Does it sound too good to be true? Do you think alternative battery technologies like this have a shot? Save 25% on your first Native Plastic-Free Deodorant Pack - normally $39, you’ll get it for $29! Click here bit.ly/nativeundecided and use my code UNDECIDED. If you liked this video, how about watching "Energy Storage Breakthrough - Solid Hydrogen Explained": ruclips.net/video/U7CCq4oBgw4/видео.html
I don't think concrete structures are really designed to last hundreds of years: 50 to 100 is more reasonable - sometimes less. However, this might be to the benefit of concrete battery technology since new tech would be incorporated in to new structures. Concrete is now recycled and all this extra metal would have to be considered during the grinding and recycling. Not a huge deal, you would think
Even the prototype of this has real world uses today without improvement. Just look at how much concrete is used in literally everything and all we ask of it is to be solid. This makes it also store power while storing heat and being solid.
Some possible problems that popped up in my head: * How much does it complicate the cement pouring practices that are used today? (Might making cement bricks and using those in the walls be a better idea?) * How do the anodes, cathodes, and additional add-ins affect the structural integrity of the cement? * What happens during a critical failure of one of these batteries and is that something you'd accept happening inside your walls? * (On a lesser note) I imagine this would make it close to impossible for WiFi signals to get through the walls.
And the very fact that there are questions such as these tells me that there is no way this technology is being adopted any time soon. Why would construction companies take on this risk with little or no benefit to themselves. The problem of storage for renewables is a problem for utilities not construction firms. Possibly utilities could sponsor the technology, but why would they do that when there are solutions available that are 100% under their control?
Let's not forget how do you maintain one of these concrete-batteries? Do you go at the wall with a drilljack and diamond saw and hope you got the right one?
One of the reasons why modern concrete bridges need to be replaced every 30-40 years is because of a redox reaction. The iron/steel rebar within the concrete starts to rust which expands in volume as it does so. This expansion, especially when combined with colder temperature or wetter climates causes the concrete to crack which allows more moisture in which then increases the redox reaction even more. The fact that this cement is based upon a redox reaction worries me. How long with the concrete last? Even if the concrete lasts, how long will it remain operational as a battery? I think this requires a massive amount of study and further development before it can be considered a viable alternative. Concrete itself, without the rebar, can last a thousand years or more if you get the right mix and don't add anything that can rust. The Colosseum in Rome is a prime example of this. What would be very useful is if we can find a building method that uses different materials that when combined, can create an energy storage system. The more pure these materials (granite for example) then the longer it will last. Granite can last tens of thousands of years, and as a building material, can be extraordinarily strong.
Putting a negative voltage on the iron should make it less likely to rust. There may be an alloy we could use for the iron that would resist rusting without costing too much. I doubt that concrete batteries will be a good idea but I am very happy to be shown to be wrong in this.
@@kensmith5694 Lead plating the iron can prevent it from rusting for thousands of years. Unfortunately, people freaked out about lead so it is difficult to use as a building material.
Theres a move to phase out steel as rebar due to the problems with concrete cancer.. as its known. What they are using in domes and other structures especially in Maritime environments is artificial Basaltic rods.. it behaves more like concrete in density, in terms of expansion co efficient s, water, fire and corrosion resistance...it can even be formed into woven and chopped strands..like Glass in GRP construction.
@@spiritzweispirit1st638 It doesn't solve the problem, it merely delays it. Epoxy can wear off too and all it takes is one little cut or undercoated area to spread the reaction under the epoxy.
"I know what you're thinking: will my house electrocute me?" - Actually, I was wondering whether the conduction of electrolytes in the cement could pose a risk to the structural integrity. Could the addition of new metals in new structures change concretes susceptibility to 'concrete cancer'?
That was exactly my thought - like stories of peoples galvanized plumbing suddenly ALL going bad at the same time. IMO, this was most likely due to the addition of cable TV (remember grounding incoming cable to a water pipe?) Or even the addition of lawn chemicals watered in by sprinklers. We all know that galvanized was a bad idea, but does anyone know exactly why it randomly caused so many problems so suddenly. Concrete is already becoming a trillion dollar issue and now they want to make it subject to electric fields? What if my cell carrier installs a new localized transmitter up the street - or if the city moves my power lines under ground - or if we're having a bad solar flare day. What do you do when you live on the 7th floor of a 17 floor eco building with a koi pond on the roof and grass on the walls and a guy with a clip board stops by to say you have to move out for 18-30 months while they "fix" it?
