It will be like barbeque gas cylinders, you pay a deposit for the first one (inc in the price of the car) and then for each refill. The eStations will continually recycle and recondition the batteries so they shouldn't be crap or under capacity. If my iphone can tell me its peak capacity in 2020 then I imagine the technology would be even more advanced in a decade. As for exploding batteries, the technology would obviously have to have ISO standards for batteries and eStation compliance and their licence to operate will be determined by that.

Hydrogen really makes sense for heavy trucks. In a week they consume the yearly consumption of a car. Also an option for public transport.

Biggest problem with that is that it effectively kills innovation (or innovation will kill it). Let's say Tesla come up with new Li-Ion technology that offers 30% greater capacity and 25% less cost (a very realistic prospect) - why would they want to share that with other manufacturers? And why would a Tesla owner want to swop his Tesla pack for a lower performing one?

BBQ cylinders are identical and there is no development to be expected. Li-Ion is nowhere near a mature technology and there's plenty of innovation to come.

Perfectly feasible for cars too.

New, nearly new big deal.

With hydrogen your still not chopping down a forest and destroying a mountain side to access the Lithium. Kind of defeats the purpose of a green car.

So you know nothing about how Lithium is extracted either?

That's at least the third time you've gone on about a forest and half a mountain.

Lithium is extracted from salt flats. So, no forest, no half mountain. Sure, there's a bloody big hole, but your forests and both halves of your mountains are safe. So that's all good, then.

Maybe I'm trying too hard to sell this, but I don't really get that
Tesla are not a battery company, they partner with the likes of Panasonic and LG who are the innovators in this area. So let these companies bring out their new innovative batteries in IEC/ANSI standard form and charge more for them, just like you have a choice of supermarket own brand batteries or better Duracell Alkaline ones.

I usually fill up with 95 RON unleaded unless I'm feeling particularly fruity, in which case I will give her a tank of V-Power 98 RON... same thing really

Not necessarily - gas cylinders is a good example, with plastic ones becoming available that are interchangeable in appliances with the same standard that existed for many years.

With batteries the standard only needs to cover the output interface and mounting points, the internals can be changed. And given the interface will no-doubt be smart (like USB), even the various capacities/limits don't need to be fixed in the standard, only the mechanism for communicating between the car and the battery.

So you could easily foresee cars making use of extra current capabilities (in both directions, for acceleration and regeneration), and battery stations having a range of options for capacity and power.

ps. In the Tesla example - they're already viewing battery production as a commercial operation; many companies do this sort of thing, taking a year or two of a new technology advantage in their own products, then rolling out the parts to other companies or direct to consumers.

Mind the dumb headline, this is the important part:

https://www.bloombergquint.com/busin...-with-hydrogen

In some senses it's more practical and realistic to have a target in terms of number of clean fuel vehicles than banning oil fueled cars. If there are no alternatives, what's the point of a ban? There's an important lesson here, focus on the solution, not the problem.

At the moment yes (actually already more of a joint venture than pure partner production) but the company is moving more towards making its own. The first "pilot" plant is now ramping up and will be the 13th largest in the world shortly.

https://cleantechnica.com/2020/09/24...gest-in-world/
https://www.theverge.com/2020/9/22/2...e-cobalt-plaid

Well one hopes Elon Musk will stick to his good faith sharing of technology for the greater good of the industry.

You don’t have to be an internet expert to figure out the damage it does to communities, not sure if you ever visited Tibet to see the destruction to the beautiful environment there that is happening but you should.

There is a misconception that lithium extraction process just happens on salt flats but that is not just the case, mountain landscapes in poor communities are being decimated for short term gain like in Tibet.

Some more reading.


https://www.theguardian.com/vital-si...musk-powerwall

Really Just from salt flats😂😂😂

https://www.freetibet.org/lithium-tibet

Today as it's still the state of the art from Tesla.
Model X seems to lose value like a big Range Rover...

A salt lake. Basically a salt flat with a bit more water. No mountains being destroyed and no forests being torn down.

Despite what is written in your link, China is not that significant a player for Lithium. About 9% of current global production and only 5% of known reserves.

The problem in Tibet is weak to non existent environmental standards. Not Lithium extraction per se.

Well, mining has an environmental impact, from cooper, to iron. There's always controversy about who owns the land all around the world. Lithium is not different to disputes over water and oil. If lithium is problematic, well.....let's just remember all the oil inspired wars.

On the other hand, Tesla made 360K cars on 2019, this 2020 looks like 500K cars, and being optimistic 1 million for 2021 and 2 million for 2022?

But that's being very optimistic. For context, 92million cars were made on 2019 around the world. Teslas are popular in CH, but keep the global view since there's 1 global atmosphere. The challenge is making at least 90 million clean vehicles per year.

So explain to me how one of the lithium processes is extraction of lithium from rock does not destroy a mountainside. I saw myself in Tibet on a visit a couple of years back.

All mineral extraction causes destruction. The only difference is that in some countries flora, fauna and aesthetics are considered.

Ever seen mountains disappear in Switzerland to make cement? Of course not, because the mining is executed while minimizing aesthetic impact. Anyway, some mountains are not there anymore.

https://www.google.com/maps/@47.5334.../data=!3m1!1e3
https://www.google.com/maps/dir///@4...e3!4m2!4m1!3e1
https://www.google.com/maps/@47.4219.../data=!3m1!1e3

Also it's kind of curious to burn a few hundred liters of plane fuel to contemplate environmental destruction in all it terrifying greatness. Destroy to get annoyed by destruction. Better read about it, it's more environmentally friendly.

BJ can say what he wants, but ultimately it's Parliament that will decide.


I've not read through he whole thread, but someone mentioned Hydrogen. This is the way car manufacturers are going. They are investing hundred's of millions into this technology to develop fuel cells and we'll likely see these models sooner rather than later. This will then leapfrog battery technology making it obsolete.


And the British government is currently providing hundreds of million pounds to companies to research and further develop this technology - so on the face of it, it makes his announcement seem odd!!