Ok how about lithium-6 instead of the natural ~95% lithium-7 currently used, that should drop it by 15% for the lithium weight right? Also Lithium 6 is pretty easy to isolate.
But how cost effective would it be? Im sure that with government uses cost wouldnt be a problem, but how much would the cost go up if you were to use lithium-6 in a phone?
And that is also why you have to torture the rest of the world with the retardedly idiotic cancer that is the english language and its 95 % homophones and their users who think themselves oh so fucking clever when they come up with puns at this level of difficulty. Woohoo.
Power the planet is kind of misleading, you don't necessarily want maximum lightness and energy density for powering the smart grid, you want ultra reliable and dirty dirt cheap. Electric cars actually benefit far more from fast charging than from total range. If you only had a hundred miles of range but could charge in 5 minutes and charging stations were almost as ubiquitous as gas stations, you'd be all set.
Ryukachoo exactly, and for onsite power storage at solar or wind farms weight matters far less than a mobile device. I'm not sure where development is, but that where the molten Na batteries minutephysics alluded to are going to be used. There are prototypes about the size of a shipping container developed at mit I think currently in testing.
However, it does point out that an Electric plane is a tough feat to achieve without Some way to recharge while airborne, since high power/low weight is crucial there
I used to work for Freddiew so I was in those offices a lot, and I'm from the same part of MN as Sam, Niko and Jake (raced against them in high school cross country skiing!). Wren has done some 3D vfx for MinutePhysics in the past - the video about how bikes stay up.
Perfect world: Fusion Power to generate electricity Efficient Hydrogen storage for vehicles (make hydrogen by electrolysis) Therefore, no batteries. They're quite heavy.
Jared Maddox Good point, well made. Maybe methanol would be even better - liquid storage rather than compressed gas, so safer, and easier to use in things like aircraft engines for long haul.
Hydrogen isn't efficient. For passenger cars batteries are better: - more efficient - about 80% vs 30% overall - safer - increase body strength, decrease rollover risk - easier to fit than hydrogen tanks - can be laid flat under the floor - can quickly ramp up power output - useful in many situations - can be charged at home for free - cheaper - both batteries and electricity Hydrogen is better for bigger vehicles: - adding capacity doesn't increase weight as much as in batteries - no need for instant power ramp-up - more space for tanks - quick refueling at hydrogen stations - perfect for long-haul semi trucks
When younger and we had power outage, I use to love it. Get the candles out and chill out. It was a nice change of pace. The most awkward time I ran out of power was while on the phone. My shaver running out of power is also annoying.
I used to use wireless mice for my laptop pretty much exclusively. Frequently, the battery would die at inconvenient times, and I had to start keeping a fresh pack around at all times. What's worse, is that it would never die fully, and then I'd throw those out. They'd die slowly, only failing for a little bit at a time, and then progressively more until I could get nothing more out of them. This helped them last longer, but it was also much less convenient. I also would often run into other problems with the cheap $15-20 mice I was buying, and would have to buy a new one. Just this last year I invested in a nice wired mouse, and the inconvenience of a cord has been much more manageable than the inconveniences I'd had with wireless mice. I used them for several years, and it wasn't really worth the hassle.
I don't think that even the _Nazis_ were insane enough to try Li-Fluorine, probably the only way to make it worse is to add Sulphur (for the smell), and upgrade the Fluorine to either FOOF or Chlorine-triflouride. There's just not much more "No" left on the dial at these heights...
@@absalomdraconis Yes great idea, let's also make the containers for all these dangerous substances out of nobelium. Now if the Li-O2F2-S-ClF3 battery doesn't work, you have a very powerful thermoelectric generator for a few hours, and the decay products can also generate a lot of radiation.
What about larger scale energy storage? Since many renewable energy sources can't produce energy on demand, it will need to be stored when it can be created to be used later.
Brian Ngoma Eehh, kind of? Personally I think, not really, maybe that's just me, because I've seen quite a bit of these "comments" from self advertising channels, that honestly it gets on my nerves everytime I see one. I just see it as "What is something good that I can say to promote my own channel but not doing it in the form of 'check my channel' comment, hmm maybe this? Ehhh close enough, okay post!" comment.
1:44 Wait a minute. I know that NaCl makes salt. I also know that if you leave a battery in a device for a year or two without using it, it starts to make this white substance that kind of looks like salt. Is this the reason why?
During all of this you assume that we'll keep using the same liquid electrolyte we're using now. There's good reason to think that this won't be the case in the future. Solid electrolyte batteries like Goodeneough/Braga's glass-electrolyte design could improve the energy density way past the figures presented in this video.
Agreed, and it's super interesting stuff! But I underdtand why he skipped it for this video- you have to draw the lind somewhere, and switching electrolyte doesn't explain the gains until you introduce voltage curves and get into some EChem. Definitely worth an educational video if our favorite youtubers are willing to give it a go, but a bit too in-depth for here maybe.
BUZZ WORD. Yea the ones that media talked about to excite you. Yea those don't exist. It is in testing and no conclusive evidence it works. Not to mention that other better things have come up in the past, but never existed. This is because in testing they could explode or poison a person. Maybe there is a mechanic that we don't know yet stopping it. Currently Solid State batteries are just a hope.
Muzikgod yea source me a picture of it then? If it exists then you can 100% prove it right? No you can't because the only thing we know of them is a paten by Toyota and a guy claiming he knows how to do it. He didn't even claim he has done it. There is no solid evidence that says we can even make a solid state battery. Want to make this also clear. Big difference between a usable solid state battery and a non usable one. We can make one at extremely low temperatures, but not at a temperature of use. Which is what we are talking about.
Nice video. Busted premise though. There are far more than two main factors: speed of charging (which you just mention briefly at the end), hold of charge, max discharge current, and number of cycles for life of battery come to mind immediately. Lots more. Did ya even mention the potential promise of supercapacitors? Till next time. (Hey, sorry I fart on some videos, but I was trained to do failure mode analysis.)
Actually it would make it lighter. It would also make it more massive. Mass and weight are different. Guarantee you will loose weight if you tie helium balloons to you.
Hi Henry, have you once thought what we will do when our batteries die? Because when we're producing so many batteries, how do we recycle them? I'm a bit concerned that we will produce a lot of them and end up storing the broken one anywhere because recycling will be too expensive. Have you ever thought about this?
Well, obviously the graphene itself isn't an "energy source" - neither is lithium, nor even hydrogen (it takes more energy to manufacture a hydrogen cell than is delivered by it - it's not a fuel so much as power storage), but I've definitely heard of graphene being used to create batteries with more energy storage capacity than existing lithium-ion batteries, though I don't know the details.
