- Status
[citation][nom]chomlee[/nom]I am not sure of the advantage yet. Havent capacitors always had the ability to charge much faster than a battery? The issue is that it discharges pretty much as fast as it charges and you can't store the power for long periods of time like a battery, correct? If I am wrong and you can hold the charge, then great. Otherwise I don't really see the imediate benefit.[/citation]
That depends on the cap. Super caps are designed to have low leakage, just like some batteries. It is the energy density that is new, as until now (or carbon nano base super caps) the density just wasn't there.
That depends on the cap. Super caps are designed to have low leakage, just like some batteries. It is the energy density that is new, as until now (or carbon nano base super caps) the density just wasn't there.
[citation][nom]au_equus[/nom]how do you think graphene stores the charge? this capacitor works through the simultaneous oxidation of graphene to graphene oxide and its reduction back to graphene via laser or electrical current. you have chemicals and a supply of energy, thus new bonds can be broken and new ones formed. very few things have 'infinte lifetimes' and this one is not among them[/citation]
That is NOT how they WORK, that was how they were MADE!!!! Caps do NOT use chemical reactions to store energy!!!
That is NOT how they WORK, that was how they were MADE!!!! Caps do NOT use chemical reactions to store energy!!!
[citation][nom]john_4[/nom]Been asking this question for a long time, "Why not use a big capacitor or bank of smaller ones instead of batteries" The life expectancy would greatly increase. Sadly, there has been allot of good inventions throughout history that have been buried because of political/corporate shenanigans.[/citation]
Because current super caps only store about 1/10 the energy for the same amount of space. You want to haul a trailer full of caps around behind your car. Plus they cost a lot. This new way to make them, you could make that trailer full (but you wouldn't need that much space) for about 1/100th the price.
Because current super caps only store about 1/10 the energy for the same amount of space. You want to haul a trailer full of caps around behind your car. Plus they cost a lot. This new way to make them, you could make that trailer full (but you wouldn't need that much space) for about 1/100th the price.
zachusaman
Distinguished
- Dec 5, 2011
- 102
- 0
- 18,680
so it can discharge instantly?
im thinking tazers here, or overclocking my cpu to 30ghz for .1 seconds
im thinking tazers here, or overclocking my cpu to 30ghz for .1 seconds
- Dec 1, 2007
- 1,091
- 37
- 19,310
So, everything that took you an hour to charge before will only take 3.6 seconds?
Basically, you could charge a Tesla Roadster in 14.5 seconds. Hell, it takes longer to pump gas than it would take to charge the car.
I think this is the technology that will revolutionize the motor industry.
Basically, you could charge a Tesla Roadster in 14.5 seconds. Hell, it takes longer to pump gas than it would take to charge the car.
I think this is the technology that will revolutionize the motor industry.
[citation][nom]aplusbex[/nom]Since those are capacitors and there is no chemical reaction involved almost infinite under normal conditions also with no lost of performance during their lifetime.[/citation]
riiiight, because capacitors NEVER wear out? Not. When old radios quit working, its almost always because all the capacitors on the circuit board are shot.
riiiight, because capacitors NEVER wear out? Not. When old radios quit working, its almost always because all the capacitors on the circuit board are shot.
[citation][nom]pocketdrummer[/nom]So, everything that took you an hour to charge before will only take 3.6 seconds?Basically, you could charge a Tesla Roadster in 14.5 seconds. Hell, it takes longer to pump gas than it would take to charge the car.I think this is the technology that will revolutionize the motor industry.[/citation]
You have to also consider the amperage: Your average american all outlet is limited to 18 amps or so... If you try to exceed that, you will blow your fuse/trip your circuit-breaker real fast... If it doesn't you will likely dim the lights to your neighborhood and/or start an electrical fire from too much amperage flowing over insufficient wiring...
You have to also consider the amperage: Your average american all outlet is limited to 18 amps or so... If you try to exceed that, you will blow your fuse/trip your circuit-breaker real fast... If it doesn't you will likely dim the lights to your neighborhood and/or start an electrical fire from too much amperage flowing over insufficient wiring...
