Natron Energy Achieves First-Ever Commercial-Scale Production of Sodium-Ion Batteries in the U.S.

[Meredith Poor + 898]

https://www.businesswire.com/news/home/20240428240613/en/Natron-Energy-Achieves-First-Ever-Commercial-Scale-Production-of-Sodium-Ion-Batteries-in-the-U.S./

Quote

SANTA CLARA, Calif.--(BUSINESS WIRE)--Natron Energy, Inc. (“Natron” or “the Company”), the global leader in sodium-ion battery technology, today announced the commencement of commercial-scale operations at its sodium-ion battery manufacturing facility in Holland, Michigan.

Pretty much every day I pull up a YouTube video with another 'game changing' battery technology, which will go into production 'in two years or so'. Needless to say, a lot of these things never see the light of day.

This one evidently has. The Natron.energy website has links to dealers and distributors. In short, it is actually possible to buy one, or a truckload.

The asterisk on all this is they got some of their ramp up money from the US DOE. Some of us remember Solyndra. Hopefully this is not premature. I suspect it isn't - there are Chinese NA-ION batteries available on both Chinese and American online stores.

[footeab@yahoo.com + 2,194]

Sodium Ion...

1. ~90% efficient AKA lead acid AGM batteries pitiful territory, and has a 99% discharge eff I believe
2. voltage profile which drops from ~3.5V(technically ~3.9V) to 1.2V, a working range of 3.5V(technically higher but useless voltage and near 0% SoC up there dropping ==> 1.5V, and has 25% of its SoC below 2V even worse than Lead Acid batteries..So, may as well not even claim that voltage or SoC to begin with.
3. DeltaV/SoC is pitiful in other words = inverters will #1 die sooner, and #2 have even LOWER throughput per installation making capacity more expensive.
4. If it gets cold Na-ion fall off a cliff compared to LiFePo4(Yes technically you can charge/discharge, but efficiency drops, C rate drops off a cliff, and can't charge ~effectively)[They need heaters just like all other batteries]
5. If over 45C you can't charge, can discharge, by far the worst battery around. 
6. Its C rate is good though(technically, assuming it does not overheat due to its pitiful efficiency...)
7. oh yea and LOW cycle lifespan. Though technically better than some NMC type Lithium batteries so...

What IDIOT would buy this crap instead of LIthium Iron Phosphate???  What idiot would put $$$ into manufacturing it? Iron is dirt cheap and already has capacity.  Lithium is still partially expensive but not that bad. 

EDIT: Makes Na+ batts ~1/2 energy density of LiFeP0 and ~1/3 that of NMC.  Na+ = ~ Nickel batteries for energy density. 

EDIT2: Pro for Na+ is technically they can go to 0V and not be insta killed... so in LONG term applications where they ~get forgotten such as Thermometers, flashlights, etc, Na+ is a very good solution. 

Solyndra was right, they were 5 years too early.  China grabbed the tech for free

Capitalists will sell you the rope to hand them with...(No  Lenin did not say this, but its sentiments still ring true)

Edited July 7 by footeab@yahoo.com

[notsonice + 1,266]

2 hours ago, footeab@yahoo.com said:

Sodium Ion...

1. ~90% efficient AKA lead acid AGM batteries pitiful territory, and has a 99% discharge eff I believe
2. voltage profile which drops from ~3.5V(technically ~3.9V) to 1.2V, a working range of 3.5V(technically higher but useless voltage and near 0% SoC up there dropping ==> 1.5V, and has 25% of its SoC below 2V even worse than Lead Acid batteries..So, may as well not even claim that voltage or SoC to begin with.
3. DeltaV/SoC is pitiful in other words = inverters will #1 die sooner, and #2 have even LOWER throughput per installation making capacity more expensive.
4. If it gets cold Na-ion fall off a cliff compared to LiFePo4(Yes technically you can charge/discharge, but efficiency drops, C rate drops off a cliff, and can't charge ~effectively)[They need heaters just like all other batteries]
5. If over 45C you can't charge, can discharge, by far the worst battery around. 
6. Its C rate is good though(technically, assuming it does not overheat due to its pitiful efficiency...)
7. oh yea and LOW cycle lifespan. Though technically better than some NMC type Lithium batteries so...

What IDIOT would buy this crap instead of LIthium Iron Phosphate???  What idiot would put $$$ into manufacturing it? Iron is dirt cheap and already has capacity.  Lithium is still partially expensive but not that bad. 

