From Stanford University encouraging news, a rechargeable Zinc-air battery would put electric cars into the realm of reasonable practicality, where with lead-acid batteries they are currently not.
Stanford scientists develop high-efficiency zinc-air battery
Stanford University scientists have developed an advanced zinc-air battery with higher catalytic activity and durability than similar batteries made with costly platinum and iridium catalysts. The results, published in the May 7 online edition of the journal Nature Communications, could lead to the development of a low-cost alternative to conventional lithium-ion batteries widely used today.
“There have been increasing demands for high-performance, inexpensive and safe batteries for portable electronics, electric vehicles and other energy storage applications,” said Hongjie Dai, a professor chemistry at Stanford and lead author of the study. “Metal-air batteries offer a possible low-cost solution.”
According to Dai, most attention has focused on lithium-ion batteries, despite their limited energy density (energy stored per unit volume), high cost and safety problems. “With ample supply of oxygen from the atmosphere, metal-air batteries have drastically higher theoretical energy density than either traditional aqueous batteries or lithium-ion batteries,” he said. “Among them, zinc-air is technically and economically the most viable option.”
Zinc-air batteries combine atmospheric oxygen and zinc metal in a liquid alkaline electrolyte to generate electricity with a byproduct of zinc oxide. When the process is reversed during recharging, oxygen and zinc metal are regenerated.
“Zinc-air batteries are attractive because of the abundance and low cost of zinc metal, as well as the non-flammable nature of aqueous electrolytes, which make the batteries inherently safe to operate,” Dai said. “Primary (non-rechargeable) zinc-air batteries have been commercialized for medical and telecommunication applications with limited power density. However, it remains a grand challenge to develop electrically rechargeable batteries, with the stumbling blocks being the lack of efficient and robust air catalysts, as well as the limited cycle life of the zinc electrodes.”
Active and durable electrocatalysts on the air electrode are required to catalyze the oxygen-reduction reaction during discharge and the oxygen-evolution reaction during recharge. In zinc-air batteries, both catalytic reactions are sluggish, Dai said.
Recently, his group has developed a number of high-performance electrocatalysts made with non-precious metal oxide or nanocrystals hybridized with carbon nanotubes. These catalysts produced higher catalytic activity and durability in alkaline electrolytes than catalysts made with platinum and other precious metals.
“We found that similar catalysts greatly boosted the performance of zinc-air batteries,” Dai said. both primary and rechargeable. “A combination of a cobalt-oxide hybrid air catalyst for oxygen reduction and a nickel-iron hydroxide hybrid air catalyst for oxygen evolution resulted in a record high-energy efficiency for a zinc-air battery, with a high specific energy density more than twice that of lithium-ion technology.”
The novel battery also demonstrated good reversibility and stability over long charge and discharge cycles over several weeks. “This work could be an important step toward developing practical rechargeable zinc-air batteries, even though other challenges relating to the zinc electrode and electrolyte remain to be solved,” Dai added.
Other authors of the Nature Communications study are Yanguang Li (lead author), Ming Gong, Yongye Liang, Ju Feng, Ji-Eun Kim, Hailiang Wang, Guosong Hong and Bo Zhang of the Stanford Department of Chemistry.
The study was supported by Intel, a Stanford Global Climate and Energy Project exploratory program and a Stinehart/Reed Award from the Stanford Precourt Institute for Energy.
This article was written by Mark Shwartz, Precourt Institute for Energy at Stanford University.
Oops sorry, the bold should have stopped after:
“One of the broken symmetries proven by Wu et al. and published in 1957 is the broken symmetry of opposite charges, as on the ends of a dipole.
I would like to fill in a little history by remembering the late Stanley Garth Whitworth-Williams-Foxcroft of Johannesburg, South Africa, an orphan raised by a physicist at Wits university. He invented a zinc air battery and after demonstrating a +1000 km drive on a single charge in a Bentley sedan, sold the patent in 1953 for 15m Pounds to the largest lead acid batter company in the world at the time. They promptly filed it under ‘G’ and made sure it never saw the light of day.
When he passed away a short number of years ago he was working on an engine that used electrical power to create hydrogen in a closed cycle hydrogen engine. He had a working 135 HP single cylinder unit he could easily carry with his own nonagenarian hands. I asked him why bother and he asked if I had seen the size of a 135 HP electric motor. Good point.