Well yeah it sounds weird since having a good conductor shouln't make a huge difference because one would think that the energy source is what matters the most. I could be wrong though and it would mean that there would be huge energy loss by the resistance of the battery. That would mean that batteries would get really hot when in use but that is not what usually happens when I'm using them...
pennymac16 they are the team behind Corridor Digital, who make short TH-cam vids, alongside feature length movies and shows, commercials, and also a blog called Sam and Niko (which is why we know about each person). A clip from their blog was used in this video (the GoPro on an arrow).
We'll figure out fusion. In 20 years... and 20 more years... and 20 more... Then we need to figure out how to do something other than heat water with it. Which will take 20 more years...
Anker is great. All other powerbanks I used so far died really quickly, my Anker ones are still going strong. Got a 20k mha Power Core II and I love it!
I have an Anker battery pack. While they are quite heavy (probably because of the large dense cells in them, you can see whats inside in a video by JerryRigsEverything), their capacity, (Crazy 26,000mAh) and size is amazing when compared to other battery packs for a similar price and how many times they can charge your phone. Highly recommend buying one.
Bob Robert yeah, but I don't think saving the environment is the end goal for Tesla cars. The idea is to switch to a more sustainable fuel source and make cars/technology using such source more "cool." Petroleum is neat, it's cheap and very energy dense, but it's just not going to last forever. So using these electric cars may be the only way to well... use cars! With that, the rise of renewable energy and the inevitable super mainstream use of it may just counter the carbon footprint of electric cars. That or we just find some new hydrocarbons and everything I just said is total bullshit.
Lol I really doubt that. Where did you read that? Is that comparison taking into account the carbon footprint of making a regular car too? did they look for the kind of energy source that Tesla factories use? Elon Musk said from the very beginning that electric cars are better for the atmosphere. If anyone has proof of anything else, go and tell him.
Smitty Werbenjagermanjensen Elon Musk said Tesla cars are for saving the atmosphere (as we only have one). Derick Smith No, the way to go for saving the environment is using electric cars (to avoid pollution at street level that is actually killing a lot of people) and adopting plant-based diet (to stop global warming, as the methane of the 70 billion animals of the livestock industry is 50 times worse than CO2, and the only source of pollution bad enough to cause the global warming). And I see that thing of using classic cars a pretty bad idea. They are extremely unrecommended for having a very poor safety in comparison with today's cars. And old car would split in half in the pole crash test, while a Tesla car maintains the interior completely untouched.
ankith m - please go back to school. This video just explained why no matter what we do, there is a physical upper limit to energy density. the numbers given here would be the absolute maximum, where every single last atom is used perfectly to store energy - that is well beyond any "nano" technology (which in turn is just a buzzword for laymans).
Nanotechnology is a term that encompasses all physics related activity at the molecular or atomic level This video details the physics of lithium *molecules* , therefore the video can reasonably be described as one that explains the future *nanotechnology* of batteries The way you are using the term makes it look like nothing more than a buzzword So yea this video basically explains the nanotech and physics of battery power and what is possible for the future in terms of technology and innovation of chemical energy storage I was a casual like you too at some point but then I learned muh physics basics, you should too dude. Learning of what holds for our future through the basics of physics or through the conclusions of educated physicists makes one feel like a magician lol
Loosing my wallet and my phone died. Could have done a lot with all my apps. A charger would has save me a 6 mile walk home. Also thank you Anker for sponsoring this show. It's a great show and if you keep sponsoring him, I might move that SoundCore 2 from wishlist to cart ;)
At last, someone who sees the RIGHT picture. Not the rose tinted one, where “we’ve come so far, so further progress is inevitably going to lead to nirvana”. Physical (chemical, its all the same thing in the end) limits matter; thank you - I will be using a link to this, I’m sure.
UnknownUser025 you replied yes to the battery exploding Because of it's shape? In other words are you telling me that with Perfect Chemistry the shape of the battery alone would have caused an explosion?
MALACHI'S DISCIPLES Well, yeah. All lithium ion batteries carry a lot of energy, and inducing a short circuit in them results in the energy being released violently. There are videos of people stabbing batteries which lead to the batteries going up in flames. In the s7's case, the short circuit was not caused by an external impact, but by a flaw in the battery's design and a lack of quality control.
Funny you should mention running out of battery power during shaving. After not shaving my head for a couple months I started shaving my head earlier today and the plug/battery shaver I had, which I usually leave unplugged, and which usually starts off a little slow, just wasn't gaining power the longer it was plugged in today. It muddled through to get it 'good enough' but it was touch and go there for a bit. (After leaving it plugged in for a while it seems to have regained its old oomph. I'm not sure why, on a plug/battery hybrid you wouldn't make the plugged option powerful enough to plow through on its own.)
Well, for one, batteries are used to store energy, not to produce it. Anyway, for something as important as energy storage, you can be sure that every possibility is explored in detail. If we use chemical batteries today, that's simply because it's the best option available.
Tell us a different way to store energy then. Oh right, you don't know any? Here, let me tell you a bit about physics: there are only a very small number of ways to practically store energy. Heat, height, springs, chemicals, electrons, speed. heat is simply heating something up to later use a turbine or similar to generate power - a very very bad idea for a mobile device, but rather nice for solar power. heating up Height - lift something heavy and you store energy. But that ain't easy and doesn't store that much energy. Springs - you know old spring-watches? you need to constantly rewind them. electrons - like in capacitors. You can increase the energy stored by increasing the voltage or the surface area. But even the best capacitors are limited by the insulator between the surfaces and they are like 1/10th the capacity of batteries. Speed - a flywheel or similar. but here is the thing: Chemical energy is just vastly better. Lift 500kg 10 meters and you get 49kJ. That is about the same energy a smartphone battery holds. Chemical bonds are incredible energy dense and comparatively easy to handle.
Well, technically speaking such idea was tried, but ended up in niche application: en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Radioisotope_thermoelectric_generator Not sure, hover whether I'd really like a mobile phone powered with Pu-239.
There's actually a really cool molten salt nuclear reactor battery design that can essentially provide a year's worth of energy for buildings and so forth with no moving parts (it's natural convection-based), and can be "recharged" by swapping out the fuel/fluid inside, which is pretty simple to do. If you're wanting energy on demand in fairly large quantities, you can't do better than fission!
Honestly I think powering for example: 1: A city is not only about batteries themselfs but also about how efficient is the usage of energy, you can improve energy efficiency of light bulbs, computers, elevators or even water pumps, etc. so you will not have to be able to store as much power as you would otherwise. 2: Maybe thats just my opinion but i think and honestly hope we will be able to store power in better ways then chemical batteries only ( btw i know that there are some ways of already non chemical energy storage like storing energy in spinning disks for example.) however i mean other ways which could be used if not in small devices like smartphones but at least in electric cars, by what i mean we wouldnt have those chemical limits which you mentioned.