They probably assumed that the concrete must have very specific width to act as a battery, so the third dimension is constant. Though I would love what is that value. It might have been in the video and I just missed it.
@@hubertnnn I think they refered to the thickness of the model shown in the video. So something like 2-4 cm thick or 1-2 inches thick, approximately. Though they most likely they skewed the data in their favour the most they could, using lying by omission and omission fallacy.
This would be neat for concrete block walkway paths. We already have solar walkway lights you just need to keep replacing them every year as the batteries go dead.
Thank you again for sharing these ideas. The fact that we are aggressively looking to innovate and replace the current power production and storage systems is very encouraging.
I remember reading about the first Moscow US embassy, Officials said it was fabricated to become a battery as the concrete cured. And it worked!. Great presentation.
@@liam3284 how did the voltage escape the battery container without the electrolyte leaking. It wasn't because the battery was directly connected to the concrete floor. It was because the concrete wanted the charge maybe and it just took it somehow. Without being directly connected.
1:40 Energy density is not measured in Wh/m², it's measured in Wh/m³, surely? It's a solid substance. 1:46 Batteries do not store power, they store energy.
@@grandunifier3169 No he is right, the number of electrons within a battery shouldn't change. In general electrons stay in the same place unless there is also an ion flow(like from the cathode to the anode *within* a battery). There is some actual electron flow in circuits, but it is so slow that it is only measured in semiconductors(critical part of how they work). On a side note, if you want to look up how to calculate the flow of electrons, it is called the drift flow. It is usually measured in micrometers/second. Also, it oscillates in AC current, so electrons usually travel nowhere very slowly.
I would be very concerned about the thermal expansion and contractiom of the battery components. The usefulness of iron reinforced concrete is dependent on the rates of its components expanding and contracting at relatively close rates in changing temperatures. The crystals linkage between iron and cement wouldn't mean much if heat caused easy cracking.
You'd also have to take into account the volumetric expansion of anode and cathode caused by absorption and release of charge carrying ions carrying charge between the two electrodes.
I can only imagine a failure frying everyone inside, living inside of a battery doesn't seem like a smart idea to me when nature is a fully active wild child to deal with. lol Concrete is hella unstable and needs maintained to much. People often forget that it's brittle and porous. With that being said I could get behind the idea of it being used in driveways etc.
There’s a video by practical engineering that talks about how in modern day we help stop concrete from cracking too much. And if what Matt is saying in this video is true than I think the batteries could actually strengthen the concrete. If you want to see the video i’m talking about type in practical engineering stopping concrete from cracking.
TV/VCR combos had a fatal flaw, if one breaks, you can’t replace it without replacing the other. With batteries forming the structure of a building, when that battery stops working, it cannot be replaced.
What if we used prefabricated concrete battery blocks instead? When the battery stops working, you unbolt it and replace the block with a new one. You couldn’t make the entire structure out of these blocks, but you could have non-structural concrete be made of replaceable blocks
@@justinokraski3796 What if you just had a normal battery? Sure, it takes up a bit of space instead of being the structure itself, but with a much higher capacity, ease of access, and replaceability, I think that's worth it.
Love your channel and topics, however I was a bit confused watching this one because you seem to use cement and concrete interchangeably, like so many people do. Concrete is a building material, cement is the glue in concrete. So, is it cement that is the element that makes battery storage possible, or concrete in general?
This sort of thing tends to absorb RF rather than emit it. Concrete is not all that good in a fire. It doesn't burn but if the fire heats it to just above the boiling point of water, it started to turn back into Portland cement powder. The crystals that make Portland cement turn into a strong solid have water as part of their structure.
This may worsen galvanic corrosion of the rebar, but that can be fixed by replacing steel rebar with lighter, stronger, lower carbon basalt rock fiber rebar like Basonite rebar.
Thanks for sharing this idea. To me, using it in structural concrete is a no-go (pie in the sky, not feasible with today’s materials.) But integrating it into a wall covering (think thick multi layer stucco with a protective outer shell) could work. Especially since specialty conductive mortar seems to be an important element for energy density.
