You must log in or register to comment.

atika t1_j10kba0 wrote

"So far, the Sydney researchers have only created and tested lab-scale versions of their RT Na-S battery. They now plan to focus on scaling up and commercializing the tech, which will likely take several years."


BAG1 t1_j13lxam wrote

So in four or five years I can randomly remember this article and go, "Hmmm whatever happened to that 'new battery' we were supposed to get?" Probably gets bought by BP or Shell to be purposefully shelved like fuel cells and cheap electrolysis.


lilrabbitfoofoo t1_j1457iy wrote

> Probably gets bought by BP or Shell to be purposefully shelved like fuel cells and cheap electrolysis.

Any proof of this claim or is this just another pile of paranoid drivel from conspiracy kooks?


Toad32 t1_j13uxtf wrote

It's sickening to know that big oil keeps buying all these battery technologies just to sqauander them.


p1mrx t1_j10mu7e wrote

It's not "cheaper" if you can't buy it.


typesett t1_j10w02c wrote

bring it to market and we will see how expensive it actually is

i just want to say my favorite story about vaporware tech is that we used to talk on forums all the time in the mid 90s about tiny hard drives much like we hear about batteries now

well, eventually a tiny hard drive hit the market and it was made into the first iPod amongst other mp3 players.

that directly led to the iphone. the iphone and etc basically changed the world.

my 2 cents. when it hits, it hits and we take it for granted


radicalceleryjuice t1_j113bfj wrote

Yes, machine learning is another great example. Now that it’s happening, it’s happening fast.

I’m pretty confident that we’ll also get next generation solar panels by end of decade


asdaaaaaaaa t1_j1149zf wrote

Solar's the way to go IMO. Wind's good too, but I just have a heavy aversion to moving parts when it comes to maintenance/repair.


radicalceleryjuice t1_j114pvb wrote

Solar is more intermittent than wind but as the energy gets cheaper there will be increasing incentives to build storage solutions. The storage will probably lag though


One_Astronaut_483 t1_j115x88 wrote

That's the true bottleneck.


radicalceleryjuice t1_j118ana wrote

There are better solutions than most people realize. Off-river pumped hydro has great potential but most people don’t know what that means


0ut0fBoundsException t1_j11nfka wrote

Machine Learning done been happening


gurenkagurenda t1_j12s3m4 wrote

Yeah, it’s been something over the last few months to watch people suddenly learn that AI is an actual thing and not just a marketing buzzword. Like yeah, dudes, if you were paying attention, things have been getting extremely wild for years now.


commentingrobot t1_j11gbr4 wrote

That's a great analogy!

"In economics, things take longer to happen than you think they will, and then they happen faster than you ever thought they'd be able to"


typesett t1_j12jc0f wrote

Omg I’m flashing back now

there used to be a meme called the iwalk … because of the walkman

it’s basic premise was the iphone. This was 1996


ericneo3 t1_j12qx4e wrote

> bring it to market and we will see how expensive it actually is

I need coffee, I read that as

bring it to market and we will see how explosive it actually is


rhussia t1_j1120hk wrote

True, not to mention the open faced mines to extract the raw materials for this, the next incredible invention


The_Countess t1_j11w00g wrote

The main ingredients are Sodium (one half of normal table salt) and sulfer, that we already have piles and piles of ever since we started removing it from our fuels.


Midori_Schaaf t1_j10pdne wrote

[What’s new? Existing RT Na-S batteries have had limited storage capacity and a short life cycle, which has held back their commercialization, but there’s now a new kind of RT Na-S battery, developed by Zhao’s team. According to their paper, the device has four times the storage capacity of a lithium-ion battery and an ultra-long life — after 1,000 cycles, it still retained about half of its capacity, which the researchers claim is “unprecedented.”]

I'm sceptical. Li+ batteries have expected life of 500 to 1200 cycles, before dropping below 70% charge. The capacity could refer to useful energy though. Li+ can only be discharged to 70%, where Na chemistry allows for full discharge. The problem is that voltage drops with the capacity, so although you could use them down to 0% charge, they won't necessarily be useful.

Still, if they turn out functionally similar, a cheaper construction would be an advantage.


The_Countess t1_j11wwl0 wrote

We already have pretty good ways of taking any voltage input and returning a steady voltage. As long as the power requirements don't exceed the maximum Amp the battery will allow at the lower voltages that shouldn't be a insurmountable problem.


rydaley77 t1_j11elu6 wrote

Waiting for the “steel” of the battery industry


fiftybucks t1_j112pek wrote

Come back when you can beat li-ion at the market place


nntb t1_j12zk2z wrote

Please say they are more safer and burst into flames less


DigiMagic t1_j13fofc wrote

Actually this one probably would be flammable, and due to natrium might explode if it gets wet.


dangil t1_j13rhal wrote

And 6 times the weight


iheartrms t1_j10oji3 wrote

GTFO with this battery which doesn't exist commercially and, based on the million other posts like this we've seen, never will. :(


RverfulltimeOne t1_j10qenj wrote

Many things are demoed like this much like at trade shows that never hit the market for whatever reason. In particular medical treatments.

Then just because its better does not always mean it sees the light of day. Hundreds of billions have been invested so that means you got a fight if you threaten that.


aquarain t1_j111jk6 wrote

Yeah. The battey mafia ninjas get them because they didn't buy ninja insurance.


zanemn t1_j10wdmd wrote

Size and weight vs. lithium?


ohyonghao t1_j11e7go wrote

Yeah, I’m curious what they mean by capacity. Typically I hear batteries talked about in energy density such as kWh/kg or something. A MWh is possible with any chemistry by just having enough of them.


kukidog t1_j11ahu6 wrote

Yes they are also 4 or 6 times heavier


selectiveyellow t1_j125mju wrote

300 MEGABYTES, ^^^of ^^^hard ^^^drive ^^^capacity!


Sweet-Sale-7303 t1_j129p1a wrote

These articles suck. They put at the end can take several years to get a production ready version. Then why bother with the article at all?


stalefish57413 t1_j13hbpc wrote

Ah yes, the weekly "new revolutionary battery has been developed"-post. Ive been seeing them for years, yet batteries have barely improved.


timberwolf0122 t1_j13jw1i wrote

It still needs work. After 1,000 cycles it still retained half of its capacity, not overly great.


MikeGreat1 t1_j118z40 wrote

“ultra-long life — after 1,000 cycles, it still retained about half of its capacity, which the researchers claim is “unprecedented.”

imagine filling up your 6 year old car and only getting half the milage.


Nurpus t1_j11js03 wrote

Imagine taking a finite resource that will take millions of years to replenish and which is rapidly making this planet less and less hospitable for organic lifeforms... just to fill up the tank of your 6-year-old car.


MikeGreat1 t1_j11sbpw wrote

that’s not a bad argument - incomplete though. all of the electrical elements except the wire itself is not recyclable. at this level of technology a battery powered car has 1/2-1/4 the lifespan of an ICE powered machine with less reusable material. not a fair trade by any stretch yet.

the tech needs improvement still. i hope it happens soon.


The_Countess t1_j11wo8q wrote

The sodium and sulfer this battery uses should be pretty easy to separate though, and aren't nearly as reactive as lithium.