EDIT: Makes Na+ batts ~1/2 energy density of LiFeP0 and ~1/3 that of NMC.  Na+ = ~ Nickel batteries for energy density. 

Solyndra was right, they were 5 years too early.  China grabbed the tech for free

Capitalists will sell you the rope to hand them with...(No  Lenin did not say this, but its sentiments still ring true)

1. ~90% efficient AKA lead acid AGM batteries pitiful territory, and has a 99% discharge eff I believe????

and on  voltage profile which drops from ~3.5V(technically ~3.9V) to 1.2V,  dude you have no idea what you are talking about

 

99% discharge eff?????

did you ever take a basic electrochemistry course??? 

here is a hint all the newer batteries do not have water in them (they have organic electrolytes)  so they are not restricted to  2 V per cell as a lead acid battery....Water based batteries have the problem of gassing off...IE Hydrogen and Oxygen .......  you can play with the Ph...but it only gets you so far as you are restricted to the acid side (low pH) and can only run them up to 2 V before you start gassing  off 

1. Cathode (reduction): 2 H2O(l) + 2e− → H2(g) + 2 OH−(aq) E=-0.83

2. Anode (oxidation) 2 H2O(l) → O2(g) + 4 H+(aq) + 4e− E=1.23

3. Cathode(reduction) 2H+(aq) + 2e− → H2(g) E=0

4. Anode(oxidation) 4 OH- (aq) → O2(g) + 2H2O(l) + 4e- E=0.4

 

on losses during charging and discharge .......reality on  charging you have little losses and  up to  20 percent  losses during discharge of a lead acid battery

when you are playing with the newer batteries (not lead acid) you are at 3.5 to 3.7 V potentials per cell and the losses as a percentage become much much less.........

 

here is a refresher

https://www.sciencedirect.com/topics/engineering/ah-efficiency

BATTERIES | Charge–Discharge Curves

D.U. Sauer, in Encyclopedia of Electrochemical Power Sources, 2009

Definition of Efficiency

Several different definitions for ‘efficiency’ are used in common. These are, namely,

•

‘Coulombic efficiency’ or ‘Ah efficiency’ η_Ah or its inverse the ‘charge factor’ CF (eqn [10])

•

‘Voltaic efficiency’ η_U (eqn [11], only rarely used

•

‘Energy efficiency’ η_Wh (eqn [12])

[10]�Ah=1CF=dischargedAhchargedAh=∫Δ��d�{�=|�Battery|∀�Battery≤0�=0∀�Battery>0∫Δ��d�{�=�Battery∀�Battery>0�=0∀�Battery≤0

[11]�U=∫Δ��⋅�Batteryd�{�=|�Battery|∀�Battery≤0�=0∀�Battery>0∫Δ��⋅�Batteryd�{�=�Battery∀�Battery>0�=0∀�Battery≤0⋅CF

[12]�Wh=dischargeWhchargedWh=∫Δ��⋅�Batteryd�{�=�Battery∀�Battery≤0�=0∀�Battery>0∫Δ��⋅�Batteryd�{�=�Battery∀�Battery>0�=0∀�Battery≤0

From the application point of view, the energy efficiency is of highest relevance. The energy efficiency is a measure for the amount of energy that can be taken from the battery compared to the amount of energy that was charged into the battery beforehand. The energy efficiency has an important impact on the economy of battery operation because losses must be compensated by buying additional energy.

The coulombic efficiency is the ratio of discharged Ah divided by the charged Ah. Electrochemists also often use the charge factor, which is the inverse coulombic efficiency. The charge factor describes how much excess charge has been applied to the battery. This excess charge goes into side reactions such as gassing or aging processes. Lead–acid batteries as an example must achieve a charge factor well above 1 to compensate for the gassing losses, which cannot be avoided. On the contrary, lithium-ion batteries have no side reactions such as gassing and therefore any charge factor above 1 means an irreversible aging of the battery.

The voltaic efficiency describes the difference between the average voltage during charging and during discharging. The voltaic efficiency not only strongly depends on the current rate but also on the temperature. High current rates and low temperature cause high overvoltages and therefore reduce the voltaic efficiency.