Hey MinutePhysics, this might seem like a stupid question but I couldn't find the answer to it. Electrons get trapped in clouds causing the cloud to have a negative charge, the charge is later released on to the ground that is positively charged. My question to you is, how come batteries need a circuit to operate, but clouds can discharge the negative energy without having a full circuit? Why can't batteries discharge their energy by just attaching one wire to one battery's (-) and connecting it onto another battery's (+) without having to reconnect at the other ends?
I'm not minute physics and I don't have a ton of E&M knowledge, but I believe it's just because a battery can't create a high enough voltage. For any material, there's what is known as a breakdown voltage at which the material becomes partially conductive. For air the requisite E field is something like 3e6 V/m.
It is a full circuit. the reactions happen in the cloud and at the surface similarly is in a battery and the air is the wire. Air is not non-conductive, just very poorly conductive. Q: But air is a gas, so the molecules do not touch each other. A: molecules never touch each other in the first place, what is relevant if the electromagnetic field of the charged particles overlap sufficiently. the strength of this field strongly decreases with distance, but never reaches zero. So with a sufficiently strong energy differential air conducts. An lighting strike contains about 1,000,000,000 joules of energy. Which is enough to heat the air it is going though so much that it will glow (which is why you can see it), in fact at about 30,000 degree Celsius (50,000 degrees Fahrenheit) it is hotter that the sun.
This was touched on a little in the video, but it's worth mentioning more that even the theoretical upper bounds for how energy-dense we can make rechargeable batteries is still an order of magnitude less dense than a traditional fossil fuel. In fact, a lot of the research there is not about making more efficient batteries, but using electric power to more efficiently synthesize chemicals like ethanol and butanol (e.g. www.ornl.gov/news/nano-spike-catalysts-convert-carbon-dioxide-directly-ethanol ).
Tw!st3d D!gg3r they pretty much have to be funded by *a* company tho. And they don’t have to affect the result. Just make sure in the contract it says that the results WILL always be published.
Hey minutephysics, what's you're take on the solid-state, glass batteries that are supposed to be able to hold a ridiculous amount of charge AND last a lot longer? It would've been nice to see an explanation for how those work included in this video, although batteries in general still strain my comprehension. As I recall, they're being researched by Dr. Goodenough (one of the original developers of the Lithium-ion battery) and Dr. Braga. Googling "glass battery" should bring them up well enough, though. I'd love to see an addendum discussing the difference between glass batteries and conventional batteries.
Anker is working that PR well. Hitting the right demographic for selling their stuff. Definitely recommend checking out their battery packs cuz they fucking rock
Great video, but one issue. Lithium is not very reactive but fluorine is. The reason they react so violently is Lithium has very high amounts of electromagnetic force so the much more reactive fluorine atom can "take" the lithium electron with only a lot of energy already present in the reaction.
Hey, wouldn't it be easier to store the energy using electrolysis of water and use the oxygen and hydrogen to power cars, heating houses etc? Please make a video about it!!
I think two main technical stakes of batteries were not discussed here. Weight is certainly a problem but the volume inherent to the technology is extremely important too (otherwise, electrolysis and H2 would have conquered the market a long time ago with one of the greatest power to weight ratio). Making things compact is about making them also smaller in size. The other point about democratisation of batteries is obviously the costs that can't really be put aside either but you talked about it a little in the video.
Electrochemical batteries won't be the big solution, but something more exotic might be. I heard something about storing electrons in bulk inside of a graphene-carbon nanotube composite. Apparently it has a theoretical storage density in the gigawatt hours per kilogram, so that would be useful... Should do a video on that.
I don’t understand something: wouldn’t you want a material that produced the *least* amount of energy per electron traded? (Not the *most* energy per electron, as stated in the video at approx 1:25). The energy produced would be manifested as heat, no?
Hey other Minute Physicists! Would really appreciate your VOTE in the Ankar Power it up competition! we spent a lot of time on it. Thank you so much :)
Hydrocarbon fuels still contain over TWICE the energy to weight as the best POSSIBLE batteries, not just the batteries that we already have. Hence, for commercial aviation, large intercontinental aircraft will forever remain powered by hydrocarbon fuels. The only possible exception would be hydrogen fuel batteries. Liquid hydrogen is an excellent fuel for commercial aviation, with the proviso that large under-wing tanks will be required. Of course, it would be easier and cheaper to just burn the hydrogen in a turbo-fan engine instead of fuel batteries. Liquid hydrogen powered jet aircraft have been made (converted from standard aircraft) and flown successfully. The issue on hydrogen aviation is fuel cost. Some bad news. ALL of the lithium (or other metal, or boron, etc) oxygen batteries GAIN WEIGHT when they discharge, as the lithium (or whatever) is converted into solid lithium oxide. This is not a problem with ordinary hydrocarbon powered aircraft, since both of the resulting oxides, carbon dioxide and hydrogen oxide (water) are gasses and are ejected with the exhaust. We cannot have aircraft spraying millions of tonnes of lithium oxide into the air around the World every day. One more thing. If the World is to be battery powered, there must be a huge increase in electric power generation to charge the batteries, and by huge, I mean a factor of at least 4. This cannot be done in any short period of time.
Hydrogen embrittles many metals, so there might be an argument to be made in favor of hydrogen batteries or fuel cells for maintenance reasons. Admittedly, I'd just go for liquid methane instead.
Minutephysics, how about nanotechnology? I heard Kaku speak about basically enabling (near) infinite storage potential. It was on his video about a lightsaber i belief.
My worst moment of running out of battery power occurred several years ago. I had been kidnapped and, when I awoke, I found myself handcuffed to a radiator. The key for the handcuff had been placed out of my reach on the floor in the middle of the room. There was also a handkerchief with a one inch thick stick next to the key. I assume the last two items were there so I could use them as a tourniquet, since... next to me, I found a battery powered reciprocating saw. After sitting there in bewilderment for several minutes, a voice came over a sound system... I'm not sure from where because I couldn't see any speakers in the room. I won't bore you with those details but, suffice to say, the person on the other end, who had a distinctive lisp and identified himself as a "Sicilian" (even though he had an American accent, without a trace of European) was very persuasive. He told me that, if I didn't make the decision to hack off my own hand pretty soon... "death was on the line". I had no idea what that would entail but I got the impression that it was a bad idea to attempt to find out. I was obviously dealing with a very dangerous character. So, taking the reciprocating saw in hand and steeling my nerve, I began the gruesome work of detaching my left hand. The pain was indescribable... to be honest, I don't know how I kept myself from passing out. Then, with half the job left to go... the saw suddenly began slowing. I thought, "Perhaps it's getting stuck" and tried to reposition it but... it was the battery. Someone (possibly the "Sicilian's" henchman, or henchmen?) had forgotten to recharge it. However, I never found out the answer to that question because, when I tried calling out to the Sicilian to discover whether he had another battery or possibly an outlet where I could plug in the tool directly, I was met only with silence. I never heard from the Sicilian ever again. Several hours later, the police broke in and I was rescued. I had managed to staunch the bleeding with my own t-shirt until then. With reconstructive surgery, they were able to save my hand (I only have partial paralysis in my pinky and ring finger). The police never were able to find out what had caused the Sicilian to leave so suddenly. In fact, their theory is that he may have left even before I discovered the battery problem. They were only able to find a single clue... a note with the word: "Buttercup". They have no idea what it could mean.
