New Material Could Increase EV Range by 300%

CommanderFrank

CommanderFrank

Cat Can't Scratch It
Joined
May 9, 2000
Messages
75,399
The new material is called Aluminum-Celmet, a lightweight porous aluminum developed by Sumitomo Electric Industries, Ltd. The porosity of the aluminum provides triple the coverage area enabling a battery to produce greater charge to increase the driving range of electric vehicles by an estimated 300%.
 
Last edited:
Think i'm more excited about what it could do to a flashlight. Or a laptop.
 
Think portable devices which almost everyone has, few have electric cars
 
all i have to say is ITS ABOUT FREAKIN TIME!!

provided that this stuff actually comes out...
 
So...any new IPO coming to market to invest in with this......hmmm
 
Yeah electric cars would get a big boost in range, So far 100 miles for the Nissan Leaf is pretty good, 300% better, Now that might be 400 miles, now Yer talking, gas will be doomed then, kiss snog checks goodbye for forever, Not to mention being able to not stop at gas stations, unless one needs a poddy break, stretch their legs, etc... :D
 
Looks promising but if they want to impress me they need to use it to build a functioning product.

Not to sound jaded but every month there are dozens of "inventions that will save the world" and most never see the light of day beyond their initial announcement.
 
It's good and bad news. New tech and the possibilities it opens up is always good news. But, this will also help to encourage the auto companies to continue going down the wrong road ie. making EV replacement cars.

Current autos are very complicated machines that depend on a wide range of manufacturing and tech industries. It is not feasible to build the same kind of cars a merely swap out the power plants.

We do have the technology to build low cost commuter EV's though. The cars would be sold as additional vehicles rather than as a replacement for your current car.
 
I wonder if OPEC or some other oil consortium will buy this patent and proceed to lock it in a closet and toss the key..

Not to break out the tinfoil, but the number of "coincidental"; disappearances, deaths, thefts, screams of bad science, or fraud, and the hushed buyouts, that occur nearly every time something that could put OPEC on the ropes, comes up, seriously strains the believability of naysayers imho.

That said, build it, prove to me it works. But not in a car, I could care less abut cars I will never want to drive. I drive Lincoln Mark III's, and 70's Ford pickups because that is what I want to drive. Like some of the others, I want a triple life battery for my smart phone, and laptop that does not stick out of the back a half mile.
 
GORANKAR said:
I wonder if OPEC or some other oil consortium will buy this patent and proceed to lock it in a closet and toss the key..

Not to break out the tinfoil, but the number of "coincidental"; disappearances, deaths, thefts, screams of bad science, or fraud, and the hushed buyouts, that occur nearly every time something that could put OPEC on the ropes, comes up, seriously strains the believability of naysayers imho.

That said, build it, prove to me it works. But not in a car, I could care less abut cars I will never want to drive. I drive Lincoln Mark III's, and 70's Ford pickups because that is what I want to drive. Like some of the others, I want a triple life battery for my smart phone, and laptop that does not stick out of the back a half mile.
Click to expand...

^^ This

This product will never see the light of day. Also what ever happened to that 1 BILLION dollar reward that the USA Gov put up for a person/corp to invent a new battery that will make history.

To this day that 1 BILLION is still in the bank and if what this artical says is true then this corp will stand to make a cool 1 Billion. As I stated wont ever happen.

For every barrle of oil bought a percentage is then used to purchase US Treasuries back. Example:

Germany buys a barrle from Saudi. Saudi then takes a percentage and buys our Treasuries.

Your talking big big big money here and the USA will never allow this to come to market and be made avail to the masses of the world. Its not Opec that you have to worry about its the USA and it will do what ever is neccessary to continue as status quo.
 
some oil company is gonna buy this stuff up and then sit on it. will kill a few people too just to protect their profit margins
 
Imaulle said:
some oil company is gonna buy this stuff up and then sit on it. will kill a few people too just to protect their profit margins
Click to expand...

Nicholas A. Otto produced the first successful gasoline-powered internal-combustion four-cycle engine in 1876.

In 2011, we're still driving vehicles with motors that may trace their origins back to this development.

In other words...we're stupid.
 
