Will Electric Vehicles Be Viable? When?

[subcritical71]

For the first time in history, Russian nuclear scientists, using gas centrifuges, enriched the radioactive isotope Nickel-63, which can be used to create so-called "nuclear batteries."
the Electrochemical Plant in the city of Zelenogorsk, Krasnoyarsk Territory, made the gas centrifuge method of the radioactive nickel-63 isotope to a level of more than 69%."
“In 2019, specialists of JSC ECP, as part of their research and development, plan to achieve an enrichment of the nickel-63 isotope at more than 80%. The initial nickel-62 for these works is currently being irradiated in the RBMK-1000 power reactor at Leningrad NPP"
A non-naturally occurring nickel-63 radioisotope has the unique properties of soft beta radiation without dangerous gamma radiation.
https://tass.ru/nauka/5913056

Thanks for this info. I have to laugh at the ‘soft beta radiation’ portion of it though. No ionizing radiation is good for you. Granted beta radiation is easier to shield.

I do like that they are researching this, even if public opinion will most likely regulate this to spacecraft. I did a bit of googling and found they are up to 3.3 Wh per gram with this technology. That’s a pretty good power density if it can scale.

[lucafo]

Maybe petrol engines still survive more than we could imagine.
If this new ignition technology does what it says, than we will have a little bit more years with it
https://mwi-ag.com/technik/?lang=en
I dont remember where, but I read that, considering the mean world electric power source, the combustion engines of our current cars are só efficient as totaly electric cars. Thats why this microwave ignition could give a lot of life to petrol cars.
I think this technology could be used in F1 either. What do you think?

[henry]

BMW and Porsche are testing up to 450kW charging.

See https://www.trustedreviews.com/news/fas ... er-3636919

Two points from this in relation to all these fast charging efforts.

In fact, so powerful is the prototype, it would fry the batteries of the cars on the market right now. As such, the prototype will only provide 50KW of charge to the BMW i3, while 2020’s iW3 will take 150KW.

The test car required active cooling of the cells in the battery pack, which currently doesn’t feature in road-ready cars. Even the cable supplying the charge requires active cooling.

[loner]

Strange, I saw this this morning. No figures for it, so its interest only I'm sorry
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=b6ME88nMnYE

thnx for sharing

Thanks for this info. I have to laugh at the ‘soft beta radiation’ portion of it though. No ionizing radiation is good for you. Granted beta radiation is easier to shield.
I do like that they are researching this, even if public opinion will most likely regulate this to spacecraft. I did a bit of googling and found they are up to 3.3 Wh per gram with this technology. That’s a pretty good power density if it can scale.

it is indeed harmful , if they can scale and shield it .. one can only hope ...
a nuclear powered vehicles for the masses refuel per decade

[Brake Horse Power]

If it has 3.3 watthour per gram I think you have to recharge a bit sooner than in a decade..

Or does it provide 3.3 watt per gram?

[Big Tea]

If it has 3.3 watthour per gram I think you have to recharge a bit sooner than in a decade..

Or does it provide 3.3 watt per gram?

If its the same one - "Nickel-63 has a half-life of 100 years and in this system produces 3,300 Milliwatt-Hours per gram"


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3W96gq2rEhk

(Edit, reformat caps)

[loner]

if cars go nuclear they will be hover cars speed limits will go to 500 kph and Pirelli , Bridgestone will bankruptcy

[Big Tea]

if cars go nuclear they will be hover cars speed limits will go to 500 kph and Pirelli , Bridgestone will bankruptcy

Then again, if we have all this spare power and indestructible material, in cities at least, it would be better to cover the roads with moving walkways. Pirrelli can make belts

3 tracks 3 mph apart 3mph, 6mph 9mph. step out for longer trips.
No traffic problems no parking problems no road closing incidents no pollution.

[Cold Fussion]

I do like that they are researching this, even if public opinion will most likely regulate this to spacecraft. I did a bit of googling and found they are up to 3.3 Wh per gram with this technology. That’s a pretty good power density if it can scale.

Surely this 3.3 Wh/g figure is the total energy over the course of the half-life. Surely for a radio-active battery it is more useful to look at the power density and not energy density over a 100 year half life.

[subcritical71]

I do like that they are researching this, even if public opinion will most likely regulate this to spacecraft. I did a bit of googling and found they are up to 3.3 Wh per gram with this technology. That’s a pretty good power density if it can scale.

Surely this 3.3 Wh/g figure is the total energy over the course of the half-life. Surely for a radio-active battery it is more useful to look at the power density and not energy density over a 100 year half life.

I would normally agree if we were talking about a chemical reaction that is replenishable like gasoline that has nearly identical power density no matter when you use it. But with a nuclear reaction it is better to talk Wh/g. I'll try to explain. The 3.3 Wh/g is most likely attainable within a defined time window based on the amount of enrichment of the material and how long it has been allowed to decay after that enrichment was attained, say for manufacturing. With the decay of Ni-63 the power density is always lowering over time, that's why knowing the half life is so important as it will tell you how much of the material is left at a specific time, using the known concentration after the enrichment process was completed. The natural decay of Ni-63 is always occurring whether it is being used or not. A gram today will have one density but tomorrow will have a slightly lower density. The reason is with each decay what was once Ni-63 is now Cu-63. 1 gram of Ni-63 still produces the 3.3 Wh but the volume required to make the 3.3 Wh is increasing over time.

