vossiewulf: the unmolested oxygen is released back into the air

How exactly does one molest oxygen?

I think you need a Catholic priest for that?

That battery certainly will go far.

" IBM has enlisted the help of chemical giants Asahi Kasei and Central Glass to turn it from successful experiment to fully-fledged product by 2030. "

Come on, 2030? Unless the Federal Government is controlling the development of this battery, it can't take 17 years if it's truly going to have commercial merit.

How quick does it charge? It only takes me 10 minutes at the gas station.

Drive home at night, park car in garage, plug in to charge.

Garage rapidly fills with oxygen, next door neighbor is rudely awakened by the little pieces of you raining down from the rapidly expanding ball of fire that was your house.

Neato!

I farking love oxygen.

Yea, but how far will it power a car on a single charge?

Shouldn't that be "Battery/500"?

RatOmeter: Drive home at night, park car in garage, plug in to charge.

Garage rapidly fills with oxygen, next door neighbor is rudely awakened by the little pieces of you raining down from the rapidly expanding ball of fire that was your house.

Neato!

Yeah, but only if there are organic materials to react to. Like gasoline, oil, oil soaked rags... Oh, wait.

When I am king of the world I will make stories like this illegal - the author, publisher and CEO of the company will all be shot in the face with a bazooka if an awesome sounding invention is profiled that is more than 3 years away from being ready for release.

2030?!?!?!?! WTF?

What these air breathing, 500 miles at a time traveling batteries may look like:

...Until you turn on the headlights and AC... Then, 40 miles.

I have no sound on this computer, so I couldn't hear any explanation of the chemistry, but this sounds dangerously close to perpetual motion. If the reaction with the lithium ion is exothermic, then the oxygen won't just be "released" upon "breathing" at startup. Some kind of fuel needs to go into the system and be consumed. Is the source solar?

2030?? Don't think we can wait that long. If you need 20 years to make a new battery work, it must be a sketchy technology in the first place.

I dislike battery cars. Mainly because they take too long to charge, are heavy, cost lots of money and have short ranges.


...500 Miles to a charge?
Ok, you've got my attention.

BumpInTheNight: What these air breathing, 500 miles at a time traveling batteries may look like:
[www.newsbiscuit.com image 470x368]

...wow, they must have switched to high-index polycarbs...

vossiewulf: the unmolested oxygen is released back into the air

How exactly does one molest oxygen?




This guy could find a way.

Yeah! Another story about clean autotive energy that will be forgotten in 3 days and never see the light of day.

I predict the next time we hear about this will be when we discover that the project was shut down because another tech made it obsolete in the next 18yrs and we find out X-humdred million dollars of tax payer money was spent on it.

The first person to find something that normal internal combustion engines can run on that isn't oil, contains as much energy as gas and can be sold for $2.50/gallon wins.

Tommy Moo: I have no sound on this computer, so I couldn't hear any explanation of the chemistry, but this sounds dangerously close to perpetual motion. If the reaction with the lithium ion is exothermic, then the oxygen won't just be "released" upon "breathing" at startup. Some kind of fuel needs to go into the system and be consumed. Is the source solar?

Yes batteries are usually recharged with other sources of electricity.

not2bright: " IBM has enlisted the help of chemical giants Asahi Kasei and Central Glass to turn it from successful experiment to fully-fledged product by 2030. "

Come on, 2030? Unless the Federal Government is controlling the development of this battery, it can't take 17 years if it's truly going to have commercial merit.

When he said 2020-2030 I thought it was feasible to take that long to set up manufacturing; but then he said 'this is a high risk endeavor, showing IBM is interested in blah blah blah' which just screams vaporware. This project will be canceled for not being profitable sometime before 2020.

Great now we know what the machine/human war will be over, who gets to breath.

A fuel source that breathes?

You know... All of this stuff, I've seen where it's going.

not2bright: " IBM has enlisted the help of chemical giants Asahi Kasei and Central Glass to turn it from successful experiment to fully-fledged product by 2030. "

Come on, 2030? Unless the Federal Government is controlling the development of this battery, it can't take 17 years if it's truly going to have commercial merit.

Took about that long for Blue Ray. IBM generally does not announce products that they can't deliver, even if that delivery is much longer then anybody ever anticipated.

lockers: How quick does it charge? It only takes me 10 minutes at the gas station.

It will probably take about 15 seconds of your time to plug it in when you come home at night, and another 15 or so to unplug it in the morning.

johnnyrocket: vossiewulf: the unmolested oxygen is released back into the air

How exactly does one molest oxygen?


[encrypted-tbn1.google.com image 225x225]

This guy could find a way.

Oxygen is too old and doesn't play football.

dittybopper: not2bright: " IBM has enlisted the help of chemical giants Asahi Kasei and Central Glass to turn it from successful experiment to fully-fledged product by 2030. "

Come on, 2030? Unless the Federal Government is controlling the development of this battery, it can't take 17 years if it's truly going to have commercial merit.