So... to use this in a building you'd have to use precast concrete panels since this sounds very hard to do on site. Number of questions though: 1) How does this affect the concrete strength? 2) Does cycling the battery cause any component to swell? If so how does this affect longevity? 3) Does the ion exchange leach any important minerals from the concrete? 4) How does the battery react to water infiltration since concrete is porous?
I'm no scientist, but with my experience in construction I can confidently say this will not be used as structural material for any critical load bearing structure, it might be used as a self powered light pole but I don't see this being used in buildings.
I agree. I really don't know how reinforcement will play with this electrical concrete. I would like to see it or even design a lamp post, or some small products which are for the public. While this is a brilliant idea, I feel like its value should be directed to a more doable project. As an architect I'm also thinking of the value of such structural material. Would people really feel safe in such house
@The Southern Cross concrete doesn't hold heat very well, it's a cold material and ver yprone to water damage due to even microscopic cracks There are concretes which are used as thermal concretes but, I feel like using this in some mass production isn't a good idea for now. There are so many other ways a building could create energy especially the topic they covered about transparent solar cells This idea can be excecuted maybe on smaller elements of city
@@mrss_foster For thermal mass you do not want a material to be insulating. It should absorb and discharge heat steadily. The home insulation needs to be outside of the thermal mass. By volume concrete's heat capacity is around half of water's heat capacity.
Enjoy your channel. A lot of great information. I believe if limited resources like nickel and lithium are needed in concrete battery storage then it will not catch on. Those resources can be better used in more efficient/recyclable battery storage devices.
Will living inside a battery electrocute us? 04:50 Unlikely as you would be in contact with cement. True. Until the house settles and the cement cracks, or somebody decides to hang a picture frame or a water pipe bursts and the water soaks into all the wonderfully porous cement. Or the myriad different ways poorly maintained houses can degrade, which realistically is all of them. Generally people don't do maintenance until AFTER the damage begins to show. Also fires happen, earthquakes, extreme weather events etc etc. The technology is great if it works. Realistically though, this would be better suited to dedicated energy storage sites that can be properly maintained and regulated.
Depends on how you design the house. Imagine 6 huge thick concrete columns which are batteries also and you use to hang the frame of the house and support the roof. This would eliminate a lot of the problems you mentioned. The concrete columns would be designed to be resistant to earthquakes. If the columns crack, you wouldn’t work about being electrocuted but the house falling on you which is a bigger concern...
I think it's brilliant, especially tying into the natural energy sources. Once made safe it would free up lots of material for batteries and create a green grid
I mean there will always be an electric/electromagnetic field around the outside of a battery without needing to be in contact, so unless you're far enough away from the battery which you wont be, then you have small amounts of electricity constantly flowing through you just being near/in your house. Some health crazy people are already overly weary about things like being too close to your router and things because of slight health concerns and how its carcinogenic, but imagine literally living inside giant batteries.
I don't think this will be the future. Here in the Netherlands, I saw on the news every giant contractor, will switch to wooden houses to build. Reason, nitrogen emissons slows down contstruction sides. Even in the north of the Netherlands, we pumped up, for arround 70 years of gass to heatup our homes. The effects are now little earthquakes that damage or sometimes distroy houses and buildings.
Anywhere that has access to a sustainable supply of timber should be doing their best to build everything out of wood. And that's just for the environmental concerns of the other options. Concrete is the most destructive building material, wood the least destructive. Wood does fine in earthquakes too, if it's properly designed for it (although you'll probably get some cracks in your sheetrock). California has almost never had problems with wood houses collapsing during earthquakes. It's always the concrete and steel stuff that collapses. Even in San Francisco's 1906 earthquake where we didnt know we needed to build for earthquakes yet, most of the wood structures remained standing. That's a small part of why the fire raged so hard immediately after the earthquake. edit: Notable exception to wood doing fine in earthquakes is the 1989 Loma Prieta earthquake. There were a lot of wood apartments in the city that did collapse, but that's generally attributed to the construction trend at the time of completely gutting the structure from the bottom floor to put parking there. In other words, buildings that were so poorly designed they stood no chance to survive anything more extreme than a mild breeze. Traditionally designed houses in the suburbs did just fine.
@@tippyc2 At some point you should consider the renewable source Bamboo. Thomas Edison used bamboo to reinforce his swimming pool in Fort Myers(on the ocean) and it still holds water today. Bamboo grown in the footprint of a modern house for 2 years can build that same house. Look it up.