The efficiencies can be calculated according to eqns [10]–[12]. The integration should be done at best between two points in time with similar state of charge. For practical reasons this is typically a fully charged battery. If this is not possible, the period for integration must be sufficiently long to minimize the impact of varying states of charge on the efficiency balancing. Assuming similar internal resistance for cells of different chemistries, the voltaic efficiency decreases with decreasing nominal cell voltage. Extended charging periods increase the charge factor for lead–acid and nickel-based batteries and reduce the energy efficiency.

Typical efficiencies for different chemistries for full charge/discharge cycles are as follows:

Lead-acidbatteries:�Ah≈98%,�Wh≈80−85%Lithium-ionbatteries:�Ah≈100%,�Wh≈90−95%Ni−Cd/Ni−MH:�Ah≈98%,�Wh≈70−85%Double−layercapacitors:�Ah≈100%,�Wh≈90−95%

Generally, the efficiency decreases with decreasing nominal voltage. It is assumed that similar capacity and similar internal resistance for cells of identical capacity results in similar absolute voltage drops during charging and discharging. If the voltage drop is 100 mV during charging and 100 mV during discharging and if η_Ah of 100% is assumed, the efficiency, e.g., for a Ni–Cd cell with 1.2 V nominal voltage is η_Wh=η_U=1.1 V/1.3 V=84.6%. In comparison with a lithium-ion battery with 3.6 V nominal voltage, the efficiency is η_Wh=η_U=3.5 V/3.7 V=94.6%. This is one of the advantages of high nominal cell voltages.

Edited July 7 by notsonice

[footeab@yahoo.com + 2,194]

21 hours ago, notsonice said:

1. ~90% efficient AKA lead acid AGM batteries pitiful territory, and has a 99% discharge eff I believe????

and on  voltage profile which drops from ~3.5V(technically ~3.9V) to 1.2V,  dude you have no idea what you are talking about

 

99% discharge eff?????

did you ever take a basic electrochemistry course??? 

here is a hint all the newer batteries do not have water in them (they have organic electrolytes)  so they are not restricted to  2 V per cell as a lead acid battery....Water based batteries have the problem of gassing off...IE Hydrogen and Oxygen .......  you can play with the Ph...but it only gets you so far as you are restricted to the acid side (low pH) and can only run them up to 2 V before you start gassing  off 

1. Cathode (reduction): 2 H2O(l) + 2e− → H2(g) + 2 OH−(aq) E=-0.83

2. Anode (oxidation) 2 H2O(l) → O2(g) + 4 H+(aq) + 4e− E=1.23

3. Cathode(reduction) 2H+(aq) + 2e− → H2(g) E=0

4. Anode(oxidation) 4 OH- (aq) → O2(g) + 2H2O(l) + 4e- E=0.4

 

on losses during charging and discharge .......reality on  charging you have little losses and  up to  20 percent  losses during discharge of a lead acid battery

when you are playing with the newer batteries (not lead acid) you are at 3.5 to 3.7 V potentials per cell and the losses as a percentage become much much less.........

 

here is a refresher

https://www.sciencedirect.com/topics/engineering/ah-efficiency

BATTERIES | Charge–Discharge Curves

D.U. Sauer, in Encyclopedia of Electrochemical Power Sources, 2009

Definition of Efficiency

Several different definitions for ‘efficiency’ are used in common. These are, namely,

•

‘Coulombic efficiency’ or ‘Ah efficiency’ η_Ah or its inverse the ‘charge factor’ CF (eqn [10])

•

‘Voltaic efficiency’ η_U (eqn [11], only rarely used

•

‘Energy efficiency’ η_Wh (eqn [12])

[10]�Ah=1CF=dischargedAhchargedAh=∫Δ��d�{�=|�Battery|∀�Battery≤0�=0∀�Battery>0∫Δ��d�{�=�Battery∀�Battery>0�=0∀�Battery≤0

[11]�U=∫Δ��⋅�Batteryd�{�=|�Battery|∀�Battery≤0�=0∀�Battery>0∫Δ��⋅�Batteryd�{�=�Battery∀�Battery>0�=0∀�Battery≤0⋅CF

[12]�Wh=dischargeWhchargedWh=∫Δ��⋅�Batteryd�{�=�Battery∀�Battery≤0�=0∀�Battery>0∫Δ��⋅�Batteryd�{�=�Battery∀�Battery>0�=0∀�Battery≤0

From the application point of view, the energy efficiency is of highest relevance. The energy efficiency is a measure for the amount of energy that can be taken from the battery compared to the amount of energy that was charged into the battery beforehand. The energy efficiency has an important impact on the economy of battery operation because losses must be compensated by buying additional energy.