That tells me that they've maybe done a semi-successful very small scale experiment, and this isn't in any way "ready for prime-time". It's bordering on vaporware.

Not vaporware, there is probably a prototype. IBM does not make announcements like this unless they think they have a product that will go the distance and become real. For example Blue Ray, back in the early 90's IBM made a Blue Light Laser breakthrough announcement, which later became Blu Ray.

Same type of thing here, they have an experiment and probably a protoype that will turn into a product, but IBM is a technology company that does not need one product to be successful, so they will take their time and make sure what is delivered meets spec.

Tommy Moo: I have no sound on this computer, so I couldn't hear any explanation of the chemistry, but this sounds dangerously close to perpetual motion. If the reaction with the lithium ion is exothermic, then the oxygen won't just be "released" upon "breathing" at startup. Some kind of fuel needs to go into the system and be consumed. Is the source solar?

Lithium-Air Battery: Operation. These things have been around for decades, but there are still considerable engineering and material's science hurdles to overcome to make them economically viable. Scientifically the principle and operation is proven to work, it is a matter of improving electrical efficiency and making them stable/reliable enough for operation outside of controlled conditions.

Slaves2Darkness: not2bright: " IBM has enlisted the help of chemical giants Asahi Kasei and Central Glass to turn it from successful experiment to fully-fledged product by 2030. "

Come on, 2030? Unless the Federal Government is controlling the development of this battery, it can't take 17 years if it's truly going to have commercial merit.

Took about that long for Blue Ray. IBM generally does not announce products that they can't deliver, even if that delivery is much longer then anybody ever anticipated.

The issue here tho is a bit more pressing than data storage.
If I were in charge of the DOE or any one of a major dozen automakers, I'd want this fast tracked.

jaybeezey:
I predict the next time we hear about this will be when we discover that the project was shut down because another tech made it obsolete in the next 18yrs and we find out X-humdred million dollars of tax payer money was spent on it.

Progress in science driven technology is built piece by piece from failed projects like these, which is what makes research so capital intensive. People want clear cut greener energy results, money in - product out types of affairs, but getting a usable yet completely new technology on the first shot is like buying another Wonka bar and praying for results. Even if projects like this prove a local failure they often make significant contributions to future projects. There is of course need for some financial accountability, you fund a lot of initial research projects then narrow the funding to the projects with the most promising results, but science funding needs to be looked at more like a pooled statistic.

As for the video being completely PR I couldn't agree more. Though it has the side effect of getting people excited about these sorts of sciences, hopefully, as science is now missing showcases like the space program

Tommy Moo: I have no sound on this computer, so I couldn't hear any explanation of the chemistry, but this sounds dangerously close to perpetual motion. If the reaction with the lithium ion is exothermic, then the oxygen won't just be "released" upon "breathing" at startup. Some kind of fuel needs to go into the system and be consumed. Is the source solar?

Sounds pretty simple to me and is not perpetual motion. The battery can only absorb a limited amount of oxygen and electricity must be applied to get it to release Its oxygen so that it can work again.

I wonder how it might be effected in higher elevations with less oxygen. Would it work better than a normal engine or worse? It would certainly run for a longer time, but would it output enough juice to get a car moving?

hej: lockers: How quick does it charge? It only takes me 10 minutes at the gas station.

It will probably take about 15 seconds of your time to plug it in when you come home at night, and another 15 or so to unplug it in the morning.

That isn't very useful when i drive to Texas. I suppose i shouldn't worry about road trips that i take?

way south: Slaves2Darkness: not2bright: " IBM has enlisted the help of chemical giants Asahi Kasei and Central Glass to turn it from successful experiment to fully-fledged product by 2030. "

Come on, 2030? Unless the Federal Government is controlling the development of this battery, it can't take 17 years if it's truly going to have commercial merit.

Took about that long for Blue Ray. IBM generally does not announce products that they can't deliver, even if that delivery is much longer then anybody ever anticipated.

The issue here tho is a bit more pressing than data storage.
If I were in charge of the DOE or any one of a major dozen automakers, I'd want this fast tracked.

Like Solyndra? This is science and engineering. You can speed up development and research with more bodies and more money, but there is not a linear relationship and there are limits. Toss even a trillion dollars at this and you will not have a viable product next year or the year after. You will have spent the trillion on the things that didn't work and never could have worked and that you never would have pursued had you waited for the results of the previous research you were monitoring.

lockers: hej: lockers: How quick does it charge? It only takes me 10 minutes at the gas station.

It will probably take about 15 seconds of your time to plug it in when you come home at night, and another 15 or so to unplug it in the morning.

That isn't very useful when i drive to Texas. I suppose i shouldn't worry about road trips that i take?