Oh yeah, I think they have a shot. Everybody working in new ways to store energy is working on something esential. Even if this technology doesn't become an standard part of new skyscrapers, it could be useful for off grid homes or even something we don't have yet. Thanks for this information.
Having a corrosive compound in steel reinforced concrete would require constant monitoring and extremely diligent maintenance. I don't care if it's encapsulated in something, it'll get out. Concrete is amazing stuff, but if it's not properly maintained, people die.
Many people had this idea over decades, myself included. The ACTUAL problems are not found in the cement composition that much, but in how to mitigate the problems arised from moisture entering the concrete and galvanic corrosion of the steel re-enforcement, even using it as a cathode or anode material without compromising structural integrity. In plain English if we can use the steel inside the concrete as the cathode and the cement itself as an anode, we will have giant batteries and turn ANY concrete construction into a giant battery. Although I highly doubt it would be a good idea to constantly depleting the metal in the re-enforcement, it may be possible to at least isolate it and use doping material inside the mix to facilitate the ion exchange. Moisture will be the #1 problem to tackle. Even the best concrete always absorbs some moisture, especially when it is underground in the a building's foundation. Engineers even use special ion-exchange plugs throughout the constrction to mitigate the galvanic corrosion, and given the fact that most large cities are near the sea, the problem is even bigger.
well i'd take anything said by someone who gives energy density of a battery in Wh/m² (or Wh/ft²) with about 5 truckloads of salt. batteries tend to be 3 dimensional which makes this a really useless metric for any purpose (other than showing it in a youtube video). to prove the point: lithium ion batteries have more than 250000000 wh/m² (if your battery is 1000m high) not to mention that the resin between the layers probably messes up your overall strength so badly that you could never use it as structural material anyway.
We are better off using the buildings and housing we already have as "batteries". Using them to store (thermal) energy when it's abundant in the form of increased or decreased temps and letting them return towards the mean when energy is no so abundant. Obviously having good thermal insulation improves the "battery". Example: Using solar energy to slightly over-cool or over-heat during the day while the sun is shining by say 3 degrees and letting the interior temp swing back the other direction at night when solar energy is not being created. The perceived comfort disruption to us is fairly minimal and the change is gradual so it's hardly noticeable. You don't even have to generate your own electricity for this to be a large-scale benefit, doing the same on-grid reduces the strain and levels off power production around the clock for energy providers. All it takes is a programable thermostat or someone willing to manually control the thermostat 2x a day. This idea is basically free to do/use, it's available to just about everyone, and we can all do it today.
@@shawnr771 Agreed, but again that usually means significant redesign and cost. When it comes to battery tech, doing the above is basically free and we can pretty much all access it.
One danger I can see is the fact that electrolyte in batteries gets used up over time (not consumed, but it changes its composition, that why the capacity drops down). What would happen to my house when that happens to concrete in my walls? Is there a risk that the used concrete electrolyte will be too weak and will just cause to house to collapse?
Well, after seeing that the Chalmers U battery or the Lancaster battery had the electrical storage potential of a dead firefly, I will look back to Matt's enthusiasm for the rusting iron battery development from some months ago. It seems hugely more closer to commercial use than the concrete ones are. Good topic anyway. Maybe the concrete storage would be best applied to Mars?
I will have a look at the papers, but I suspect I will be in for some heavy reading. It's a hard problem, but this should be a solid foundation for future research.
"what if we could turn our houses themselves into batteries?" You mean surround people with insane amounts of potential energy that if failes does so spectacularly and releases massive amounts of "heat" energy into said structure. Ya.... No..
Great video. Anything has the potential to become a safe everyday item that we use for a designated purpose. Have you described the Concorde to the people building a steam locomotive, they would have said you are crazy and it is utterly impossible. Maybe a battery will be designed with high energy density and without a finite number of discharge cycles.
This is pretty cool, but my biggest question is does it affect the load bearing capability of the concrete or the overall stability? If it doesn't, then even if it has a pitifully energy density, it would be worth the additional cost to build into the structure
You might want to look up channels that talk about tartaria and "the inheritors". They have been talking a long time about two possibilities. That those really old buildings were built as batteries. And that they were built to harness sound. That wells at the center of the house were important to making them good batteries is one of the theories.
Matt uses the terms "cement" and "concrete" interchangeably. Cement is the binding agent within concrete. Concrete is usually a mixture of portland cement, gravel, sand, and water. It's only one of the ingredients in concrete, he might as well have called it: gravel, sand, or water.