Can you do a video like this on the graphine battery's that are starting to come out to compare them to the ideas you go over in the video. I really wanna know if they're better and if they'll solve this problem
What about graphite batteries? I know they will be expensive because there still reasearching it but it can be used for everything in the future i think.
I don't understand why we don't just make batteries that, you know, don't degrade over time or catch fire when something goes wrong. I wouldn't mind a phone battery that weighed twice as much if they could guarantee it would last twice as long. I work at an IT repair shop, and it's kind of incredible how commercial Li-ion batteries turn to crap after 6 months of usage. I do understand that miniaturization is good for the environment when it means you get more use out of smaller amounts of resources, but I do think our resources (and consumers' cash) could be spent more efficiently if we moved durability, reliability, and reparability up on the list of priorities. I like my Fairphone. They've just launched a new camera that I could buy and put into my phone myself. Heck of a lot better than buying a new iPhone.
3:50 Ah the good old fusion fewer dream. How exactly would that solve the problems discussed in this video? The drawing suggests each car having a fusion reactor. But how small could a fusion reactor (provided we get fusion reactors to have positive net energy output) get? You spent the video answering that question for batteries but jam fusion in with an off the cuf remark? You might as well have said "unless we figure those ultra-compact nuclear fission reactors from Fallout out".
Light batteries are good for things that move with the batteries onboard. For static stuff, like charging stations or peak-demand capacity, heavy should be fine. - Super picky point. a battery weighing 30% less than another is not is not about 1/3 as much, it is about 2/3 as much.
That huge battery pack better run that single lightbulb longer than 10hrs... i have a camping fan/light that runs on 4 D-size standard batteries, and it will run longer than 10hrs... seems like that time you suggested is waaay off. Maybe the 18650s in that battery pack are low mAh, but then what is the point of having 8x of them? Anyway, i love your videos man. I hope you are making content for years to come!
Those are all chemistry based batteries. I have heard someone is trying to create a battery, that is basically an extremely thin layer of a special material, that can "store" electrons on it's surface. Which would create a very light battery, which can hold a lot of charge while beeing able to be be recharged within seconds or minutes at best, as it just needs to be refilled with electrons, rather than go through a chemical reaction.
+Shuizid , you're describing a capacitor which is existing a long long time. Nowadays there is the big hype about "super-capacitors" that can hold a much larger charge than the "normal" capacitor but the discharge characteristics limits their use.
Yeah, my description does show I don't know how they work. However what I meant is a so called "nano-wire" battery. But after googling for "new battery type" I found some articles talking about like a dozen of different types, that all seem to offer a lot more possibilities than lithium-ion batteries.
Ok how about lithium-6 instead of the natural ~95% lithium-7 currently used, that should drop it by 15% for the lithium weight right? Also Lithium 6 is pretty easy to isolate.
But how cost effective would it be? Im sure that with government uses cost wouldnt be a problem, but how much would the cost go up if you were to use lithium-6 in a phone?
IN ENGLISH DAMMIT! (Joking, love you cody)
Make one (a Lithium-6 battery that is)? I'd watch that video.
Idiot
No, the calculation isn't correct, unless the battery contains ONLY lithium, you'll have to add sulfer/oxygen/whatever other elements into the play
You made lithium react with argon?!
LiAr!!!!!
WazzupKMS ha.. hold this L
uh man... I was gonna make a chemistry joke but all the good ones argon.😓
We can't find any good chemistry jokes because the chemist barium.
And that is also why you have to torture the rest of the world with the retardedly idiotic cancer that is the english language and its 95 % homophones and their users who think themselves oh so fucking clever when they come up with puns at this level of difficulty. Woohoo.
WazzupKMS Chromium Iodine Nitrogen Energy - Cringe
Power the planet is kind of misleading, you don't necessarily want maximum lightness and energy density for powering the smart grid, you want ultra reliable and dirty dirt cheap.
Electric cars actually benefit far more from fast charging than from total range. If you only had a hundred miles of range but could charge in 5 minutes and charging stations were almost as ubiquitous as gas stations, you'd be all set.
Ryukachoo Well, I think a lot of people would still find it tedious to have to stop to charge that often
Make the charging and cars automatic. Just sleep the whole ride.
We need another battery tech leap that will make lithium batteries look like NiCD/NiMH.
Ryukachoo exactly, and for onsite power storage at solar or wind farms weight matters far less than a mobile device. I'm not sure where development is, but that where the molten Na batteries minutephysics alluded to are going to be used. There are prototypes about the size of a shipping container developed at mit I think currently in testing.
However, it does point out that an Electric plane is a tough feat to achieve without Some way to recharge while airborne, since high power/low weight is crucial there
Did NOT expect Sam and Niko in a minutephysics video.
I used to work for Freddiew so I was in those offices a lot, and I'm from the same part of MN as Sam, Niko and Jake (raced against them in high school cross country skiing!). Wren has done some 3D vfx for MinutePhysics in the past - the video about how bikes stay up.
You should've included Peter "42" in your cloning videos :)
I knew there was a connection but i didn't know this!
Awesome!
Pfp (Profile Picture) and / or Banner Sauce (Source [Artist])? 🗿
Just crazy to see animations in places you would never expect.
Perfect world:
Fusion Power to generate electricity
Efficient Hydrogen storage for vehicles (make hydrogen by electrolysis)
Therefore, no batteries. They're quite heavy.
Hydrogen leaks a bit too much. Methane would be a better choice.
Better to supply electricity from underground superconductors or overhead catenaries than batteries or hydrogen for daily vehicle uses.
Jared Maddox Good point, well made. Maybe methanol would be even better - liquid storage rather than compressed gas, so safer, and easier to use in things like aircraft engines for long haul.
Hydrogen isn't efficient.
For passenger cars batteries are better:
- more efficient - about 80% vs 30% overall
- safer - increase body strength, decrease rollover risk
- easier to fit than hydrogen tanks - can be laid flat under the floor
- can quickly ramp up power output - useful in many situations
- can be charged at home for free
- cheaper - both batteries and electricity
Hydrogen is better for bigger vehicles:
- adding capacity doesn't increase weight as much as in batteries
- no need for instant power ramp-up
- more space for tanks
- quick refueling at hydrogen stations - perfect for long-haul semi trucks
@@surplusking2425 trolleybuses ☝️😉😏
When younger and we had power outage, I use to love it. Get the candles out and chill out. It was a nice change of pace. The most awkward time I ran out of power was while on the phone. My shaver running out of power is also annoying.