Tab54o
Distinguished
- Jan 10, 2012
- 261
- 0
- 18,790
[citation][nom]saturnus[/nom]This might be ok when we talk small battery pack like those used in a smart phone and laptop. For EVs the problem becomes the delivery system that is going to charge the batteries or ultracaps of the future.Let's take a Tesla battery at 56KWh as what would be standard for a long range EV of the future. If we assume we can get conversion and terminal losses down under 10% then we can say 60KW is required to charge the battery pack. Over the normal 4 hour charge time that's 15KWh. That's 65A @ 230V or 37½A @ 400V. Doable on a household circuit if it's a fairly recent install, or can be achieved relatively inexpensively.Now if you have to charge it 1000 times faster, ie. in about 14½ seconds, that'll mean that you'd need something that can supply 15MWh. It's totally impossible to do in anything that is even remotely safe to handle by a consumer. Even at 92% conversion efficiency as assumed above the waste heat generated will be equal to 1000 electric kettles. Might only be for 14 seconds but it'll melt your car in that time, even if it's made of metal.Far more realistic goal is just 50 times faster that today. It will mean a full recharge will take about 5 minutes. Or less time as takes to fill up a gas tank at a petrol station. It could be possible to transfer the needed 750KW but it will be problematic to make it safe enough. And it'll also require that each filling station would have it's own transformer station. And maybe use a large bank of ultracaps as buffers.[/citation]
But you can always slow the charge down. Just because you CAN charge it that fast doesn't mean you need to you can limit the current and lets say charge it in 10 min or whatever you want. That goes for any battery or capacitor. Either way you put the same amount of energy into it. Also if the batteries are lower voltage which I imagine they could be you will get more current by reducing voltage. Lets say you got a 220v line at 30 amps. That's about 6600 watts convert it to 12V. I'm sure they could design very efficient and fast 12v motors for vehicles. At 12v that's 550 amps for the same 6600 Watts. Also I imagine they could pulse the batteries charge and get the current very high for split seconds, not long enough to blow any breakers. There are ways around it, the most obvious being just slow it down a tad until domestic wiring and power distribution gets better.
But you can always slow the charge down. Just because you CAN charge it that fast doesn't mean you need to you can limit the current and lets say charge it in 10 min or whatever you want. That goes for any battery or capacitor. Either way you put the same amount of energy into it. Also if the batteries are lower voltage which I imagine they could be you will get more current by reducing voltage. Lets say you got a 220v line at 30 amps. That's about 6600 watts convert it to 12V. I'm sure they could design very efficient and fast 12v motors for vehicles. At 12v that's 550 amps for the same 6600 Watts. Also I imagine they could pulse the batteries charge and get the current very high for split seconds, not long enough to blow any breakers. There are ways around it, the most obvious being just slow it down a tad until domestic wiring and power distribution gets better.
jamie_1318
Distinguished
- Jun 25, 2010
- 188
- 0
- 18,710
[citation][nom]loomis86[/nom]riiiight, because capacitors NEVER wear out? Not. When old radios quit working, its almost always because all the capacitors on the circuit board are shot.[/citation]
I'm guessing you don't know about supercapacitors....
They aren't built at all like The capacitors in old radios. You know some of those capacitors are made of wax paper.
And there are capacitors that you should almost never replace, any of the smaller types are usually Ceramic, those shouldn't be replaced unless you can confirm they have a problem. 99% of them are still working.
Anyhow compared to a battery that caps out at 1000 cycles, SuperCaps have several million.
I'm guessing you don't know about supercapacitors....
They aren't built at all like The capacitors in old radios. You know some of those capacitors are made of wax paper.
And there are capacitors that you should almost never replace, any of the smaller types are usually Ceramic, those shouldn't be replaced unless you can confirm they have a problem. 99% of them are still working.
Anyhow compared to a battery that caps out at 1000 cycles, SuperCaps have several million.