I'd say yes because of the volumetric expansion of anode and cathode during charging and discharging. And because of different thermal expansion of the anode and cathode metals. The reason why iron is used to reinforce concrete is because its thermal expansion very closely matches that of concrete. But nickel....I don't know. Also I know that at least in lithium ion batteries the charge carrying lithium ions in the electrolyte plate on the surfaces of the two electrodes over the battery life. And in this type of battery the plaster is the electrolyte. So similar kind of reaction could weaken the plaster over time. But I am not sure
Im planning on a post and beam style concrete garage. using these as the wall fill is viable. better is a way to use the existing rebar in CMU to act as the anode and merely add nickel
Yeah, great idea, let's replace lithium with a material that's even more destructive to the environment, cement. I can't imagine this would work for buildings anyway, the constant battery activity would degrade the concrete too quickly. There's two mechanisms that will break down the concrete: volumetric expansion of metal oxides in the battery components, and heat cycling during charge/discharge, both of which will lead to microcracking of the concrete. Potentially there could be decomposition of the actual cement bonds as well. And if there's any water being electrolyzed by the process, that would definitely degrade the hydrated cement, and you might even see hydrogen embrittlement of the reinforcing steel as well.
For very large structures like freeways, overpasses, bridges etc. this makes sense to store electricity inside the structure it would be a micro grid within a Macro grid urban setting yes has potential
Problem: cement and concrete when saturated or even surface wet is conductive, which would short out the battery and could electrocute a person. Likely not with a lethal voltage, but the amperage would burn the flesh at the contact point. Concrete and cement are listed as conductive flooring under electrical code because of the danger when it gets wet. The low voltage is the only way this could be safe, but rebar would become part of the circuit and could become part of a circuit when equipment is anchored to the concrete. Some electrical code would need to be written for this to be used.
Power density maybe low but in an apartment building or business complex building scale it would certainly be enough to run all the community lighting and possibly help out with elevators
You Sir deserve a medal for this joke. Live well in the knowledge that you created one of the finest jokes of our time and that will undoubtedly go unnoticed by the many! When you are dead and gone, perhaps a young researcher will rediscover this fine example of human thinking and hold it up, on a pedestal for all the appreciate the sheer genius of construction. ;-)
Non-starter for use in structural applications. Would be limited to use in peripheral areas due to the fact that applying a voltage gradient across a concrete structure full of steel rebar is a superb way to accelerate corrosion. In which case, may as well bolt a more effective battery to the wall.
Enough retained charge to evacuate a building when the power fails, or enough charge to provide a basic level of lighting off roof top panels would be a very good thing. LED lighting would use very low power yet probably give a soft "Navigation" level of lighting in halways 24/7 I wonder how much lload that would take off the grid? A lot of tall buiuldings have to pump water to maintain pressure, having a means of pumping water in a power failuire situation might be a good thing too. It would add a lot of resilience to structures and self sustainability too.
Talk about a power wall, I like the idea of a cinder block battery, build a small cabin or shed with them, throw a couple solar panels on top and your lighting is taken care of, maybe not much else, but it's something. Given time and development it has potential.
high density mean high temperatures so if you charge or discharge the wall and floor of your apartement in summer it heat the inside and considering solar panel more eficient by summer day than winter night its again the reverse that is needed
Every home should have it's own energy system including storage. The same way homes will store chords of wood for the winter, we can store electrical energy in many ways.
what about the battery structrural resistance compared to regular concrete ? I though that would be the first answer, because you know, main concrete usage is in STRUCTURES, to HOLD things. If you plan to change that and add some other functionnalities (here energy storage) you should compare how it performs on its first objective first. If overall you need to pour like twice the same amount of concrete in order to achieve the same structural resistance, leading to bigger buildings for the same usable space, that's not good at all.
There is a company here in Texas, Italy Texas to be exact that builds Monolithic Dome Homes, if you were to build that home and have a flexible wire grid added to layers of the concrete, your house in the long run could really be energy saving at that
Perhaps the modern slab home or concrete superstructure of a building would behave more like a battery "backup" or buffer for when you experience "brown-outs" or "black-outs" that are temporary in nature. That way your refrigerators and medical equipment stay on even when your TV doesn't. Maybe the house becomes a giant surge protector.
