this post was submitted on 10 Feb 2024
293 points (90.6% liked)

Technology

73534 readers
2401 users here now

This is a most excellent place for technology news and articles.


Our Rules


  1. Follow the lemmy.world rules.
  2. Only tech related news or articles.
  3. Be excellent to each other!
  4. Mod approved content bots can post up to 10 articles per day.
  5. Threads asking for personal tech support may be deleted.
  6. Politics threads may be removed.
  7. No memes allowed as posts, OK to post as comments.
  8. Only approved bots from the list below, this includes using AI responses and summaries. To ask if your bot can be added please contact a mod.
  9. Check for duplicates before posting, duplicates may be removed
  10. Accounts 7 days and younger will have their posts automatically removed.

Approved Bots


founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
top 50 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] lengau@midwest.social 53 points 1 year ago (2 children)

Or, better yet, they could provide the same range in smaller, lighter vehicles with less resource use.

[–] mediate@lemmy.world 18 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (2 children)

From the article:

"Moreover, the silicon-gel electrolyte system demonstrated ion conductivity comparable to conventional batteries while achieving a remarkable 40 percent increase in energy density. This represents a significant leap forward in battery technology, offering a practical solution ready for immediate application."

So, same energy output, lower weight, similar range. Would be good if this soon becomes a drop in replacement option for older EVs that are nearing EOL on their batteries and require new ones anyway.

[–] Blooper@lemmy.world 4 points 1 year ago (5 children)

I've always said that about one of my big reasons for buying an EV several years ago. By the time I'm in need of a replacement battery, it will be better in virtually every way - safer, faster to charge, higher capacity, lighter, and (potentially) cheaper. The first replacement battery might not be much of an improvement, but my 3rd might be light-years ahead.

[–] Shady_Shiroe@lemmy.world 8 points 1 year ago (3 children)

Looking at past actions of capitalism, it is more likely that same type of batteries will be sold for older cars and the new tech batteries will be only made for newer models, unless right to repair takes off, but who knows, still I do hope for a better and more sustainable future.

load more comments (3 replies)
load more comments (4 replies)
load more comments (1 replies)
[–] frezik@midwest.social 3 points 1 year ago

Why would we do that? I want to be able to sit in a car for 10 hours, pee in a bottle, and eat sandwiches I prepared ahead of time. This is an excellent way to spend most of a waking day. Who wants to do something as silly as getting out to stretch?

[–] Brokkr@lemmy.world 40 points 2 years ago (2 children)

Article states the use of an electron beam to enable this. So not currently scalable, but still a seemingly significant result.

[–] GluWu@lemm.ee 35 points 2 years ago (2 children)

Oh I know, just put it in an oven. Trust me, I saw one video on impossible blue LEDs, I know what I'm talking about.

[–] SoleInvictus@lemmy.world 6 points 1 year ago (1 children)

A microwave oven? According to some YouTube videos, Apple had this tech in their phones years ago.

[–] Blooper@lemmy.world 4 points 1 year ago (1 children)

They still do! Fastest wireless charge in the West.

load more comments (1 replies)
load more comments (1 replies)
[–] DemBoSain@midwest.social 19 points 2 years ago (3 children)

Can you expand on this? There used to be multiple electron beams in every house in America.

[–] Brokkr@lemmy.world 11 points 2 years ago

Ok, maybe it's possible that they aren't using a very focused electron beam, but usually when scientists think about using an electron beam they mean something inside of a machine like an SEM or e-beam lithograph. These only operate on small areas.

If an unfocused beam (and therefore lower energy density) can be used, then this could likely be scaled more easily. Even if a focused beam is needed, scaling may still be possible, but will likely require additional developments to create that process.

[–] Spaghetti_Hitchens@kbin.social 6 points 2 years ago

All of the beams in my house have electrons

[–] Alexstarfire@lemmy.world 3 points 2 years ago

I'm using mine right now.

[–] phoenixz@lemmy.ca 33 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Oooohhh, battery revolution claim #3515351657829, one of these days one of em MUST be true!

[–] Viper_NZ@lemmy.nz 4 points 1 year ago (3 children)

It’s not Toyota making the claim this time, it may not be bullshit for once.

load more comments (3 replies)
[–] QuandaleDingle@lemmy.world 22 points 2 years ago* (last edited 2 years ago) (3 children)

1k mile or kilometer range? Which is it? I'm inclined to believe it's kilometers. Time to read the article, I suppose. It's enticing either way.

[–] betabob@lemmy.dbzer0.com 14 points 2 years ago (1 children)

A bit misleading but yes, 1000km is what they are talking about. Also the article doesn't address scalability.

[–] metallic_substance@lemmy.world 5 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (2 children)

Well, there's a lot the article doesn't address. I can say this with complete confidence, even as someone who hasn't read the article

Edit: don't freak out, I eventually did read the whole article. Every word. And I was right.

[–] DacoTaco@lemmy.world 5 points 1 year ago

You READ it? What kind of madlad are you?!?!

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] AA5B@lemmy.world 8 points 1 year ago

They demonstrated 40% increase in energy density.

The stuff about the range appears to be simply applying that percentage to common EV ranges, which is nonsense. It’s probably more likely that an increase in energy density would be used to decrease battery size, leading to cheaper and lighter EVs

[–] nilloc@discuss.tchncs.de 4 points 1 year ago

The title says “1000 miles”, the the subtitle right below says “moving closer to 1000 kilometers” which is only 621 miles and pretty close to what we already could do with a ridiculously big battery in a Lucid Air or Tesla (if they didn’t bother with the plaid speed bullshit and just build for single motor range).

