Ummmmm, no. Not for cars. I worked with them at TRW (now a part of Northrop Grumman). Unless something’s changed (possible), the volumetric energy density is poor. They are BIG. The cost of the pressure vessel will always be a handicap compared to other cell chemistries. However, they can be (relatively) light weight at the cell level. Peak pressure can be 900 psi. They DO last a long time. Unlike lithium, they can be overcharged, and they can be safely discharged to zero without damage. Memory isn’t a problem, and they don’t degrade if regularly charged to 100%. As you’ve mentioned, they are relatively temperature insensitive. They could (perhaps!) work for ships, and stationary storage, but don’t hold your breath.
Nickel-hydrogen was practically the only battery technology used on satellites. That started changing about 10 years ago, now pretty much every satellite uses lithium ion. This is basically abandoned aerospace technology. Granted, the lithium-free aspect is nice, but can this compete with sodium-ion ~5 years from now, and calcium-ion a decade later?
The real problem here is that producing Hydrogen is extremely difficult and expensive right now. It's not commercially viable for mass production in the next few decades from now on. So; no, they won't compete with sodium or calcium. I believe sodium will to become the norm in 10 years and things will to stabilize a little bit then for the 2035-2055 time frame. Calcium or otherwise will be 2055 onward.
@@nunagoras This doesn't use hydrogen as fuel therefore production issues are no problem. Simple hydrolysis will produce all the H2 this requires. Source hydrogen only matters if you are going to burn it for energy, not if you are using it as a charge holder.
If you use the energy for 30k-60k cycles i just don't see the H2 production cost as an issue. Nickel is actually the higher priced part. The pressure vessel is only 100 bar. That's an 3rd the pressure of an scube tank. Main Issue was platinum and paladium used. But it seems the mentionned doctor solved that issues. So now just the production scale and Nickel price. Seems promissing to me. @@nunagoras
At the time these NiH2 Batteries were amazing especially at 0g not so great on Earth due to the recombination and popping effecting. But this is interesting that they are still pursuing this tech.
I am not surprised they used molybdenum. Its the ultimate catalytic converter used by the human body for nitrate reductases and molybdenum cofactors. Stablizes h2s, no2, sulfates, and sulphides in the human metabolism.
These vs reflow batteries will be an interesting battle. Reflow definitely benefits from warmer environments so maybe these would be better for colder climates.
I love these comments on the pros and cons of various battery chemistries, even the snarky ones, because I invariably learn something I didn't know (after due diligence on various well informed, scientific, engineering, economics sites). I'm grateful to Sam for highlighting edge innovators.He knows yhe disruptors will come from the outliers, he just doesn't know which one. But it won't come from the incumbents, even though they have the data and ought to know better. Keep it up, Sam. You can't cover every alternative in one production. But over time, you have covered a hell of a lot of ground.
If this is as robust as it is described - then this is a no brainer for large scale energy storage from sources like solar, wind, nuclear -etc. In the future they could be made mobile so stored energy could be transported to where needed. This could be very cool.
Another startup company called Ambri manufactures liquid metal batteries which are undergoing real-world grid testing at the moment. These batteries are cheap, safe and long lasting. Whilst they are guaranteeing a lifespan of 20 years, because the components self-clean, the batteries could last over 100 years or more! These are exciting times for grid storage battery development which is only going to get better and benefit our planet greatly in the future!
The biggest battery need right now is for something big, clunky, ugly, long-lasting and inexpensive to pair with solar to power homes and businesses! Tesla Powerwalls and their competitors are pathetically weak and 4x too expensive. We need an inexpensive home storage battery!
I couldn't agree with you more. Battery prices keep dropping and with all the factors at play recently I would expect them to continue to fall. You can get an EG4 pro battery currently for half the price of a Powerwall with the same storage if you need something now. Otherwise I would wait a few months. With Lithium prices in free fall, the newly released sodium-ion batteries, and weakening economy, I would be amazed if battery prices didn't fall further in the coming months.
@@edwardmorpeth5988 There has to be a catch. If it's truly $20/kw and could scale to industrial size, it would change the world. Maintaining 230 degree temps for charging and discharging is likely part of the reason. There's also no resent news on it's development so they may have issues not easily overcome.
I think cobalt will be an issue. People already lose their minds over the cobalt in current EV batteries, even though they are mostly cobalt-free chemistries now like LFP. I assume this would be met with massive social blowback if it ever got to the scale where it was on the public's radar.
