Thread for new battery breakthrough PR releases

Hi,

I know we've all heard similar claims before but this sounds promising to me , because they claim to have working cells. If that's true, and if they can be mass produced at half the cost of conventional cells Sakti3 and Tesla's gigafactory are a great match!:
http://www.cartalk.com/blogs/jim-mo...ouble-energy-density-and-half-weight-and-cost
Sakti3's Big Claim: EV Batteries with Double the Energy Density and Half the Weight and Cost

We have to think about these things as companies like Tesla prepare “gigafactories” to dramatically ramp up battery production for electric vehicles. Ann Marie Sastry, until recently a tenured engineering professor at the University of Michigan, thinks her company, Sakti3, has that disruptive tech—solid-state lithium-based batteries printed on thin film.
sakti3%20cell.jpg

Sakti3 battery cell on thin film. That's right, no liquid electrolyte. (Sakti3 photo)

Now here’s the big claim. Sakti3 has attracted $30 million in venture capital funding, including from Khosla Ventures and General Motors, and Sastry says the company can, in two years, produce cells at half the cost of conventional li-ion, but with double the energy density and half the weight. And they’ll also be very safe, she says. If true, that’s darned disruptive!

Sakti3, which has been notably reticent about making bold pronouncements up to now, has working batteries that Sastry says deliver on the company’s promises. Sometime today, Sakti3 is announcing an affiliation with the Department of Energy’s Joint Center for Energy Storage Research (JCESR), which is led by Argonne National Laboratories. "Argonne has been given the responsibility of managing a $100-million battery hub, but it's working on technology that is a decade or more off in the future," Sastry said. "It's good that the federal government is placing long-term bets on storage technology, but we'll work with them on implementing any innovations that could give a nearer-term benefit."

The next step for Sakti3 is for the company to partner with a manufacturer, possibly including major battery producers. “The reality is no single company can do everything,” Sastry said. “It’s a team of teams.” She said Sakti3, which has less than two dozen employees, is engaged in partnership talks aimed at scaling up production and supplying multiple automakers. "Given the volume of thin-film products on the market now, thin-film batteries could easily scale quickly," she said.

There are other caveats out there. One battery expert, Eric Carlson, a senior fellow at Boston Power, says he hasn’t seen Sakti3’s specific technology, but, “in my experience, solid-state batteries are high resistance, which means they tend not to have much power for delivering the instantaneous current you need for rapid acceleration.”

Sastry counters. “We have demonstrated both high power and low resistance. That complaint about solid-state has been out there for some time, and a number of cells do have that issue. The key is proper engineering of the interface, and with tuning of the layers you can achieve very impressive power.

Despite fairly substantial EV battery subsidies from the Obama Administration, large-scale production remains abroad. Sastry comments, in her careful way, on why she needs a big and experienced battery partner. “The markets are large and varied, but the reality is that large battery companies are already scaled in Asia and can readily scale the same or similar technologies here as needed,” she said. “Even when companies find new, niche markets, sales are often short lived and difficult to maintain. Companies with scaled production are advantaged in all battery markets—hundreds of commoditized cell formats spanning all sectors, years of test results, and technical sales and marketing teams that have already sold into more difficult sectors, like automotive.”

ann%20marie%20sastry.png
 
I've talked with her at a 10x battery conference where she was speaking.

I haven't personally seen or tested one. Lots of BS in the battery space right now, but nobody wants it to be true more than myself. :)
 
Hi,

liveforphysics said:
I've talked with her at a 10x battery conference where she was speaking.

I haven't personally seen or tested one. Lots of BS in the battery space right now, but nobody wants it to be true more than myself. :)
I think we'll know pretty soon. If it's good, it's such a perfect match for Tesla's gigafactory...

http://www.altenergymag.com/news/20...oint-center-for-energy-storage-research/32707
ANN ARBOR, Mich.– March 13, 2014 – Sakti3, Inc., an award-winning U.S. innovator in solid state energy storage, has become an affiliate to the U.S. Department of Energy's Joint Center for Energy Storage Research (JCESR). Possible areas of collaboration include simulations and prototyping of materials for Sakti3 solid state batteries....