It's interesting to considering that unlike other battery systems, people already use concrete. So what is the cost difference between existing concrete, and battery concrete?
As long as it's not bad for your health this can be revolutionary. Even if the energy density is garbage you still need to build houses and right now concrete is the go-to material. Might as well use the otherwise static walls for something else too.
Does it sound too good to be true? Do you think alternative battery technologies like this have a shot? Save 25% on your first Native Plastic-Free Deodorant Pack - normally $39, you’ll get it for $29! Click here bit.ly/nativeundecided and use my code UNDECIDED.
If you liked this video, how about watching "Energy Storage Breakthrough - Solid Hydrogen Explained": ruclips.net/video/U7CCq4oBgw4/видео.html
Idea for next video : Thermally-Localized Multistage Solar Still TMSS
I don't think concrete structures are really designed to last hundreds of years: 50 to 100 is more reasonable - sometimes less. However, this might be to the benefit of concrete battery technology since new tech would be incorporated in to new structures. Concrete is now recycled and all this extra metal would have to be considered during the grinding and recycling. Not a huge deal, you would think
Even the prototype of this has real world uses today without improvement.
Just look at how much concrete is used in literally everything and all we ask of it is to be solid. This makes it also store power while storing heat and being solid.
All the puns in the world won't save you from the upcoming Thunderf00t video.
Thunderfoot is coming for you 😂😂😂😂
Some possible problems that popped up in my head:
* How much does it complicate the cement pouring practices that are used today? (Might making cement bricks and using those in the walls be a better idea?)
* How do the anodes, cathodes, and additional add-ins affect the structural integrity of the cement?
* What happens during a critical failure of one of these batteries and is that something you'd accept happening inside your walls?
* (On a lesser note) I imagine this would make it close to impossible for WiFi signals to get through the walls.
Plus a very important question should be: does it affect the ability to recycle concrete?
And what happens if you need to core cut a hole for a duct or pipe to go through one of these concrete walls?
And the very fact that there are questions such as these tells me that there is no way this technology is being adopted any time soon. Why would construction companies take on this risk with little or no benefit to themselves. The problem of storage for renewables is a problem for utilities not construction firms. Possibly utilities could sponsor the technology, but why would they do that when there are solutions available that are 100% under their control?
Let's not forget how do you maintain one of these concrete-batteries? Do you go at the wall with a drilljack and diamond saw and hope you got the right one?
Also will this impact structural integrity
The puns ... they really cemented this video.
One of the reasons why modern concrete bridges need to be replaced every 30-40 years is because of a redox reaction. The iron/steel rebar within the concrete starts to rust which expands in volume as it does so. This expansion, especially when combined with colder temperature or wetter climates causes the concrete to crack which allows more moisture in which then increases the redox reaction even more. The fact that this cement is based upon a redox reaction worries me. How long with the concrete last? Even if the concrete lasts, how long will it remain operational as a battery? I think this requires a massive amount of study and further development before it can be considered a viable alternative. Concrete itself, without the rebar, can last a thousand years or more if you get the right mix and don't add anything that can rust. The Colosseum in Rome is a prime example of this.
What would be very useful is if we can find a building method that uses different materials that when combined, can create an energy storage system. The more pure these materials (granite for example) then the longer it will last. Granite can last tens of thousands of years, and as a building material, can be extraordinarily strong.
Putting a negative voltage on the iron should make it less likely to rust.
There may be an alloy we could use for the iron that would resist rusting without costing too much.
I doubt that concrete batteries will be a good idea but I am very happy to be shown to be wrong in this.
@@kensmith5694 Lead plating the iron can prevent it from rusting for thousands of years. Unfortunately, people freaked out about lead so it is difficult to use as a building material.
Theres a move to phase out steel as rebar due to the problems with concrete cancer.. as its known.
What they are using in domes and other structures especially in Maritime environments is artificial Basaltic rods.. it behaves more like concrete in density, in terms of expansion co efficient s, water, fire and corrosion resistance...it can even be formed into woven and chopped strands..like Glass in GRP construction.
We now cover Modern Rebar with 'Epoxy' _Problem solved _
@@spiritzweispirit1st638 It doesn't solve the problem, it merely delays it. Epoxy can wear off too and all it takes is one little cut or undercoated area to spread the reaction under the epoxy.
really love that you guys covered this and brining a light to issues
"I know what you're thinking: will my house electrocute me?" - Actually, I was wondering whether the conduction of electrolytes in the cement could pose a risk to the structural integrity. Could the addition of new metals in new structures change concretes susceptibility to 'concrete cancer'?
