Prieto batteries (FINALY)

rillip3

· #2 · Sep 14, 2010

Pirape said:
Hello, finaly a new battery that will revoltionize the world

Even the military

10x the power of lithium Ion 10x the lasting of lithium X batteries

at a fraction of the cost because the Prieto batteries will be cheap to produce

for more info

http://www.today.colostate.edu/story.aspx?id=2849

ENJOY

prototype in "early" 2010. A web search says "February 2010". ... Chirp chirp, silence from the gallery. It might be legit research but CSU isn't going to go into battery manufacturing. More vaporware for now.

Reply

Save

Like

G

GerhardRP

· #3 · Sep 14, 2010

Pirape said:
Hello, finaly a new battery that will revoltionize the world

Even the military

10x the power of lithium Ion 10x the lasting of lithium X batteries

at a fraction of the cost because the Prieto batteries will be cheap to produce

for more info

http://www.today.colostate.edu/story.aspx?id=2849

ENJOY

Notsofast.

[from a blog..
http://thisweekinbatteries.blogspot.com/2010/07/200-mile-ev-or-13-mile-phev-you-choose.html]

Venkat Srinivasan said...
On the Prieto Battery: Its difficult to judge. I have seen some of this work in the past, but that was related to making an anode using electrodeposition. So we only have the website to go by.
In general as Jordi Cabana was pointing out in his post high surface area is not a good thing in anode for lithium batteries (see http://thisweekinbatteries.blogspot.com/2010/03/what-can-nano-do-for-batteries.html). This is one issue to look out for.

Other than this, they are trying to make a 3D battery. I know a bit (probably quite a bit!) on this topic. 3D designs by themselves are not novel. The devil is in the details on how its made. Its not easy making a battery, so you have to give them some time before a prototype comes along. Dont expect something soon.

Venkat

Reply

Save

Like

D

drivin98

· #4 · Sep 14, 2010

Maybe the cells are power dense and long lasting but they avoid discussing energy density, which is the needed property to be revolutionary. Altairnano and A123 already make powerful, long lasting cells. We need energy density.

Reply

Save

Like

M

MN Driver

· #5 · Sep 14, 2010

drivin98 said:
Maybe the cells are power dense and long lasting but they avoid discussing energy density, which is the needed property to be revolutionary. Altairnano and A123 already make powerful, long lasting cells. We need energy density.

I agree with this. To add to that I think we need a lower price too.

If I can get the size, weight, and cost of LiFePO4 to go down to 1/3 of the three main factors that are important to me with this chemistry: cost, weight, and size. I wouldn't mind going with a less powerful cell because then I would purchase higher capacity cells and it wouldn't matter as much. If I put 3 times the capacity in, I wouldn't mind settling for 1C. Granted I might not need the capacity but since it would essentially be a step in the direction of the same 'costs' in those respects, I'll take the range. I'd have a 300 mile vehicle. In reality I'd go with a 100 mile car and call it good though and the power likely will continue to follow the density and cost improvements with the technological advances. ...that's the way it's working with LiPo cells in the RC community. Their cost is dropping rapidly and is currently on par with LiFePO4 for some of the lower powered stuff, power density is insane(45C constant 90C burst), and energy density by volume and weight is unbeatable. ...LiFePO4 took huge advances with the initial step-in of A123 and SAFT's cells but the advances in LiFePO4 energy and power density feel stagnant in comparison to other chemistries at the moment. If it wasn't for calendar life considerations, shipping costs from Hong Kong, and the inability to charge during the winter, I would have purchased LiPo cells and be using them today.

...but instead I'm waiting on LiFePO4 advances at the moment.

See less See more

Reply

Save

Like

P

Pirape

Discussion Starter · #6 · Sep 16, 2010

MN Driver said:
I agree with this. To add to that I think we need a lower price too.

If I can get the size, weight, and cost of LiFePO4 to go down to 1/3 of the three main factors that are important to me with this chemistry: cost, weight, and size. I wouldn't mind going with a less powerful cell because then I would purchase higher capacity cells and it wouldn't matter as much. If I put 3 times the capacity in, I wouldn't mind settling for 1C. Granted I might not need the capacity but since it would essentially be a step in the direction of the same 'costs' in those respects, I'll take the range. I'd have a 300 mile vehicle. In reality I'd go with a 100 mile car and call it good though and the power likely will continue to follow the density and cost improvements with the technological advances. ...that's the way it's working with LiPo cells in the RC community. Their cost is dropping rapidly and is currently on par with LiFePO4 for some of the lower powered stuff, power density is insane(45C constant 90C burst), and energy density by volume and weight is unbeatable. ...LiFePO4 took huge advances with the initial step-in of A123 and SAFT's cells but the advances in LiFePO4 energy and power density feel stagnant in comparison to other chemistries at the moment. If it wasn't for calendar life considerations, shipping costs from Hong Kong, and the inability to charge during the winter, I would have purchased LiPo cells and be using them today.

...but instead I'm waiting on LiFePO4 advances at the moment.

Same with me I will build a car EV ready and go from there
Hope they release a new kind of batteries cheaper and better

Reply

Save

Like

JRP3

· #7 · Sep 16, 2010

I wouldn't count on any breakthroughs hitting the market in the next 5 years or so. Prices may drop a bit next year though they've remained fairly flat since last year.

