oil will run out.

Maybe not in your lifetime, but certainly in the lifetime of your
children. And it will _never_ \'run out\', but it will become very
expensive (more than it\'s worth as a fuel) to extract the remaining
amounts.

That\'s the energy trap - since it takes energy to make energy
(see EROI - Energy returned on Energy Invested), there comes a
point where you don\'t have enough energy to develop the next
source.

Discussed here: https://escholarship.org/uc/item/9js5291m

A very accessible introduction to the physics of energy
(for an educated layman) and the difficulties in maintaining
the historic exponential growth in energy production/consumption.



It will get expensive as it get harder to
find and process.

indeed.

If we get even near using it up, that may be the least of our problems.
We will be living in a hell hole.

 

[Frank]

On 4/15/2023 11:59 AM, Cindy Hamilton wrote:

On 2023-04-15, Scott Lurndal <scott@slp53.sl.home> wrote:
John Larkin <jjlarkin@highlandtechnology.com> writes:
On Fri, 14 Apr 2023 15:14:20 -0700, T <T@invalid.invalid> wrote:

On 4/14/23 10:11, Frank wrote:
On 4/14/2023 12:04 PM, Ed P wrote:
On 4/14/2023 10:49 AM, Frank wrote:
On 4/13/2023 11:57 PM, Commander Kinsey wrote:
Are you greenies nuts?
https://www.ebay.co.uk/itm/385430139122
Nearly 3 grand for a battery with the same capacity of two deep
cycle lead acid batteries costing £150?

As it is EV\'s with lithium batteries weigh about about a half ton
more than ICE vehicles.  Would be interesting to see what they would
weigh with a lead battery.

One problem with price is demand.  Currently lead is a commodity and
most of it is available as recycle from depleted batteries.  Even if
price were equivalent there is probably more cost in manufacture of
lithium batteries needing additional materials and more complexity of
manufacture.


lithium batteries are just a passing phase of technology.

The future will be either graphene, aluminum or silicone anode.

https://www.technologyreview.com/2023/01/04/1066141/whats-next-for-batteries/
This year could be a breakout year for one alternative: lithium iron
phosphate (LFP), a low-cost cathode material sometimes used for
lithium-ion batteries.

Yes, there are a lot of technologies being looked into.  Something like
sodium would be much cheaper and not have the flammability concerns even
though only slightly heavier.

Natural gas fuel cells come to mind.

Fuel cells have been the thing of the future since 1838. Car makers
keep promising hydrogen fuel cell cars but don\'t deliver.

Seems to me that an NG fuel cell car would make more sense than
hydrogen. I suspect that fuel cells aren\'t very practical.

Natural gas is CH4. What happens to the C? It\'s turned into
CO2, of course - which just makes the problem worse.

CH4 + 2O2 -> CO2 + 2H2O

2C8H18 + 25O2 -> 16CO2 + 18H2O

The trick is: how much energy do we get out of CH4 compared to C8H18?

https://transportgeography.org/contents/chapter4/transportation-and-energy/combustibles-energy-content/

And, of course, storage and efficiency of combustion are factors.

Google sez:

\"Fuel cell vehicles, which use electric motors, are much more energy
efficient. The fuel cell system can use 60% of the fuel\'s
energy—correspond- ing to more than a 50% reduction in fuel consumption
compared to a conventional vehicle with a gasoline internal combustion
engine.\"

Problem with pure hydrogen is that you cannot carry a lot of it around
and need high pressure storage tanks. Nobel prize winning chemist,
George Olah, thought methanol would be the best renewable fuel to use.

 

[Anthony William Sloman]

On Sunday, April 16, 2023 at 2:12:35 AM UTC+10, Frank wrote:

On 4/15/2023 11:59 AM, Cindy Hamilton wrote:
On 2023-04-15, Scott Lurndal <sc...@slp53.sl.home> wrote:
John Larkin <jjla...@highlandtechnology.com> writes:
On Fri, 14 Apr 2023 15:14:20 -0700, T <T...@invalid.invalid> wrote:
On 4/14/23 10:11, Frank wrote:
On 4/14/2023 12:04 PM, Ed P wrote:
On 4/14/2023 10:49 AM, Frank wrote:
On 4/13/2023 11:57 PM, Commander Kinsey wrote:

<snip>

Problem with pure hydrogen is that you cannot carry a lot of it around
and need high pressure storage tanks.

You can liquify it, and carry it around in well-insulated tanks, as people do with liquid nitrogen.

> Nobel prize winning chemist, George Olah, thought methanol would be the best renewable fuel to use.

He\'s nuts. Ammonia is much more practical and entirely carbon free (not that the way we make it at the moment is carbon-free).

