introducing the cotton battery

Page 1 of 41234>
May 16th, 2014 at 9:11:03 AM permalink
reno
Member since: Oct 24, 2012
Threads: 58
Posts: 1384
Here's Mr. Kaname Takeya's claim: his company, Power Japan Plus, has spent 6 years developing a new battery that he says will completely revolutionize electric cars. We've heard this kind of hype before, and if it's too good to be true, it probably is. But Takeya's credentials are impressive (he helped design the battery for the Toyota Prius) so let's hear him out.

His new battery is cheaper. A conventional Li-ion battery uses rare earth metals like nickel, manganese, and cobalt. His battery uses none of those expensive metals. The active ingredient in Mr Takeya's battery is carbon made out of cotton.

His new battery charges faster. It currently takes 4 hours to fully charge a Nissan Leaf (range: 73 miles). If Takeya's claims pan out, the charge time for a Leaf would be only 12 minutes.

His new battery is safer. It's temperature stays consistent (it doesn't heat up) so there's no risk of thermal runaway. The temperature consistency eliminates the need for complex cooling systems. And in the event of a car crash, Mr. Takeya's batteries are not prone to fire or explosion if punctured.

His new battery is more durable. He says the battery can reliably be charged & depleted 3,000 times without degradation.

Power Japan Plus has built a pilot production line in Okinawa that will begin manufacturing 500 to 5,000 batteries a month later this year. We'll know soon enough if all this hype is justified.
May 16th, 2014 at 9:33:16 AM permalink
chickenman
Member since: Oct 24, 2012
Threads: 0
Posts: 368
These are not rare earth metals but your point stands.
He's everywhere, he's everywhere...!
May 16th, 2014 at 10:13:26 AM permalink
Pacomartin
Member since: Oct 24, 2012
Threads: 1068
Posts: 12569
Normally, an engineering choice involves some kind of trade off. I am wary of articles where some new technique offers improvement by a dozen times, but there is no mention of any issues. Are these carbon batteries more prone to fires? I assume that they are considerably larger. Are they much more expensive initially?

A Nissan Leaf that goes only 73 miles in average temperature costs over $30K and takes all night to charge. It would be nice to charge one in 12 minutes, but if the car costs $50K is it really worth it? You still don't have an intercity vehicle if you need to stop every hour and charge for 12 minutes.
May 16th, 2014 at 10:37:45 AM permalink
AZDuffman
Member since: Oct 24, 2012
Threads: 135
Posts: 18136
Quote: Pacomartin
Normally, an engineering choice involves some kind of trade off. I am wary of articles where some new technique offers improvement by a dozen times, but there is no mention of any issues. Are these carbon batteries more prone to fires? I assume that they are considerably larger. Are they much more expensive initially?


Carbon is the most reactive element so we could guess forever what will be the genus behind the battery. I just wonder what cotton has to do with it all. Cotton is a natural fiber and cotton breathes. But when carbon reacts it really changes. Time will tell.

Quote:
A Nissan Leaf that goes only 73 miles in average temperature costs over $30K and takes all night to charge. It would be nice to charge one in 12 minutes, but if the car costs $50K is it really worth it? You still don't have an intercity vehicle if you need to stop every hour and charge for 12 minutes.


Correct, and unless they can get that down to 12 minutes every 300-400 miles or more electrics will still have very slow adoption. My current car can barely make it 300 miles on a tank and that is annoying enough. What the backers of electrics refuse to see is that it does not matter me if I only need the longer range even 1% of the time, that is still at least 4 times a year I need it. And it is more like 10% than 1%.
The President is a fink.
May 16th, 2014 at 10:41:42 AM permalink
rxwine
Member since: Oct 24, 2012
Threads: 188
Posts: 18633
Quote: Pacomartin
Normally, an engineering choice involves some kind of trade off..