“””””…..said Hongjie Dai, a professor chemistry at Stanford and lead author of the study. “Metal-air batteries offer a possible low-cost solution.”……”””””
Not quite a true statement.
“””””…..said Hongjie Dai, a professor chemistry at Stanford and lead author of the study. “Metal-air batteries possibly offer a low-cost solution.”…..””””
There, now it’s fixed.
Blade says:
May 31, 2013 at 1:09 am
“””””…..Everytime I see a greenie using wireless mouse and keyboard I like to shove this inconvenient truth down their pompous piehole. There are times wireless, and consequently a battery is necessary and cannot be avoided. Pacemakers would be difficult if tethered. 🙂 However the truth of the matter is that someone who professes green dreams should be avoiding using batteries whenever possible because in almost every instance it wastes more energy than if it were not using one. Add in those other factors about cost and hazardous materials and disposal and batteries become as eco-unfriendly as possible……”””””
Shows how much YOU know about mice, including wireless mice.
There simply is no such thing, as a wireless mouse that was designed for any green reason. The entire motivation for wireless mice, or wireless keyboards, is ERGONOMICS.
Wired keyboards, and specially wired mice are ergonomically destructive. The cable forces a user hand position that leads often to crippling repetitive stress wrist problems, that can be career ending.
I personally know two brilliant graduates of leading technical institutions; one male, one female, who became crippled to the point of having to exit their chosen professions as design engineers, by ergonomically bad keyboards and wired mice. And I designed the optics in probably one half of all the mice still living alongside computers on this planet; over two billion of them at last count.
None of them were green projects. Certainly, battery life was a key factor; (a) it leads to less frequent need for replacement, and use of a smaller battery, allows the industrial designer, to make an even more ergo safe design.
I cut the optical system of the very first laser mouse down from a 35 mm cube of volume (more a rat, than a mouse) down to smaller than a sugar cube, 8mm on a side, in the replacement model, and infinitely better performing as well.
“””””…..Tsk Tsk says:
May 30, 2013 at 7:09 pm
In other news, new breakthrough in solar cell efficiency!! Of course it’s a hopelessly expensive multi-junction concentrator, but it makes for great press. Count me firmly in the overhyped camp along with carbon nanotubes and High Tc. Get back to me when you’ve demonstrated something approaching real world usage……”””””
Not so fask Tsk.
For starters, there has been no perceptible increase in PV cell efficiency, in the last 12 months. I attended the latest solar symposium at UC Davis, earlier this month, and Lawrence L. Kazmerski of NREL National Renewable Energy Laboratory in Golden Colorado, reported the same 43.5% efficiency for a triple junction cell, as was the record announced at last year’s solar symposium, at UC Merced.
The thing about solar energy, is that it is free (to some people; those being the people who own land.
What is NOT free about solar energy, is the gathering of it. You get about 1 KW/m^2 at air mass 1.5, that is /m^2 normal to the sun vector. So the money is in the land, not the solar cells. So triple junction cells in cheap steerable optical collection arrays, offer considerable advantage over acres of cheap low efficiency solar cells. UC Merced is at the forefront of efficient optical concentrator development. Professor Roland Winston, who heads up their program, is probably the world’s leading authority, on high efficiency non-imaging optics. That is efficiency in achieving solar flux concentration limited only by the second law of thermodynamics. Winston et al, actually made a solid optical concentrator made out of a YAG crystal, that achieved a W/m^2 level, that is higher than the sun.
(by virtue of the fact that there is an N^2 factor missing from the Stefan-Boltzmann equation). That high density, is only available inside the crystal; you can’t get it out into the air. Yes cooling was a problem, but they were able to tweak the system, by concentrating the full moon instead of the sun.
Myrrh,
TAANSTAAFL
There ain’t no such thing as a free lunch. Yes the time/space field is absolutely full of energy. So is a teaspoon full of water. enough to destroy a large city. Getting that energy to do work is a different matter altogether. Contrary to anything from New Scientist, there is no Grand conspiracy to Suppress The Truth. There’s only the hard facts of physics. Work can only be done by energy flowing from place to place, and that can only happen when the potentials differ.
Honestly, there’s too much money on the table to keep free energy secret.. Energy systems are a multi-trillion dollar industry where gaining a single percentage point of efficiency can mean literally unimaginable wealth. The idea that a biased educational system could keep literally tens of thousands of Electrical Engineers from seeing the truth is laughable.