The coulombic efficiency is the ratio of discharged Ah divided by the charged Ah. Electrochemists also often use the charge factor, which is the inverse coulombic efficiency. The charge factor describes how much excess charge has been applied to the battery. This excess charge goes into side reactions such as gassing or aging processes. Lead–acid batteries as an example must achieve a charge factor well above 1 to compensate for the gassing losses, which cannot be avoided. On the contrary, lithium-ion batteries have no side reactions such as gassing and therefore any charge factor above 1 means an irreversible aging of the battery.

The voltaic efficiency describes the difference between the average voltage during charging and during discharging. The voltaic efficiency not only strongly depends on the current rate but also on the temperature. High current rates and low temperature cause high overvoltages and therefore reduce the voltaic efficiency.

The efficiencies can be calculated according to eqns [10]–[12]. The integration should be done at best between two points in time with similar state of charge. For practical reasons this is typically a fully charged battery. If this is not possible, the period for integration must be sufficiently long to minimize the impact of varying states of charge on the efficiency balancing. Assuming similar internal resistance for cells of different chemistries, the voltaic efficiency decreases with decreasing nominal cell voltage. Extended charging periods increase the charge factor for lead–acid and nickel-based batteries and reduce the energy efficiency.

Typical efficiencies for different chemistries for full charge/discharge cycles are as follows:

Lead-acidbatteries:�Ah≈98%,�Wh≈80−85%Lithium-ionbatteries:�Ah≈100%,�Wh≈90−95%Ni−Cd/Ni−MH:�Ah≈98%,�Wh≈70−85%Double−layercapacitors:�Ah≈100%,�Wh≈90−95%

Generally, the efficiency decreases with decreasing nominal voltage. It is assumed that similar capacity and similar internal resistance for cells of identical capacity results in similar absolute voltage drops during charging and discharging. If the voltage drop is 100 mV during charging and 100 mV during discharging and if η_Ah of 100% is assumed, the efficiency, e.g., for a Ni–Cd cell with 1.2 V nominal voltage is η_Wh=η_U=1.1 V/1.3 V=84.6%. In comparison with a lithium-ion battery with 3.6 V nominal voltage, the efficiency is η_Wh=η_U=3.5 V/3.7 V=94.6%. This is one of the advantages of high nominal cell voltages.

 The post you typed gave shows you an... well idgit(Engineering ignorant idiot).   Your quoted PHD loser theoretical post does NOT take into account anything other than internal resistance and only pertains to linear portion of its State of Charge near its peak voltage.  News flash, batteries LOSE VOLTAGE as their SoC drops... Therefore its internal RESISTANCE creates an ever HIGHER percentage of its voltage drop and HEATING of the cells creating an every HIGHER loss of efficiency you BLITHERING $@$$$$$$@$*$*(!@!!!!!!!!! 

A battery which only loses 0.5V over ~90% of its Soc is NOT equal to a battery which loses >>2V over a mere 70% of its SoC 

<<COUGH COUGH lithium iron phosphate compared to garbage Sodium ion >>  

Charge/discharge loss of power is different for each battery and C rating.  And internal RESISTANCE of each battery changes by its State of charge(SoC)  Also its temperature. The above post you quoted used mV loss internal(resistance) the nice linear portion of a batteries charge/discharge graph at probably around 80% SoC which is typical for lead acid as NO ONE can use its bottom 50% SoC,, and this grandfathered data point has been kept for Lithium batteries as well by and large even though it is completely outdated.  

No battery has a linear charge/discharge graph.  Lithium ion is very close though as it is linear and then drops off a cliff.  Thus where its linearity ends, its SoC effectively ends.  This is NOT true of Lead acid where the last tiny bits of voltage at top have an enormous amount of SoC, and has an enormous amount of SoC where it is not linear but the voltage is so low and resistance so high it is useless to use.   And no, charging efficiency is NOT equal to discharging efficiency.   Though in Lithium Ion's case it ~is so Most idiots on the internet have forgotten this BASIC fact of batteries as we have not had to USE GARBAGE style battery cells in a VERY LONG TIME!!!<<Cough Sodium ion>>

  Sodium ion for instance has 25% of its SoC left after it hits 2V after losing ~50% of its starting voltage... AKA its internal resistance is still the same, but its efficiency MASSIVELY swings between Lead Acid on low end and near lithium ion on its TOP end...((HELLO!  Anyone HOME?))  Why generally those who actually USE batteries claim Sodium ion is ~90% efficient, yet sometimes it is stated as the same as lead acid or the same as lithium ion.... They and I use these numbers because this is REALITY!!!