So if you use something like power density it will make the maths more complicated. I've seen it listed both ways (power/energy density) but the energy density seems to be the most common method.

Realistically though the battery will not make it to 100 years as most people get upset once Li-Ion batteries reach <80%. To get to 80% your looking at a 30 year life, down to 70% gets you to 50 years which seems a bit long but more reasonable than 100 years for a cars life.

Wow, never thought I'd get to use my nuclear training on a F1 forum!

[Big Tea]

I do like that they are researching this, even if public opinion will most likely regulate this to spacecraft. I did a bit of googling and found they are up to 3.3 Wh per gram with this technology. That’s a pretty good power density if it can scale.

Surely this 3.3 Wh/g figure is the total energy over the course of the half-life. Surely for a radio-active battery it is more useful to look at the power density and not energy density over a 100 year half life.

I would normally agree if we were talking about a chemical reaction that is replenishable like gasoline that has nearly identical power density no matter when you use it. But with a nuclear reaction it is better to talk Wh/g. I'll try to explain. The 3.3 Wh/g is most likely attainable within a defined time window based on the amount of enrichment of the material and how long it has been allowed to decay after that enrichment was attained, say for manufacturing. With the decay of Ni-63 the power density is always lowering over time, that's why knowing the half life is so important as it will tell you how much of the material is left at a specific time, using the known concentration after the enrichment process was completed. The natural decay of Ni-63 is always occurring whether it is being used or not. A gram today will have one density but tomorrow will have a slightly lower density. The reason is with each decay what was once Ni-63 is now Cu-63. 1 gram of Ni-63 still produces the 3.3 Wh but the volume required to make the 3.3 Wh is increasing over time.

So if you use something like power density it will make the maths more complicated. I've seen it listed both ways (power/energy density) but the energy density seems to be the most common method.

Realistically though the battery will not make it to 100 years as most people get upset once Li-Ion batteries reach <80%. To get to 80% your looking at a 30 year life, down to 70% gets you to 50 years which seems a bit long but more reasonable than 100 years for a cars life.

Wow, never thought I'd get to use my nuclear training on a F1 forum!

So if used with sufficient capacity of super capacitor (which probably does not exist yet) and trickle charge to smaller conventional battery, it could end up quite usable over normal ranges when incorporated into a full system with re-gen etc? The actual driving hours of most cars is very low, so if it is 'tanked up' enough to do the trip, then recover between it could be good

[SectorOne]

Maybe petrol engines still survive more than we could imagine.
If this new ignition technology does what it says, than we will have a little bit more years with it
https://mwi-ag.com/technik/?lang=en
I dont remember where, but I read that, considering the mean world electric power source, the combustion engines of our current cars are só efficient as totaly electric cars. Thats why this microwave ignition could give a lot of life to petrol cars.
I think this technology could be used in F1 either. What do you think?

Will be tested in next years Porsche SuperCup by one team. Should be interesting.

[subcritical71]

So if used with sufficient capacity of super capacitor (which probably does not exist yet) and trickle charge to smaller conventional battery, it could end up quite usable over normal ranges when incorporated into a full system with re-gen etc? The actual driving hours of most cars is very low, so if it is 'tanked up' enough to do the trip, then recover between it could be good

So you could have a nuclear battery powered EV! One item that concerns me though is what do you do when you can no longer harvest the energy like in your scenario. You can't turn off the nuclear decay so the energy has to go somewhere. If your battery is topped off there isn't anywhere for it to go. Assuming this scales, with a 5 kg Ni-63 battery you could have 16.5 W power output. This would charge most EV from dead to full charge overnight with no issue. And be able to charge or directly drive during usage.
The always one characteristic is somewhat why I think it will be relegated to things like spacecraft. They have a known power requirement and you can size the battery accordingly taking into account expected spacecraft operational life.

[Big Tea]

So if used with sufficient capacity of super capacitor (which probably does not exist yet) and trickle charge to smaller conventional battery, it could end up quite usable over normal ranges when incorporated into a full system with re-gen etc? The actual driving hours of most cars is very low, so if it is 'tanked up' enough to do the trip, then recover between it could be good

So you could have a nuclear battery powered EV! One item that concerns me though is what do you do when you can no longer harvest the energy like in your scenario. You can't turn off the nuclear decay so the energy has to go somewhere. If your battery is topped off there isn't anywhere for it to go. Assuming this scales, with a 5 kg Ni-63 battery you could have 16.5 W power output. This would charge most EV from dead to full charge overnight with no issue. And be able to charge or directly drive during usage.
The always one characteristic is somewhat why I think it will be relegated to things like spacecraft. They have a known power requirement and you can size the battery accordingly taking into account expected spacecraft operational life.

Good point. I suppose it continues to produce when open circuit. The obvious 'dummy load' resistor would soon be a liability, so I don't have a clue. If available you could maybe plug into 'donate and rebate' public system and gain points for when you need a fast charge yourself?

[Brake Horse Power]

If it has 3.3 watthour per gram I think you have to recharge a bit sooner than in a decade..

Or does it provide 3.3 watt per gram?

If its the same one - "Nickel-63 has a half-life of 100 years and in this system produces 3,300 Milliwatt-Hours per gram"


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3W96gq2rEhk

(Edit, reformat caps)

So if you have used 3.300 milliwatt hours of energy the battery is end of life? Or is it rechargable? Sorry the movie is a bit long and boring.