Comments on: MIT Working on More Powerful, Lightweight Batteries

By: J Marshall

J Marshall — Wed, 22 Dec 2010 04:03:44 +0000

Without a doubt batteries have been the limiting factor in the adoption of several new green technologies. Glad to see battery advancements that hold real promise.

By: Peter

Peter — Wed, 01 Sep 2010 19:11:22 +0000

What prevents us from making a battery that has these specifications: 1) Provides 110 or 220 V energy; 2) Weighs 40 pounds or less; 3) gives 1,600 kWh over a month’s time; can be recharged by using solar energy.

Is it expense? is there a physics barrier that stops us from making this battery? Why couldn’t we get rid of the distribution grid with batteries like this in every home and business?

By: ben

ben — Mon, 16 Aug 2010 01:58:40 +0000

to James:
yes I can, why not?
cycle life for some current batteries is guaranteed to be more than 3000 cycles, nanotech will improve this further. I agree current battery tech does not have the energy density required to easily use for big trucks (but it is do-able) but if you could double or triple the density as these apparently do (actually thats wrong, from my understanding the theoretical (un-achievable) improvement with li-air is about 80 times the specific energy of lipoly, with perhaps 20 – 40 times an achievable number, ie 3 – 6 KWH/KG!

anyway, what is your point regarding the weight of the truck? scale up the vehicle scale up the battery. if batteries last long enough to pay themselves back via cheaper energy costs then no reason trucking companies wont start to use them

by the way, look up the thundersky electric luxury coaches… not too much of a step from a full size bus to a truck…

By: James

James — Wed, 07 Jul 2010 07:09:24 +0000

Can you see a 80,000 lb transport truck that is electric?
It ain’t gonna happen!
How much do you think these batteries will cost and how many times will they recharge. If we can’t afford them ( and who can after their job goes to China ) what’s the point in making something no one can afford.

By: Richard Fletcher

Richard Fletcher — Tue, 27 Apr 2010 16:33:43 +0000

Euroflycars seems to have captured everything about this issue.

By: Euroflycars

Euroflycars — Wed, 14 Apr 2010 12:08:30 +0000

Let me plagiate amoline’s comment, with just a few slight enhancements to announce a paradigme shift in personal mobility:

Lightweight means better efficiency for PA (Personal Aircraft). Improved materials, means cheaper (???) return for PA. More and more we see the reality that the Electric Personal Aircraft may not be so far in the distant future as we thought. There have been huge gains in development which may bring the cost down to where flying a PA makes economical sense…

By: liezl

liezl — Wed, 14 Apr 2010 01:18:51 +0000

This is good news! Lightweight means it is cost effective. Hope to see them out in the market soon.

By: Howard Butts

Howard Butts — Tue, 13 Apr 2010 22:18:37 +0000

Energy from air now that is just about to good to be true, but time will tell. Lets fund this research instead of bailing out credit card Co.

By: amoline

amoline — Tue, 13 Apr 2010 20:09:46 +0000

Lightweight means better efficiency for EV. Improved materials, means cheaper return for EV. More and more we see the reality that the electric car may not be so far in the distant future as we thought. There have been huge gains in development which may bring the cost down to where driving a EV makes economical sense.