Sujet : Re: battery fire
De : jeroen (at) *nospam* nospam.please (Jeroen Belleman)
Groupes : sci.electronics.designDate : 17. Jan 2025, 20:58:41
Autres entêtes
Organisation : A noiseless patient Spider
Message-ID : <vmechg$6bkn$1@dont-email.me>
References : 1 2
User-Agent : Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:102.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/102.13.0
On 1/17/25 18:49, Cursitor Doom wrote:
On Fri, 17 Jan 2025 07:03:06 -0800, john larkin <JL@gct.com> wrote:
>
>
https://sfstandard.com/2025/01/16/moss-landing-power-plant-fire-evacuations-highway-1/?utm_source=newsshowcase&utm_medium=gnews&utm_campaign=CDAqEAgAKgcICjDWi6sLMNOWwwMwpvnXAw&utm_content=rundown
>
Sounds expensive.
>
Windmills, solar cells, batteries. May not be worth it long term.
>
Luckily, the wind is not blowing the crud our way right now.
Lithium technology really isn't up to the job. Someone needs to come
up with a quantum leap forward in batteries. A fortune awaits the
person or team which can deliver on this. And I mean a *fortune*.
It's funny how 'quantum leap' has come to be taken for a
huge change, although it originally really meant the tiniest
possible change.
High energy density batteries will always be dangerous.
It's the inevitable consequence of storing a lot of energy
in a small package. A tank full of fuel is really much
safer. What we really need is an efficient flow battery,
where reactive components are kept apart until needed.
Jeroen Belleman