So if someone created batteries that were cheaper but held maybe 10x more energy per kg than the current best batteries, what impact would that have on our technology?
The obvious one is that it would make electric cars a lot better. Also, if people want to live off the grid and just use solar it would make it easier too.
But batteries are currently a limiting factor in robotic exoskeletons for the elderly and disabled (and likely bipedal robots). So it would make a big improvement in robotics and technology to help the disabled.
Battery powered helicopters and airplanes (full size) could be realistic. Probably full size ships too.
Is there anything else where we would see massive changes?
The Grid itself. Currently, there are some frighteningly huge (large building sized) batteries being built to store and help even out the grid. If this got down to say, tractor-trailer sized batteries holding megawatt hours, then peaks and valleys from renewable energy sources (wind, solar) become much less of an issue.
Directed energy weapons. Remember the 747 loaded with chemical power sources to power the 1mw anti-missile laser? Cost over $1 million a shot. Now imagine a single megawatt/hour battery in such a plane, capable of hundreds of shots. All the way down to hand-held laser pistols and rifles capable of multiple shots on a removable battery.
Jetpacks, maybe? Electric motorcycles currently have a range of about 130 miles; 10x the capacity would help boost sales (and, with more power, allow them to make a much better bike).
Laptops and cellphones you only had to charge up once a week. Flashlights that would only need replacing when they broke, for most people… Small submersibles would be much more versatile with ten times the power available.
The downside to all of these would be that having 10x the capacity would mean 10x the recharge time, but I think you’d see a resurgence of 220v lines in houses and apartments if this became common.
I wouldn’t have to charge all the batteries I have for video, cameras, power tools and phones as often. Imagine being able to run a cellphone for a month without a charge!
For some applications, energy density isn’t the issue so much as cost. For example, if you have the space, there is no theoretical limit to the capacity of flow batteries. That’d be better if they weren’t so expensive, in which case they could be deployed more quickly to store renewable power on a grid scale to displace things like coal plants. Higher energy density would be nice but probably isn’t necessary for this application.
If this happened in parallel along with the deployment of a large ev fleet, in the mid-term flow batteries could take over the structure/stationary electricity space, while traditional power generation could be applied to ev power, displacing oil imports, until renewables gain enough market share to replace the whole she-bang.
Rather than start a new thread, I’d like to add the question: what is the theoretical limit for electrical energy density? Assuming that the cell relies on electrical-chemical conversion for charging and chemical-electrical for sourcing, is there a limit to how much power a battery of given size could hold? Adjust the parameters as needed but stay within presently understood technology… all as you address the OP with the result, of course.
Theoretically the limit is the number of electrons you can fit into each cubic meter. It is a staggering limit, but I don’t know how this kind of electron plasma could be managed.
There would be some negative consequences. Accidental short circuits would be that much more dangerous. You’d see more house- and car-fires started by accidental bridging of contacts. (The days of batteries with exposed metal contacts would come to an end! Safety receptacles would become standard.)
And, people being people, we’d see a lot more toys and devices that had extra power-hungry features. More devices with video screens. Your mobile phone might come with a taser as an optional feature!
The first commandment of the universe is sometimes said to be “Thou shalt not waste.” Yeah, we break that one pretty regularly, right up there with coveting others’ property and talking back to dad and mumsy.
Mass itself has huge energy density. There is a famous equation that covers this.
Sadly the release of that energy can only be done by nuclear fission, which releases about 0.1% from splitting the atom and the reactors for this (in a controlled process rather than a bomb) are rather on the large side. But that is from the ‘weak nuclear force’ that holds the nucleus of large atoms together.
Quite different from the ‘electromagnetic force’ that binds molecules together and is released in chemical reactions.
Uranium 25,000,000,000 Wh/kg
Gasoline is 12,200 Wh/kg
LiFePO4 439 Wh/kg
Lead Acid 25 Wh/kg
If our best batteries held 10x the power, it would make their use in transportation viable but not if they also take 10x longer to charge. The internal resistance is a big factor - how fast you can get the energy in and out. So, too is how many times you charge a battery before it fails to keep a viable level of charge.
A tank of gasoline with a very inefficient engine is still way ahead.
Fire a silent, invisible recoilless beam at the speed of light in a perfectly straight line completely unaffected by wind?
WRT recharging these batteries for cars. I think we still have the same copper-wire-network problem that exists for today’s battery powered cars. The amount of energy that cars use is very high compared to what can easily be transmitted through a handheld copper wire charging device. Roadside charging stations will be limited to something like 400V x 200A and take 10 to 20 times as long as gas refueling.
I personally think the answer is overnight charging and extended range batteries that can provide a full day’s travel on a single charge. You schedule an overnight charge at your daily destination, and have enough energy to drive the entire day. No need for a roadside charging station at all in that model.
An efficient high capacity battery that could be charged and discharged quickly.
This is the great missing invention of the 20th and 21st centuries.
The power generation industry would be completely different. No need for huge amounts of spare generating capacity in reserve ready to supplement the grid. Just a few big grid batteries fed by efficient generators.
No need for gasoline, diesel or gas delivery networks. Most methods of transport electrified and no pollution from engines. The air would be sweeter. The cities quieter.
Living off grid would involve far less disadvantages if batteries could be charged by local renewable generators. It might arrest the mass migrations to cities that are affecting much of the developing world.
There would be a huge increase in human productivity across the world as stored electricity lit up the world without dependency on a grid.
It would be like the second electrical revolution such as we saw in the early years of the twentieth century. It would have a profound effect on the world economy.
And of course there would be ray guns.
I got rather excited about superconductivity when it was thought it may be possible at room temperature. Electric current going around in circles with high charge and discharge rates.
10x the energy density of current batteries? That would be nice, but I don’t think it would be based on the chemical storage mediums we have, now. We’d need batteries with pretty heavy-field magnets that regulate an electron plasma (As was previously stated).
However, if we had the capability, I think we would use it for miniaturization more than progress. That’s really what battery advances in the past have done. Our cell phones get smaller, but they operate the same. Our electric cars no longer require batteries as the only passenger, but they aren’t fundamentally different to the electric cars 100 years ago…or even much different from the electric vehicles used in supermarkets and golf courses.
We’d get an iPhone 12 that weighs half as much as one does now, though.
There has been quite an informed discussion on Reddit on the subject of whether a nuclear powered mobile phone would be possible.
Sadly reality fell short of the dream. Rather too many disadvantages associated with humans getting ‘close up and personal’ to a radiation source. Though I was not for the want of trying.
They would change everything instantly. But you left out one important factor and that’s the time it takes to recharge. Add that in and all portable energy intensive devices will run on batteries only.