Still sounds better than a south US drawl, New York, or Chicago to me. NaySA doesn't sound as good as Nahsa to the ear of anyone outside the US. A least his accent doesn't draw regional/political bias within the US.
In my neck of the woods down under we say dance/trance/path like they rhyme with "are", but even we don't say NASA like Sam does. He's on his own there. North American Redundant Space Agency since Space X took over?
Twenty to thirty thousand charge/discharge cycles would be big. Something is going to displace Lithium Ion batteries at some point, it's inevitable. Could this be it?
Why are you certain that lithium has to be displaced? Did we erver displace Iron? There are certain chemical properties that are universal from the formation of elements. Lithium is right after hydrogen (and helium but im not talking about that). Iron is element that collapses stars due to being energy negative. Uranium and Thorium (and artificial Plutoniom) are only elements which fuel viable fission. Aluminium is the cheapest conducting element even while 200 years ago was considered precious metal next to gold and silver. Copper is perfect balance of conducting and extraction cost between Aluminium and Silver/Gold. Those truths stay strong for hunderts of years so why would you assume that "change at some point is inevitable". Maybe it is but it will take rather 1000 years than your lifespan so from your point of view and people who you talk to is irrelevant. EDIT: Cheapest lighweight is what i meant.
Hi from the uk If you are looking for mass storage what would be wrong with the iron flow battery, with mass storage space/energy density is not really a concern but reliability safty and cost are. I am not dismissive of the hydrogen nickle unit just intrigued as to which would be better suited for large scale or even some kind of off grid small factory
It looks like one of these the same size as the propane tank for my fireplace could keep my house running all night long, after being charged-up by my solar panels during daylight. And it would last for the lifetime of my house! My monthly electric bill to the power company would drop to almost zero. Perhaps when the price drops enough, 2 or three together and I'll go off-grid completely.
The part about the pressure being only 5% of that in a hydrogen fuel cell is totally disingenuous. The pressure in a NiH2 cell is very high, hundreds of PSI. The pressure in a fuel cell is a few PSI at most. I think they’re comparing it to the pressure in a hydrogen storage tank, not the fuel cell. Also, that efficiency rating of 90% is NOT better than lithium ion, and also not even true. The best NiH2 cells (which are still in research stage) can’t get better than 75% due to side reactions and resistivity of the cathode. Yes, they can just about manage 90% if you charge and discharge them extremely slowly, but at normal levels, like 0.5C and above, 75% is the limit. Also, due to the pressure vessel construction, bringing the cost down with large scale manufacturing will not be very effective - making a 250 PSI vessel with electrical terminals going in and out is always going to be difficult, and therefore expensive. Unfortunately, it’s a nice idea but probably just a short-term investment moneymaker for the individuals involved, destined to be relegated to the bin of other failed battery technologies.
Platinum might not be out of the question when there are no more catalytic converters for ICE cars being made in volume. I wonder how much platinum is required?
Depending on the vehicle, a catalytic converter contains 3 to 7 grams of platinum. Fuel cells intended for use in a passenger vehicle would require 30 to 60 grams.
Global production of platinum is around 190 tonnes per annum. Automotive catalysts consume roughly 40% of that so around 76 tonnes. (and sorry, but that is still how I spell a metric ton. The spell checker doesn't like it.) So yeah, get rid of ICE vehicles and we do indeed free up a significant amount of Pt. Also used though are other platinum Group Metals (PGMs) like Palladium and Rhodium. Also very good catalysts.
Well I mean generally these things are used for nighttime only. How much do you use at night? Anyway it is pressurized with hazardous gas?! I wonder how just compressed air works. 3kw from that thing... I need comparisons. I didn't see any volume comparisons Sam. That is your job on how they compare!
Your maths is wrong because the batteries don't do one charge cycle per year. The tank spec was 3kWh... a typical EV is 70-100 kWh, so would need 20-30 of these tanks in a car... and you'd run your house comfortably on an EV-sized battery.
One of two situations will happen here. 1. These things will cost so much no one but NASA can afford to buy/use them. 2. No one will actually make them on a large scale because a battery that lasts for 60 years will never make enough money for it to make sense. Think about that for a second; a battery company that may or may not see a return customer for at least 30 years.
This will work well as electric grid batteries just not dense enough for your Cyber truck. In fact it would nearly match pumped water storage systems in cost.