I used to use wireless mice for my laptop pretty much exclusively. Frequently, the battery would die at inconvenient times, and I had to start keeping a fresh pack around at all times. What's worse, is that it would never die fully, and then I'd throw those out. They'd die slowly, only failing for a little bit at a time, and then progressively more until I could get nothing more out of them. This helped them last longer, but it was also much less convenient. I also would often run into other problems with the cheap $15-20 mice I was buying, and would have to buy a new one.
Just this last year I invested in a nice wired mouse, and the inconvenience of a cord has been much more manageable than the inconveniences I'd had with wireless mice. I used them for several years, and it wasn't really worth the hassle.
its an awesome day when minutephysics uploads!
same bro
Very true
Software Man ii
Good sponsor choice! Bought one of these 4 years ago and its still working as intended.
My first thought when you mentioned Li - Flourine batteries. "Hell no."
I don't think that even the _Nazis_ were insane enough to try Li-Fluorine, probably the only way to make it worse is to add Sulphur (for the smell), and upgrade the Fluorine to either FOOF or Chlorine-triflouride. There's just not much more "No" left on the dial at these heights...
@@absalomdraconis Yes great idea, let's also make the containers for all these dangerous substances out of nobelium. Now if the Li-O2F2-S-ClF3 battery doesn't work, you have a very powerful thermoelectric generator for a few hours, and the decay products can also generate a lot of radiation.
I have an Outdoor Anker speaker and it is amazing it's been through mud, snow, and water.
Wendover also uploaded a video a few minutes ago sponsored by Anker, coincidence, I think not.
Nuthin141 I was searching for this
Nuthin141 Real Engineering also just uploaded at the same time too
WAKE UP SHEEPLE!
Nuthin141 Yeah I saw. Seems fishy...
Kevin Chen was about to say the same, literally just watched Wendover's vid before this
Am I the only one who sees the humour in the illustrations ? Raelly excellent for forming visuals on complicated concepts and remember easily
MinutePhysics and Real Engineering? best day ever!
What about larger scale energy storage? Since many renewable energy sources can't produce energy on demand, it will need to be stored when it can be created to be used later.
Knowing me, I'd still probably lose those batteries..
_Y O U A G A I N_
You really like to self advertise your channel huh? I've seen you on LOTS OF videos.
Paul last, if he is, he's doing it in a pretty clever way with all dem witty comments.
Brian Ngoma Eehh, kind of? Personally I think, not really, maybe that's just me, because I've seen quite a bit of these "comments" from self advertising channels, that honestly it gets on my nerves everytime I see one. I just see it as "What is something good that I can say to promote my own channel but not doing it in the form of 'check my channel' comment, hmm maybe this? Ehhh close enough, okay post!" comment.
1:44 Wait a minute. I know that NaCl makes salt. I also know that if you leave a battery in a device for a year or two without using it, it starts to make this white substance that kind of looks like salt. Is this the reason why?
It is a salt, but not sodium chloride
During all of this you assume that we'll keep using the same liquid electrolyte we're using now. There's good reason to think that this won't be the case in the future. Solid electrolyte batteries like Goodeneough/Braga's glass-electrolyte design could improve the energy density way past the figures presented in this video.
Agreed, and it's super interesting stuff! But I underdtand why he skipped it for this video- you have to draw the lind somewhere, and switching electrolyte doesn't explain the gains until you introduce voltage curves and get into some EChem.
Definitely worth an educational video if our favorite youtubers are willing to give it a go, but a bit too in-depth for here maybe.
Great video and congrats on the awesome sponsor!
What about Solid State Batteries? This could be a revolution!
BUZZ WORD. Yea the ones that media talked about to excite you. Yea those don't exist. It is in testing and no conclusive evidence it works. Not to mention that other better things have come up in the past, but never existed. This is because in testing they could explode or poison a person. Maybe there is a mechanic that we don't know yet stopping it. Currently Solid State batteries are just a hope.
As I said: This COULD be a revolution. I know that they are still under development.
there has been around 100 new battery technology announcements in the past few years
the funny thing is that they never make it past that
Muzikgod yea source me a picture of it then? If it exists then you can 100% prove it right? No you can't because the only thing we know of them is a paten by Toyota and a guy claiming he knows how to do it. He didn't even claim he has done it. There is no solid evidence that says we can even make a solid state battery.
Want to make this also clear. Big difference between a usable solid state battery and a non usable one. We can make one at extremely low temperatures, but not at a temperature of use. Which is what we are talking about.
Muzikgod nope
just got so excited hearing real engineering in the vid!
Can we just appreciate his hard work for every video?
YAAAY a collaboration by two of my fav youtube teachers! On a subject that is vital to the immediate future of humanity.
power the world? all the devices need to be light and trasportables? Always thought weight is not a problem for micro and macro grid.
Right... Weight is important for electronics and transportation, but nearly meaningless for general storage...
Nice video. Busted premise though. There are far more than two main factors: speed of charging (which you just mention briefly at the end), hold of charge, max discharge current, and number of cycles for life of battery come to mind immediately. Lots more. Did ya even mention the potential promise of supercapacitors? Till next time. (Hey, sorry I fart on some videos, but I was trained to do failure mode analysis.)
Or if you want to make it lighter, put helium in it... duh.
OceanOinker That doesn't make it lighter. It just changes the average density. The total weight still increases.
Oh, okay. I just thought that cuz helium balloons rise
Actually it would make it lighter. It would also make it more massive. Mass and weight are different. Guarantee you will loose weight if you tie helium balloons to you.
nope, helium does *NOT* have a negative weight, it just rises because it is lighter than air
exactly, so on a scale, if you tie helium balloons to a battery ( or any object ), then it would weigh less on the scale, making it lighter, right?
Hi Henry, have you once thought what we will do when our batteries die? Because when we're producing so many batteries, how do we recycle them? I'm a bit concerned that we will produce a lot of them and end up storing the broken one anywhere because recycling will be too expensive. Have you ever thought about this?
Hey, minutephysics, what about graphene?
It is a good conductor, but not a energy source
Well, obviously the graphene itself isn't an "energy source" - neither is lithium, nor even hydrogen (it takes more energy to manufacture a hydrogen cell than is delivered by it - it's not a fuel so much as power storage), but I've definitely heard of graphene being used to create batteries with more energy storage capacity than existing lithium-ion batteries, though I don't know the details.
Well yeah it sounds weird since having a good conductor shouln't make a huge difference because one would think that the energy source is what matters the most. I could be wrong though and it would mean that there would be huge energy loss by the resistance of the battery. That would mean that batteries would get really hot when in use but that is not what usually happens when I'm using them...
graphene and carbon nanotubes can't be the answer to ALL of our problems . . .
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Potential_applications_of_graphene#Batteries
0:27 have I already seen this video?