I don't know about anyone else, but I love the idea of an electric car that stacks up pretty well against any ice vehicle in price, utility, and power. A pure EV is simple, cheap to operate, and best of all you're not buying oil and sending hundreds of billions a year out of the country for a product that you burn.

They're just still to expensive, don't have enough range, and can't charge fast enough. I could get by with a leaf 90%of the time, but the other 10% is a real inconvenience without having a second car. Oh and the Leaf is hideous.
 
wtiger said:
I don't know about anyone else, but I love the idea of an electric car that stacks up pretty well against any ice vehicle in price, utility, and power. A pure EV is simple, cheap to operate, and best of all you're not buying oil and sending hundreds of billions a year out of the country for a product that you burn.

They're just still to expensive, don't have enough range, and can't charge fast enough. I could get by with a leaf 90%of the time, but the other 10% is a real inconvenience without having a second car. Oh and the Leaf is hideous.
Click to expand...

Range, charging speed, and a charging infra structure has been the big issue with EVs since the start. It's why we ended up with the somewhat over complicated, and often expensive hybrids. A 300% increase in a battery's capacity, at a similar size, and weight, would change things dramatically. But an increase in battery capacity of 300% has a ton of other uses. Pacemakers that last 3 times as long, cordless tools, cell phones, watches, anything that uses a battery could get a boost in battery life, or a size weight reduction from this tech............ If it actually works.
 
JokerCPoC said:
Yeah electric cars would get a big boost in range, So far 100 miles for the Nissan Leaf is pretty good, 300% better, Now that might be 400 miles, now Yer talking, gas will be doomed then, kiss snog checks goodbye for forever, Not to mention being able to not stop at gas stations, unless one needs a poddy break, stretch their legs, etc... :D
Click to expand...

smog checks are piss useless for most cars, the computer controlled sparks with fuel injection machines they are.
 
Anything like this would be great. The EV market really needs a kick in the ass before it reaches mass appeal. Right now EVs are the toys of rich people and eco nerds with extra cars in their driveway. A lot of people and families simply can't live with a car that only gets 75 miles between charges, especially if it was their only car.
 
what about that new battery tech that can fully charge in less time it takes to fill up a tank of gas?
 
ICOM said:
Nicholas A. Otto produced the first successful gasoline-powered internal-combustion four-cycle engine in 1876.

In 2011, we're still driving vehicles with motors that may trace their origins back to this development.

In other words...we're stupid.
Click to expand...

+1

We're using 100+ year old technology to power our vehicles. The resource that is needed to power this technology is quickly running out, damaging our environment and air, and killing everyone's pocketbooks. Petroleum is also used to power and create other things as well. As soon as we run out it's going to be back to drawing on cave walls with stones unless some new technology starts appearing very quickly. I hope this actually meets the light of day, this would be a great step in the right direction.
 
jeremyshaw said:
smog checks are piss useless for most cars, the computer controlled sparks with fuel injection machines they are.
Click to expand...

This year Mine doesn't require one, thankfully, yeah it's an injected 2.0L i4, I make no payments on it, it gets 26mpg city when I do drive it and it's cheap to insure @ $184 a year. Of course the a/c still needs work, the last place to fix it said they can only work under the hood, not under the dash, so since I don't drive much that will wait as It's not that important to Me eight now, I can withstand 105F+ for a bit on the local freeway, I'm getting ready to save up for a possible move, so it'll wait.
 
This year Mine doesn't require one, thankfully, yeah it's an injected 2.0L i4, I make no payments on it, it gets 26mpg city when I do drive it and it's cheap to insure @ $184 a year. Of course the a/c still needs work, the last place to fix it said they can only work under the hood, not under the dash, so since I don't drive much that will wait as It's not that important to Me right now, I can withstand 105F+ for a bit on the local freeway, I'm getting ready to save up for a possible move, so it'll wait.
 
JokerCPoC said:
Yeah electric cars would get a big boost in range, So far 100 miles for the Nissan Leaf is pretty good, 300% better, Now that might be 400 miles, now Yer talking, gas will be doomed then, kiss snog checks goodbye for forever, Not to mention being able to not stop at gas stations, unless one needs a poddy break, stretch their legs, etc... :D
Click to expand...