Is this new battery heavier, same or less? The Tesla is already pretty heavy.
You believe in an invisible god, and dismiss people who say they are trans? Really?
May 16th, 2014 at 4:40:18 PM permalink
beachbumbabs
Member since: Sep 3, 2013
Threads: 6
Posts: 1600
Googled this . They give a bit more information on their site. However, I had the same impression as Paco about all upside, no drawbacks. It's also interesting that they had this technology in the 1970's but shelved it because they couldn't generate enough power to make it practical. The current (pun intended) iteration has been worked on for 10 years.
Never doubt a small group of concerned citizens can change the world; it's the only thing ever has
May 16th, 2014 at 4:45:19 PM permalink
beachbumbabs
Member since: Sep 3, 2013
Threads: 6
Posts: 1600
Quote: rxwine
Is this new battery heavier, same or less? The Tesla is already pretty heavy.


They say their battery will fit in current footprints, so density could be anything from a pile of t-shirts to a block of diamonds, I guess. Still seems lighter but that's probably a mind trick based on starting with cotton.

And here I would have thought polyester or nylon would be the magic electric fiber. Static cling in the Northern winter throughout growing up, required to wear stockings in church and school. Cotton was the only one that DIDN'T stick and snap when you tried to move.
Never doubt a small group of concerned citizens can change the world; it's the only thing ever has
May 16th, 2014 at 5:09:57 PM permalink
reno
Member since: Oct 24, 2012
Threads: 58
Posts: 1384
Quote: Pacomartin
I assume that they are considerably larger.


The new cell, known as the Ryden Dual-Carbon Battery, promises energy density equal to today's lithium-ion cells.


Quote: Pacomartin
A Nissan Leaf that goes only 73 miles in average temperature costs over $30K and takes all night to charge. It would be nice to charge one in 12 minutes, but if the car costs $50K is it really worth it?


These guys insist this battery will be cheaper because the raw materials are cheaper. (It's telling that the company will not disclose exactly how much cheaper.) Anyway, even if the Leaf is exactly the same price with these carbon batteries, the 12 minute charge time would still be a game changer.

No, the Leaf would still not be practical for a 700 mile road trip. Is it practical for a 150 mile trip? If charging stations become even more ubiquitous (there are already 400 Walgreens stores with charging stations), sure a 150 mile trip would be practical. Stop once for 12 minutes, and a second stop for 5 minutes.
May 16th, 2014 at 6:03:13 PM permalink
Evenbob
Member since: Oct 24, 2012
Threads: 146
Posts: 25010
"the chemistry requires specific and proprietary changes to the nanostructure of the carbon crystals."

This is exciting stuff. I always thought they would
discover how to make batteries from cheaper,
more common materials. Wouldn't this be like
a perpetual motion machine, if you get more
energy out than the energy you put in charging it?
12 min? How much energy can you be using in
12 min.

If this charges that quickly, why couldn't the battery
run a small generator that would constantly charge
the battery. Could these batteries be big enough
to power medium sized planes on 1 or 2 hour
flights. They may be heavy but a gallon of jet fuel
weighs 8 pounds. A thousand gallons is 8000
pounds.
If you take a risk, you may lose. If you never take a risk, you will always lose.
May 16th, 2014 at 10:11:31 PM permalink
boymimbo
Member since: Mar 25, 2013
Threads: 5
Posts: 732
EB makes a good point. Currently, the Leaf charges at 3.3kW (220 V x 15 amps) x 7 hours = 83 MW. The Leaf stores 22.48kwh or about 80 MW.

A 12 minute charge means that the leaf is getting its 83MW at a rate of 115KW. What freaking home system is going to be able to supply that? Will all of the charging stations need to change their infrastructure to provide the charge at a higher rate of speed?

i don't get it. Or are they saying now that the energy that the car needs is much lower. Or are they saying they can put 35x as much range into the car because it can store 35 times as much power?

Enlighten me.
Page 1 of 41234>