Comments

You must log in or register to comment.

JoeBoredom t1_j2y6w9m wrote

"no acute toxicity"

Ok, but what about long term exposure? These batteries have toxic and corrosive components. The military doesn't have a stellar performance history of protecting it's personnel or the environment.

199

thalassicus t1_j2ykzs3 wrote

What are you talking about?! Just have the soldiers throw the batteries into burn pits. Problem solved!!

50

lvl100_richarizard t1_j304bpg wrote

We have examined your case, and found your cancer to be non service related. Next!

11

illigal t1_j2ynqzd wrote

What do you mean? These are “biodegradable” I.e. they just get burned in a burn pit when worn out.

8

T0MSUN t1_j32bi99 wrote

No the great thing about flow batteries is the ability to completely avoid toxic components because you just need an electrolyte solution. You can use toxic electrolyte solutions but don’t need to.

The real issue is their size. Power density is real low and you need a ton of space to get any real capacity.

6

BirdiePolenta t1_j30ej83 wrote

I mean, if they want this to be known (and of course they do, because we are reading about it), it´s two things:

  • psyops
  • they have a way more advanced tech behing the curtains
47

PublicFurryAccount t1_j31hdk3 wrote

Why would you think that?

The US military has always been shockingly open about what they’re working on, in large part because they need Congress to give them money for it.

12

Longjumping_Meat_138 t1_j31kthx wrote

Also you aren't exactly going to be hiding any advanced tech that is used commonly. If the US suddenly found a way to make Ray Guns, and decided to make them standard for every unit, Then obviously they are not going to be able to hide it.

4

PublicFurryAccount t1_j32e0zn wrote

Yep! Also, don’t underestimate the value of deterrence or of, well, advertising for the MIC! Unit costs are cheaper when you have more buyers.

3

2020willyb2020 t1_j30y727 wrote

Bet the trucks tanks etc are all battery charged with insane distance and they have mobile charging stations on small trucks when needed - would sure help logistics and supply lines

7

bogglingsnog t1_j33bmz4 wrote

Even civilian e-motorcycles can hit some crazy distances these days, I have seen a few with 100-150 miles of range. If the military wanted to they could make their own with double or triple the amount of batteries, it will just behave more like a full size motorcycle than a dirt bike.

I imagine it will be awhile before they switch to fully electric trucks. I could see a hybrid being used though it could possibly increase maintenance challenges.

Non-flammable batteries would be a HUGE leap forward for the military, they could have fully electric drivetrains with no risk of fire, would be amazing for tanks. The batteries could even form a part of the internal armor, wrap it around the ammo rack etc.

4

DevinMGates t1_j322jhl wrote

Or.... this is just how batteries actually work, on a larger scale?!!

I mean... it's literally the same concept, from what I've read, but on a MUCH larger and non-SS, scale.

3

Orc_ t1_j3borz0 wrote

> they have a way more advanced tech behing the curtains

not in batteries, thats for sure, that whole area of tech if bottlenecked by the laws of physics. Even nano-batteries that I read about made by nano-structures had the capacity to be charged quite rapdily BUT the energy density continues to be ABYSMAL.

Meaning we never really gonna get something like a T-800 ever, you'd have to run that bish with a tether like something out of Evangelion.

2

DukeOfGeek OP t1_j2y4ktb wrote

New power supply/back up being installed at military bases. If it works there it could have civilian applications.

21

[deleted] t1_j2y5hfq wrote

[deleted]

−20

manikin13 t1_j2yf1s4 wrote

All power generation requires energy input, that's what the diesel is. Here you combine this with Solar panels or wind turbines, or other electric sources, and its the same,

30

[deleted] t1_j2ygcol wrote

[deleted]

−24

manikin13 t1_j2ygvg7 wrote

The battery may bring long-duration, large-capacity energy storage to bases around the world."

19

[deleted] t1_j2yi0e7 wrote

[deleted]

−31

manikin13 t1_j2ykgvq wrote

Did you read the article? "Operational in 2024, .... grid scale energy storage, " yes there are other players in the market, but this is new technology, nothing is guaranteed, but without innovation there is no progress.

19

cluckatronix t1_j2z25gn wrote

The military has already started using solar in some field applications because they were tired of their diesel supply convoys getting blown up. If I find the podcast I learned about this on I’ll link it.

8

croninsiglos t1_j2zoj3a wrote

This is not a new or novel solution and these have been used in industry for some time now.