--
Bill Sloman, Sydney

 

[Thomas Prufer]

On Sat, 15 Apr 2023 12:12:25 -0400, Frank <\"frank \"@frank.net> wrote:

Problem with pure hydrogen is that you cannot carry a lot of it around
and need high pressure storage tanks. Nobel prize winning chemist,
George Olah, thought methanol would be the best renewable fuel to use.

There were a few attempts to make a commercial methanol-fueled power bank...

Sounds good: stick some methanol in, charge equipment, resulting in water &
maybe some heat. Carry spare methanol to repeat. No recharge time, power easily
transported in a safe fluid, etc etc.

Never came to pass: There was a kickstarter that never got off the ground.
Google finds that Toshiba sold such a thing called \"dynario\", which seems to
have faded away, and there is no such successor.

That makes me wonder what the hurdles were, as I think it would likely sell even
for silly prices to off-gridders, hikers, and so on.

here is a commercially available woodburner that includes a small fan, and
charges a cell from a thermopile that gets it\'s heat from the fire the fan helps
along -- the \"BioLite Campstove\" so there is a market for such things.


Thomas Prufer

 

[danny burstein]

In <r4ml3i12mmi0lgqqio8sbmrjnhm1mflgov@4ax.com> Thomas Prufer <prufer.public@mnet-online.de.invalid> writes:

There were a few attempts to make a commercial methanol-fueled power bank...

Sounds good: stick some methanol in, charge equipment, resulting in water &
maybe some heat. Carry spare methanol to repeat. No recharge time, power easily
transported in a safe fluid, etc etc.

Never came to pass: There was a kickstarter that never got off the ground.
Google finds that Toshiba sold such a thing called \"dynario\", which seems to
have faded away, and there is no such successor.

A couple of well meaning, \"alternate power\" types, had a store
in Cadillac, Michigan, which actually had something like
this for sale. I don\'t recall the brandname.

They also promoted solar cells,etc., etc., etc.

About a decade ago.

When I swung by that area a year later they were gone.


--
_____________________________________________________
Knowledge may be power, but communications is the key
dannyb@panix.com
[to foil spammers, my address has been double rot-13 encoded]

 

[Rod Speed]

On Sat, 15 Apr 2023 22:11:05 +1000, Frank <\"frank \"@frank.net> wrote:

On 4/15/2023 12:51 AM, Rod Speed wrote:
On Sat, 15 Apr 2023 07:17:46 +1000, T <T@invalid.invalid> wrote:

On 4/14/23 07:51, Frank wrote:
On 4/14/2023 1:14 AM, T wrote:
On 4/13/23 21:35, Commander Kinsey wrote:
On Fri, 14 Apr 2023 04:57:37 +0100, Commander Kinsey
CK1@nospam.com> wrote:

Are you greenies nuts?
https://www.ebay.co.uk/itm/385430139122
Nearly 3 grand for a battery with the same capacity of two deep
cycle lead acid batteries costing £150?

Or.... £446 for 100Ah, when you an get a 130Ah lead acid for £75:
https://www.ebay.co.uk/itm/114677041217


But, But, But, But lithium batteries rape the earth
to extract the lithium and are a nightmare to
recycle so they are considered green!!!!
I have seen analysis of ores coming out of Peruvian lead mine.
There is nothing green there and it is a nightmare compared to
lithium salts with all the other heavy, toxic metals along with the
lead.

And the water used is not toxic to the point of not
being able to be used for a very, very long time.
You know that will eventually, with some palm
waxing, be flushed into the rivers. Oppps,
how did that happen???
No relevant rivers with most of our heavy metal mines.
It has been a problem with one mine in PNG.

The lead is full of other heavy metals

Irrelevant to his line about what gets dumped into adjacent rivers.

where I assume lithium is full of other alkali metal salts like sodium..
Lithium mining probably requires more water.

But that doesnt have to be at the mine. Much
of ours is actually processed in Malaysia.

I see that lithium is more abundant than lead but the problem is supply
and demand. Lead has been in use for many years and easily recyclable
where the lithium business has just taken off.

As a chemist, I would not have large lithium batteries in my house. If
a charged battery ignites you cannot extinguish it and there goes your
house. Gasoline in ICE vehicles has high energy but requires oxygen
whereas in EV\'s all the energy is self contained.

 

[Thomas Prufer]

On Sat, 15 Apr 2023 17:21:39 -0000 (UTC), danny burstein <dannyb@panix.com>
wrote:

In <r4ml3i12mmi0lgqqio8sbmrjnhm1mflgov@4ax.com> Thomas Prufer <prufer.public@mnet-online.de.invalid> writes:

There were a few attempts to make a commercial methanol-fueled power bank...

Sounds good: stick some methanol in, charge equipment, resulting in water &
maybe some heat. Carry spare methanol to repeat. No recharge time, power easily
transported in a safe fluid, etc etc.

