Ultra-fast charging, cheap, safe aluminum battery developed at Stanford outperforms lithium batteries

[Hobble]

How far are we from fusion or cold fusion?

Would that be the best option to generate electricity of the future, supported by dams and turbines?

[Webster6]

How far are we from fusion or cold fusion?

Would that be the best option to generate electricity of the future, supported by dams and turbines?

Supposedly there's potential for beta-esque testing by 2019?

http://www.extremetech.com/extreme/137520-clean-limitless-fusion-power-could-arrive-sooner-than-expected

http://www.extremetech.com/extreme/149090-nasas-cold-fusion-tech-could-put-a-nuclear-reactor-in-every-home-car-and-plane

[aeromotacanucks]

Picking up chicks in a smart car

I don´t "pick up" girls...

I talk with them like a real man and if the girl likes me then we go to the next stage...

and I´m thinking logic. big car that I don´t need = big problems + big taxes

and if you really need you can always rent a car. expecially in North America where it isn´t expensive rent a Mustang...

[Ghostsof1915]

Theres a lot of solutions, not just fusion.

There's oil from algae. Which can be grown almost anywhere. And you need CO2 to feed it, so it helps absorb the carbon we burn.

Best of all, algae is grown so it's renewable. Might be the solution for aviation fuel.

And we can try and create strains that perhaps burn cleaner.

[aeromotacanucks]

Good on you for being having an environmental conscience.

Sorry to burst your bubble, but where do you think the power to charge your EV/EHV will come from? You do realize that in the US, 2/3 of all electrical power that is generated comes from fossil fuels? You know, coal (btw, "clean coal" = fallacy), gas, oil. Canada's better than the US because we have an abundance of HE power generation...but have you ever wondered why there is a raging debate going on with BC Hydro's planned Site C? Hmmmm...could be due to significant environmental issues related to flooding large swaths of land and diverting the natural flow of water that have got NGOs and environmentalists up in arms.

It's commendable that you want to do your part to reduce GHG emissions...everybody should take some stewardship of the earth. But until such time where our collective reliance on fossil fuels to generate electricity is a thing of the past, no matter what you do, you're still going to be a consumer of dirty power.

The good news is that power from wind/solar/biomass/geothermal is on the rise...countries like Brazil have an awesome energy mix where biofuels from their wealth of sugar canes make up the primary source of energy...Denmark has shown that they can rely almost entirely on wind. So it's doable...and doable in our lifetime.

Yes it´s called Etanol and due to our Commie "government" is expensive now. but it´s still a cheap solution...

for me it´s the future. wanna be green? start by small things...

-use public transportation when the place you go doesn´t have a proper parking area for your car or if you´re going to the city centre...

-don´t use your car for everything. if the place is close to your house, go walking. I do this. anything up tp 4km from my house I go walking...

- learn the "optimal performance" from yours car´s engine and use then fully. ride an empty car means you´re burning fuel for nothing. what about do a single but large supermarket at once so you don´t have to return ther untill the next month? what about your friends/colleages go to the work in one single car?

-if is sunny you don´t have to use a dry machine. let the sun dry your clothes...

be green doesn´t mean you have to be an idiot. just practical and realistic...

[Webster6]

Theres a lot of solutions, not just fusion.

Nuclear/Cold fusion, if perfected would likely be the most effective energy. Or at least the most effective source conceptualized. I'm sure plenty of science will go into funding many sources, and that's a good thing. However the argument is that the endgame is Cold Fusion.

[Ghostsof1915]

Picking up chicks in a smart car

No, you pick them up in one of these....

Or ride one of these.....

[Webster6]

No, you pick them up in one of these....

[Hobble]

seems like with the technology today, it might be more efficient to just build new cities from the ground up.

Speaking as a Winnipegger, this city was designed so poorly and inefficiently. Same could probably be said of a lot of bigger cities as well.

[Webster6]

seems like with the technology today, it might be more efficient to just build new cities from the ground up.

Speaking as a Winnipegger, this city was designed so poorly and inefficiently. Same could probably be said of a lot of bigger cities as well.

Do some research into the concept of seasteading on a grand scale.

Now take this concept and think 100's of years down the road, how this could become 'skysteading'.

[Ghostsof1915]

Nuclear/Cold fusion, if perfected would likely be the most effective energy. Or at least the most effective source conceptualized. I'm sure plenty of science will go into funding many sources, and that's a good thing. However the argument is that the endgame is Cold Fusion.

Only one problem. Scientists have been talking about Fusion power plants since the 1970's. In 1970's we were 20 years away.

In the 1990's we were 20 years away. It's 2015 and it's been 40 years, and still no breakthrough. I'm not saying it won't happen. It's just we need solutions now. I agree if the world dumped the money it puts into killing one another, instead into developing fusion or any other clean energy it would be better world.

[butters]

I've always told people.. "Think about how old most of the technologies you frequently use are. Then realize the internal combustion engine is over 100 years old."

