HHarrison

As GM Goes, So Goes the Nation (Part 2)

While I agree with some of your list, there are some problems.

On Feb 27 10:00 AM Chris B wrote:

> Richard,
> You're absolutely right about MSFT. Let's review the similarities:
>
>
> -massive quality / reliability / safety problems
> -refusal to recognize quality / reliability / safety problems
> -bureaucratic and defensive
> -lack of innovation

I'd caveat that with: lack of innovation that appeals to consumers, rather than innovation that locks people to your platform (zune vs. ipod)

> -wedded to old way of doing things (e.g. DOS based OS!)

Win98 was the last DOS-based kernel, Windows2000 and thereafter
has a WinNT pedigree

> -high-cost labor
> -inefficient product (i.e. processor requirements in this case)<br/>-can
> only make sales through particular financing tactics (i.e. preinstalled
> on new computers)

This point feeds itself, if you rely on installations of new machines...you
need to make sure your next version _drives_ people to buy new machines

> -so profitable for so many years, that some people think the idea
> of future losses is preposterous!

See XBox division...has it ever made a profit? Let's call this "Failure to profit from anything other than Windows and Office products"

America Must Rebuild Domestic Battery Manufacturing Infrastructure

On Dec 15 11:44 AM John Petersen wrote:

> HHarrison, as I understand it you can measure energy density either
> by weight or volume.

True, but my point applies equally well to both.

>In automotive and stationary applications volume
> is not anywhere the issue weight is. Sony's original Li-ion chemistry
> came in at about 180 Wh/kg, but it had a nasty habit of overheating
> and exploding.

Construction issue. In overdischarge cases Li-ion releases hydrogen gas (and it gets hot...boom). Sony had a piss-poor membrane design and in addition the quality control at the manufacturing end didn't help things. This allowed the hydrogen gas to pressurize rather than tripping a safety relief...stupid, stupid.....stupid.

> The safer new generation batteries are coming in at
> 80 to 100 Wh/kg. The Firefly, CSIRO and Axion products all take out
> big chunks of the inactive lead weight which significantly increases
> energy density. Likewise, the CSIRO and Axion battery supercapacitor
> hybrids boost power, slash recharge times and allow for much greater
> depth of discharge (80% to 90%). There is a lot of fascinating research
> being done right now. But nobody is going to convince me that the
> solution is importing Li-ion from China.

True, the vehicle based solutions have vastly different constraints than a bulk-storage case. Mainly in the load characteristics...it's incredibly 'peaky' which is why a capacitor added to the mix (with no comment as to the actual battery used) makes so much sense allowing the peaks to get smoothed out.

Agreed about the Li-ion imports, but the tech exists today for a decent solution (see the Prius, NiMH). Now add some additional capacity to the battery pack and add the option to plug it in as well as fuel with gas/diesal, and you start to bridge the gap to pure plugins (perhaps short-range at first, but things only improve over time)

America Must Rebuild Domestic Battery Manufacturing Infrastructure

From an electrical engineer:

I think there is certainly some merit to some of these points, let's have a look at some of your 'cherished mythologies':

1) Lead-acid batteries are rust-belt technology.

I've honestly never heard this one, agreed that it is silly. There are substantial uses of lead-acid battery packs that don't run on four wheels. It's just another way of storing electrical energy...and a cheap one if you can afford the weight required.

2) Lead-acid batteries are environmental hazards.

Fully agreed, lead-acid batteries are highly recyclable and will
only increase as raw material prices increase (salvage rates will increase)

3) Li-ion batteries are one-quarter of the weight of their lead-acid equivalents.

Why talk about weight when you immediately 'refute' this point by talking about energy density. It's a tradeoff as always. Lead acid has the energy storage to get your vehicle the distance you've targeted...great! But if you switch to NiMH or Lion and now you've doubled the range for
the same weight...but it costs more. How much is that extra range worth to you?

4) NiMH and Li-ion batteries have more power than lead-acid batteries.

Again, energy density is higher for Li-ion/NiMH (Chem 101). Lead-acid
does have a problem with high-discharge rates damaging the cathode
and reducing the lifetime of the cell. But, it can be discharged more fully without reducing its capacity. See for example why the Toyota batttery packs only discharge/charge the NiMH packs between 40% and 90% of
the actual capacity....there's your 50% decrease from theoretical density but the lifetime of the cells has increased (conservatively) 10x in terms of charge/discharge cycles. Lead acid hold up much better under full discharge/charge cycles....again tough choices to be made. That's also why a capacitor coupled battery makes so much sense in a vehicle as it can even out the very irregular load cycle. (acceleration and regen. braking (dis)charging the pack)

5) NiMH and Li-ion batteries have far longer cycle-lives than lead-acid batteries.

I touch on this above, lead-acid are great for full discharge/charge cycling, NiMH/Li-ion will exhibit a memory effect and lose capacity over time if charge discharge outside of a working range (approx. 40%-90% is what I use in my designs for NiMH)

6) NiMH and Li-ion batteries will improve as the technology matures.

I disagree that these are fully mature technologies...but in the end, energy is energy, it doesn't matter what it is stored in, if you can do what you need to with lead-acid, by all means go for it as it is easily the cheapest of the available battery technologies currently ($/Watt)

7) NiMH and Li-ion batteries will get cheaper as demand increases.

I don't have numbers at hand to agree or disagree with your assertion that 75% of the cost of NiMH/Li-ion is in raw materials. But I would suggest that every point you make about spiralling raw material prices will equally apply to lead-acid.

8) Li-ion batteries are a silver bullet solution to energy storage problems.

Fully agreed, there;s no free lunch.

9) Plug-in electric vehicles provide a cost-effective path to a clean energy future.

Not enough space to cover this one. But the best thing that would occur with a large EV fleet would be a place to store all of the non-constant output of alternative energy generation technologies (solar/wind/whatever) to be used effectively.