I'm thinking that NiFe batteries are more durable, and there are new tech methods for overcoming the previous shortcoming. Edison batteries are still functioning 100 years after production.
Storage density is comparatively low. 60 wh/kg or litre. Also in a safety pressure release valve fails, what's the risk? But if the numbers work, so be it.
Yes NASA has many excellent technology and innovations after many years of R&D but to put them to a domestic scale application is an economic consideration. Everybody knows US first developed the solar panel in NASA application but is was so expensive that it never took off. Only after Germany popularized it by state subsidies did the world start to see solar park becoming a reality. The breakthrough was by China who lowered the western solar cell cost by 90% so today solar power is the cheapest form of power generation. Without making it cheap and affordable by the world population any good idea is useless!
Also a solar power outfit in China (Longi?) has achieved 33% solar efficiency which is 50% better than current deployed panels. It's hard to see how solar won't be the most economical renewable energy for grid supply.
Just how much hydrogen are we talking about per fuel cell. How does this get around dirty hydrogen production from methane. Are we just replacing one fossil fuel with..... the same fossil fuel?. You need to address this side of it Sam. Doesn't sound like such a clean alternative especially with all the pressure cylinders that are required for a not so dense battery. That requires smelters which sounds like going backwards. I noticed no mention was made of the cylinders/tanks. What about the issue of hydrogen interacting with steel and making it brittle. What are the relative weights per kilowatt storage lithium ion vs nickel hydrogen. How does this differ from nickel metal hydride.
During discharge, hydrogen reacts with oxygen to produce water, within the closed system. That means for production, they can just use water, and internally produce hydrogen by charging. So no need for any potentially dirty hydrogen sources. But I agree with all your other points. Especially about preventing hydrogen embrittlement. I can't see them preventing this at temperature for 30 years.
Sam Evans (The Electric Viking) often doesn't do enough research about the topics he reports. If an old technology hasn't taken off in the market, then there is probably a reason why, and I suspect that NiH2 batteries aren't cost competitive. First of all, nickel and molybdenum are expensive at $24 and $56 per kg, respectively, and they probably need a high purity, so it wouldn't surprise me if the price is 3 times higher for use in NiH2 batteries. NiH2 has a low energy density around 60-70 Wh/kg, whereas LFP is 160 Wh/kg and NMC is 250 Wh/kg. NiH2 batteries have a 40,000 cycle life IF doing 40% depth of discharge AND they lose their energy quickly, so they are only good for short term storage. I suspect that NiH2 batteries cost 2-3 times more per kWh than LFP batteries that are commonly used for grid storage. LFP gets about 10,000 cycles at 60% depth of discharge and it doesn't lose its charge nearly as fast, so it is better for longer term storage. However, we have salt water flow and iron salt flow batteries coming onto the market that have extremely low material costs (around $5 per kWh), and they should last for 20,000 cycles or 25 years. It is hard to see NiH2 batteries competing with salt water and iron salt grid batteries.
I’m not a fan of pressure vessels in potential mass domestic applications, interesting though. By the way, when annunciating the word “NASA” why would one introduce the letter R? 🤔
Sam, pronouncing a name isnt whatever you feel it should be. It is NASSA, please STOP calling it NARSA. Or are you doing this for click bait comments? Not a good look.
Sopa 10 bagger alert 3 research reports out with 3 to 4 target trading at 30 cents.. 100 percent revenue growth expected for 2024 18 million from 9 million for 2023
Gold capacitance isn’t being touted, naturally collects charge in the proper humidity and never corrodes, When they finally discover that it is in fact feasible, I just want to tell them if they weren’t so stupid, They would have stored the reserves in a proper arrangement, and to mark that it’s 2023 in this post.
Definitely not. Not for safety reasons, but just because they’re very large and heavy for the amount of energy stored. For example, to have an equivalent 120kWh as a Tesla, you’d need at least another car full of these being towed behind it. Not very practical! For stationary energy storage, they’re ok, but expensive.
The 1.8m long tanks were 3kWh. EV's are around 70-100kWh... so at least 20 tanks for a shortish range car and realistically 30, if you want the typical acceptable minimum range. Where are you going to fit them and how much will they weigh? Not feasible.
