the optimal battery
in [Physics]
|
Prev: Albert Einstein Explaning Energy
Next: Reference frames.....Re: Experts doubt Einstein..... but Einstein Dingleberries still worship him
From: RichD on 17 Jun 2010 22:37 Battery technology is an active area of research, but an obvious question occurs to me: why is it, no one has determined the maximum possible energy/volume, and energy/weight? And from there, discover the chemistry which achieves it? Is there some lacuna in our understanding of solid state physics which necessitates an empirical, rather than theoretical approach? -- Rich
From: Salmon Egg on 17 Jun 2010 23:43 In article <910b6e89-7fa7-4f90-914f-3022018b4a14(a)b3g2000prd.googlegroups.com>, RichD <r_delaney2001(a)yahoo.com> wrote: > Battery technology is an active area of research, but an > obvious question occurs to me: why is it, no one has determined > the maximum possible energy/volume, and energy/weight? > And from there, discover the chemistry which achieves it? > > Is there some lacuna in our understanding of solid state physics > which necessitates an empirical, rather than theoretical approach? > > -- > Rich I believe it has been done. The ultimate limit is pretty much defined by the electromotive series. After selecting your electrode materials you should know the THEORETICAL potential difference available for that cell. You know that you get one mole of charge per equivalents of each of anode and cathode materials. That gives you an upper limit energy output for the a known mass of electrodes. Throw in the mass of require electrolyte and structural material. That gives you the scientific limit. Then it becomes an non-trivial engineering job. Other technological problems arise on suitable redox reactions. My first hand experience is limited, but it seems hat lithium based anodes will give just about the highest energy density because of the high electropositive nature of lithium and lithium's low atomic mass. Life is complicated because aqueous electrolyte of olde primary cells is not suitable for lithium anodes. It is this kind of engineefing that will affect ultimate performance. Bill -- An old man would be better off never having been born.
From: Uncle Al on 18 Jun 2010 11:09 RichD wrote: > > Battery technology is an active area of research, but an > obvious question occurs to me: why is it, no one has determined > the maximum possible energy/volume, and energy/weight? > And from there, discover the chemistry which achieves it? > > Is there some lacuna in our understanding of solid state physics > which necessitates an empirical, rather than theoretical approach? Ya gotta reduce to practice, it must recharge at least 1000 times; exploding during storage, use, or recharge is a bad thing. 1) Aluminum / fluorine battery is great gazongas on paper - dig the equivalent weights; 2) tetrafluorotetracyanoquinodimethane / 1,3,6,8-tetrakis(dimethylamino)pyrene is great gazongas on paper. 3) Go build either one, inorganic or organic. We'll wait. -- Uncle Al http://www.mazepath.com/uncleal/ (Toxic URL! Unsafe for children and most mammals) http://www.mazepath.com/uncleal/qz4.htm
From: Mark Thorson on 18 Jun 2010 17:02 Androcles wrote: > > The best way to store a lot of energy in a small, lightweight space > is to use TNT, nitroglycerine or similar compounds. It is also not > practical for domestic application, it has too much energy. You don't understand explosives. They don't have more energy than other fuels. What they have is brisance, the ability to build up pressure quickly. Gasoline, for example, has about 10 times more energy content per unit weight than TNT. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Trinitrotoluene#Energy_content
From: bw on 18 Jun 2010 19:40
"Mark Thorson" <nospam(a)sonic.net> wrote in message news:4C1BDEDC.7F485984(a)sonic.net... > Androcles wrote: >> >> The best way to store a lot of energy in a small, lightweight space >> is to use TNT, nitroglycerine or similar compounds. It is also not >> practical for domestic application, it has too much energy. > > You don't understand explosives. They don't have > more energy than other fuels. What they have is > brisance, the ability to build up pressure quickly. > Gasoline, for example, has about 10 times more > energy content per unit weight than TNT. > > http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Trinitrotoluene#Energy_content Yes, reaction rates matter here. A loaf of bread has more energy than the same mass of nitroglycerine |