As reported by the New York Times, Envia Systems, a California-based battery manufacturing company, announced yesterday what it calls a “major breakthrough” in battery technology that is “poised to revolutionize cost, range and safety in electric vehicles.”
According to Envia’s press release, the breakthrough is a world record 400 Watt hour/kg lithium-ion battery, at a cost of $150 per kilowatt-hour, which is expected to “slash the price of a 300-mile range electric vehicle by cutting the cost of the battery pack by more than 50 percent.”
Envia was awarded $4 million by DOE’s ARPA-E in 2009, and later received $7 million in funding by a venture capital group owned by General Motors.
“Envia’s new battery technology represents exactly the kind of innovation and breakthroughs that ARPA-E is looking for from the American research and development community,” said ARPA‐E Director Arun Majumdar. “We hope that this low cost and high density battery technology enables wide spread adoption of electric vehicles across the country and around the world.”
What would a breakthrough like this mean for electrified transportation? For public and political support of energy R&D? Would a technical achievement like this be a “game-changer”?
By Gary Vesperman Founding Member, New Energy Congress
Their 400 watt-hours/kg lithion-ion battery compares unfavorably with at least two batteries in my compilation of “102 Electrical Energy Innovations” in http://www.padrak.com/vesperman.
The I. N. Frantsevich Institute for Problems of Materials Science (IPMS), Kiev, Ukraine, developed energy accumulator devices with energy densities of between 850 and 1050 watt-hours/kg. The measurements were conducted by both the Idaho National Electronic Laboratories and the Technology Materials Testing Laboratory of the Defense Department at the Pentagon. A key element of their crystalline lattice deposition method relies on the effects of a torsion field beam.
The solid-state Quantum High Energy Density Storage or Retrieval Device (QUENSOR™) has an energy density of about 1-15 kilowatt-hours/kg, which is comparable to gasoline, or more.
The profiles of these other batteries unfortunately do not include watt-hours/kg energy density claims. Maxwell Technologies’ commercially available PowerCache ultra-capacitors pack up to 100 times the energy of conventional capacitors and can deliver ten times the power of ordinary batteries.
Alvin Snaper’s nickel-iron battery has none of the drawbacks of all other types of batteries such as temperature sensitivity. Increasing the surface area of the electroplates by up to 1000 times greatly increases current output and allows much quicker charge/discharge rates. Different chemistry reduces the weight of the battery by 50%, reduces cost, and is much more environmentally friendly than lead.
Ed Baldwin’s solid-state multi-layered “super-capacitor” has a very high dielectric constant. It is believed ultimately capable of ten times the electrical energy storage capacity per pound of lead-acid batteries.
The Takahashi ultra-capacitor is rated at approximately 20 farads at 25 volts in a volume of about one cubic centimeter.
An interesting class of energy storage devices are those that replenish themselves as energy is extracted. Paul Brown’s nuclear battery uses tritium to power small circuits and electrical devices for several years. John Hutchison’s self-charged battery generates a perpetual DC voltage without external recharging.
Thin-film electrolytic cells have energy densities exceeding 250-400 watt-hours/kg. With 2-3 volts of electrical power and 1.5 milliamperes of current, the single film experiments have shown the material to produce more than 10 times as much output power as input. The input power is no more than 0.01 watts while .5 watt of heat is produced.
Mike Windell and Matt Schadeck’s Casimer-effect energy cells are like a solid-state battery that recharges itself with some valuable features such as simplicity and compactness.
David Yurth’s ceramic electrodynamic wafer is an alpha-emitter isotope which is combined with a proprietary thin film to produce a homogeneous crystalline material on an inert substrate. When subjected to a continuous magnetic field flux, the ions emitted by the isotopic material can be collected and rectified to perform work functions.
The Moe-Joe orgone energy cell is a five-inch metal sphere filled with specially charged water. Operating as an orgone energy accumulator, orgone energy is transferred from the cell through a tube into a gasoline engine via its PCV valve intake. Installed in a 1993 Saturn in 2008, its carefully measured mileage jumped from 30 MPG to 47 MPG. Smog checks before and after installation of the ball measured a 90% reduction of exhaust pollutants. Water does NOT enter the engine.
By Elias Hinckley Partner, KL Gates
Beyond a basic threshold (if you can give me 1500+ miles on a charge maybe I think differently about it), this is all about cost. The ability to compete on a cost per mile driven basis is vital to the EV market.
Do your have cost modeling for any of the technologies you reference?
By Gary Vesperman Founding Member, New Energy Congress
The only technologies for which I have specific costs are the Moe-Joe orgone energy cell and the electrino fusion power reactor.
Inventor Gordon Ziegler calculated that the first prototype electrino fusion power reactor could be built for $100 million. Subsequent production units would cost $37.5 million. What’s kind of inconvenient about the electrino fusion power reactor is that it only comes in one size – 1880 megawatts net. At least Ziegler claims that the electricity would only cost about 1.5% of current rates.
Re the Moe-Joe orgone energy cell, I just checked inventor Moshe Daniel’s website http://www.moe-joe-cell.com/Moe-Joe-Cell/. I see he has dropped the price to $250 plus another $50 or so for spacers, tubes, etc .With the gasoline prices going up again, the potential of a substantial increase in mileage (our 1993 Saturn went from 30 MPG to 47 MPG) should make it an attractive automotive aftermarket product. Unfortunately it is currently not a consumer friendly device. Some electronics needs to be built to fool the O2 signal. Otherwise the engine computer will add more fuel when the fuel-air mixture becomes leaner.
When I was working with the Russians on the hydro-magnetic dynamo, I recall being told they could build another prototype for under a million dollars. I have dozens of old files on that project. I may be able to find their specific claim of costs.
Please note the disclaimer at the end of my compilation of “102 Electrical Innovations”. Apparently it is perfectly OK for me to recommend to an elected public official to build a “Bridge to Nowhere”. But I am not recommending any inventions for investment by private parties. I do of course have personal preferences of some inventions over some of the other inventions.
If somebody gave me a blank check to do something with these inventions, the first thing I would do is interview all their inventors and thorougly document their inventions for posterity. Some of them are getting into their eighties. It could be greatly tragic to lose their work. I know we may have already lost at least two energy inventions.