Sakti3 is commercializing a breakthrough, high performance, low cost and intrinsically safe solid-state battery technology. The materials, device designs and manufacturing methodologies were selected and optimized using advanced computational modeling, and lockstep, small-scale prototyping. The company is now scaling its prototypes in pilot production.
I seems like at a minimum JCESR believes that Sakti3 has successfully built prototype cells, which is a huge first step. Hopefully JCESR is 100% sure, but to steal a line from P.T. Barnum, nobody ever went broke underestimating the competence of government officials.

Even if that's true they could run into problems scaling production, but OTOH scaling thin film printing doesn't sound too challenging.
 
MitchJi said:
....I think we'll know pretty soon. If it's good, it's such a perfect match for Tesla's gigafactory...
..

Any thing is possible... you realize that Tesla has its own patents on new battery technology that may also fit with the GF speculation.. ??
http://green.autoblog.com/2013/09/18/tesla-patent-reveals-metal-air-hybrid-battery-powertrain/
 
No mention of any specifics, C-rate, cycle life, calendar life, specific energy density etc.

Current batteries must be near 300 watt-hours per kg by now. Extrapolating from this she claims to have a battery of 600 watt hours per kg?

Haven't the Germans been working on fluoride batteries with up to six times the energy-density of today's offering?

Edit: I see Panasonic NCR18650A battery is 237.67 watt-hours per kg. This is the one that the Model S is supposed to be using. Although Tesla have changed the lid and probably tweaked the chemistry.

The Panasonic NCR18650B is 253.89 watt-hours per kg.

In hindsight the above projection was optimistic. 500 watt-hours per kg is what we should be looking at so if we take her statement at face-value.
 
Model S runs a 2.9Ah NCA cell called the NCR18650PD.

The cells you proposed it uses would make it's charge/discharge rates impossible, as well as having poor cycling performance.

We can waste time guessing the energy density. However, if it's simply not any worse than what we currently have, and it brings with it all the tremendous advantages of not being a sack/pouch/can of fluid (electrolyte/solvent), then it's paints a fantastic safe and rugged future for EV batteries.

If it also has higher energy density, that's fantastic as well. :)
 
Hi,

Hillhater said:
Any thing is possible... you realize that Tesla has its own patents on new battery technology that may also fit with the GF speculation.. ??
http://green.autoblog.com/2013/09/18/tesla-patent-reveals-metal-air-hybrid-battery-powertrain/
green.autoblog.com said:
You see, the image comes from a US patent titled "Electric vehicle extended range hybrid battery pack system," that Tesla originally filed December 8, 2010 and was granted June 25, 2013. The abstract explains:

A power source comprised of a first battery pack (e.g., a non-metal-air battery pack) and a second battery pack (e.g., a metal-air battery pack) is provided, wherein the second battery pack is only used as required by the state-of-charge (SOC) of the first battery pack or as a result of the user selecting an extended range mode of operation. Minimizing use of the second battery pack prevents it from undergoing unnecessary, and potentially lifetime limiting, charge cycles. The second battery pack may be used to charge the first battery pack or used in combination with the first battery pack to supply operational power to the electric vehicle.

You can read the whole thing in the included gallery but, put simply, what Tesla is proposing is an electric-electric hybrid system that uses two different battery types to create an EV with tremendous range.
I don't see how that patent effects the Tesla's gigafactory.
1. Dated in 12-2010, nothing to do with new battery technology.
1. That system still requires conventional cells.
2. They didn't patent the metal-air batteries, merely a way to combine conventional batteries with batteries with high energy/low cycle life.

A really sleazy type of patent. Maybe the moderators should remove Gary's post so Mr. Paypal doesn't sue him for patent infringement (their application beat his post by about 4 months):
http://endless-sphere.com/forums/viewtopic.php?f=14&t=26797#p387147
GGoodrum said:
Fri Apr 08, 2011 1:34 pm
I decided that I could simply add a Lithium-based booster pack to the gels, if I could sort out keeping the booster pack off, when it wasn't needed, and if it could be charged at the same time as the gels, using the GEM's built-in 15A DeltaQ "smart" charger. The first thing i needed to do was document how much current was being drawn, at what voltages, during discharge, and then monitor what the DeltaQ did for charging profiles. It turns out the max drain is limited to about 180-190A, going up the hills, with the voltage, even with the gels right off the charger, dipping down to about 66-67V. When the gels were about half-full, I saw it go down to about 60V. This is easy enough to take care of, just using the "standard" active cutoff circuits we've used for LVC, but just in reverse. The FETs need to stay off, until the voltage on the gels sag, and then turn on...