Honestly man, do you LOVE being spanked everytime you POST?

 

 

Edited July 7 by footeab@yahoo.com
for clarity and removed name calling

[TailingsPond + 1,013]

5 minutes ago, footeab@yahoo.com said:

I know you are utterly CLUELESS about anything regarding engineering The post you gave shows you are.  As it takes into account NOTHING other than internal resistance and only pertains to linear portion of its State of Charge near its peak voltage.  News flash, batteries LOSE VOLTAGE as their SoC drops... Therefore its internal RESISTANCE creates and ever HIGHER percentage of its voltage drop and HEATING of the cells you BLITHERING IDIOT!!!!!!! 

Charge/discharge loss of power is different for each battery and C rating.  And internal RESISTANCE of each battery changes by its State of charge(SoC)  Also its temperature. The above used mV loss internal(resistance) the nice linear portion of a batteries charge/discharge graph.  

No battery has a linear charge/discharge graph.  Lithium ion is very close though as it is linear and then drops off a cliff.  Thus where its lenearity ends, its SoC effectively ends.  This is NOT true of Lead acid where the last tiny bits of voltage have an enormous amount of SoC but achieving this heats the battery up MASSSSSSIVELY as its internal resistance massively changes and why its CHARGING efficiency SUCKS, but a lead acids DISCHARGING efficiency is Ok.  This is NOT true of Sodium Ion.  Sodium ion for instance has 25% of its SoC left after it hits 2V after losing ~50% of its starting voltage... AKA its internal resistance is still the same, but its efficiency MASSIVELY swings between Lead Acid on low end and near lithium ion on its TOP end..  Why generally those who actually USE batteries claim Sodium ion is ~90% efficient, yet sometimes it is stated as the same as lead acid or the same as lithium ion.... They and I use these numbers because this is REALITY!!!

Honestly man, do you LOVE being spanked everytime you POST?

 

Some of the problems could be mitigated with battery management technology and overbuilding to spec.

You feed all the data from a multi-meter (voltage, current, resistance, e.t.c) and the battery temperature into a computer and it can optimize the battery usage / health.  My cell phone already does all that.  The device could also do small-scale load tests to monitor battery health.

Then you overbuild the battery to above spec so it never gets fully drained or overcharged.  The battery management software keeps it in the linear range. 

The device may lie to you and say the battery is fully dead, when it is in reality not, same with charging, it may tell the user it is full but really it is only at 90%.

If they can make it much cheaper than lithium there could be some future for this; but I won't hold my breath.

[notsonice + 1,266]

1 hour ago, footeab@yahoo.com said:

 The post you typed gave shows you an... well idgit(Engineering ignorant idiot).   Your quoted PHD loser theoretical post does NOT take into account anything other than internal resistance and only pertains to linear portion of its State of Charge near its peak voltage.  News flash, batteries LOSE VOLTAGE as their SoC drops... Therefore its internal RESISTANCE creates an ever HIGHER percentage of its voltage drop and HEATING of the cells creating an every HIGHER loss of efficiency you BLITHERING $@$$$$$$@$*$*(!@!!!!!!!!! 

A battery which only loses 0.5V over ~90% of its Soc is NOT equal to a battery which loses >>2V over a mere 70% of its SoC 

<<COUGH COUGH lithium iron phosphate compared to garbage Sodium ion >>  

The above post you quoted used mV loss internal(resistance) the nice linear portion of a batteries charge/discharge graph at probably around 80% SoC which is typical for lead acid as NO ONE can use its bottom 50% SoC,, and this grandfathered data point has been kept for Lithium batteries as well by and large even though it is completely outdated.  

