Batteries and New Battery Technologies

[CDK]

No way Bert.
Using mirrors or light guides may increase the output of a bare panel, but that is also adding surface area. Of the 1 KW/m2 standard radiation only a part is converted into electricity, the visible spectrum and the near-infrared. Under 400 and above 720 nm the cells are blind.

There is also more aging than I've always told the customers.

The best panels I have are 4 SM-50s (4x9 cells) with special glass from Corning, the type that repels water and dirt. I recently took them down for work on the roof they are installed on and saw the brown color was not on the glass but under it: the bedding resin around and over the cells looks quite different after 15 years in the mediterranean sun. there's been no really bright day yet, but I'm sure the output has dropped considerably.

The SM-55 panels (3x12 cells) elsewhere in the garden were made in USA after Siemens acquired Solarex. The cells are not covered by resin, but each one has whitish corrosion spots near the conductors, reducing the active surface. That may turn out even worse.

[SaltOntheBrain]

I did a search on this thread to see if it had been discussed and got no match. I've been gone from this site for a while and have not had time to catch up on the 27,850 replies to this thread, so please forgive me if this has been discussed.

In Japan, Australia, and right here across the state line in Oklahoma, there are people building magnetic engines that produce power by switching polarity on magnets to use attraction/deflection to turn the rotor/armature. Once started, the motor runs indefinitely under its own power and in the case of the guy in Oklahoma, was used to power a small car.(a GEO Metro hatchback)

If this technology comes on, there will be very little need for much of the current battery technology.

Any comments?

Lance.

[portacruise]

Seems like much larger single lithium cells would be an improvement over the thousands being used in the Tesla. Wouldn't it be ironic if the single "di-lithium crystal" of "Star Trek" notoriety turns out to be the prophetic solution for EVs? A single, huge, lithium cell coupled with a 90%+ efficient inverter/charger might be the way to go.

Solar and wind presently excel in niche uses, like where there is no grid, or extending the grid would be extremely costly.

How costly does oil have to get for economic parity to be achieved? Is it $100 per barrel or $10,000+? If some of the original infrastructure Saudi oil is still coming in under $10, could we see another bust in alternative energy like the last energy crisis?

Would "fill up" stations made of huge banks of stationary, ultra low cost, LEAD batteries be the best solution to rapidly "dump" charge into electric cars and boats? So far that looks to be the best solution, as the grid is presently incapable of supporting direct fast charging. Whether the huge banks are charged up by solar, wind, or off peak grid, remains to be seen.

Porta

Originally Posted by BertKu

Very much true and for that reason, solar energy should have been given greater support to come up with better re-charging facilities. I am thinking aloud now. But "re-fueling stations" with their own solar installations and battery banks who could reduce the load on the electricity grid. They could charge and re-charge reasonable fast. Maybe even some wind energy added.

I am for too long out of this solar business.
Where am I wrong.

1) per 1 square meter , the maximum theoritical efficiency archievable is 26% i.e. 260 watt per square meter

2) In the day to day production models only up to 18% i.e. 180 watt per square meter

3) There are some tricks by catching the photons passing through the first layer, to be court in the second layer. But this is expensive.

4) As previous proposed, some reflectors could increase the output, but only for small installations and (near) stationary installations.

There are reports of 3D cells, but what does it do, to increase the photons per square meter?
Is there really a method to obtain 300 watt with 1 square meter space?

[portacruise]

Something like what you have described has been discussed under various other threads in the boat design forum. Old issues of Popular Mechanics and newspapers show that these schemes come back periodically, but never amount to anything and quietly disappear.

We can always hope it is different this time, but any such "perpetual motion" device violates the first law of thermodynamics.

Porta

Originally Posted by SaltOntheBrain

I did a search on this thread to see if it had been discussed and got no match.

Once started, the motor runs indefinitely under its own power and in the case of the guy in Oklahoma, was used to power a small car.(a GEO Metro hatchback)

If this technology comes on, there will be very little need for much of the current battery technology.

Any comments?

Lance.

[CDK]

Originally Posted by SaltOntheBrain

If this technology comes on, there will be very little need for much of the current battery technology.

Any comments?

Lance.

YES!

Absolute nonsense.
Has not been possible in the past, isn't possible now and will never be in the future. Anybody with just some basic knowledge of thermodynamics knows why.

[Submarine Tom]

Originally Posted by CDK

YES!

Absolute nonsense.
Has not been possible in the past, isn't possible now and will never be in the future. Anybody with just some basic knowledge of thermodynamics knows why.

CDK,

I get your point and agree to some extent but, I think the key words above are, "If this technology comes on..."

That, of course, is a mighty big 'if'.

-Tom

[SaltOntheBrain]

Check out the videos on you tube and google video. I know these things can be faked, but it appears to show that the technology is going somwhere this time.

Perpetual motion is not supposed to work, but with something as simple as a desktop novelty, that has been proven to be wrong. When I was a kid, I played with a flywheel on a small dia. spindle(axle) thas was set on a pair of rails which sloped downward in a hyperbolic slope from each end toward the center.

When the flywheel was set on either end, it rolled down the slope and up the other (identical) slope on the other end, where it slammed into the far end and spun in place for a second or so until it stopped and headed the other way. Not only perpetual motion, but excess energy as well.

Dismissing me out of hand by quoting a flawed "law" doesn't help the discussion. Check out the emerging technology before you slap me down.

Damn "Flat Earthers"

Lance.

[Submarine Tom]

Lance,

You did ask for comments...

It's still a mighty big "IF"...