Originally, I was thinking of using a 24s2p 77V/24Ah PSI-based booster pack, but in my experience these cells are at best 7-8C, under load, so a 2p configuration just wouldn't cut it. There would still be significant voltage sag, which defeats the purpose. I then settled in on using the new Turnigy 25-50C 10s1p "Nanotech" packs. With four of these, I end up with a 20s2p 76V/10Ah booster pack, about the size of a loaf of bread. My only real question was whether or not 10Ah would be enough to last the duration of the 100Ah gels, only kicking in when needed. As it turns out, it is just fine. When the gels are done, the booster pack is down about 80%...

The best part about this setup is that the only connections that need to be made to install this in the GEM are two big battery cables that connect to the main gel + and - connections. Operation of the various modes is completely automatic. It kicks in during discharge, when it needs to, charges using the same built-in charger until the Nanaotech cells get to 4.14V, and then shuts down while the charger finishes charging the gels...

I'm quite pleased with the results. I no longer get the huge sag, and subsequent slowing down, going up a hill. It just blasts over the top now. :) I'm also seeing quite a big jump in range. I haven't quantified it yet, but the added benefit of not having the voltage sag, going up hills, means the gels are not being worked as hard, so I get more capacity out of them. Definitely a win-win. :wink: :)
 
Hi,

liveforphysics said:
]Lots of BS in the battery space right now, but nobody wants it to be true more than myself. :)
Joseph C. said:
No mention of any specifics, C-rate, cycle life, calendar life, specific energy density etc.

In hindsight the above projection was optimistic. 500 watt-hours per kg is what we should be looking at so if we take her statement at face-value.
Luke's post already addressed your skepticism (which might be justified) much more concisely :wink: :).

liveforphysics said:
We can waste time guessing the energy density. However, if it's simply not any worse than what we currently have, and it brings with it all the tremendous advantages of not being a sack/pouch/can of fluid (electrolyte/solvent), then it's paints a fantastic safe and rugged future for EV batteries.

If it also has higher energy density, that's fantastic as well. :)
If the only benefit is that they cost half as much to print (manufacture) that would also be fantastic.
 
liveforphysics said:
Model S runs a 2.9Ah NCA cell called the NCR18650PD.

The cells you proposed it uses would make it's charge/discharge rates impossible, as well as having poor cycling performance.

We can waste time guessing the energy density. However, if it's simply not any worse than what we currently have, and it brings with it all the tremendous advantages of not being a sack/pouch/can of fluid (electrolyte/solvent), then it's paints a fantastic safe and rugged future for EV batteries.

If it also has higher energy density, that's fantastic as well. :)

Interesting. That's 222 watt-hours per kg according to Panasonic assuming you meant PF rather than PD? Therefore, either Tesla's modifications result in better energy density or they fudged the figures on their 250 watt-hour claim.

Yes, I think we are about half a decade away from some real profound energy changes. It all hinges on getting it below 100 dollars per KW/hr. If they can get the energy density up twofold as well that would mean that the price of shipping would be cut in two.
 
MitchJi said:
green.autoblog.com said:
what Tesla is proposing is an electric-electric hybrid system that uses two different battery types to create an EV with tremendous range.
I don't see how that patent effects the Tesla's gigafactory.
.

How it may affect the GF..?
In itself, it may not. But it shows that Tesla are actively looking at other battery chemistry's and format's.
Despite what EM says about the GF capacity of 35gWhr "matching" the world current capacity of 18650 production, there is data to suggest this is not so .
A 2010 report placed the capacity then at 10Bn cells ( 80gWhr equivalent if only 2Ahr cells )
In addition, the vast majority of those cells are produced for laptop computers,..a rapidly declining market with the move to thinner mobile devices and tablets that demand a different format cell.
So potentially there is a huge surplus of 18650 capacity becoming available over the next few years, which will inevitably drive prices down. ( note , already wholesale prices of $1.0 /cell are being reported for quality cells)
Note also that Tesla's (optimistic ?) forecast of 500,000 cars by 2017 would only require 3-5 bn cells ( assuming 7,000 per vehicle average)
So, why would a smart business guy like EM, or any other industry informed investor (EG: Panasonic), even consider investing $6 bn to add more volume of 18650 production into an already oversupplied, low cost base, market. ??
I dont believe they would do that, they dont need more 18650 capacity,.. but they do see a need for the production of a new type of cell which is not currently available in volume. That is why they need the GF.
 