No battery has a linear charge/discharge graph.  Lithium ion is very close though as it is linear and then drops off a cliff.  Thus where its linearity ends, its SoC effectively ends.  This is NOT true of Lead acid where the last tiny bits of voltage at top have an enormous amount of SoC, and has an enormous amount of SoC where it is not linear but the voltage is so low and resistance so high it is useless to use.   And no, charging efficiency is NOT equal to discharging efficiency.   Though in Lithium Ion's case it ~is so Most idiots on the internet have forgotten this BASIC fact of batteries as we have not had to USE GARBAGE style battery cells in a VERY LONG TIME!!!<<Cough Sodium ion>>

  Sodium ion for instance has 25% of its SoC left after it hits 2V after losing ~50% of its starting voltage... AKA its internal resistance is still the same, but its efficiency MASSIVELY swings between Lead Acid on low end and near lithium ion on its TOP end...((HELLO!  Anyone HOME?))  Why generally those who actually USE batteries claim Sodium ion is ~90% efficient, yet sometimes it is stated as the same as lead acid or the same as lithium ion.... They and I use these numbers because this is REALITY!!!

Honestly man, do you LOVE being spanked everytime you POST?

 

 

This is NOT true of Lead acid where the last tiny bits of voltage at top have an enormous amount of SoC,????

 

wtf are you know babbling about....dude stop using drugs

where do you come up with your garbage.................

do you even have a basic electrochemistry background or knowledge?????? 

 

you are just babbling nonsense as you did with your first post. Your first post you were babbling about efficiency on charging and discharge and you got it all wrong (backwards) ....Then  you had the  cell voltages for lithium and lead acid mixed together....no idea how you did that one

 

you do realize a cells voltage is not the same as the battery voltage as a battery is just a stack of cells........

 

now you are babbling about SOC....and 2 voltage drops

why would anyone try to defend a lead acid battery against the performance  of a lithium or sodium based batteries???

Lead Acid batteries are the choice of Neanderthals 

There is a multitude of reasons why  no one ever made a BESS using  Lead Acid batteries

Lead Acid batteries are crude ineffeicent batteries that do not last very long and they have massive overpotential losses 

I have to tell you , you are the worlds biggest idiot.....You are just grabbing comments out of google searches and trying to patch them together in your weird attempt to defend Lead acid batteries and a real weird way at trying to somehow discredit sodium based battery tech

and for all of the rest of your babble..............

 

you should stick to your tunnel schemes.........lol oh what a joke that one is..........

and you are an engineer.?????????...Sanitary is my bet....keep cleaning those toilets

 

 

Edited July 7 by notsonice

[footeab@yahoo.com + 2,194]

44 minutes ago, notsonice said:

This is NOT true of Lead acid where the last tiny bits of voltage at top have an enormous amount of SoC,????

 

wtf are you know babbling about....dude stop using drugs

where do you come up with your garbage.................

do you even have a basic electrochemistry background or knowledge?????? 

 

you are just babbling nonsense as you did with your first post. Your first post you were babbling about efficiency on charging and discharge and you got it all wrong (backwards) ....Then  you had the  cell voltages for lithium and lead acid mixed together....no idea how you did that one

 

you do realize a cells voltage is not the same as the battery voltage as a battery is just a stack of cells........

 

now you are babbling about SOC....and 2 voltage drops

why would anyone try to defend a lead acid battery against the performance  of a lithium or sodium based batteries???

Lead Acid batteries are the choice of Neanderthals 

There is a multitude of reasons why  no one ever made a BESS using  Lead Acid batteries

Lead Acid batteries are crude ineffeicent batteries that do not last very long and they have massive overpotential losses 

I have to tell you , you are the worlds biggest idiot.....You are just grabbing comments out of google searches and trying to patch them together in your weird attempt to defend Lead acid batteries and a real weird way at trying to somehow discredit sodium based battery tech

and for all of the rest of your babble..............

 

you should stick to your tunnel schemes.........lol oh what a joke that one is..........

and you are an engineer.?????????...Sanitary is my bet....keep cleaning those toilets

 

 

So, completely ignorant you do not even know basic properties of Na+ vrs Li+ vrs lead acid and why batteries are spec'd how they are yet are babbling baffoonery.--> Smooth

Thank  you for solidifying you are truly a fool. 

Didn't think you could get any dumber.  I was wrong

[footeab@yahoo.com + 2,194]

1 hour ago, TailingsPond said:

Some of the problems could be mitigated with battery management technology and overbuilding to spec.

You feed all the data from a multi-meter (voltage, current, resistance, e.t.c) and the battery temperature into a computer and it can optimize the battery usage / health.  My cell phone already does all that.  The device could also do small-scale load tests to monitor battery health.

Then you overbuild the battery to above spec so it never gets fully drained or overcharged.  The battery management software keeps it in the linear range. 

The device may lie to you and say the battery is fully dead, when it is in reality not, same with charging, it may tell the user it is full but really it is only at 90%.