0:32 oh ok now it makes sense
Real Engineering best channel
0:10 was that niko from node
Rapth in an above comment he mentions that he grew up with Sam Niko and Jake and that Wren has worked on some 3D aspects of his videos before!
Who are these people, Niko, Sam, Jake, and Wren I've been reading about in the comments?
pennymac16 they are the team behind Corridor Digital, who make short TH-cam vids, alongside feature length movies and shows, commercials, and also a blog called Sam and Niko (which is why we know about each person). A clip from their blog was used in this video (the GoPro on an arrow).
@Peregrine I see. Thank you so much for talking the time to write such an informative reply =)
I let out a very hearty laugh when you mentioned a lithium-fluorine battery. Yeah that would be a wonderful idea...
We'll figure out fusion. In 20 years... and 20 more years... and 20 more...
Then we need to figure out how to do something other than heat water with it. Which will take 20 more years...
We already know how to do more than heat water with fusion, heating the water is the bit we _haven't_ figured out.
Anker is great. All other powerbanks I used so far died really quickly, my Anker ones are still going strong. Got a 20k mha Power Core II and I love it!
Do you think the first person to arrive in North America said; "First"?
You'd have to go back many thousands of years to find out.
First in Native American.
Once they had a language with the a word for "first", someone likely said it.
It would be nice to get a copy of that periodic table, very clean looking.
who else used to think Li-ion was Lion battery when he was young?
I have an Anker battery pack. While they are quite heavy (probably because of the large dense cells in them, you can see whats inside in a video by JerryRigsEverything), their capacity, (Crazy 26,000mAh) and size is amazing when compared to other battery packs for a similar price and how many times they can charge your phone. Highly recommend buying one.
is it true that the making of a tesla car have a carbon foot print of a regular car used for 8 years ?
Bob Robert yeah, but I don't think saving the environment is the end goal for Tesla cars.
The idea is to switch to a more sustainable fuel source and make cars/technology using such source more "cool."
Petroleum is neat, it's cheap and very energy dense, but it's just not going to last forever. So using these electric cars may be the only way to well... use cars! With that, the rise of renewable energy and the inevitable super mainstream use of it may just counter the carbon footprint of electric cars.
That or we just find some new hydrocarbons and everything I just said is total bullshit.
Lol I really doubt that. Where did you read that? Is that comparison taking into account the carbon footprint of making a regular car too? did they look for the kind of energy source that Tesla factories use?
Elon Musk said from the very beginning that electric cars are better for the atmosphere. If anyone has proof of anything else, go and tell him.
Smitty Werbenjagermanjensen Elon Musk said Tesla cars are for saving the atmosphere (as we only have one).
Derick Smith No, the way to go for saving the environment is using electric cars (to avoid pollution at street level that is actually killing a lot of people) and adopting plant-based diet (to stop global warming, as the methane of the 70 billion animals of the livestock industry is 50 times worse than CO2, and the only source of pollution bad enough to cause the global warming).
And I see that thing of using classic cars a pretty bad idea. They are extremely unrecommended for having a very poor safety in comparison with today's cars. And old car would split in half in the pole crash test, while a Tesla car maintains the interior completely untouched.
vistaero but is it true that the making of a tesla car have a carbon foot print of a regular car used for 8 years ?
You should read the report on "Cleaner Cars from Cradle to Grave", it'll answer your question.
Also you need to look at the resources you need to build them, and how long they keep working
Nanotechnology is the answer.
I don't think you understand what that means
ankith m - please go back to school.
This video just explained why no matter what we do, there is a physical upper limit to energy density.
the numbers given here would be the absolute maximum, where every single last atom is used perfectly to store energy - that is well beyond any "nano" technology (which in turn is just a buzzword for laymans).
nanomachines, son
Nanotechnology is a term that encompasses all physics related activity at the molecular or atomic level
This video details the physics of lithium *molecules* , therefore the video can reasonably be described as one that explains the future *nanotechnology* of batteries
The way you are using the term makes it look like nothing more than a buzzword
So yea this video basically explains the nanotech and physics of battery power and what is possible for the future in terms of technology and innovation of chemical energy storage
I was a casual like you too at some point but then I learned muh physics basics, you should too dude. Learning of what holds for our future through the basics of physics or through the conclusions of educated physicists makes one feel like a magician lol
HomeSkillenSLICE ,
Loosing my wallet and my phone died. Could have done a lot with all my apps. A charger would has save me a 6 mile walk home.
Also thank you Anker for sponsoring this show. It's a great show and if you keep sponsoring him, I might move that SoundCore 2 from wishlist to cart ;)
When you're early and you dont know what to say....
WazzupKMS I'm glad you thought of something.
You don't have to say anything. Commenting is optional and not a requirement.
Say what you need to say!
[insert witty comment here]
At last, someone who sees the RIGHT picture. Not the rose tinted one, where “we’ve come so far, so further progress is inevitably going to lead to nirvana”. Physical (chemical, its all the same thing in the end) limits matter; thank you - I will be using a link to this, I’m sure.
The fuel for the world will be Algae Bio-Diesel fuel, Noob
2:08 Secret footage of Samsung creating the S7
I guess stupid decisions about battery combinations have led to the many cases of exploding Samsung phones . . .
. . . I think.
And that's bad reference for what?
note 7 battery explode because of the rounded corner shape of the battery to fit the phone, not because of the new chemistry or some shit
mobai123 so let me get this straight... The battery exploded Because of round corners, not because of bad chemistry??..lol.... 👍ok
UnknownUser025 you replied yes to the battery exploding Because of it's shape? In other words are you telling me that with Perfect Chemistry the shape of the battery alone would have caused an explosion?
MALACHI'S DISCIPLES Well, yeah. All lithium ion batteries carry a lot of energy, and inducing a short circuit in them results in the energy being released violently. There are videos of people stabbing batteries which lead to the batteries going up in flames. In the s7's case, the short circuit was not caused by an external impact, but by a flaw in the battery's design and a lack of quality control.
Funny you should mention running out of battery power during shaving. After not shaving my head for a couple months I started shaving my head earlier today and the plug/battery shaver I had, which I usually leave unplugged, and which usually starts off a little slow, just wasn't gaining power the longer it was plugged in today. It muddled through to get it 'good enough' but it was touch and go there for a bit. (After leaving it plugged in for a while it seems to have regained its old oomph. I'm not sure why, on a plug/battery hybrid you wouldn't make the plugged option powerful enough to plow through on its own.)
What if we ditch chemical energy altogether and figure out other ways to generate energy?
then what would happen to all battery powered gadgets? Oh wait, you haven't thought about that, have you?
Well, for one, batteries are used to store energy, not to produce it.
Anyway, for something as important as energy storage, you can be sure that every possibility is explored in detail. If we use chemical batteries today, that's simply because it's the best option available.
Tell us a different way to store energy then.
Oh right, you don't know any?
Here, let me tell you a bit about physics:
there are only a very small number of ways to practically store energy.