Joseph C. said:
Yes, I think we are about half a decade away from some real profound energy changes. It all hinges on getting it below 100 dollars per KW/hr. If they can get the energy density up twofold as well that would mean that the price of shipping would be cut in two.

Back in 2012 the market price for 18650 cells was as low as us$0.12 per Whr ( $120 kWhr) ,..and not likely to increase with the decline in the laptop market (the main user)
More recently, industry experts have quoted wholesale prices of $1.0 for quality cells. ( <100 $/kWhr)

I dont think shipping costs are worth considering.
You can get over a million 18650 cells in a shipping container that costs about $5k to ship anywhere in the world.
That represents 0.5% of the cost..or 0.5 cents per cell !...$5 per 1000.
 
Hillhater said:
Joseph C. said:
Yes, I think we are about half a decade away from some real profound energy changes. It all hinges on getting it below 100 dollars per KW/hr. If they can get the energy density up twofold as well that would mean that the price of shipping would be cut in two.

Back in 2012 the market price for 18650 cells was as low as us$0.12 per Whr ( $120 kWhr) ,..and not likely to increase with the decline in the laptop market (the main user)
More recently, industry experts have quoted wholesale prices of $1.0 for quality cells. ( <100 $/kWhr)

I dont think shipping costs are worth considering.
You can get over a million 18650 cells in a shipping container that costs about $5 to ship anywhere in the world.
That represents 0.5% of the cost..or 0.5 cents per cell !...$5 per 1000.


These numbers are below raw materials cost to make any 18650 cell. Most "experts" you hear talking about batteries have zero real world experience or relevant knowledge of cell production in industry or its expenses. They are typically some PhD in a research lab somewhere who wouldn't be able to assemble a single working type of any lithium ion cell if you gave him a year alone in a battery factory.
 
These particular experts were analysis from the Industrial Economics & Knowledge Center IEK-ITIS (Industry & Technology Intelligence Services) in Taiwan. Who do the official reporting of Taiwan's trade figures.
They most likely could never make a battery, but they seem to know exactly how many have been made and how much revenue those sales raised.
There must be thousands of other people in the commercial channels of the industry who know exactly how much these cells trade for on the wholesale market...few of them with any understanding of manufacturing processes or costs.
 
Hillhater said:
These particular experts were analysis from the Industrial Economics & Knowledge Center IEK-ITIS (Industry & Technology Intelligence Services) in Taiwan. Who do the official reporting of Taiwan's trade figures.
They most likely could never make a battery, but they seem to know exactly how many have been made and how much revenue those sales raised.
There must be thousands of other people in the commercial channels of the industry who know exactly how much these cells trade for on the wholesale market...few of them with any understanding of manufacturing processes or costs.

I want to believe that, but it doesn't jive.

Materials cost for the cobalt, electrolyte, copper and can/top exceeds $1 per 18650 from all the data I've seen. (From actual mfg's making millions of cells, not "experts")

You can get MSDS weight percentage estimates that are inside 1% or so. Perhaps check the commodities market and see if $1 can cover just the raw metals costs. Then look at the outrageous price of good electrolyte. Then remember it's all gotta be processed and refined to absurdly high purity if you don't want to be having a hobbyking-esque cell failure rate.
 
One thing i learned from many years being deeply involved in the design & production of HVFMCG (High Volume , Factory Made Consumer Goods ) with access to every minutiae of material, labour, energy, service, maintenance , etc etc, costs ,.. was that when you are dealing with big contracts, and even if you think you have the inside secret track on a major suppliers cost structure,..there are always "backdoor" adjustments, rebates, concessions, "future tariffs" ..or such, that only the those who "sleep in the Presidents bed" , ever get to know about.!
Also, .. it is common for big producers to sell a large proportion of their product capacity to one or two large customers, at or below cost price in order to secure a "core" volume of production to cover most of the production costs. Then the rest of the production is sold to multiple smaller customers (who do not have the volume for negotiating discounts) at price levels that ensure an overall profit.
 
Hillhater said:
Also, .. it is common for big producers to sell a large proportion of their product capacity to one or two large customers, at or below cost price in order to secure a "core" volume of production to cover most of the production costs. Then the rest of the production is sold to multiple smaller customers (who do not have the volume for negotiating discounts) at price levels that ensure an overall profit.