Never came to pass: There was a kickstarter that never got off the ground.
Google finds that Toshiba sold such a thing called \"dynario\", which seems to
have faded away, and there is no such successor.

A couple of well meaning, \"alternate power\" types, had a store
in Cadillac, Michigan, which actually had something like
this for sale. I don\'t recall the brandname.

They also promoted solar cells,etc., etc., etc.

About a decade ago.

When I swung by that area a year later they were gone.

\"Prototype Toshiba cell phone with fuel cell\"

https://youtu.be/wmdEQ5pb3Dk

\"Recharges with a squirt of methanol\" -- video from 13 years ago, so *that*
technology didn\'t make it to the consumer...

And Toshiba likely brought more resources to bear than a kickstarter project.


Thomas Prufer

 

[John Larkin]

On Sat, 15 Apr 2023 19:10:56 +0200, Thomas Prufer
<prufer.public@mnet-online.de.invalid> wrote:

On Sat, 15 Apr 2023 12:12:25 -0400, Frank <\"frank \"@frank.net> wrote:

Problem with pure hydrogen is that you cannot carry a lot of it around
and need high pressure storage tanks. Nobel prize winning chemist,
George Olah, thought methanol would be the best renewable fuel to use.

There were a few attempts to make a commercial methanol-fueled power bank...

Sounds good: stick some methanol in, charge equipment, resulting in water &
maybe some heat. Carry spare methanol to repeat. No recharge time, power easily
transported in a safe fluid, etc etc.

Never came to pass: There was a kickstarter that never got off the ground.
Google finds that Toshiba sold such a thing called \"dynario\", which seems to
have faded away, and there is no such successor.

Yup, there was also a PCB-mountable tiny methanol-powered turbine
generator. Fun idea. Bankrupt of course.

That makes me wonder what the hurdles were, as I think it would likely sell even
for silly prices to off-gridders, hikers, and so on.

One problem, among many, is that water vapor is a by-product of the
fuel cell or the trubine, and things get mouldy.

here is a commercially available woodburner that includes a small fan, and
charges a cell from a thermopile that gets it\'s heat from the fire the fan helps
along -- the \"BioLite Campstove\" so there is a market for such things.

2 pounds, 3 watts. If you\'re camping, turn off your phone.

Or get a battery-powered cell phone charger, lighter and much cheaper.

I have a cool lithium battery car starter, claimed 1000 amps (probably
300 peak in real life) that also has a USB outlet. Better than jumper
cables!



>Thomas Prufer

 

[Ed P]

On 4/15/2023 1:21 PM, danny burstein wrote:

In <r4ml3i12mmi0lgqqio8sbmrjnhm1mflgov@4ax.com> Thomas Prufer <prufer.public@mnet-online.de.invalid> writes:

There were a few attempts to make a commercial methanol-fueled power bank...

Sounds good: stick some methanol in, charge equipment, resulting in water &
maybe some heat. Carry spare methanol to repeat. No recharge time, power easily
transported in a safe fluid, etc etc.

Never came to pass: There was a kickstarter that never got off the ground.
Google finds that Toshiba sold such a thing called \"dynario\", which seems to
have faded away, and there is no such successor.

A couple of well meaning, \"alternate power\" types, had a store
in Cadillac, Michigan, which actually had something like
this for sale. I don\'t recall the brandname.

They also promoted solar cells,etc., etc., etc.

About a decade ago.

When I swung by that area a year later they were gone.


And that proves . . . .

A new bakery I used to go to is gone too. Think is was the same reason?

 

[Rod Speed]

On Sun, 16 Apr 2023 02:09:45 +1000, Bob F <bobnospam@gmail.com> wrote:

On 4/15/2023 8:34 AM, Scott Lurndal wrote:
Ed P <esp@snet.xxx> writes:
On 4/14/2023 6:14 PM, T wrote:

lithium batteries are just a passing phase of technology.

The future will be either graphene, aluminum or silicone anode.

https://www.technologyreview.com/2023/01/04/1066141/whats-next-for-batteries/
This year could be a breakout year for one alternative: lithium iron
phosphate (LFP), a low-cost cathode material sometimes used for
lithium-ion batteries.

Yes, there are a lot of technologies being looked into. Something
like sodium would be much cheaper and not have the flammability
concerns even though only slightly heavier.

Natural gas fuel cells come to mind.

Also, gasoline engines continue to become
more efficient and less polluting.

Yes, been many advances. Fact is, not in our lifetime, but in the
future, oil will run out.
Maybe not in your lifetime, but certainly in the lifetime of your
children. And it will _never_ \'run out\', but it will become very
expensive (more than it\'s worth as a fuel) to extract the remaining
amounts.
That\'s the energy trap - since it takes energy to make energy
(see EROI - Energy returned on Energy Invested), there comes a
point where you don\'t have enough energy to develop the next
source.
Discussed here: https://escholarship.org/uc/item/9js5291m
A very accessible introduction to the physics of energy
(for an educated layman) and the difficulties in maintaining
the historic exponential growth in energy production/consumption.

