"Green" Batteries

[jeff88]

I looked into the graphene battery a little bit after you mentioned it. A lot of news about them, but not a lot of information. From what I read, it sounds like it would be a great replacement for other chemical based batteries. I have no evidence to back this up, but I would think they would be lighter as well. What really surprised me is how many applications graphene could be used for.

This is pretty much what I was looking for, is there anything else which could be similar to this in terms of eco-friendly?

[cRiPpLe_rOoStEr]

I'm actually not aware of any battery "cleaner" than Graphene-based ones.

[IamIan]

Originally Posted by cRiPpLe_rOoStEr

I'm actually not aware of any battery "cleaner" than Graphene-based ones.

I guess it depends on what is included and/or excluded to get X-Joules of electrical energy output ... and what types of 'batteries' you want to compare it to.

- - - - - - - - -

I can think of some possibilities for an atomic battery to be net 'cleaner'... depending on the list of included / excluded.

For one such example:

• A modern one can put out around ~140 Mwh of electrical energy over ~263 years from ~1kg of Pu238 +33kg of device... It will have __ dirty/waste in it's production.
• If I include all the dirty/waste of production of the many many Graphene batteries needed to get the same ~140Mwh electrical output... either one giant battery cycled many times ... or many smaller ones cycled many times.
  • This is already included for the Initial Atomic's production waste.
• If I include all the dirty/waste of energy production with which to charge charge those Graphene batteries to get ~140Mwh of electrical output.
  • This is already included for the initial Atomic's production waste.
• If I include all the dirty/waste production of the electronics needed for Graphene Battery Input & Output ... charger , electronics to ensure not over discharged ... etc.
  • This is already included as part of the initial Atomic's production waste.
• If I include the disposal waste of all those worn out Graphene batteries, electronics, etc ... compared to the disposal waste of the worn out Atomic.

That creates a fairly tall order for the Graphene battery.


- - - - - -

Especially considering ... that whether you use it in the Atomic battery or not ... the Pu238 is going to do it's half life and it is going to emit the radiation ... convert it to electrical energy and contain and reduce the harmful radiation emitted with an Atomic cell ... or spread out that same initial radiation ( more net radiation output ) over a larger geographic area , and don't make use of that energy at all.

- - - - - -

Electric Eels could also be considered a fairly net 'clean' ... 'battery'... if you wanted to include them.

[IamIan]

Originally Posted by cRiPpLe_rOoStEr

That's why I still consider an old Diesel beater over a hybrid

To each their own ... but I have my doubts about and the net 'cleanness' over the entire service life.

The old diesel will be less 'clean' to operate per gallon ... especially the old ones ... I'm not so certain that the end of service life dirty effects of recycling are larger than the total net dirty from all those dirtier gallons.

[guudasitgets]

Originally Posted by IamIan

To each their own ... but I have my doubts about and the net 'cleanness' over the entire service life.

The old diesel will be less 'clean' to operate per gallon ... especially the old ones ... I'm not so certain that the end of service life dirty effects of recycling are larger than the total net dirty from all those dirtier gallons.

I agree with the diesel beater concept. In my camp I live in Wisconsin, home of many a fish-fry. There's an endless supply of veggie oil here (and they pay you to take it away) to convert to Bio diesel. And old beater diesels are one group that can burn that stuff without a problem, and cleaner too.

The hybrids are done. No-one is making any money on them because the masses are not buying them. Yes Toyota sells a lot of them but the investment versus reward is not paying off. They tell you how good and clean they are but the battery recycling cost to them is not taken into account. As is the millions of losses that they had to anti up when they introduced the car. They lost a lot of money on every car, and are not saying but rumor has it they still are. The Volt plug in is a better setup in my opinion and now we return back to the battery. The greener it is and the longer it lasts the more attractive it is to buy and easier to promote. Lead acid is not used for the storage battery but all the recycling systems have long been in place for them. so it's cheaper to dispose of these. The clad group cost of recycling will come down some as more companys get on line. But it is still a more costly process and not as clean. A lot of acids and toxic chemicals are used in the electrolysis process. As of now lets just face it, there is no "clean" way. You either contribute to the problem by driving a car, or you walk or ride a bike. Focus now should be and I know there is a lot of, is safety and efficiency in the battery recycling process.

[cRiPpLe_rOoStEr]

Originally Posted by guudasitgets

I agree with the diesel beater concept. In my camp I live in Wisconsin, home of many a fish-fry. There's an endless supply of veggie oil here (and they pay you to take it away) to convert to Bio diesel. And old beater diesels are one group that can burn that stuff without a problem, and cleaner too.