[citation][nom]Tab54o[/nom]But you can always slow the charge down. Just because you CAN charge it that fast doesn't mean you need to you can limit the current and lets say charge it in 10 min or whatever you want. That goes for any battery or capacitor. Either way you put the same amount of energy into it. Also if the batteries are lower voltage which I imagine they could be you will get more current by reducing voltage. Lets say you got a 220v line at 30 amps. That's about 6600 watts convert it to 12V. I'm sure they could design very efficient and fast 12v motors for vehicles. At 12v that's 550 amps for the same 6600 Watts. Also I imagine they could pulse the batteries charge and get the current very high for split seconds, not long enough to blow any breakers. There are ways around it, the most obvious being just slow it down a tad until domestic wiring and power distribution gets better.[/citation]
You missed my point above. A Tesla roadster battery already exceeds what a standard household install can supply in the time it can actually be recharged in (4 hours). With the meager 6600W you describe above it takes 9 hours to recharge a Tesla. Now try imagine to power required to recharge it in 5 or 10 minutes. This will never be allowed to be installed anywhere except special filling stations.
You missed my point above. A Tesla roadster battery already exceeds what a standard household install can supply in the time it can actually be recharged in (4 hours). With the meager 6600W you describe above it takes 9 hours to recharge a Tesla. Now try imagine to power required to recharge it in 5 or 10 minutes. This will never be allowed to be installed anywhere except special filling stations.
[citation][nom]pocketdrummer[/nom]So, everything that took you an hour to charge before will only take 3.6 seconds?Basically, you could charge a Tesla Roadster in 14.5 seconds. Hell, it takes longer to pump gas than it would take to charge the car.I think this is the technology that will revolutionize the motor industry.[/citation]
Except it would require several major break through in energy transmission to achieve those 14.5 seconds.
We already have batteries widely available on the market that can be recharged at very high rates. Although doing so will cost you cycles. But given that LiFeYPO4 battereis already have 5000+ cycles which means a full recharge every day for over 13 years that's a small price.
I have a few LiFeYPO4 cells that I have tested to be able to recharge at 10C, meaning they can be recharged fully in about 7 minutes. They supposedly do take permanent damage from it in the form of lost cycles but since I'm not using them very often high cycle count don't matter that much to me. I have not been able to measure any difference before or after the torture test.
Except it would require several major break through in energy transmission to achieve those 14.5 seconds.
We already have batteries widely available on the market that can be recharged at very high rates. Although doing so will cost you cycles. But given that LiFeYPO4 battereis already have 5000+ cycles which means a full recharge every day for over 13 years that's a small price.
I have a few LiFeYPO4 cells that I have tested to be able to recharge at 10C, meaning they can be recharged fully in about 7 minutes. They supposedly do take permanent damage from it in the form of lost cycles but since I'm not using them very often high cycle count don't matter that much to me. I have not been able to measure any difference before or after the torture test.
- Jul 16, 2009
- 4,821
- 0
- 22,780
This needs to be researched more, because it doesn't matter if people have eelectric cars, or if the powerstations are all free electric from fusion reactors - it will never happen if I drive into a garage to recharge and have to spend more than 2 minutes.
How do I know?
Because the Western world has made it a point to spend billions going to war to ensure we can keep a regular flow of oil from the middle east right into "fat joeys" car because he is a fat lazy office drone
NO ONE wants to spend 8 hours charging a car, not even at home, even 8 minutes is a ball-ache
How do I know?
Because the Western world has made it a point to spend billions going to war to ensure we can keep a regular flow of oil from the middle east right into "fat joeys" car because he is a fat lazy office drone
NO ONE wants to spend 8 hours charging a car, not even at home, even 8 minutes is a ball-ache
NoCaDrummer
Distinguished
- Aug 2, 2008
- 104
- 0
- 18,680
[citation][nom]cyprod[/nom]... Then some company, I want to say it was Bic, but I can't remember who made it originally, developed a pressurized pen on their own volition and marketed it to NASA.....[/citation]
It was Paper Mate that created it. I remember using one in high school in the late 60's/early 70's. (We were all still hyped up that 2001 would be like "2001" - what a disappointment THAT turned out to be.)