It will get expensive as it get harder to
find and process.
indeed.

If we get even near using it up, that may be the least of our problems.
We will be living in a hell hole.

Fantasy.

 

[Peeler]

On Sun, 16 Apr 2023 03:24:26 +1000, cantankerous trolling geezer Rodent
Speed, the auto-contradicting senile sociopath, blabbered, again:

<FLUSH the abnormal trolling senile cretin\'s latest trollshit unread>

--
Website (from 2007) dedicated to the 89-year-old senile Australian
cretin\'s pathological trolling:
https://www.pcreview.co.uk/threads/rod-speed-faq.2973853/

 

[Peeler]

On Sun, 16 Apr 2023 03:48:08 +1000, cantankerous trolling geezer Rodent
Speed, the auto-contradicting senile sociopath, blabbered, again:

<FLUSH the abnormal trolling senile cretin\'s latest trollshit unread>

--
Pomegranate Bastard addressing the trolling senile cretin from Oz:
\"Surely you can find an Australian group to pollute rather than posting
your unwanted guff here.\"
MID: <c1pqvgte5ldlo1rn3fpl7igtg4h8i9mk7p@4ax.com>

 

[T]

On 4/15/23 06:51, Commander Kinsey wrote:
> Every time one of those morons says greenhouse gases, say plant air supply.

These \"alarmists\" act like the CO2 that goes into the atmosphere stays
there. Plants create sugars from it.
Our entire food supply is dependent on CO2. And
if for some strange reason CO2 drops too far in our
atmosphere, plants start dying and every living
thing on this planet is in a heap of trouble.

So ya, \"plant air supply\", \"plant food supply\",
\"Everything else\'s food supply\". CO2 is part of
cycle of life.

It just occurred to me that most of there
\"Alarmists\" as \"vegetarians\" and do not realize
the above. This is what you get when you don\'t
think for yourself and rely on political offices
for your narratives.

 

[T]

On 4/15/23 01:30, The Natural Philosopher wrote:

On 15/04/2023 00:38, Ed P wrote:
On 4/14/2023 6:14 PM, T wrote:

lithium batteries are just a passing phase of technology.

The future will be either graphene, aluminum or silicone anode.

https://www.technologyreview.com/2023/01/04/1066141/whats-next-for-batteries/
This year could be a breakout year for one alternative: lithium
iron phosphate (LFP), a low-cost cathode material sometimes used
for lithium-ion batteries.

Yes, there are a lot of technologies being looked into.  Something
like sodium would be much cheaper and not have the flammability
concerns even though only slightly heavier.

Natural gas fuel cells come to mind.

Also, gasoline engines continue to become
more efficient and less polluting.

Yes, been many advances.    Fact is, not in our lifetime, but in the
future, oil will run out.  It will get expensive as it get harder to
find and process.

Fortunately there are people working on renewable technology to keep
that from becoming a big problem.  Long way to go, but working towards
in.

The great thing about academic science and engineering is, that given
the laws of Nature as currently understood are not being broken, it
tells you a little about what might be possible and an enormous amoiunt
about what is impossible.

People working on \'renewable technology\' are completely wasting their
time and your money.

It hasn\'t delivered anything in 20 years and it never will. Every single
great white hope turns out to be  a business basket case.

Renewable energy was only ever a virtue signalling move by the EU to
sell German windmills to gullible governments. And get their electorates
to pay for it.

If you want to reduce emissions, its a bust. Its made no difference
whatsoever.

Our grandkids and great grandkids will be driving EVs, thank to the
effort made today.

I very much doubt it.

But rich leftists will get rich. What is the issues????

Horse and cart if the Greens get their way.

There is only one substitute for hydrocarbon fuel and that is nuclear
power. And its going to be massively hard to remodel industry to use
that, and its a dead cert there wont be enough lithium to make the EVS
from/ Zil lanes only for the Party apparatchiks. Everyone else  gets to
cycle.

Or bite the bullet and start manufacturing diesel.

The problem is all the engineering effort and tax payer money is going
into the dead end of \'renewables\' instead of working out how an all
nuclear electric society will work

These new small nuclear generators that can\'t melt
down are a good start. As with all nuclear generator,
they have a hard time power up and down for peak
periods and lulls. But, they can run at peak power
and generate hydrogen, which can be used to power conventional
generators that can power up and down
on command.

 

[T]

On 4/15/23 07:01, Commander Kinsey wrote:

On Fri, 14 Apr 2023 23:15:19 +0100, danny burstein <dannyb@panix.com
wrote:

[snip of more base64 garbage by \"T\"]

Is that the idiot who uses pretty colours for his text?

Danny need a better news reader