Stupid editorial work for maximum click bait.

[–] finkrat@lemmy.world 18 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Sounds nice, wake me up when it's available

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] fmstrat@lemmy.nowsci.com 14 points 1 year ago (1 children)

So how long can we play Steam Deck?

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] MNByChoice@midwest.social 11 points 1 year ago (1 children)
[–] AA5B@lemmy.world 4 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Thanks for the source. I wish I understood it better

[–] TonyTonyChopper@mander.xyz 7 points 1 year ago (1 children)

This research was focused on the lithium battery anode. Ideally we could just put a chunk of lithium in there but the stripping and deposition chemistry doesn't work well long term. Modern batteries use graphite instead. But of course you waste a significant amount of cell volume and weight with all of that carbon, and the potential is lower than Li metal. Alloying Li with silicon gets you properties more similar to Li.

So this paper talks about their efforts to make LiSi more viable as an anode. They gave it a coating to protect it from electrolyte side reactions and created a new gel electrolyte formation reaction. The capacity they report isn't remarkably higher than what's out there now since the cathode is the heaviest part of the cell.

As to the results I do have to say 60% capacity retention after 200 cycles is not nearly good enough for real world use. And I have no clue where they got the "1000 mile range" headline from.

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] Diplomjodler@feddit.de 11 points 1 year ago (13 children)

I wish people would stop obsessing so much over range. Once we have decent charging infrastructure in place and people overcome all the FUD, this will simply cease to be relevant.

[–] Kbobabob@lemmy.world 13 points 1 year ago (3 children)

Some people don't want to feel like they have to stop every hour for 15-20 minutes. If I'm going on a long road trip I'm fine driving 300-400 miles without stopping. I'm probably a minority but I'm sure I'm not the only one.

[–] Diplomjodler@feddit.de 3 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (1 children)

You're certainly not the only one but you're also being grossly irresponsible. Sufficient breaks are essential for staying attentive. Not stopping for five or six hours is just asking for disaster. Just think about what you're going to feel like if you killed someone because you fell asleep at the wheel.

Edit: and as per usual, lots of downvotes but no counterargument

[–] Mr_Dr_Oink@lemmy.world 8 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago)

Gonna upvote you, anyone who isnt taking regular breaks on long trips is asking for trouble. This is true of anything we do. No one here is going to argue we should work for 5-8 hours without a break.

They only make driving lessons 45 minutes because any longer and you start to lose concentration.

Truck drivers have to take breaks every 4.5 hours for 45 minutes.

When studying they recommend a 15 minute break every 45 minutes

When learning in school lessons are 45 minutes to an hour due to concentration lapsing and you get a break in the middle of the day.

If you are being downvoted its only by people who dont think about what you are saying or they think they are superhuman and the normal limitations of human beings dont apply to them.

load more comments (2 replies)
[–] SupraMario@lemmy.world 7 points 1 year ago (25 children)

Yea....no. Most of the USA is rural areas, range is a huge deal.

load more comments (25 replies)
[–] chiliedogg@lemmy.world 4 points 1 year ago (3 children)

I drive 82 miles a day on average according to my tracking, but that frequently involves days of 400+ miles. And since I drive in hill country and require air conditioning most of the years I know the range estimates are wildly optimistic versus real-world performance.

And charging a car isn't like filling up with gas. It's not a 3-minute stop. If a car can get me as far as I'm willing to drive in a day, then an overnight charge seems like an option.

But even then, since I'm a renter and always will be because of the shit going on with housing I can't get a fast charger.

All of this is to say that it's not 1 issue. It's all of them. Range, charging speeds, and availability of chargers ALL have to be addressed and essentially 100% reliable before I can risk owning an all-electric vehicle.

load more comments (3 replies)
load more comments (10 replies)
[–] troyunrau@lemmy.ca 7 points 1 year ago (5 children)

That would go a long way towards solving the range anxiety barrier. 1000km is close to the maximum that same people can do in a single day. Yes, you could push further in a day in a pinch, but not comfortably unless you're rotating drivers. It's pretty close to the limits enforced on long haul truck drivers in Canada or the US (depends on speed limits and traffic density and a few other things).

load more comments (5 replies)
[–] laverabe@lemmy.world 7 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (3 children)

Sodium is the future of batteries right now.

Projections from BNEF suggest that sodium-ion batteries could reach pack densities of nearly 150 watt-hours per kilogram by 2025. And some battery giants and automakers in China think the technology is already good enough for prime time. 1

+1 for them not exploding too.

load more comments (3 replies)
[–] atrielienz@lemmy.world 5 points 1 year ago (1 children)

I won't be buying a new car. ICE or EV. Specifically because my old car doesn't have a lot of the things that allow the car manufacturer to spy on me, and I won't upgrade to any of the nonsense. Right now I can fix pretty much everything in that car for less than the price of a new vehicle.

[–] echodot@feddit.uk 3 points 1 year ago (2 children)

I've managed to somehow make friends with the owner of a local junkyard. Not quite sure how I did that it wasn't intentional but it's quite useful because I can get parts for my car that the manufacturer would want hundreds of pounds for otherwise.

In the future I bet they pull some apple style rubbish and start software locking components to individual vehicles so you can't just pull them off a donor car to fix yours

load more comments (2 replies)
load more comments
view more: next ›