🔋EV NEWS - Sodium-Ion Batteries are Here! 🔋 A Chinese automaker just put sodium ion batteries in a car. The batteries are from Farasis Energy and Hina Battery, marking a step closer to large-scale use of the new, lower-cost batteries. Right now these batteries are in the low-end tiny cars. The sodium-ion batteries built by Farasis Energy in partnership with JMEV, an EV brand owned by Jiangling Motors Group, rolled off the assembly line on December 28, according to the battery maker. I believe VW is heavily invested in these batteries or with one of these companies. The sodium-ion powered car is based on JMEV's EV3, The Sodium-Ion model has a range of 251 km (156 mi) with a battery pack capacity of 21.4 kWh. The car starts at RMB 58,800 The Lithium Ion model has a range of 301 km (187 mi) and a battery pack capacity of 31.15 The Lithium Ion cars starts at RMB 62,800 ($8,840 USD)
How r damm u said it!!! This weeks game changing battery technology is……..it’s been 2 1/2 weeks…… tell us bout NISSAN JUNK RATING come on please Mr Sam before th end of 2023
Energy density means absolutely 0 at grid scale. Especially, since these batteries are being stacked and as such density per square foot will be significantly higher than lithium. This is not the only company ramping these up and there are a backlog of orders. Assuming no major new technology like fusion comes along soon, these batteries will be a thing.
You can't use hydrogen at home. So you have to go fill your hydrogen tank somewhere... at high price. Hydrogen is *STUPID* for cars and most trucks. For ship or planes it's better to use NG or Methane.
im sorry to be that guy but its pronounced NASA (Nah-Sah (with the A from Apple)) not Narsar (nar-sar (with ar from star))... great video all the same!
Energy density is unimportant for grid storage. Expense, environmental impact and longevity are the criteria that matter. So if the price is similar it's a winner. On another matter, please stop pronouncing NASA with that AR sounding A as in rdvark. You are the only person I have ever heard pronounce it like that. Most of us say "Nasser" where the A sounds like A as in pple
What’s with calling it Narsa? It’s not an Australian pronunciation I’ve ever heard and makes my skin crawl. Perhaps it’s an intentional ploy to increase “engagement” from the audience? This will only work short term as it will drive viewers away.
Ummmmm, no. Not for cars. I worked with them at TRW (now a part of Northrop Grumman). Unless something’s changed (possible), the volumetric energy density is poor. They are BIG. The cost of the pressure vessel will always be a handicap compared to other cell chemistries. However, they can be (relatively) light weight at the cell level. Peak pressure can be 900 psi. They DO last a long time. Unlike lithium, they can be overcharged, and they can be safely discharged to zero without damage. Memory isn’t a problem, and they don’t degrade if regularly charged to 100%. As you’ve mentioned, they are relatively temperature insensitive.
They could (perhaps!) work for ships, and stationary storage, but don’t hold your breath.
Nickel-hydrogen was practically the only battery technology used on satellites. That started changing about 10 years ago, now pretty much every satellite uses lithium ion. This is basically abandoned aerospace technology.
Granted, the lithium-free aspect is nice, but can this compete with sodium-ion ~5 years from now, and calcium-ion a decade later?
60 000 charges?
The real problem here is that producing Hydrogen is extremely difficult and expensive right now. It's not commercially viable for mass production in the next few decades from now on. So; no, they won't compete with sodium or calcium. I believe sodium will to become the norm in 10 years and things will to stabilize a little bit then for the 2035-2055 time frame. Calcium or otherwise will be 2055 onward.
@@nunagoras This doesn't use hydrogen as fuel therefore production issues are no problem. Simple hydrolysis will produce all the H2 this requires. Source hydrogen only matters if you are going to burn it for energy, not if you are using it as a charge holder.
If you use the energy for 30k-60k cycles i just don't see the H2 production cost as an issue. Nickel is actually the higher priced part. The pressure vessel is only 100 bar. That's an 3rd the pressure of an scube tank.
Main Issue was platinum and paladium used. But it seems the mentionned doctor solved that issues.
So now just the production scale and Nickel price. Seems promissing to me.
@@nunagoras
At the time these NiH2 Batteries were amazing especially at 0g not so great on Earth due to the recombination and popping effecting. But this is interesting that they are still pursuing this tech.
Nice review Vik!
dang thats a 1501800 cell
😂
Biggest cell I have seen
Happy New Year! 🎉 🎆
Happy new year!
I am not surprised they used molybdenum. Its the ultimate catalytic converter used by the human body for nitrate reductases and molybdenum cofactors.