Danby says:
May 31, 2013 at 10:28 pm
There ain’t no such thing as a free lunch. Yes the time/space field is absolutely full of energy. So is a teaspoon full of water. enough to destroy a large city. Getting that energy to do work is a different matter altogether. Contrary to anything from New Scientist, there is no Grand conspiracy to Suppress The Truth. There’s only the hard facts of physics. Work can only be done by energy flowing from place to place, and that can only happen when the potentials differ.
Hence my questions.
What is it that is done in batteries to shut down the dipole?
Why can’t we just stop doing it?
Honestly, there’s too much money on the table to keep free energy secret.. Energy systems are a multi-trillion dollar industry where gaining a single percentage point of efficiency can mean literally unimaginable wealth. The idea that a biased educational system could keep literally tens of thousands of Electrical Engineers from seeing the truth is laughable.
It’s precisely because as it stands this is a license to print money industry… These corporations do not want us to have ‘free’ energy on tap as it were.
Maxwell’s original equations are not taught. Tesla’s work was destroyed. I can only suggest that you read more about how the bankers and corporations got to monopolise the growing industries in the US at the turn of the new energy age, this was at the very beginning of the electrical industry. Before tv..
When farmers in the US had their own wind power to run their radios and Ford was not only running his cars on hemp, was building them out of it.. The original denims were made from hemp, soft and very hard wearing, used for sail cloth and rope and paper and food and etc etc, the infant oil industry and the pharmatceuticals developing new materials and Hearst demonised it by first giving it a name change together with a huge ad campaign showing young white girls ruined by black men in sleazy surroundings.. And they didn’t stop there – they got it banned all over the world.
A bit of your history to get you going: http://rense.com/general67/FORD.HTM
And a bit more history of hemp: http://drlwilson.com/Articles/hemp.htm
Until you have some idea of the power of these growing industries in influencing the markets to suit themselves and creating monopolies, like the pharmaceutical companies even now getting herbs banned from common sales, you are going to find it hard to grasp the problem here.
Morgan was supporting DC current production and Tesla’s was not only better in travelling distances, but his genius could pull it out of the air on the spot.. There’s quite a lot on the ac/dc wars but the original Maxwell equations were ‘too difficult’, and seen as a bigger threat to monopoly control, and so were buried and Tesla broken.
You must be used to by now all the disinformation promoted as “science” in AGW.., the same people are in control of this as they won the monopoly wars against rivals in the same industries and against alternative products in the last century. That’s how they built up their power base, which has now conned even people who can otherwise think rationally into believing a trace gas which is practically 100% hole in the atmosphere with zilch heat capacity, which means it can neither trap nor store heat, is a great thermal blanket and has super powers to raise global temperatures – and conned them into not seeing how absurd this is by instigating arguments about how many degrees..
Here a short piece on the Tesla history and method: http://www.frankgermano.net/nikolatesla7.htm
Does anyone know any electrical engineers who could explain this in terms of the questions I asked about the battery?
I still can’t get past the detail that batteries store chemicals not electricity.
And the last time I checked the petrol (Gas) in my tank is a chemical.
The ‘problem’ of practical energy storage has already been solved.
It would be fun to swap my Nissan Leafs battery pack for this theoretical Zinc-air pack which proposes 10x greater energy density. My car would have a range approaching 1,000 miles in the right conditions.
On a serious note it’s sad to read so many ill informed opinions about this subject on this site.
First my previous car needed 30~40 minutes to fill it up if you include travelling, queuing, filling paying and in all sorts of garbage weather. £6 fekkin’ a gallon!!
Why you people don’t know the drilling, transporting and processing every gallon of fuel consumes at least 6.5KWH of energy. My last car consumed about that in 30 miles. The middle man who hates you and supplies the terrorism – is defunct.
And to the gentleman who says nobody will consider an electric car until it makes at least 300hp. I must remind you of the Tesla Model S, (which is priced against BMW) and over 400hp. Consumer Reports states its definitely the best car they have ever tested.
Lastly I’ll wrap up with the 787 battery pack and the propensity to overcharge its cells. The modifications made to it have turned it from a death trap into a potential bomb! Mark my words. No surprises if the Tesla CEO avoids flying in that plane.