This is why the big oil industry doesn't have to do much to keep people fooled....


sigh
 
Weenis said:
This is why the big oil industry doesn't have to do much to keep people fooled....


sigh
Click to expand...

100 miles, Jeez, I could drive to My relatives place and back, but no where else, Victorville CA to Disneyland is more than that or even Yermo CA to Disneyland, You know the 1st one in Anaheim...
 
So this would give a top of the line Tesla Model S a 900 mile range? OK.

Is there just some bot that spews amazing battery press releases every six months or so? If you took all of the battery development PR we've seen over the years my HTC Sensation should run for a month on a charge with the screen on.
 
JokerCPoC said:
100 miles, Jeez, I could drive to My relatives place and back, but no where else, Victorville CA to Disneyland is more than that or even Yermo CA to Disneyland, You know the 1st one in Anaheim...
Click to expand...

We're in the infancy of the EV. Sheesh.

The Model-S if it meets the actual specs will do 300 on a charge. But that version is $75K.

Eventually "big oil" will have an insurmountable problem: no oil. So, don't sweat it. Someone will fill the void.

My money is on coal fired steam commutotrons.
 
JokerCPoC said:
Yeah electric cars would get a big boost in range, So far 100 miles for the Nissan Leaf is pretty good, 300% better, Now that might be 400 miles, now Yer talking, gas will be doomed then, kiss snog checks goodbye for forever, Not to mention being able to not stop at gas stations, unless one needs a poddy break, stretch their legs, etc... :D
Click to expand...

This is also assuming that batteries would stay the same size even when efficiency goes up. Much more likely is that manufacturers will cut down the amount of battery going into the car so as to reduce cost, etc. If people get used to 1-200 mile range, why have a 400 mile range on anything but a premium vehicle?
 
ianken said:
We're in the infancy of the EV. Sheesh.

The Model-S if it meets the actual specs will do 300 on a charge. But that version is $75K.

Eventually "big oil" will have an insurmountable problem: no oil. So, don't sweat it. Someone will fill the void.

My money is on coal fired steam commutotrons.
Click to expand...

Yeah well, I couldn't even buy a used car with My pitiful income, But then $830.40 is all I get, I'm permanently disabled and I get SSI(Supplemental Security Income), So I'll keep My nice used '99 Ford Escort zx2 Hot Coupe, sure the a/c needs to be fixed, but since I have other more important matters to attend to, it'll wait.
 
JokerCPoC said:
Yeah electric cars would get a big boost in range, So far 100 miles for the Nissan Leaf is pretty good, 300% better, Now that might be 400 miles, now Yer talking, gas will be doomed then, kiss snog checks goodbye for forever, Not to mention being able to not stop at gas stations, unless one needs a poddy break, stretch their legs, etc... :D
Click to expand...
Hope that was a typo, if not, then ya might wanna work on those math skills.
 
Electric cars again eh?

I guess no one knows this -but electric cars are also very very old. Both ICE and electric cars have been around for ages. Actually some of the first cars were electric but because of limit range - yup same problem as now - they gave up and went with ICE.

The engine in a car traces back to 1876 you say.. Well then its 50 years IN THE FUTURE from Electric cars as they had an electric car in 1828!

Anyway this technology (if it worked) would be a boon to Electric car industry if it happens. However like another poster said I am jaded. I have been hearing about battery boosting technology for 10+ years now with very little real progress.

Personally I think it would be better to just concentrate on cheap electricity from nuclear power - and use hydrogen based fuel. Because crazy at it sounds that seems like a smaller hurdle then good batteries.
 
GuyClinch said:
Electric cars again eh?

I guess no one knows this -but electric cars are also very very old. Both ICE and electric cars have been around for ages. Actually some of the first cars were electric but because of limit range - yup same problem as now - they gave up and went with ICE.

The engine in a car traces back to 1876 you say.. Well then its 50 years IN THE FUTURE from Electric cars as they had an electric car in 1828!

Anyway this technology (if it worked) would be a boon to Electric car industry if it happens. However like another poster said I am jaded. I have been hearing about battery boosting technology for 10+ years now with very little real progress.