Anyways in regards to the bolded, maybe land vehicles will soon be mostly electric, but as far as planes and jets, I think they'll still be using jet fuel for much much longer.

plumbing is 2000+ years old and is fine as a techonology, just to give a counterexample.

[Dickie]

The transportation of goods relies on how quick it is to fill up with gas and drive another 1500km. Could you drive across Canada in 2 days with an electric engine? Not likely. Having to stop and recharge every 8hrs for 6-8hrs would make it hard to transport fresh goods from the East to the West. The tag-team drivers that drive 24/7 would no longer exist. Transporting goods would take longer and become more expensive as a result. The same goes for any industry that requires constant movement of vehicles. Don't get me wrong, I am 100% for electric vehicles, but their use in the commercial world is decades away from being the norm.

[Webster6]

plumbing is 2000+ years old and is fine as a techonology, just to give a counterexample.

Plumbing isn't exactly "a technology" it's a concept, brought together by several different technologies. All of which have vastly been revamped and improved through innovation over the years. The motor engine, although becoming more powerful every year, hasn't been radically revamped in terms of the components used, and the energy required to operate it. I see where you're coming from with that example, but my argument was more along the lines of: the motor engine has not been innovated to the degree it could have been by now, because of lobbying efforts against clean energy. Including science funded by oil oligarchies. We still use the internal combustion process with the pistons pumping and whatnot... Old news. Give me something better.

[Webster6]

http://www.solarmill.com/

Our goal is to set an example by crafting quality products manufactured entirely with solar power.

[aeromotacanucks]

The transportation of goods relies on how quick it is to fill up with gas and drive another 1500km. Could you drive across Canada in 2 days with an electric engine? Not likely. Having to stop and recharge every 8hrs for 6-8hrs would make it hard to transport fresh goods from the East to the West. The tag-team drivers that drive 24/7 would no longer exist. Transporting goods would take longer and become more expensive as a result. The same goes for any industry that requires constant movement of vehicles. Don't get me wrong, I am 100% for electric vehicles, but their use in the commercial world is decades away from being the norm.

for now yes. your statement is 100% true.

but maybe the way should be make it more especialized.

why use a truck to cross Canada? USA? Russia? Brasil? or any continental country?

sure it will consume a lot of fuel, a lot of time and a lot of resources.

instead why not think better?

use trucks for short/medium distances only. then use trains. there´s eletric trains already. just make their engines better. improve the rail system. it´s cheaper than the truck transportation in terms of long distance delivery.

use the modal system. connecting trucks to the train stations and then make the cargo goes faster and more efficiently...

if your country has large rivers (like Brasil have) use them too. you don´t need rails when you have the Amazonic River on your yard. water transportation is cheaper than the rail transportation. sure it´s slower but can carry way more cargo...

make bigger ships with better engines...

if the engine spend less fuel and cost less to mantain it the transportation cost will become less expensive meaning the overhall transportation cost will be cheaper allowing the "non-regular" customer like you and me send more cargo/products to our friends anywhere...

if you need your cargo going faster? sure. planes...

but not the anging one that spend more fuel. why a B727-200 when you can use a more efficient B757-200? it´s more advanced. better fuel efficient, lower costs ,lower CO2.

why use the same airport for cargo and passengers? some areas DEMAND a "cargo exclusive" airport so it will be able to carry/handle even more cargo. why FEDEX still use Memphis when surely FEDEX have money to build their own airport for their own cargo terminal?

Sharing the space with passengers (I know Memphis isn´t a passenger hub, but even so it uses a lot of space) when you handle a lot of cargo it´s a waste of time. companies like FEDEX, UPS, DHL so on have money to build their own "cargo exclusive airports".

but for me. the future goes not only eletric. goes better efficient systems...

[avelanch]

Can anyone confirm or deny if Duracell is crapping their pants right now?

they are probably in a bidding war for exclusive rights to the process. the only crapping of pants is if they think energizer might have a better bid on the table.

[Canada Hockey Place]

Impressive stuff. At the early stages of development. There are other developers too - http://www.extremetech.com/computing/142155-doe-calls-for-a-chemical-battery-with-5x-capacity-within-5-years-can-it-be-done

Elon Musk (huge lithium-ion investor) isn't impressed - http://bgr.com/2015/04/07/stanford-aluminum-ion-battery-full-charge/

[Webster6]

Anything Elon Musk has to say.. I listen to.

Maybe his initial view is financially biased? Hopefully anyway. Either way it's good to see progress towards innovation.

[Offensive Threat]

seems like with the technology today, it might be more efficient to just build new cities from the ground up.

Speaking as a Winnipegger, this city was designed so poorly and inefficiently. Same could probably be said of a lot of bigger cities as well.

In its defense, Winnipeg was not designed. It was a fur trading site, then a fort, then streets and roads went out from there. Nobody at that fort in the woods thought, "Hmmm..how are we going to design these streets to deal with traffic flow in the future" You want a city designed from the ground up to be a big city check out Brasilia or any one of a dozen in China.