From: Alan <nuh-uh@nope.com>
Newsgroups: alt.global-warming,alt.fan.rush-limbaugh,can.politics,alt.politics.liberalism,alt.politics.democrats,alt.politics.usa.republican
Subject: Re: Y'all Keep Sharp Objects Away From Unum - Don't Worry Bi-Polar
Date: Wed, 17 Apr 2024 11:23:26 -0700
Organization: A noiseless patient Spider
On 2024-04-17 11:03, Lil-man-ball wrote:
> On Wed, 17 Apr 2024 09:59:24 -0700 Alan <nuh-uh@nope.com> wrote:
>
>> On 2024-04-17 09:13, Lil-man-ball wrote:
>>> On Wed, 17 Apr 2024 08:28:59 -0400 JTEM <jtem01@gmail.com>
>>> wrote:
>>>
>>>> EVs suck. Lithium is a crisis. For real.
>>>
>>> There are other far more promising and less toxic batter
>>> technologies being suppressed, so...
>>>
>>
>> Ah, the classic conspiracy nutcase argument:
>>
>> "There are secrets being kept from us...
>>
>> ...but somehow I know all about them!"
>
> Are you devoid of all knowledge but the Goo Goo brand?
LOL
This is your new thing, lil-ball-man?
>
> https://newatlas.com/tag/batteries/
>
> https://newatlas.com/energy/iron-air-grid-battery/
>
> The advantages of an iron-air battery are simple and clear. Direct
> reduced iron is the cheapest form of iron available, and was
> previously mainly used in steelmaking. It's extremely abundant, and
> totally safe. So are water and air, the other two main ingredients.
>
> https://newatlas.com/technology/simple-tweak-creates-safer-more-efficient-solid-state-batteries/
>
> Oak Ridge National Laboratory (ORNL) has come up with a small tweak
> that could have big consequences. By making a small change to how a
> type of solid-state battery is made, the scientists managed to
> eliminate defects in the electrolyte film, opening the way to safer
> and more efficient batteries.
>
> Solid-state batteries have a lot of promise. Unlike current
> lithium-ion batteries, solid-state ones don't contain flammable
> liquids, which are a major drawback as illustrated by stories of
> laptops and electric cars bursting into flames. Solid-state batteries
> are also less toxic, have higher energy densities, charge faster, and
> survive more recharge cycles without degenerating.
>
> https://newatlas.com/energy/form-energy-iron-battery-plant/
>
> Form's grid-scale batteries are built around huge flat iron-air
> cells, about a meter (3.3 ft) square, around 50 of which are slotted
> into modules the size of a washing machine and bathed in a liquid
> electrolyte. These cells effectively work using the rust cycle; you
> charge them up by applying energy to iron oxide, turning it back into
> metallic iron, then add oxygen to initiate the rust process and
> release energy.
>
> Iron is cheap and abundant, making these modules extremely
> affordable. They last a long time, they're safe and they're
> recyclable; if you tear down a battery you can take the metal out and
> use it elsewhere. These factors all combine to make them an
> exceptionally affordable form of energy storage, with a Levelized
> Cost of Storage (LCoS) more than 10 times lower than lithium
> batteries, even before you take the expected lithium resource squeeze
> into account.
>
> They won't charge or discharge as quickly as lithium, of course, so
> they'll likely work alongside lithium grid batteries in hybrid
> configurations, the iron-air batteries dealing with longer, slower
> load demands while the lithium packs handle momentary spikes. Form
> says that at scale, they'll deliver more than 3 MW of output capacity
> per acre, and they'll excel where energy needs to be stored for
> around 100 hours or more.
So completely NOT suppressed.
Got it.