Stablizes h2s, no2, sulfates, and sulphides in the human metabolism.
These vs reflow batteries will be an interesting battle. Reflow definitely benefits from warmer environments so maybe these would be better for colder climates.
I love these comments on the pros and cons of various battery chemistries, even the snarky ones, because I invariably learn something I didn't know (after due diligence on various well informed, scientific, engineering, economics sites). I'm grateful to Sam for highlighting edge innovators.He knows yhe disruptors will come from the outliers, he just doesn't know which one. But it won't come from the incumbents, even though they have the data and ought to know better. Keep it up, Sam. You can't cover every alternative in one production. But over time, you have covered a hell of a lot of ground.
Thanks
Very cool! 😊
Thank you! Cheers!
Interesting technology, fascinating. Thanks Sam
If this is as robust as it is described - then this is a no brainer for large scale energy storage from sources like solar, wind, nuclear -etc. In the future they could be made mobile so stored energy could be transported to where needed. This could be very cool.
Interesting way to pronounce NASA
Interesting or irritating?
I agree. It irritated me. @@christopherj2231 No one pronounces it like that.
@@michaelginever732 I have taken him to task previously but the big bad Viking did not heed my advice.
Another startup company called Ambri manufactures liquid metal batteries which are undergoing real-world grid testing at the moment. These batteries are cheap, safe and long lasting. Whilst they are guaranteeing a lifespan of 20 years, because the components self-clean, the batteries could last over 100 years or more!
These are exciting times for grid storage battery development which is only going to get better and benefit our planet greatly in the future!
Another day. Another's battery. 💤 💤
Happy new day Sam
Happy holidays!
The biggest battery need right now is for something big, clunky, ugly, long-lasting and inexpensive to pair with solar to power homes and businesses! Tesla Powerwalls and their competitors are pathetically weak and 4x too expensive. We need an inexpensive home storage battery!
Also, Sam, happy New Years to you and yours. I enjoy your posts!
I couldn't agree with you more. Battery prices keep dropping and with all the factors at play recently I would expect them to continue to fall. You can get an EG4 pro battery currently for half the price of a Powerwall with the same storage if you need something now. Otherwise I would wait a few months. With Lithium prices in free fall, the newly released sodium-ion batteries, and weakening economy, I would be amazed if battery prices didn't fall further in the coming months.
MIT's - Don Sadoway's - Aluminium/ Salt/ Sulphur cell is sitting there waiting for the world to catch on. Its now and about $20/kw
@@edwardmorpeth5988 There has to be a catch. If it's truly $20/kw and could scale to industrial size, it would change the world. Maintaining 230 degree temps for charging and discharging is likely part of the reason. There's also no resent news on it's development so they may have issues not easily overcome.
They also deal with extreme temperatures no problem
The truth is that you cannot win against Sodium-Ion batteries.
I think cobalt will be an issue. People already lose their minds over the cobalt in current EV batteries, even though they are mostly cobalt-free chemistries now like LFP. I assume this would be met with massive social blowback if it ever got to the scale where it was on the public's radar.
Narsa?
It’s th quality of information Not th pronunciation
coz Sahm says so.....
Still sounds better than a south US drawl, New York, or Chicago to me. NaySA doesn't sound as good as Nahsa to the ear of anyone outside the US. A least his accent doesn't draw regional/political bias within the US.
In my neck of the woods down under we say dance/trance/path like they rhyme with "are", but even we don't say NASA like Sam does. He's on his own there. North American Redundant Space Agency since Space X took over?
Twenty to thirty thousand charge/discharge cycles would be big. Something is going to displace Lithium Ion batteries at some point, it's inevitable. Could this be it?
Don't know. Don't really care.
There are more important things to consider.
Nickel-hydrogen battery has lower energy density when compared to Lithium based.
Why are you certain that lithium has to be displaced? Did we erver displace Iron? There are certain chemical properties that are universal from the formation of elements. Lithium is right after hydrogen (and helium but im not talking about that). Iron is element that collapses stars due to being energy negative. Uranium and Thorium (and artificial Plutoniom) are only elements which fuel viable fission. Aluminium is the cheapest conducting element even while 200 years ago was considered precious metal next to gold and silver. Copper is perfect balance of conducting and extraction cost between Aluminium and Silver/Gold. Those truths stay strong for hunderts of years so why would you assume that "change at some point is inevitable". Maybe it is but it will take rather 1000 years than your lifespan so from your point of view and people who you talk to is irrelevant.