It was Paper Mate that created it. I remember using one in high school in the late 60's/early 70's. (We were all still hyped up that 2001 would be like "2001" - what a disappointment THAT turned out to be.)
I don't think that we would use supercapacitors as the main energy storage in a car. Rather, they would be useful as an intermediate step between the motor/regen and the main battery. In current hybrid and electric cars, brake regeneration only can capture part of the energy dissipated due to the limited ability of the batteries to accept it. Supercapacitors could take the energy from a hard stop, and then recharge the batteries at a slower rate. Also, supercapacitors could have stored energy ready for short term acceleration. This could reduce wear on the main batteries and increase their lifespan.
[citation][nom]saturnus[/nom]You missed my point above. A Tesla roadster battery already exceeds what a standard household install can supply in the time it can actually be recharged in (4 hours). With the meager 6600W you describe above it takes 9 hours to recharge a Tesla. Now try imagine to power required to recharge it in 5 or 10 minutes. This will never be allowed to be installed anywhere except special filling stations.[/citation]
Except these could be cheap enough to have a second one at the charging station, charging all day, and then use IT to charge the one in the car. Of coarse you still need to worry about current. Wires can only supply so much at a time.
Except these could be cheap enough to have a second one at the charging station, charging all day, and then use IT to charge the one in the car. Of coarse you still need to worry about current. Wires can only supply so much at a time.
bad_student
Honorable
- Mar 26, 2012
- 21
- 0
- 10,510
This.
From skimming wikipedia (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Supercapacitors), a large disadvantage of these has been a low energy storage to weight ratio compared to electrochemical batteries.
From reading the first 10 lines of the actual article, "Our study demonstrates that our new graphene-based supercapacitors store as much charge as conventional batteries…"
bad_student
Honorable
- Mar 26, 2012
- 21
- 0
- 10,510
This.
From skimming wikipedia (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Supercapacitors), a large disadvantage of these has been a low energy storage to weight ratio compared to electrochemical batteries.
From reading the first 10 lines of the actual article, "Our study demonstrates that our new graphene-based supercapacitors store as much charge as conventional batteries…"
Electricity storage remotely approaching the practicality and cost of liquid fuels would be the biggest advance in mechanical engineering since the invention of steam power. It would change everything. If this guy was really on to something he wouldn't be talking about it. He's just trolling for suckers with money.
In the beginning mother nature wrote a rule book. The first rule is, you can't break the rules. The best we know of what's in the rule book is there's not going to be any nanotech super battery. Turn down the thermostat, fix up the bicycle, start your victory garden.
In the beginning mother nature wrote a rule book. The first rule is, you can't break the rules. The best we know of what's in the rule book is there's not going to be any nanotech super battery. Turn down the thermostat, fix up the bicycle, start your victory garden.
No good technology gets buried, If people think they can make money buy selling something.. they will sell it. Not to say oil companies wouldn't buy tech like this to shelve it.. but they could only do so for 7 years.
[citation][nom]speakmymind[/nom]don't know how many charge/discharge cycles you can get it out of this thing[/citation]
Probably a lot more than a battery. Batteries degrade over time because they are function via chemical interaction, whereas capacitors are purely electrical -- just conducting materials separated by a dielectric material.
Sure, you might get some degradation from heat produced by the current, but carbon is notoriously tolerant to high temperatures. In principle these could be extremely durable parts.
Probably a lot more than a battery. Batteries degrade over time because they are function via chemical interaction, whereas capacitors are purely electrical -- just conducting materials separated by a dielectric material.
Sure, you might get some degradation from heat produced by the current, but carbon is notoriously tolerant to high temperatures. In principle these could be extremely durable parts.
- Status
TRENDING THREADS
-
-
-
-
Discussion What's your favourite video game you've been playing?- Started by amdfangirl
- Replies: 4K
Latest posts
-
-
-
Question Thinkpad L15 Gen 2 AMD R5 5650 PCIe 4 NVME SSD?
- Latest: Reggin Drawkcab Daer
-
Facebook
Twitter
Instagram