That's my point. The ability to run on cleaner fuels with an engine that operates in a more efficient thermodynamic cycle outruns the benefits of a gasser hybrid which costs more to produce and to get worn-out batteries disposed in a "sustainable" way. This way, even an old 7700lbs. GVWR van can be cleaner than a Prius considering the useful operational lifespan of the vehicles.

[guudasitgets]

Originally Posted by cRiPpLe_rOoStEr

That's my point. The ability to run on cleaner fuels with an engine that operates in a more efficient thermodynamic cycle outruns the benefits of a gasser hybrid which costs more to produce and to get worn-out batteries disposed in a "sustainable" way. This way, even an old 7700lbs. GVWR van can be cleaner than a Prius considering the useful operational lifespan of the vehicles.

Now somebody gets it. Amen brother, add to the fact none of the raw materials and energy that was not used to produce a car, polluted anything because you didn't have to make a new Prius. No imported steel made in coal infested China, no Japanese nuclear electricity, no plastics and aluminium mining etc. The beater is already made, YOUR recycling IT.

[cRiPpLe_rOoStEr]

Originally Posted by guudasitgets

Now somebody gets it. Amen brother, add to the fact none of the raw materials and energy that was not used to produce a car, polluted anything because you didn't have to make a new Prius. No imported steel made in coal infested China, no Japanese nuclear electricity, no plastics and aluminium mining etc. The beater is already made, YOUR recycling IT.

Even if the old beater would require a major overhaul, it might eventually be still less energy-expensive than making a brand-new hybrid.

Let's now consider a modern car as an example: the Peugeot 3008

It's available in some markets with a 1.6L turbodiesel fitted with idle-stop, and a hybrid version with a 2.0L turbodiesel providing FWD with the electric motor bolted to the rear axle. In this case, the hybrid version doesn't really provide such a great improvement in fuel savings, in spite of the 4WD being a nice feature. Then, we must consider the overall energy expense to manufacture and to perform the maintenance, the more intense mineral extraction (or eventually a higher demand for recycled materials which could be used for other purposes) and the disposal of the batteries.

[Xist]

Originally Posted by cRiPpLe_rOoStEr

Let's now consider a modern car as an example: the Peugeot 3008
[IMG]
It's available in some markets with a 1.6L turbodiesel fitted with idle-stop, and a hybrid version with a 2.0L turbodiesel providing FWD with the electric motor bolted to the rear axle. In this case, the hybrid version doesn't really provide such a great improvement in fuel savings, in spite of the 4WD being a nice feature. Then, we must consider the overall energy expense to manufacture and to perform the maintenance, the more intense mineral extraction (or eventually a higher demand for recycled materials which could be used for other purposes) and the disposal of the batteries.

Non-hybrid has a smaller engine than the hybrid, while both have turbos?! How does that make any sense?!

What size engine would you guys put in the hybrid?

[IamIan]

Originally Posted by cRiPpLe_rOoStEr

Even if the old beater would require a major overhaul, it might eventually be still less energy-expensive than making a brand-new hybrid.

I don't think comparing overhaul vs new is a valid comparison.

If you want to do a complete life cycle vs complete life cycle ... or overhaul vs overhaul... OEM vs OEM ... or modified vs modified ... that would be better.

- - - - - - -
As for the anti-HEV clean rant ...

While it might be possible ... I see the odds are very much stacked against the old having a net total cleaner operational life ... as much as the idea is often romanticized ... gets debunked ... then comes back ... like some kind of zombie.

Many parts of the industry were far worse in the past than they are today ... more energy per pound of steel in the past ... more pollution to make each pound of steel in the past ... more pollution for each kwh of energy in the past ... more steel on the older heavier vehicle ... a vehicle that is less safe to drive ... that needs some maintenance items more often ... that is less aerodynamic ... that has larger more toxic and energy costly engine ... and engine that produces vastly more toxins out of it's tail pipe per gallon ... and uses more gallons to travel the same number of miles... etc...etc.

The HEV batteries are a negative that the old option didn't have ... No argument about that at all ... but the other option has lots of other things adding to it's giant pile of life time dirty ... I just don't see a ~50lbs NiMH battery in some HEVs being a big enough hit to be able to counter all the other very large hits the other vehicle has added up over it's lifetime... especially when one tries to stretch it as far as a 7,700 lbs van vs a smaller lighter more aerodynamic , etc , etc ... that heavy aerodynamic brick of a vehicle reeks of energy waste and pollution for the vast majority of U.S. driving population ... it only has a remote chance against some other overly large and overly heavy with crappy aerodynamics horribly low efficiency vehicle.

but that's just my 2 bits.