EDIT: Cheapest lighweight is what i meant.
@@robertfonovic3551 like what?
@@valenrn8657 That has no meaning for grid scale applications.
Hi from the uk
If you are looking for mass storage what would be wrong with the iron flow battery, with mass storage space/energy density is not really a concern but reliability safty and cost are. I am not dismissive of the hydrogen nickle unit just intrigued as to which would be better suited for large scale or even some kind of off grid small factory
It looks like one of these the same size as the propane tank for my fireplace could keep my house running all night long, after being charged-up by my solar panels during daylight. And it would last for the lifetime of my house! My monthly electric bill to the power company would drop to almost zero. Perhaps when the price drops enough, 2 or three together and I'll go off-grid completely.
That 1.8m long tank is 3kWh... A BBQ sized 9kg propane tank is 116 kWh
The part about the pressure being only 5% of that in a hydrogen fuel cell is totally disingenuous. The pressure in a NiH2 cell is very high, hundreds of PSI. The pressure in a fuel cell is a few PSI at most. I think they’re comparing it to the pressure in a hydrogen storage tank, not the fuel cell. Also, that efficiency rating of 90% is NOT better than lithium ion, and also not even true. The best NiH2 cells (which are still in research stage) can’t get better than 75% due to side reactions and resistivity of the cathode. Yes, they can just about manage 90% if you charge and discharge them extremely slowly, but at normal levels, like 0.5C and above, 75% is the limit. Also, due to the pressure vessel construction, bringing the cost down with large scale manufacturing will not be very effective - making a 250 PSI vessel with electrical terminals going in and out is always going to be difficult, and therefore expensive. Unfortunately, it’s a nice idea but probably just a short-term investment moneymaker for the individuals involved, destined to be relegated to the bin of other failed battery technologies.
Sound bloody good
Way to expensive, to heavy and to inefficient (75%)... The ONLY advantage is the long lifespan.
Platinum might not be out of the question when there are no more catalytic converters for ICE cars being made in volume. I wonder how much platinum is required?
Depending on the vehicle, a catalytic converter contains 3 to 7 grams of platinum. Fuel cells intended for use in a passenger vehicle would require 30 to 60 grams.
Global production of platinum is around 190 tonnes per annum. Automotive catalysts consume roughly 40% of that so around 76 tonnes. (and sorry, but that is still how I spell a metric ton. The spell checker doesn't like it.) So yeah, get rid of ICE vehicles and we do indeed free up a significant amount of Pt. Also used though are other platinum Group Metals (PGMs) like Palladium and Rhodium. Also very good catalysts.
Morning mate
was excited until I realized I use around 20MW/year and this battery stores like 3KW. I just need 7000 of these huge tanks.
Well I mean generally these things are used for nighttime only. How much do you use at night?
Anyway it is pressurized with hazardous gas?! I wonder how just compressed air works.
3kw from that thing... I need comparisons. I didn't see any volume comparisons Sam. That is your job on how they compare!
Your maths is wrong because the batteries don't do one charge cycle per year. The tank spec was 3kWh... a typical EV is 70-100 kWh, so would need 20-30 of these tanks in a car... and you'd run your house comfortably on an EV-sized battery.
@@goldreverre was hoping to store energy for winter heating
One of two situations will happen here. 1. These things will cost so much no one but NASA can afford to buy/use them. 2. No one will actually make them on a large scale because a battery that lasts for 60 years will never make enough money for it to make sense. Think about that for a second; a battery company that may or may not see a return customer for at least 30 years.
This will work well as electric grid batteries just not dense enough for your Cyber truck. In fact it would nearly match pumped water storage systems in cost.
Quite impressive for NASA moving with hydrogen driven ecosystem and hopefully today I bought winter friendly blanket
Interesting.
The transportation applications may be ships and railroads.
Buildings including homes with outdoor equipment.
Farm tractors and corn driers.
Again with the Nahsa??
AGL is building a nickel-hydrogen battery pilot.
Great news. Can he pilot an aircraft?
I'm thinking that NiFe batteries are more durable, and there are new tech methods for overcoming the previous shortcoming. Edison batteries are still functioning 100 years after production.
Not related to the topic but, why is the spaceman in one of the opening graphics trying to swim in a vacuum?
00:30 - who are “Narsa”?