@Andyj
And Tesla is also bankrupt, as all the other electric vehicle manufacturers. The last one recently gone is an Israeli one which country pushes them as the next best inventions since sliced bread. If electric vehicles were that great they’d take over the market by storm just on their own merits. But even despite huge governement subsidies (which are one of the reasons you pay 6$ per gallon) they not even make the tiniest dent in regular carsales.
Let’s just look at reality and not at bogus numbers. The only way an electric vehicle can replace a regular one is by fitting it with a diesel-electric drivetrain. Proven technology, simple and sturdy, powering massive cargofreighters, locomotives etc for decades without a hitch.
In other news on the Alt-energy front
http://www.nytimes.com/2013/05/29/business/energy-environment/solar-powers-dark-side.html?_r=3&
Solar Industry Anxious Over Defective Panels
“LOS ANGELES — The solar panels covering a vast warehouse roof in the sun-soaked Inland Empire region east of Los Angeles were only two years into their expected 25-year life span when they began to fail.
Coatings that protect the panels disintegrated while other defects caused two fires that took the system offline for two years, costing hundreds of thousands of dollars in lost revenues.
It was not an isolated incident. Worldwide, testing labs, developers, financiers and insurers are reporting similar problems and say the $77 billion solar industry is facing a quality crisis just as solar panels are on the verge of widespread adoption….
The quality concerns have emerged just after a surge in solar construction. In the United States, the Solar Energy Industries Association said that solar panel generating capacity exploded from 83 megawatts in 2003 to 7,266 megawatts in 2012, enough to power more than 1.2 million homes. Nearly half that capacity was installed in 2012 alone, meaning any significant problems may not become apparent for years….”
Read it all, and keep in mind this the NYT, not exactly a dedicated enemy of the enviros.
Yikes! George, my friend, I have been in the personal computer tech game for like 30 years, and big iron another ten. You misunderstand me completely.
Ergonomics is what you or I think of, and rightly so. But for lefty greenies the thought never crosses their tiny little minds. These hipsters get wireless tech for convenience, ergonomics isn’t even an afterthought. They get this stuff to eliminate wires and clutter and furthermore they actually believe that the missing wires means less energy, not more, which is the very point I am making. Worst of all, they proudly stump for all things green including carbon taxes while they consume extra energy every chance they get.
I kept it simple because it is simple. When moving from the established infrastructure to any new wireless electrical paradigm, the cost is paid in increased net energy consumption, and batteries are a key part of that because they get you coming and going.
Furthermore, I actually offer no opinion on this new paradigm. It may make some sense to push the energy generation upstream ( in the case of coal plants and electric vehicles ) or it may make sense to have wireless everything in the home ( more net energy usage but free roaming convenience ), as long as you acknowledge the sacrifice of more energy consumption for the sake of convenience. Please re-read my comment because it honestly went right past you.
My real point is only to label hypocrites as hypocrites and stick a needle in the pompous gas filled balloons that describe our friendly neighborhood green eco-nuts.
Petrossa,
You are another fine example of a person who’s fine theories are dashed by the facts.
.
If Tesla is bankrupt, explain why their shares (TSLA) have doubled within this past month, the Gov’t loan is paid off early and they are still selling cars like nobodys business. Not to forget Tesla is now working on fast charging stations over ALL the USA, offering free recharging for life!
.
That Israeli “Better Place” had no product. No swap stations, no car, nothing to offer me.
Fuel here in the UK is £6 ($9), not $6 a gallon due wholly to taxes. It’s ALWAYS been high here.
.
Diesel electric as you opine is merely a form of continuously variable transmission. Mainly used on back yard goods trains, not the large EU high speed electric rail networks.
.
I have been keeping tabs on costs and consumption of my Nissan Leaf. Granted I bought it new at the right price. Running costs here are around 3.3p/mile against 16p/mile. Servicing @7,500miles is rotate tyres, fill bottles.
No road tax, last car was £197.
It’s not only proved to be a complete no-brainer; the equipment and ride are Mercedes S class territory. With no exceptions.
Dave Wendt says:
June 2, 2013 at 2:52 am
In other news on the Alt-energy front
http://www.nytimes.com/2013/05/29/business/energy-environment/solar-powers-dark-side.html?_r=3&
Solar Industry Anxious Over Defective Panels
New York Times as a credible news source for solar panels…..