Good point - it's a completely non-viable technology because it isn't practical for the cross-country trips that the average driver takes several times a week.

jaybeezey: Yeah! Another story about clean autotive energy that will be forgotten in 3 days and never see the light of day.

I predict the next time we hear about this will be when we discover that the project was shut down because another tech made it obsolete in the next 18yrs and we find out X-humdred million dollars of tax payer money was spent on it.

The first person to find something that normal internal combustion engines can run on that isn't oil, contains as much energy as gas and can be sold for $2.50/gallon wins.

Yep.

There's a simple solution: buy more fuel efficient cars. There are many out there. Ask yourself, "do you really need a 22 MPG SUV?"

IBM still does research?

loonatic112358: IBM still does research?

Yeah, I'm actually surprised by that. I thought all they do now is consulting.

I wonder how much mass a 500 mile range battery pack would gain in oxygen during a full discharge.... not that it's important, just wondering.

I see the goal posts are being dug up to be moved --- "well yeah but I have a 50 mile commute each way so a Volt/Leaf/Fisker just wont work for me..." to the new and improved "I can't drive 2000 miles at a time so clearly it has no place in this world...." distance. Either that or successful troll is successful ;)

2030? So just after the fusion reactors go online?

As a hater of the current crop of electric vehicles, since they in no way fit my driving habits and will never break even on the initial high costs, I welcome this breakthrough.

The Holy Grail is when this comes to market it need to be about the same price as a gasoline engine and can recharge quickly--even it's only enough to get you home or to a hotel if going cross country.

The infrastructure will be built once there is a demand for it via many purchases of these hopefully-wonderful engines.

/Get ready for electrical grid upgrades--they're overdue anyway.

//Threadjack time. Where is all the extra electricity going to come from that is actually greener than coal, but for a similar price per kilowatt hour? Nuclear is cheap, but isn't the theory right now we have passed "peak uranium"?

It's still a reasonable question. How long does it take to charge? Like it or not, you can go a couple hundred miles on a tank of gas, spend a few minutes filling it back up and you're good to go for another few hundred. Some people do take road trips. What about fleet vehicles for businesses and government entities where the vehicle is in use pretty much 24/7, only changing drivers as shifts change. No, it doesn't mean this is bad tech. It's a great improvement and might finally make electric vehicles useful for a big portion of driving. But the charge time question shows that there is still going to be a give and take, and that there are people and entities for whom this might not be the best choice.

quoinguy: As a hater of the current crop of electric vehicles, since they in no way fit my driving habits and will never break even on the initial high costs, I welcome this breakthrough.

The Holy Grail is when this comes to market it need to be about the same price as a gasoline engine and can recharge quickly--even it's only enough to get you home or to a hotel if going cross country.

The infrastructure will be built once there is a demand for it via many purchases of these hopefully-wonderful engines.

/Get ready for electrical grid upgrades--they're overdue anyway.

//Threadjack time. Where is all the extra electricity going to come from that is actually greener than coal, but for a similar price per kilowatt hour? Nuclear is cheap, but isn't the theory right now we have passed "peak uranium"?

Nuclear is a bad deal if we do things today the way we did things 50 years ago: One off "unique" reactor construction, using a process that discards the fuel rods when they still have 85% of the energy still present etc etc.

If you can settle on a national single design using modern reactor technologies which are much safer and efficient construction costs (the big hurdle) would go way down.

We also don't have to use uranium - there are a number of thorium designs that are quite promising and we already know we've got about 100,000 years worth of Thorium reserves.

It all comes down to political will - 18 months ago I would have said we were getting really close to a second nuclear Renaissance - then Fukishima happened (very old design) and we probably stepped away from nuclear power for at least another decade.

lockers: hej: lockers: How quick does it charge? It only takes me 10 minutes at the gas station.

It will probably take about 15 seconds of your time to plug it in when you come home at night, and another 15 or so to unplug it in the morning.

That isn't very useful when i drive to Texas. I suppose i shouldn't worry about road trips that i take?

In general I take announcements like these (the kind that are 10+ years off) with a grain of salt. I am, however, optimistic enough to think that if they plan on 15+ years to make it viable, some of that time will be spent making it so it's portable enough that an average vehicle could carry a spare.
With any luck, you'll still be able to get to Texas (if you feel you must).

Fizpez: there are a number of thorium designs that are quite promising and we already know we've got about 100,000 years worth of Thorium reser

Thorium reactors could solve a lot of problems if we had the political will to make it happen.

OK, then thorium it is.

Get out there you eco-people. Now that it looks like we can get away from BIG-OIL in our lifetimes, go pressure Democratic legislators to approve building new thorium reactors all over the country.

/Most people have no big love for oil, it's always been an issue of finding a decent replacement.

//Thorium brigade assemble!!