Entire utility scale solutions exist such as a facility in China which has a 100 MW model. Compared to Lithium based batteries, flow batteries suffer from low energy density and low charge/discharge rates.

Here's their argument for flow batteries:

> With lithium-ion, the power and energy are fused together in a single package. If you want to have longer duration lithium above four hours [discharge duration] you’re basically buying power capacity you don’t need, that’s redundant

> -Lockheed Martin business development director Roger Jenkins

Which, if you know anything about batteries, is the dumbest excuse imaginable. This is likely simply to not rely on foreign suppliers of necessary metals and that makes more sense than purposely using an inferior technology because the current stuff is too capable.

12

80percentlegs t1_j3114t2 wrote

He is right about long duration, but doesn’t quite get into the details. There are duration limits to Li+ mostly because short circuit current ratings of the DC inputs on the inverter limit how many batteries you can put behind a single inverter. This means to get longer durations, you need to derate the power output of the inverter, but if you’re trying to hit a certain plant power capacity that means buying more inverters. That means your plant has a lot of potential power capacity in the inverters that is not being used.

3

zg3409 t1_j312qok wrote

Flow batteries have been around for 10+ years. They are basically a lead acid battery (or similar) where the liquid in the battery is moved in and out of battery into a big liquid storage so the battery itself is small but the amount of liquid is massive. Nothing really special and tend to be relatively expensive. Maybe handy for reducing costs of running generators at night. Lots of previous research on them. It's more an engineering solution than magic. Here from 2005 https://www.irishtimes.com/news/dundalk-college-gets-wind-turbine-to-supply-its-electricity-1.483649

8

StrugglesTheClown t1_j31fnkr wrote

I'm assuming the goal would be more energy independence if military installations. So Solar and wind tied to a big ass battery, or something like that

4

DukeOfGeek OP t1_j33bk95 wrote

Not having to ship fuel to a remote base is double plus good.

3

prickles_and_goo t1_j32g0fb wrote

DARPA at it again. Military tech becomes civilian tech after X number of years.. always good to get the sneak peek on what's coming!

6

Carl_The_Sagan t1_j32fq4t wrote

The US military is the world's number one polluter as a single organization and has more pollution than several first world countries. Not sure this will help. Oh well

4

gypsynose t1_j35u9k0 wrote

This is a key to the US military switching to solar in a reliable fashion. You need abundant/on demand storage for intermittent power generation.

4

RUIN_NATION_ t1_j30zaxe wrote

we are only hearing about it now almost bet they had it 10 years or so.

2

gypsynose t1_j35tucd wrote

I worked as an intern on this project 5 years ago. It was public knowledge then, you just have to know what you're looking for or be highly invested in news in this space. I'm constantly reading about the cutting edge in energy storage and material science.

1

Jim-Slady t1_j339xs0 wrote

What happens if we run out of "military power"? Then do we lose our military power?

2

Ownza t1_j39rb04 wrote

>What happens if we run out of "military power"? Then do we lose our military power?

If we lose millitary power we probably produce an immense amount of power instantly.

1

No_Bet_1687 t1_j31re5y wrote

So could this besides to power some handheld energy weapons? This is the future where the hell are all the lasers and stuff?

1

S0nG0ku88 t1_j31zqos wrote

"Lasers and stuff" would be a cool grocery store name in the future. Hey you need anything? I'm going down to the 'lasers and stuff' at Toshi station to get some power couplers and maybe a laser gun or two.

2

imlaggingsobad t1_j344n9a wrote

This isn't the good stuff. The military has been working on fusion energy since the cold war. They've got amazing tech locked away in bunkers somewhere.

1

king-of-yodhya t1_j34okel wrote

So you are saying that American military will finally be able to win a war ?

1

WowzerzzWow t1_j33fmyk wrote

I guarantee that one private will either eat these or shove them up their butt.

0

goodwc72 t1_j344ian wrote

Army not Marines lol

1

WowzerzzWow t1_j344ua0 wrote

My bad. Correction: I bet some private will shove one up their butt and then I’ll have to do mandatory training because of it.

2

goodwc72 t1_j34ghy2 wrote

Lol. I was just joking that a marine is more likely to wash down their crayons with a battery lmao

1

johnsonder t1_j325oey wrote

What happens when one of these inevitably blows up?

−2

ADDnMe t1_j36z165 wrote

An engineering autopsy is done, hopefully they find the reason why. They can then improve the system.

Source : See every past scientific / engineering advancement.

1