Metal hydride is old tech. Hydrogen storage is impractical for vehicles. Maybe a large ship?
Storage density is comparatively low. 60 wh/kg or litre. Also in a safety pressure release valve fails, what's the risk? But if the numbers work, so be it.
With all the new battery technologies coming at us would you say that a better car design would be to have swappable batteries?
Yes NASA has many excellent technology and innovations after many years of R&D but to put them to a domestic scale application is an economic consideration.
Everybody knows US first developed the solar panel in NASA application but is was so expensive that it never took off. Only after Germany popularized it by state subsidies did the world start to see solar park becoming a reality. The breakthrough was by China who lowered the western solar cell cost by 90% so today solar power is the cheapest form of power generation. Without making it cheap and affordable by the world population any good idea is useless!
Also a solar power outfit in China (Longi?) has achieved 33% solar efficiency which is 50% better than current deployed panels. It's hard to see how solar won't be the most economical renewable energy for grid supply.
Just how much hydrogen are we talking about per fuel cell. How does this get around dirty hydrogen production from methane. Are we just replacing one fossil fuel with..... the same fossil fuel?. You need to address this side of it Sam. Doesn't sound like such a clean alternative especially with all the pressure cylinders that are required for a not so dense battery. That requires smelters which sounds like going backwards. I noticed no mention was made of the cylinders/tanks. What about the issue of hydrogen interacting with steel and making it brittle. What are the relative weights per kilowatt storage lithium ion vs nickel hydrogen. How does this differ from nickel metal hydride.
During discharge, hydrogen reacts with oxygen to produce water, within the closed system. That means for production, they can just use water, and internally produce hydrogen by charging. So no need for any potentially dirty hydrogen sources.
But I agree with all your other points. Especially about preventing hydrogen embrittlement. I can't see them preventing this at temperature for 30 years.
Sam Evans (The Electric Viking) often doesn't do enough research about the topics he reports. If an old technology hasn't taken off in the market, then there is probably a reason why, and I suspect that NiH2 batteries aren't cost competitive. First of all, nickel and molybdenum are expensive at $24 and $56 per kg, respectively, and they probably need a high purity, so it wouldn't surprise me if the price is 3 times higher for use in NiH2 batteries. NiH2 has a low energy density around 60-70 Wh/kg, whereas LFP is 160 Wh/kg and NMC is 250 Wh/kg. NiH2 batteries have a 40,000 cycle life IF doing 40% depth of discharge AND they lose their energy quickly, so they are only good for short term storage. I suspect that NiH2 batteries cost 2-3 times more per kWh than LFP batteries that are commonly used for grid storage. LFP gets about 10,000 cycles at 60% depth of discharge and it doesn't lose its charge nearly as fast, so it is better for longer term storage.
However, we have salt water flow and iron salt flow batteries coming onto the market that have extremely low material costs (around $5 per kWh), and they should last for 20,000 cycles or 25 years. It is hard to see NiH2 batteries competing with salt water and iron salt grid batteries.
I’m not a fan of pressure vessels in potential mass domestic applications, interesting though. By the way, when annunciating the word “NASA” why would one introduce the letter R? 🤔
👍👍
It "could". Then again, maybe not. Time will tell. In any case, we wont know for years.
Sam, pronouncing a name isnt whatever you feel it should be. It is NASSA, please STOP calling it NARSA. Or are you doing this for click bait comments? Not a good look.
😂😂😂😂
Aliens could come from the big dipper.
Sopa 10 bagger alert 3 research reports out with 3 to 4 target trading at 30 cents.. 100 percent revenue growth expected for 2024 18 million from 9 million for 2023
Gold capacitance isn’t being touted, naturally collects charge in the proper humidity and never corrodes, When they finally discover that it is in fact feasible, I just want to tell them if they weren’t so stupid, They would have stored the reserves in a proper arrangement, and to mark that it’s 2023 in this post.
You're saying NARSA again stop it just stop it.
did someone say cobalt?
No liquid metal batteries last for longer, they are just not mobile , 300 years of daily cycling, to get to 80 percent
About 1/5 the energy density. So not EV or electronic devices.
🔋
Schlumberger goes by the French pronunciation Schlumber-zhay.
Schlumber is not pronounced slum-burger it is schlum-ber-zhay. It’s french…
can they ever be used in cars
No.