If they can make it much cheaper than lithium there could be some future for this; but I won't hold my breath.

Uh, no.  Wasted power is wasted power.  Why efficiency matters and why LiFePo4 is king currently.  Worse is spending $$$ on capacity you cannot use.  Worse yet is having to spend even MORE money on unused inverter capacity which sits around half the time but is same cost regardless of battery it is tied to.  Worse yet when you have to spend $$$ cooling and maintenance on the cooling systems.  Worse yet is that the cost of LiFePo4 cell is ~identical to cost of Na+.  Not much lithium required for them.  The cost is in the base manufacturing center and transportation of the battery. 

Only reason fools are talking about Na+ batts is because your/mine/our loser governments won't build lithium mines/processing plants in your/mine/our countries alleviated the problem.  Lithium is very abundant. 

EDIT: PS: Lead acid batteries have Battery management systems on them if you want them to last a long time.  They last ~30 years with BMS's as used by the Phone companies.  The difference is they CAN be used without BMS's as they do not(as often) catch fire etc due to OVERCHARGING them or at least it is MUCH harder to overcharge them and why you can get away with it.  Try that with Lithium ion and you have a massive fire on your hands and why Lithium ion initially and still to this day have a bad reputation.  One of the 2 biggest causes of fires in ICE vehicles is their Lead Acid Battery.  First Cause is the gasoline vapors in most ICE.  In Diesel trucks #1 cause of fires are their tires in trucking.  So when people are arguing that battery vehicles have fewer fires... Uh... Not exactly.  Though they technically CAN have fewer fires if engineered correctly.  <-- That is the problem, the engineering. 

Edited July 7 by footeab@yahoo.com

[TailingsPond + 1,013]

54 minutes ago, footeab@yahoo.com said:

Uh, no.  Wasted power is wasted power.  Why efficiency matters and why LiFePo4 is king currently.  Worse is spending $$$ on capacity you cannot use.  Worse yet is having to spend even MORE money on unused inverter capacity which sits around half the time but is same cost regardless of battery it is tied to.  Worse yet when you have to spend $$$ cooling and maintenance on the cooling systems.  Worse yet is that the cost of LiFePo4 cell is ~identical to cost of Na+.  Not much lithium required for them.  The cost is in the base manufacturing center and transportation of the battery. 

Only reason fools are talking about Na+ batts is because your/mine/our loser governments won't build lithium mines/processing plants in your/mine/our countries alleviated the problem.  Lithium is very abundant. 

EDIT: PS: Lead acid batteries have Battery management systems on them if you want them to last a long time.  They last ~30 years with BMS's as used by the Phone companies.  The difference is they CAN be used without BMS's as they do not(as often) catch fire etc due to OVERCHARGING them or at least it is MUCH harder to overcharge them and why you can get away with it.  Try that with Lithium ion and you have a massive fire on your hands and why Lithium ion initially and still to this day have a bad reputation.  One of the 2 biggest causes of fires in ICE vehicles is their Lead Acid Battery.  First Cause is the gasoline vapors in most ICE.  In Diesel trucks #1 cause of fires are their tires in trucking.  So when people are arguing that battery vehicles have fewer fires... Uh... Not exactly.  Though they technically CAN have fewer fires if engineered correctly.  <-- That is the problem, the engineering. 

All I was saying is if they can make it cheaper then it could be a remote possibility with some ingenuity.

Lithium is very light, sodium is light, lead is very heavy.  For any mobile application that has to be considered.

[notsonice + 1,266]

1 hour ago, footeab@yahoo.com said:

So, completely ignorant you do not even know basic properties of Na+ vrs Li+ vrs lead acid and why batteries are spec'd how they are yet are babbling baffoonery.--> Smooth

Thank  you for solidifying you are truly a fool. 

Didn't think you could get any dumber.  I was wrong

you should stop using drugs....

you babble nonsense again and again

tunnels.........you are the worlds biggest idiot......we are all waiting for you to kick off your first tunnel project...ha ha ha

batteries..........you are clueless ...when you started babbling about batteries being inefficient on discharge you proved once again that you are the worlds biggest idiot...

Please keep telling us how lead acid batteries are great.......are you also a giant fan of  alkaline batteries...

 

batteries containing water based electrolytes are doomed

same as your Luddite coal powered world

Enjoy the solar revolution ....backed up with Lithium and now Sodium batteries

 

and please stop using drugs............