Yes! I can confirm this practice IS done in the battery industry, and an unfortunately regular practice.
Though someone choosing to sell well below costs for business reasons doesn't effect the costs of making an 18650.

I agree that it would have a decent shot at fooling "experts" unknowingly looking at sold-for prices on loss-leader accounts, or sales of B-stock cells (which are always sold at well below materials cost to the "ultra-fire-esque" re-shrink-wrapping retailers. Then making pretty drastically optimistic estimations on the materials cost for an 18650. I really really wish it was $1/cell.

$1 a cell enables things like ~$13,000 100kWh batteries. That would be an enabling technology to simply end gasoline car market prevalence immediately.


For small aero cars, it would become very easy to be directly be gasoline competitive with upfront costs.

Even for the massive and silly energy wasting vehicle choices with terrible aero. Want a 300mile/charge range on your massive SUV? (I personally hate SUV's Just ~$40k in batteries to go with a $10k motor/chassis and you're ballpark to be directly gasoline price competitive, at least for the snobbier SUV's (pretty much all $50-100k).
 
I can't help but believe that if there IS going to be some better battery before the GigaFactory is underway, that's what will be produced there. Someone owning the technology might be a partner in the factory at that point, but if it wasn't going to happen, why build the place?

He who misquotes Mencken is doomed to paraphrase him:

Henry Louis Mencken said:
No one in this world, so far as I know—and I have researched the records for years, and employed agents to help me—has ever lost money by underestimating the intelligence of the great masses of the plain people. Nor has anyone ever lost public office thereby.

Phinneaus Taylor Barnum said:
There's a customer born every minute.
 
Dauntless said:
I can't help but believe that if there IS going to be some better battery before the GigaFactory is underway, that's what will be produced there. Someone owning the technology might be a partner in the factory at that point, but if it wasn't going to happen, why build the place?

He who misquotes Mencken is doomed to paraphrase him:

Henry Louis Mencken said:
No one in this world, so far as I know—and I have researched the records for years, and employed agents to help me—has ever lost money by underestimating the intelligence of the great masses of the plain people. Nor has anyone ever lost public office thereby.

Phinneaus Taylor Barnum said:
There's a customer born every minute.

I always remember that Barnum said " There is a sucker born every minute"! Perhaps he was really politically correct and your quote is more accurate.
otherDoc
 
Let's hope GM doesn't pull the same shit they did with Ovonics and sell the tech to Chevron, are some other company that will limit the use to small format cells only

GM saw the writing on the wall in the late 80s and they chose to delay (wisely from their point of view)

Now everyone can see the writing on the wall so I think this tech will not be buried. Just imagine if GM still had all the Magnequench neodymium patents and made direct drive motors using their monopoly to source neo mags. Much more difficult to make direct driver induction motors. Tesla/BMW/NISSAN would not stand a chance. China and Japan have also lost this opportunity now that the key patents are expiring in 2015. Hitachi is still making it difficult with over 1600 patents covering every aspect of the process. It is going to be like Mickey Mouse all over.
 
docnjoj said:
I always remember that Barnum said " There is a sucker born every minute"! Perhaps he was really politically correct and your quote is more accurate.
otherDoc

Barnum is the GODFATHER of politically correct, for one thing he wouldn't think of people as being 'Succored.'

Meanwhile, it was David Hannum who doomed himself to paraphrasing P.T. when he said "There's a succor born every minute" to mock Barnum. Hannum was angry because he'd beaten Barnum to buying the Cardiff Giant, but Barnum simply made his own copy and claimed his was the REAL one and Hannum's was a fake. This is such fun story, because Hannum sued Barnum for libel over his giant being called a fake, so the Judge asked Hannum for proof his was indeed REAL. Could the Giant testify to that?

The Cardiff Giant was indeed a hoax, Hannum knew it from the start. A palaeontologist from Yale called it what things Barnum connected himself to were often called, "HUMBUG!" But the very Christian Fundamentalists that the hoax was intended to ridicule were indeed saying their faith PROVED the authenticity of the Giant. The man who spent nearly $3,000 setting up the prank staged an apparently successful exhibition at an unspecified net profit, then sold out the Giant to Hannum's group for $23,000 and moved on to create the Solid Muldoon. Late to the game, Barnum offered $50,000, then resorted to creating his own.

