Cor wrote:
> Who do you trust...
http://arstechnica.com/science/2015/04/flexible-aluminum-battery-charges-fas
t-stable-for-over-7000-cycles/ -- "But the fact that aluminum atoms only
transferred a single electron when they transited to the cathode is really
not taking full advantage of the whole reason that people think the material
would be good for batteries. And that leads to the low power density of
these batteries."
http://geniushowto.blogspot.com/2015/04/invented-aluminium-battery-recharges
-in-1-minute.html -- "The only disadvantage that these Aluminum ion
batteries haven't been able to cover is voltage and power density here it
lags behind lithium powered batteries average 4 volts with its 2 volts
production and packs a power of 40 watts/kg compared to lithium batteries
humongous 206 Watts/kg power density."
So I read those numbers in three different articles before posting. But
after your Nature reference, I've also now found some articles quoting 3000
W/kg. So it's hard to say which is correct at this point. Note that the
arstechnica article referenced above specifically talks about lower power
density without using numbers.
Is it possible that the cells can be charged much faster than they can be
discharged, and the 3000 W/kg number is referring to charge rate, while the
40 W/kg number is discharge rate?
Bill
_______________________________________________
UNSUBSCRIBE: http://www.evdl.org/help/index.html#usub
http://lists.evdl.org/listinfo.cgi/ev-evdl.org
For EV drag racing discussion, please use NEDRA
(http://groups.yahoo.com/group/NEDRA)