Personally I think it would be better to just concentrate on cheap electricity from nuclear power - and use hydrogen based fuel. Because crazy at it sounds that seems like a smaller hurdle then good batteries.
Click to expand...

Hydrogen by its nature is very, very, very difficult to contain, as every known material allows it to leak out due to everything being extremely porous to Hydrogen cause of size issues.
 
GuyClinch said:
The engine in a car traces back to 1876 you say.. Well then its 50 years IN THE FUTURE from Electric cars as they had an electric car in 1828!
Click to expand...

That's basically what I was going to say. The internal combustion engine is far more modern than the electric engine.
 
JokerCPoC said:
Yeah electric cars would get a big boost in range, So far 100 miles for the Nissan Leaf is pretty good, 300% better, Now that might be 400 miles, now Yer talking, gas will be doomed then, kiss snog checks goodbye for forever, Not to mention being able to not stop at gas stations, unless one needs a poddy break, stretch their legs, etc... :D
Click to expand...

Or spending 12 hours to charge your car. :D
 
JokerCPoC said:
Hydrogen by its nature is very, very, very difficult to contain, as every known material allows it to leak out due to everything being extremely porous to Hydrogen cause of size issues.
Click to expand...
I agree, hydrogen is highly volatile, expensive to produce, no real fueling infrastructure in place (that'll take years and a lot of money), and yet they keep throwing money at this fuel source (and others) that will cost more to produce than it's worth. Why do these people insist that the Kool-Aid is so good when there's better, and cheaper alternatives out there? We turn food into fuel (Ethanol) while we cry about world hunger...how brilliant is that? Not to mention a bad harvest screws the supply. There are cheap ways of producing BioDiesel from pond scum, and extra high yields from genetically enhanced pond scum, it's cheap, easily done, doesn't have a huge startup cost, the production plants don't use huge amounts of area currently used to grow corn, etc., and it's enclosed, so weather, etc. doesn't affect harvests. Not only that, but there wouldn't be a need to build a new fueling infrastructure. So why is it not up near the top of consideration? I'm sure they've got a host of BS reasons why it's not. Why do the powers that be always do things the hard way? Other than having a vested interest in what they push that is. :rolleyes:

Want a high mileage electric vehicle? Why not just throw a lead encased mini thermonuclear reactor in the trunk & call it good? ;)
 
jctusmc03 said:
+1

We're using 100+ year old technology to power our vehicles. The resource that is needed to power this technology is quickly running out, damaging our environment and air, and killing everyone's pocketbooks. Petroleum is also used to power and create other things as well. As soon as we run out it's going to be back to drawing on cave walls with stones unless some new technology starts appearing very quickly. I hope this actually meets the light of day, this would be a great step in the right direction.
Click to expand...

Don't forget donations from oil-rich countries are the #1 source of funding for terrorism as well. We fund our own enemies, and we know it. How many of the 9/11 perpetrators were Saudi again?
 
I agree, hydrogen is highly volatile, expensive to produce, no real fueling infrastructure in place (that'll take years and a lot of money), and yet they keep throwing money at this fuel source (and others) that will cost more to produce than it's worth
Click to expand...

We aren't throwing money at hydrogen. Hydrogen works right now and burns clean - both in fuel cells and in ICE engines. If we had very cheap electricity - we would probably use hydrogen right now.

Efficency is only the critical element if we are suffering from an energy shortage. Taking the long term view I consider our energy shortage articifical and temporary. We are sitting near a star spewing out massive amount of energy - AND - we know how to transform matter into energy.

So I personally think the long term future of hydrogen is certainly a possibility - as battery technology moves incredibly slow. As I pointed out before electric cars have been around for ever and even after 150+ years they still suffer from range issues.

Even if you like alternative energies - like wind hydrogen is nice. Instead of hooking a windmill up to the power grid and trying to guess how much wind we can bank on having that day.. and then turning down the coal and nuclear plants a tiny bit (just to be safe)....

You can build a windmill near water - use electrolysis to create hydrogen. Now you have energy that you can use when you need it..and its pretty clean. This isn't viable right now of course. But you don't have to be a futurist to see it might work down the road.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top