Reply

Save

Like

vpoppv

· #8 · Sep 16, 2010

I guess I just can't see the big picture here, but even Lithium seems plenty energy dense to me. Even if someone handed me a full set of LiFePO4 batteries, I couldn't afford to charge them. You get any more energy dense, how will you get the juice into them? I'm thinking a standard 15 amp outlet isn't going to cut it. So after the cost of the batteries, and the charger, are you going to need to call an electrician to come rewire your house to be able to supply the required power?

Reply

Save

Like

JRP3

· #9 · Sep 16, 2010

Well better density means less weight which is always good. Not sure what you mean by a full set of Lithium batteries, but most homes have at least a 240V 30 amp circuit which could charge even a Tesla sized pack overnight. You won't fully discharge the pack most of the time anyway so you could still recharge your normal daily use from 110.

Reply

Save

Like

Y

yarross

· #10 · Sep 16, 2010

For me, anything above 60Wh/kg (@1C) is technically enough. I would be happy seeing efforts lowering the price rather than pumping up performance. Of course, it's possible that high density batts will have lower price per Wh.

Reply

Save

Like

M

MN Driver

· #11 · Sep 17, 2010

vpoppv said:
I guess I just can't see the big picture here, but even Lithium seems plenty energy dense to me. Even if someone handed me a full set of LiFePO4 batteries, I couldn't afford to charge them. You get any more energy dense, how will you get the juice into them? I'm thinking a standard 15 amp outlet isn't going to cut it. So after the cost of the batteries, and the charger, are you going to need to call an electrician to come rewire your house to be able to supply the required power?

I'd wire in whatever outlet I need since I have the skill of working with household wiring. I've got a breaker box in the garage and wouldn't need to go far to plug in a car. The only issue I have is that I am working with a 100 amp service and I'm convinced that adding something too big would take me out of code compliance quickly. ...70 amps wouldn't be a good idea if I fired up the air conditioning at the same time. ;P

Reply

Save

Like

DIYguy

· #12 · Sep 17, 2010

My 240 volt 30 amp install cost me about $30. (I had the breaker). Most of my trips are recharged in 2 hours to 90%. It takes a while longer if I want to wait for the charger to finish off the last 10%. I have a 6kw charger.

Reply

Save

Like

M

MN Driver

· #13 · Sep 17, 2010

I'll add to what I originally said about this "You get any more energy dense, how will you get the juice into them? I'm thinking a standard 15 amp outlet isn't going to cut it."

If someone has a battery with a range of 300 miles(which is overkill IMHO), let's say a 75kwh pack and it is way oversized because they drive once a week up to their cabin or some other place but only use 50 miles round trip to work and back(let's say 12kwh, roughly 250wh/mile for the trip). They can charge their daily commute on a 15 amp 120 volt outlet in about 8 hours or so. These are rough numbers, it depends on the wattage of the charger too. If that person drove to work and back and had 10 hours available their battery would pretty much always be full. Once they make that big weekend trip, they would be able to do it but the charge time wouldn't matter so much anymore because if they spend the weekend they will have the opportunity to charge up at the cabin. It might take 50 hours or so to pile in 75kwh but with proper planning, having a 240 volt service might not be needed. It would probably be convenient to keep everything topped up but to someone with decent planning, they might not need it. Would this be the solution for someone crossing the country in an electric car 300 miles at a time, of course not. ...it all depends on the use, some people might be able to get away with it. In the right circumstances it might even be ideal for someone.

See less See more

Reply

Save

Like

DIYguy

· #14 · Sep 17, 2010

Lots of good points there MN....
just a couple comments...
Everyone really has "240 volt service". This is single phase...just two lines of 120vac.

I was using only 120v on my charger for quite a while..then I connected to 240. I really like it this way because I can use the truck several times in one day if I need to.

all the best.....

Reply

Save

Like

M

MN Driver

· #15 · Sep 17, 2010

DIYguy, I agree with you. For most people 240 volts is going to be beneficial and the cost of it is fairly low. Anyone who can afford a large pack is likely not going to even think about the cost of running lines from their electric box to their car. It was more of a hypothetical situation. I've been told that much of residential Canada isn't wired with split-phase 120/240 but I haven't had any real confirmation on that and I'm not sure why there wouldn't be because that would require a higher amperage wiring running to the house without the split. I'm also not sure how central air, welders, or an electric dryer or range(I personally prefer gas) would be able to operate without the higher wattage output. For the sake of Canada, I hope I'm wrong(someone please fill me in).

Reply

Save

Like

DIYguy

· #16 · Sep 17, 2010

I'm not aware of any part of Canada that is not split phase. Yes, it's correct...typically those appliances are 240 volt. ( I like natural gas also..I have cook top, clothes dryer, furnace and water heater running on NG.)

Reply

Save

Like

JRP3

· #17 · Sep 17, 2010

After the recent NG explosion I'm glad I have no gas in my house

Reply

Save

Like

Tahoe Tim

· #18 · Sep 18, 2010

Usually a house is wired for gas AND 240 volt electric to the range and the dryer. If you are lucky and are using gas appliances, there may be an unused 30 and 50 amp circuit breaker sitting there waiting to be used.

I personally would install a receptacle near the panel and buy a pre-made RV cord to connect to the car. They are available in 30 amp and 50 amp versions and various lengths.

Reply

Save

Like

JRP3

· #19 · Sep 18, 2010

I popped in a new 240V 30 amp breaker in the main panel, ran some 10/3 to the outside and mounted a 240V 30 amp locking twist lock and used an old marine shore power cord with new ends.

Reply

Save

Like

Top Contributors this Month