Hey, wanna buy an Irish Gold mine?
Andyj, the only reason Tesla is still here is because of taxpayersmoney.
“Take that Fiat comparison: In the first quarter of this year, Fiat sold 1 million cars and made a $40 million profit. Tesla sold 4,900 cars and, not counting the sale of regulatory credits under California law, lost $53 million, or more than $10,000 per car.”
http://www.washingtonpost.com/business/economy/teslas-market-value-soars-but-some-see-a-bubble/2013/05/16/7589d84c-bcd1-11e2-97d4-a479289a31f9_story.html?hpid=z2
Amazed that you are that gullible.
What a coincidence Andyj, Zerohedge came with this Tesla calculator: How Many Cars Must Tesla Sell: This Interactive Calculator Has The Scary Answer: 537815 http://www.zerohedge.com/news/2013-06-03/how-many-cars-must-tesla-sell-interactive-calculator-has-scary-answer?destination=node%2F474792
In other words Tesla is bankrupt but kept alive via taxpayersmoney.
Petrossa, you’re making the fatal mistake of quoting the Washington post. Fiat have always been a dead duck company selling garbage. It’s recent success has been the foreign redesigned/engineered reborn 500 and it’s still in deep debt:-
(wiki)
“In 2010, credit rating agency Fitch cut Fiats debt rating to BB- after it had accumulated a debt of around €9.3 Billion. In 2013, Fiats debt rating was cut again, this time by Moody’s, to Ba3[7] over concerns European demand was lower and debt was falling slower than expected.[8] The Financial Times estimate of Fiats debt at the time was almost €28 billion.[9]”
Now I suggest you read the Wiki on Tesla motors
( https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tesla_Motors ).
TSLA was the most shorted stock. many US hating gas-heads have lost out big time. It’s now $97 a share and I’m considering buying an arable mountain in the South of France..
P.S. Gross profit for Dec 2012 was $30.1M
.
You cannot win this one.
Zerohedge are smarting very badly over their great advice. Want another spanking?
NEVER listen to anyone who uses the word ASS-U-ME!
Finally….
“TESLA REPAYS DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY LOAN NINE YEARS EARLY
ONLY AMERICAN CAR COMPANY TO HAVE PAID BACK GOVERNMENT”
WEDNESDAY, MAY 22, 2013
Must go. Just got an email off my car. It’s finished charging. Off on a 100 mile highway run to a friends. I’ll be stopping off half way for a (free) high speed recharge so I might have 15 minutes spare to eat a pie and drink a cup of tea on the way down 🙂
Life is tough for stupid people :))
Wikipedia, facts by consensus. Tesla pays 15 million with money it loaned and with some creative bookkeeping suddenly made a profit on cars it loses 10000$ a pop on. Yep. Sounds like green calculations indeed. Way to go. Tesla isn’t going to last 2 years this way. Obama can’t keep on funding them.
ok clever lad.
Tesla has paid off money it did not have and did not need to. Also loses money on every car they are selling but to break even on this loss they must sell 1/2M cars on your idiot piece about an assumption… Each year on year they show a profit. The share price has quadrupled on your bad news.
All without taking any other loan or moneys off the state. Seems to you they must be printing money from the losses they are making.
Give us a break! Please, change your medication or something. The Tesla S is better than the M5 class of car it is up against which cannot and will not offer free fuel for life used interstate.
.
p.s. Zinc-air rechargeables will never get any funding from me. That is a quacks dream.
The share price is way below IPO, no way Tesla is going to get enough loading stations placed to support the millions of cars it needs to sell to make a profit, no way no grid no where is going to be able to service millions of cars loading at about the same time no matter which make.
DOA. But pleasant dreams of nice clean future.
Petrossa,
from $25 to $97 and some predict in the long run to hit $140+ well after this feeding frenzy on the losers who shorted. Early days yet.
This car is mooted as “Apple” of this decade.
You say “no way” yet the Superchargers are in existence and being built right now as you sit there like the three wise monkeys. 25% of the people who drive this car in the USA end up buying it. It’s that good!
Get your sorry ass in a Leaf and realise as you drive off in your car what a sorry mess you are having to put up with, servicing, consumables, dirt and so much “cost plus”. It’s your call to lose your bigotry.