Heat, height, springs, chemicals, electrons, speed.
heat is simply heating something up to later use a turbine or similar to generate power - a very very bad idea for a mobile device, but rather nice for solar power.
heating up
Height - lift something heavy and you store energy. But that ain't easy and doesn't store that much energy.
Springs - you know old spring-watches? you need to constantly rewind them.
electrons - like in capacitors. You can increase the energy stored by increasing the voltage or the surface area. But even the best capacitors are limited by the insulator between the surfaces and they are like 1/10th the capacity of batteries.
Speed - a flywheel or similar.
but here is the thing:
Chemical energy is just vastly better.
Lift 500kg 10 meters and you get 49kJ. That is about the same energy a smartphone battery holds.
Chemical bonds are incredible energy dense and comparatively easy to handle.
Nigga he said generate, not store.
Well, technically speaking such idea was tried, but ended up in niche application:
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Radioisotope_thermoelectric_generator
Not sure, hover whether I'd really like a mobile phone powered with Pu-239.
Good video guys! I think it's really awesome to learn about batteries.
Woah, two videos in a row about Anker. They really know how to advertise.
There's actually a really cool molten salt nuclear reactor battery design that can essentially provide a year's worth of energy for buildings and so forth with no moving parts (it's natural convection-based), and can be "recharged" by swapping out the fuel/fluid inside, which is pretty simple to do. If you're wanting energy on demand in fairly large quantities, you can't do better than fission!
Honestly I think powering for example:
1: A city is not only about batteries themselfs but also about how efficient is the usage of energy, you can improve energy efficiency of light bulbs, computers, elevators or even water pumps, etc. so you will not have to be able to store as much power as you would otherwise. 2: Maybe thats just my opinion but i think and honestly hope we will be able to store power in better ways then chemical batteries only ( btw i know that there are some ways of already non chemical energy storage like storing energy in spinning disks for example.) however i mean other ways which could be used if not in small devices like smartphones but at least in electric cars, by what i mean we wouldnt have those chemical limits which you mentioned.
Hey MinutePhysics, this might seem like a stupid question but I couldn't find the answer to it. Electrons get trapped in clouds causing the cloud to have a negative charge, the charge is later released on to the ground that is positively charged. My question to you is, how come batteries need a circuit to operate, but clouds can discharge the negative energy without having a full circuit? Why can't batteries discharge their energy by just attaching one wire to one battery's (-) and connecting it onto another battery's (+) without having to reconnect at the other ends?
I'm not minute physics and I don't have a ton of E&M knowledge, but I believe it's just because a battery can't create a high enough voltage. For any material, there's what is known as a breakdown voltage at which the material becomes partially conductive. For air the requisite E field is something like 3e6 V/m.
It is a full circuit. the reactions happen in the cloud and at the surface similarly is in a battery and the air is the wire. Air is not non-conductive, just very poorly conductive.
Q: But air is a gas, so the molecules do not touch each other.
A: molecules never touch each other in the first place, what is relevant if the electromagnetic field of the charged particles overlap sufficiently. the strength of this field strongly decreases with distance, but never reaches zero.
So with a sufficiently strong energy differential air conducts.
An lighting strike contains about 1,000,000,000 joules of energy. Which is enough to heat the air it is going though so much that it will glow (which is why you can see it), in fact at about 30,000 degree Celsius (50,000 degrees Fahrenheit) it is hotter that the sun.
This was touched on a little in the video, but it's worth mentioning more that even the theoretical upper bounds for how energy-dense we can make rechargeable batteries is still an order of magnitude less dense than a traditional fossil fuel. In fact, a lot of the research there is not about making more efficient batteries, but using electric power to more efficiently synthesize chemicals like ethanol and butanol (e.g. www.ornl.gov/news/nano-spike-catalysts-convert-carbon-dioxide-directly-ethanol ).
Anker batteries and cables rock! I've been using them for years
The only kind of paid promotions I enjoy x
I love the way you explain
Sponsorship and science do NOT belong together. It can make your experiments end short in favor of your sponsor's product.
Tw!st3d D!gg3r they pretty much have to be funded by *a* company tho. And they don’t have to affect the result. Just make sure in the contract it says that the results WILL always be published.
Hey minutephysics, what's you're take on the solid-state, glass batteries that are supposed to be able to hold a ridiculous amount of charge AND last a lot longer? It would've been nice to see an explanation for how those work included in this video, although batteries in general still strain my comprehension.
As I recall, they're being researched by Dr. Goodenough (one of the original developers of the Lithium-ion battery) and Dr. Braga. Googling "glass battery" should bring them up well enough, though. I'd love to see an addendum discussing the difference between glass batteries and conventional batteries.
0:10 Eyyyyyyyyyyyy Sam & Niko
Great video as always.
Can you do a video on Sodium-Ion batteries? I hear about it sometimes, but nothing more than a few articles or blogs are all I can find.
Anker is working that PR well. Hitting the right demographic for selling their stuff.
Definitely recommend checking out their battery packs cuz they fucking rock
What if we don't care about wight but about the energy, could we use heavier elements than just (Li,S,O,F) ?. More energy even if more wight.
Great video, but one issue. Lithium is not very reactive but fluorine is. The reason they react so violently is Lithium has very high amounts of electromagnetic force so the much more reactive fluorine atom can "take" the lithium electron with only a lot of energy already present in the reaction.
Background accompaniment provided by Phillip the Magical Bass.
What ever happened about the wonder material "Graphene" batteries, which promised to be rechargeable in minutes?
Hey, wouldn't it be easier to store the energy using electrolysis of water and use the oxygen and hydrogen to power cars, heating houses etc? Please make a video about it!!
I think two main technical stakes of batteries were not discussed here.
Weight is certainly a problem but the volume inherent to the technology is extremely important too (otherwise, electrolysis and H2 would have conquered the market a long time ago with one of the greatest power to weight ratio). Making things compact is about making them also smaller in size.
The other point about democratisation of batteries is obviously the costs that can't really be put aside either but you talked about it a little in the video.
I'm really curious what you think about non-chemical batteries, fuel cells, and supercapacitors.
Was expecting a comment on graphene as a supercapacitor. That shit is the future of batteries
Electrochemical batteries won't be the big solution, but something more exotic might be. I heard something about storing electrons in bulk inside of a graphene-carbon nanotube composite. Apparently it has a theoretical storage density in the gigawatt hours per kilogram, so that would be useful... Should do a video on that.
I don’t understand something: wouldn’t you want a material that produced the *least* amount of energy per electron traded? (Not the *most* energy per electron, as stated in the video at approx 1:25). The energy produced would be manifested as heat, no?
Sam and Niko team!!! Just came to this from their vlogs
Hey other Minute Physicists! Would really appreciate your VOTE in the Ankar Power it up competition! we spent a lot of time on it. Thank you so much :)
WHAT ABOUT THE POSSIBILITY OF GRAPHENE BATTERIES????? I love the thought of graphene getting used for things like this
Wendover Productions, Minute Physics, and Real Engineering all upload at once with the same sponsor.