That was exactly my thought - like stories of peoples galvanized plumbing suddenly ALL going bad at the same time. IMO, this was most likely due to the addition of cable TV (remember grounding incoming cable to a water pipe?) Or even the addition of lawn chemicals watered in by sprinklers. We all know that galvanized was a bad idea, but does anyone know exactly why it randomly caused so many problems so suddenly. Concrete is already becoming a trillion dollar issue and now they want to make it subject to electric fields? What if my cell carrier installs a new localized transmitter up the street - or if the city moves my power lines under ground - or if we're having a bad solar flare day. What do you do when you live on the 7th floor of a 17 floor eco building with a koi pond on the roof and grass on the walls and a guy with a clip board stops by to say you have to move out for 18-30 months while they "fix" it?
I love the pace of the video and the precisely distilled puns :)
At 1:43 you mentioned average energy density at Wh/square meter. A square meter is area. Density measured would be cubic meter.
They probably assumed that the concrete must have very specific width to act as a battery, so the third dimension is constant.
Though I would love what is that value. It might have been in the video and I just missed it.
@@hubertnnn I think they refered to the thickness of the model shown in the video. So something like 2-4 cm thick or 1-2 inches thick, approximately. Though they most likely they skewed the data in their favour the most they could, using lying by omission and omission fallacy.
My baloney meter went off scale at this point and I had a hard time believing any of the rest of the video.
"Sounds edifying right, but it's got concrete challenges to overcome!" Nicely done.
Hi Matt , I absolutely love to watch your videos. Highly informative and simple language. It's one of my way to escape from stress.
Glad you like them!
@@UndecidedMF Thanks for responding, Matt . Ur content is so nice. So thanks.
My nickel- Iron battery made in 1955 still works. Thanks mr Edison
I think the concepts are electrifying but I'd like to see something more concrete.
Ha. Excellent!!
This would be neat for concrete block walkway paths. We already have solar walkway lights you just need to keep replacing them every year as the batteries go dead.
Thank you again for sharing these ideas. The fact that we are aggressively looking to innovate and replace the current power production and storage systems is very encouraging.
Absolutely! Thanks for watching.
Could have an energy storage application in large concrete hydroelectric dams and pumped storage.
I remember reading about the first Moscow US embassy, Officials said it was fabricated to become a battery as the concrete cured. And it worked!. Great presentation.
When you leave a battery on concrete all night somehow it loses its charge. It just happens and I don't know why.
@@liam3284 how did the voltage escape the battery container without the electrolyte leaking. It wasn't because the battery was directly connected to the concrete floor. It was because the concrete wanted the charge maybe and it just took it somehow. Without being directly connected.
Thanks.I often find myself inspired to give my students some.projects for new ideas
1:40 Energy density is not measured in Wh/m², it's measured in Wh/m³, surely? It's a solid substance.
1:46 Batteries do not store power, they store energy.
They store {condensed} electrons...
@@grandunifier3169 The amount of electrons in a full or an empty battery should be the same.
👍
@@bloepje no, they are {exchanged} for {mechanical} energy...
@@grandunifier3169 No he is right, the number of electrons within a battery shouldn't change. In general electrons stay in the same place unless there is also an ion flow(like from the cathode to the anode *within* a battery). There is some actual electron flow in circuits, but it is so slow that it is only measured in semiconductors(critical part of how they work).
On a side note, if you want to look up how to calculate the flow of electrons, it is called the drift flow. It is usually measured in micrometers/second. Also, it oscillates in AC current, so electrons usually travel nowhere very slowly.
To make cement we need a LOT of power too.
Some arestarting to moving away from concrete homes.
I would be very concerned about the thermal expansion and contractiom of the battery components. The usefulness of iron reinforced concrete is dependent on the rates of its components expanding and contracting at relatively close rates in changing temperatures. The crystals linkage between iron and cement wouldn't mean much if heat caused easy cracking.
You'd also have to take into account the volumetric expansion of anode and cathode caused by absorption and release of charge carrying ions carrying charge between the two electrodes.