-Tom

[BertKu]

Originally Posted by CDK

No way Bert.
Using mirrors or light guides may increase the output of a bare panel, but that is also adding surface area. Of the 1 KW/m2 standard radiation only a part is converted into electricity, the visible spectrum and the near-infrared. Under 400 and above 720 nm the cells are blind

You are absolute correct, but what is 3D solarcells actually?

The way I see it, if every house (not in flats, not enough space) has 100 - 150m2 meter solar energy conversion, the need for buying additional energy will be reduced. We all have roofs in anyway. to have some 20 Kwh every day generated would be good enough for town travelling. This would partialy solve the distribution problem.

[BertKu]

Originally Posted by SaltOntheBrain

I did a search on this thread to see if it had been discussed and got no match. I've been gone from this site for a while and have not had time to catch up on the 27,850 replies to this thread, so please forgive me if this has been discussed.

In Japan, Australia, and right here across the state line in Oklahoma, there are people building magnetic engines that produce power by switching polarity on magnets to use attraction/deflection to turn the rotor/armature. Once started, the motor runs indefinitely under its own power and in the case of the guy in Oklahoma, was used to power a small car.(a GEO Metro hatchback)

If this technology comes on, there will be very little need for much of the current battery technology.

Any comments?

Lance.

I am an optimist. Lets say, it is possible. Where is the energey coming from, to switch the magnetic poles. That requires quite some energy.

In a car we have a battery which starts the engine, and then we use "something " to keep us going. What could that "something " be for switching the poles?? If it is again diesel or petrol or gasoline or gas or whatever you call it, I am not interested.
If it is sun energy, I will start waking up.

[BertKu]

Originally Posted by portacruise

Seems like much larger single lithium cells would be an improvement over the thousands being used in the Tesla. Wouldn't it be ironic if the single "di-lithium crystal" of "Star Trek" notoriety turns out to be the prophetic solution for EVs? A single, huge, lithium cell coupled with a 90%+ efficient inverter/charger might be the way to go.

Absolute , that would be fantastic to have 14 large cells giving 48 Volt and 30 Kwh, or one plastic casing containing the above. Who owns the Lithium mining rights and production? Anybody done some searching on this?

Solar and wind presently excel in niche uses, like where there is no grid, or extending the grid would be extremely costly.

Porta

But if every house with 100 - 150m2 roof surface area would produce electricity for their cars, it would reduce the load on the grid and electric cars (with 2 bearings only, how marvelous) would be a revolution, and that is were the crunch lies. Every household with a large lithium battery pack. Mmmmh, problem solved.
Bert

[BertKu]

Originally Posted by CDK

No way Bert.
The SM-55 panels (3x12 cells) elsewhere in the garden were made in USA after Siemens acquired Solarex. The cells are not covered by resin, but each one has whitish corrosion spots near the conductors, reducing the active surface. That may turn out even worse.

The 3 x 12 cells is for your 12 Volt, 2 Ampere system, I assume. What current rating would you guess, can the interconnections handle? Love to know this.

Bert

[CDK]

Originally Posted by BertKu

You are absolute correct, but what is 3D solarcells actually?

Current cell technology uses horizontal layers for substrate, anode and cathode, which is very understandable because the process is identical with the way other semiconductors are made: vacuum depositing and doping on a flat wafer.

Scientists have figured out that the surface area would be increased if the substrate was not flat but structured like a mountain or high-rise landscape. Someone dropped the word "nanotubes" and the journalist's attention was drawn.
It is always the same story.
The product doesn't yet exist, because it is impossible to produce uniform layers over a mountainous surface and the gain in output still has to be proven.
One journalist was completely fooled and wrote that 3D solar cells even work underground....

[kistinie]

Some news about the Nice Tesla Car
http://energy.gov/news2009/8538.htm

And a battery business model
http://www.fastcompany.com/blog/arie...00000-evs-2016
http://www.triplepundit.com/2009/09/...n-up-to-tokyo/

These battery swap or refill solutions tend to remember me, "wire to the leg model", we have today, with petrol.


To come back to solar efficiency, we must not forget the O.U motion less controller solution to rise efficiency.
Some more info

[CDK]

Originally Posted by SaltOntheBrain

Check out the videos on you tube and google video. I know these things can be faked, but it appears to show that the technology is going somwhere this time.

Perpetual motion is not supposed to work, but with something as simple as a desktop novelty, that has been proven to be wrong. When I was a kid, I played with a flywheel on a small dia. spindle(axle) thas was set on a pair of rails which sloped downward in a hyperbolic slope from each end toward the center.

When the flywheel was set on either end, it rolled down the slope and up the other (identical) slope on the other end, where it slammed into the far end and spun in place for a second or so until it stopped and headed the other way. Not only perpetual motion, but excess energy as well.

Dismissing me out of hand by quoting a flawed "law" doesn't help the discussion. Check out the emerging technology before you slap me down.

Damn "Flat Earthers"

Lance.

There once was a guy who owed me some money. He stood right in front of me, pulled a blank piece of paper from his breast pocket and during the movement I saw it turn into a banknote. I was stunned.
He smiled and said "With this trick you are never out of money. I'll do it again, slowly". And again I saw the white paper gradually get color and turn into a banknote when it left his pocket!

You have seen something on YouTube, where it is a million times easier to fool people than when you are standing in from of them.
The Discovery Channel's "Myth Busters" has exposed many YouTube clips as fakes. In fact it is safe to assume that if you've seen it on YouTube, it is probably not true.

There are some basic principles and they will never change:
A solid piece of iron doesn't float on water, but a hollow one can. Archimedes explained why 23 centuries ago and has never been proven wrong.

The law of conservation of energy is a bit more complex, but Thales of Miletus mentioned the principle already 600 b.C. It is still an empirical law, but even Einstein built his theory on it.

And a piece of blank paper can never turn into a banknote.