3 great channels with a semi-collaboration. Yay!
Hydrocarbon fuels still contain over TWICE the energy to weight as the best POSSIBLE batteries, not just the batteries that we already have. Hence, for commercial aviation, large intercontinental aircraft will forever remain powered by hydrocarbon fuels. The only possible exception would be hydrogen fuel batteries. Liquid hydrogen is an excellent fuel for commercial aviation, with the proviso that large under-wing tanks will be required. Of course, it would be easier and cheaper to just burn the hydrogen in a turbo-fan engine instead of fuel batteries. Liquid hydrogen powered jet aircraft have been made (converted from standard aircraft) and flown successfully. The issue on hydrogen aviation is fuel cost.
Some bad news. ALL of the lithium (or other metal, or boron, etc) oxygen batteries GAIN WEIGHT when they discharge, as the lithium (or whatever) is converted into solid lithium oxide. This is not a problem with ordinary hydrocarbon powered aircraft, since both of the resulting oxides, carbon dioxide and hydrogen oxide (water) are gasses and are ejected with the exhaust. We cannot have aircraft spraying millions of tonnes of lithium oxide into the air around the World every day.
One more thing. If the World is to be battery powered, there must be a huge increase in electric power generation to charge the batteries, and by huge, I mean a factor of at least 4. This cannot be done in any short period of time.
Hydrogen embrittles many metals, so there might be an argument to be made in favor of hydrogen batteries or fuel cells for maintenance reasons.
Admittedly, I'd just go for liquid methane instead.
I just now realized that you and Real Engineering are different channels
Very Educational
Sam and Niko!
Minutephysics, how about nanotechnology? I heard Kaku speak about basically enabling (near) infinite storage potential. It was on his video about a lightsaber i belief.
Minutephysics? More like Minutechemistry
Great collab project!
My worst moment of running out of battery power occurred several years ago. I had been kidnapped and, when I awoke, I found myself handcuffed to a radiator. The key for the handcuff had been placed out of my reach on the floor in the middle of the room. There was also a handkerchief with a one inch thick stick next to the key. I assume the last two items were there so I could use them as a tourniquet, since... next to me, I found a battery powered reciprocating saw. After sitting there in bewilderment for several minutes, a voice came over a sound system... I'm not sure from where because I couldn't see any speakers in the room. I won't bore you with those details but, suffice to say, the person on the other end, who had a distinctive lisp and identified himself as a "Sicilian" (even though he had an American accent, without a trace of European) was very persuasive. He told me that, if I didn't make the decision to hack off my own hand pretty soon... "death was on the line". I had no idea what that would entail but I got the impression that it was a bad idea to attempt to find out. I was obviously dealing with a very dangerous character.
So, taking the reciprocating saw in hand and steeling my nerve, I began the gruesome work of detaching my left hand. The pain was indescribable... to be honest, I don't know how I kept myself from passing out. Then, with half the job left to go... the saw suddenly began slowing. I thought, "Perhaps it's getting stuck" and tried to reposition it but... it was the battery. Someone (possibly the "Sicilian's" henchman, or henchmen?) had forgotten to recharge it. However, I never found out the answer to that question because, when I tried calling out to the Sicilian to discover whether he had another battery or possibly an outlet where I could plug in the tool directly, I was met only with silence. I never heard from the Sicilian ever again. Several hours later, the police broke in and I was rescued. I had managed to staunch the bleeding with my own t-shirt until then. With reconstructive surgery, they were able to save my hand (I only have partial paralysis in my pinky and ring finger). The police never were able to find out what had caused the Sicilian to leave so suddenly. In fact, their theory is that he may have left even before I discovered the battery problem. They were only able to find a single clue... a note with the word: "Buttercup". They have no idea what it could mean.
Can you do a video like this on the graphine battery's that are starting to come out to compare them to the ideas you go over in the video. I really wanna know if they're better and if they'll solve this problem
Can you make a video explaining the difference between DC current and AC current?
What about graphite batteries? I know they will be expensive because there still reasearching it but it can be used for everything in the future i think.
Yes, but How about Quantum batteries ? how would they work ? they are mentioned in the TED-Ed video about batteries
Love me some Anker, the USB Type-C charger I got from them always gets stolen by my family and friends
great great video and explanation
I don't understand why we don't just make batteries that, you know, don't degrade over time or catch fire when something goes wrong.
I wouldn't mind a phone battery that weighed twice as much if they could guarantee it would last twice as long.
I work at an IT repair shop, and it's kind of incredible how commercial Li-ion batteries turn to crap after 6 months of usage.
I do understand that miniaturization is good for the environment when it means you get more use out of smaller amounts of resources, but I do think our resources (and consumers' cash) could be spent more efficiently if we moved durability, reliability, and reparability up on the list of priorities.
I like my Fairphone. They've just launched a new camera that I could buy and put into my phone myself. Heck of a lot better than buying a new iPhone.
3:50 Ah the good old fusion fewer dream. How exactly would that solve the problems discussed in this video? The drawing suggests each car having a fusion reactor. But how small could a fusion reactor (provided we get fusion reactors to have positive net energy output) get? You spent the video answering that question for batteries but jam fusion in with an off the cuf remark? You might as well have said "unless we figure those ultra-compact nuclear fission reactors from Fallout out".
Light batteries are good for things that move with the batteries onboard. For static stuff, like charging stations or peak-demand capacity, heavy should be fine.
-
Super picky point. a battery weighing 30% less than another is not is not about 1/3 as much, it is about 2/3 as much.
That huge battery pack better run that single lightbulb longer than 10hrs... i have a camping fan/light that runs on 4 D-size standard batteries, and it will run longer than 10hrs... seems like that time you suggested is waaay off. Maybe the 18650s in that battery pack are low mAh, but then what is the point of having 8x of them? Anyway, i love your videos man. I hope you are making content for years to come!
What about liquid batteries?
Those are all chemistry based batteries. I have heard someone is trying to create a battery, that is basically an extremely thin layer of a special material, that can "store" electrons on it's surface. Which would create a very light battery, which can hold a lot of charge while beeing able to be be recharged within seconds or minutes at best, as it just needs to be refilled with electrons, rather than go through a chemical reaction.
+Shuizid , you're describing a capacitor which is existing a long long time. Nowadays there is the big hype about "super-capacitors" that can hold a much larger charge than the "normal" capacitor but the discharge characteristics limits their use.
Yeah, my description does show I don't know how they work. However what I meant is a so called "nano-wire" battery. But after googling for "new battery type" I found some articles talking about like a dozen of different types, that all seem to offer a lot more possibilities than lithium-ion batteries.
Great channel! Keep it up.
I have that battery pack! It's amazing!