Definitely not. Not for safety reasons, but just because they’re very large and heavy for the amount of energy stored. For example, to have an equivalent 120kWh as a Tesla, you’d need at least another car full of these being towed behind it.
Not very practical! For stationary energy storage, they’re ok, but expensive.
The 1.8m long tanks were 3kWh. EV's are around 70-100kWh... so at least 20 tanks for a shortish range car and realistically 30, if you want the typical acceptable minimum range. Where are you going to fit them and how much will they weigh? Not feasible.
Ni batteries very old hat, heavy, low voltage, etc
NimH batteries had a nasty tendency to explode if overcharged.
🔋EV NEWS - Sodium-Ion Batteries are Here! 🔋
A Chinese automaker just put sodium ion batteries in a car. The batteries are from Farasis Energy and Hina Battery, marking a step closer to large-scale use of the new, lower-cost batteries. Right now these batteries are in the low-end tiny cars. The sodium-ion batteries built by Farasis Energy in partnership with JMEV, an EV brand owned by Jiangling Motors Group, rolled off the assembly line on December 28, according to the battery maker. I believe VW is heavily invested in these batteries or with one of these companies.
The sodium-ion powered car is based on JMEV's EV3,
The Sodium-Ion model has a range of 251 km (156 mi) with a battery pack capacity of 21.4 kWh.
The car starts at RMB 58,800
The Lithium Ion model has a range of 301 km (187 mi) and a battery pack capacity of 31.15
The Lithium Ion cars starts at RMB 62,800 ($8,840 USD)
20USD per kg so a 1000 kg battery is 20000$? Thats trash I believe.
See see we were right th whole time Mr Sam U & Toyota an me KNEW HYDROGEN IS TH FUTURE YEHEHE
What's narsa Sam? 😂
Is it Toyota hybrids and hydrogen cell cheap solid nickel battery( 5000 dollars)?😁
Cheaper than Hyundai and tesla lithium battery ( 61,000 dollars.)😁
How r damm u said it!!! This weeks game changing battery technology is……..it’s been 2 1/2 weeks…… tell us bout NISSAN JUNK RATING come on please Mr Sam before th end of 2023
But maybe not.
NASA spends tons of money to complete a mission--definitely not the most efficient or cost-effective.
Very old technology from 70s. Very poor energy density. Sam are you running out of things to talk about
that doesnt really matter for grid storage. price is more of a concern for that.
@@zachmoyer1849 that's true but for grid storage there cheaper options than pressurized hydrogen. Salt water flow battery for example
Energy density means absolutely 0 at grid scale. Especially, since these batteries are being stacked and as such density per square foot will be significantly higher than lithium. This is not the only company ramping these up and there are a backlog of orders. Assuming no major new technology like fusion comes along soon, these batteries will be a thing.
@@i6power30 they would be close given this still has 5x the cycle life of salgenx advertised 5k cycles
Ha ur FIRED MR SAM YEHEHE
There is no R in the name NASA. Please get it right and stop disrespecting NASA. If you can’t don’t comment 😡😡😡😡
NA SA their is no R in the name. Watch some official NASA videos and see how they pronounce it.
If this follows any of NASA's recent trends, it'll be orders of magnitude more expensive, and take way longer.
Why on earth are we funding NASA? Evetyime space X launches and return their boosters on pilotless drone ship and landing pads im disgusted by NASA
You can't use hydrogen at home.
So you have to go fill your hydrogen tank somewhere... at high price.
Hydrogen is *STUPID* for cars and most trucks.
For ship or planes it's better to use NG or Methane.
im sorry to be that guy but its pronounced NASA (Nah-Sah (with the A from Apple)) not Narsar (nar-sar (with ar from star))... great video all the same!
Rubbish if they are only about 70 Wh/kg. Already lithium batteries are 1/3 the weight.
Energy density is unimportant for grid storage. Expense, environmental impact and longevity are the criteria that matter. So if the price is similar it's a winner.
On another matter, please stop pronouncing NASA with that AR sounding A as in rdvark. You are the only person I have ever heard pronounce it like that. Most of us say "Nasser" where the A sounds like A as in pple
What’s with calling it Narsa? It’s not an Australian pronunciation I’ve ever heard and makes my skin crawl. Perhaps it’s an intentional ploy to increase “engagement” from the audience? This will only work short term as it will drive viewers away.
EVS must be banned until then.
These batteries aren’t suitable for EV’s!
Stationary storage