The original can be seen at the Farmers' Museum in Cooperstown, New York. The Barnum version is said to be at the Marvin's Marvelous Mechanical Museum in Farmington Hills, Michigan. The Solid Muldoon disappeared and is perhaps walking the night as we speak. . . .
 
Hi,

http://time.com/18114/heres-why-teslas-massive-new-factory-will-change-everything/
But according to Navigant Research analyst Sam Jaffe, there’s one must-have that Tesla’s new plant will need more than any other: a freight train.

“The single-most important aspect is that it’s near a rail line,” said Jaffe, who specializes in the energy storage market. “These batteries are very heavy, and they have to ship them all the way to their plant in California.”

Put a rail line toward the top of the factory’s basic requirements, and the list of possible locations narrows.

“If you look at the Union Pacific line, they go right through El Paso, cut through New Mexico, through Arizona, and then up through Nevada,” Jaffe said. “And look at their Fremont plant; it’s right next to the rail line.”
140309214214-tesla-union-pacific-railroad-map-620xa.png


Panasonic has had a relationship with Tesla — first as a battery cell supplier, later as an investor — since 2009. The company invested $30 million in Tesla in 2010. Last year, Panasonic agreed to expand its arrangement and supply Tesla with nearly 2 billion cells over the course of four years. The battery cells will be used to power the Model S as well as Model X, a sport utility vehicle scheduled to go into production by the end of this year.

Still, Tesla has vetted other battery cell suppliers, Jaffe said. And it has certified other companies, including the Korean firms LG Chem and Samsung SDI and China’s BYD. “Tesla has essentially given the specs of the cell they want built for its battery and have confirmed that [each] manufacturer is capable of doing it,” Jaffe said.

Which means Tesla could order battery cells from several suppliers — though it is unlikely that the automaker will choose more than one manufacturer to partner with on the Gigafactory, Jaffe said.

Size is key
But the capacity of the factory may be the most clever part of Tesla’s plan to attract a battery partner. Tesla said the factory will have the capacity of 35 gigawatt-hours (GWh) per cell and 50 GWh per pack. The extra 15 GWh is the carrot Tesla is holding out to its potential partner, Jaffe said. Tesla is essentially guaranteeing that while most of the battery cells from the factory will go toward its next-generation model, it will still need to buy more.

“Let’s imagine you’re a battery manufacturer and your big buyer comes to you and says, ‘I want you to help me build a factory so I can make a product that you make today and cut you out of the supply chain,’ ” Jaffe said. “Why would you possibly do that?”...

Nevertheless, if Tesla expects to sell more than 10 GWh per year’s worth of battery packs to the stationary storage market, the packs will have to be priced below $200 per kilowatt-hour (kWh), Jaffe said. Tesla has said that the lithium-ion batteries it buys from Panasonic are between $200 and $300 per kWh...
 
An old Video but this is the first time i've heard of Lithium titanate. I googled it and Energy Density sucks but the ability to charge it very fast is interesting.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dcUV_UCpHy4
 
This one *appears* to be concrete: working car, investment for auto maker, and expected release in 2017:

Aluminium Air Fuel System, dissolves aluminium into AlO3 using ambient air... 25 kilos of aluminium can get a car 1000km, so 1 kilos should be able to get a bike 2000km! hopefully. after you have to put in a new aluminium rod. the rest of the battery is probably 70 percent of the weight.

http://www.greencarcongress.com/2014/02/20140205-alcoa.html
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=k6kIJlgqezE
 
zzoing said:
This one *appears* to be concrete: working car, investment for auto maker, and expected release in 2017:

Aluminium Air Fuel System, dissolves aluminium into AlO3 using ambient air... 25 kilos of aluminium can get a car 1000km, so 1 kilos should be able to get a bike 2000km! hopefully. after you have to put in a new aluminium rod. the rest of the battery is probably 70 percent of the weight.

http://www.greencarcongress.com/2014/02/20140205-alcoa.html
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=k6kIJlgqezE
Sounds like a dream come true for Alcoa as there has been such huge investment in bauxite mines but they struggle to make a profit from the metal so being able to make batteries out of the stuff is a plus.

If I understood it right to "recharge" the battery you add water? heh that is weird.
 
Back
Top