869
Samsung’s 20-year-life EV battery runs 600 miles on 9-minute charge
(interestingengineering.com)
this post was submitted on 02 Aug 2024
869 points (98.3% liked)
Technology
59148 readers
2533 users here now
This is a most excellent place for technology news and articles.
Our Rules
- Follow the lemmy.world rules.
- Only tech related content.
- Be excellent to each another!
- Mod approved content bots can post up to 10 articles per day.
- Threads asking for personal tech support may be deleted.
- Politics threads may be removed.
- No memes allowed as posts, OK to post as comments.
- Only approved bots from the list below, to ask if your bot can be added please contact us.
- Check for duplicates before posting, duplicates may be removed
Approved Bots
founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
There may not be a revolutionary discovery, but we are nearing a tipping point where battery makes more sense for most disconnected power storage than anything else.
The cell phone I had 30 years ago had a battery pack that was about as big as my current cell phone and was 500 mAh. My current cell phone has a little battery tucked away in it that stores 4000 mAh, recharges about as fast, and can be recharged more before it loses a significant amount of its capacity. It also costs about 1% per mAh of the price of that battery from 30 years ago.
Just because you haven't bothered to investigate advances in battery technology doesn't mean significant advances haven't occurred.
...what else are you using for "disconnected power storage" than batteries?
Please tell me what part of my comment led you to believe I was insinuating battery technology had not improved in the last 30 years...
Please read better.
Fossil fuels are currently the largest disconnected power storage by overall power used. You know, the thing cars use when they aren't EVs. You may have heard of diesel and gasoline generators, or oil-fueled ships.
As per the previous part of my comment that you quoted, my point was that incremental changes can accumulate to the point where at some point revolutionary changes can occur. We increased capacity and longevity by a factor of 10 over 30 years, have a new technology hitting mainstream, and another that could double power density in the next 5 to 10. Yet you seem skeptical that's possible, in spite of the decades of advances we already have made.
Fossil fuels do not store "power" at all.
If it takes place over the course of 30 years, it is not "revolutionary".
I am skeptical because of the decades of advances that have been promised time and time again but have not been made...
I am not remotely skeptical of iterative advancements.
Now, if you're quibbling about the term power vs. energy, I can't really be bothered with it. If you aren't, what exactly do you think is the reason we use gasoline in vehicles than because it's a highly portable source of energy?
Yeah, I'm getting that impression about you.
I can't be bothered because laymen don't generally know the difference, and it's the least important detail about this conversation. Granted, unimportant details seem to be your forte.