I can only imagine a failure frying everyone inside, living inside of a battery doesn't seem like a smart idea to me when nature is a fully active wild child to deal with. lol Concrete is hella unstable and needs maintained to much. People often forget that it's brittle and porous. With that being said I could get behind the idea of it being used in driveways etc.
This sounds like a Surfside Condo collapse in the making...
There’s a video by practical engineering that talks about how in modern day we help stop concrete from cracking too much. And if what Matt is saying in this video is true than I think the batteries could actually strengthen the concrete. If you want to see the video i’m talking about type in practical engineering stopping concrete from cracking.
never heard of that, seems like a great, cheat and durable add-on to incorporate in new buildings along common higher energy density options
TV/VCR combos had a fatal flaw, if one breaks, you can’t replace it without replacing the other. With batteries forming the structure of a building, when that battery stops working, it cannot be replaced.
What if we used prefabricated concrete battery blocks instead? When the battery stops working, you unbolt it and replace the block with a new one. You couldn’t make the entire structure out of these blocks, but you could have non-structural concrete be made of replaceable blocks
@@justinokraski3796 What if you just had a normal battery? Sure, it takes up a bit of space instead of being the structure itself, but with a much higher capacity, ease of access, and replaceability, I think that's worth it.
Would be cool if one could retrofit existing structures with this tech.
Love your channel and topics, however I was a bit confused watching this one because you seem to use cement and concrete interchangeably, like so many people do. Concrete is a building material, cement is the glue in concrete. So, is it cement that is the element that makes battery storage possible, or concrete in general?
Amazing the more We have alternatives This will bring further innovation and hopefully lead to a more energy efficient future
until now i only had to make sure i dont hit a wire, when drilling. imagine the stress of hanging something on the wall in a house like this
This could be a solution for missions to help power habitation on the Moon and Mars. Thanks, Matt.
I'm very curious about RF emissions from a building made of this stuff. How it might affect fires. As well as how it behaves in a lightning storm.
This sort of thing tends to absorb RF rather than emit it. Concrete is not all that good in a fire. It doesn't burn but if the fire heats it to just above the boiling point of water, it started to turn back into Portland cement powder. The crystals that make Portland cement turn into a strong solid have water as part of their structure.
Your new born babies head will be fried and you can't put out electrical fires with water :D
DC current produces no RF. The F stands for frequency dc is direct current, not AC.
This may worsen galvanic corrosion of the rebar, but that can be fixed by replacing steel rebar with lighter, stronger, lower carbon basalt rock fiber rebar like Basonite rebar.
Thanks for sharing this idea. To me, using it in structural concrete is a no-go (pie in the sky, not feasible with today’s materials.) But integrating it into a wall covering (think thick multi layer stucco with a protective outer shell) could work. Especially since specialty conductive mortar seems to be an important element for energy density.
Highways use concrete barriers. Planter boxes. Swimming pool. Front steps.
@@stefanr8232 yes nice
Wish we could be involved in these start up technologies
So... to use this in a building you'd have to use precast concrete panels since this sounds very hard to do on site. Number of questions though:
1) How does this affect the concrete strength?
2) Does cycling the battery cause any component to swell? If so how does this affect longevity?
3) Does the ion exchange leach any important minerals from the concrete?
4) How does the battery react to water infiltration since concrete is porous?
Sooooo...what happens when I drill a 1" through hole in the wall or drive an anchor into it?
:) The expression is "Set in concrete", cement is a component thereof. Keep up the great work!
I'm no scientist, but with my experience in construction I can confidently say this will not be used as structural material for any critical load bearing structure, it might be used as a self powered light pole but I don't see this being used in buildings.
Can't we work out on the designing part so we need less strength.
I agree. I really don't know how reinforcement will play with this electrical concrete. I would like to see it or even design a lamp post, or some small products which are for the public. While this is a brilliant idea, I feel like its value should be directed to a more doable project. As an architect I'm also thinking of the value of such structural material. Would people really feel safe in such house
@The Southern Cross concrete doesn't hold heat very well, it's a cold material and ver yprone to water damage due to even microscopic cracks
There are concretes which are used as thermal concretes but, I feel like using this in some mass production isn't a good idea for now. There are so many other ways a building could create energy especially the topic they covered about transparent solar cells
This idea can be excecuted maybe on smaller elements of city
@The Southern Cross "Supercapacitors are the future"
Ask an electrician why you're both right but also horrifically wrong.
@@mrss_foster For thermal mass you do not want a material to be insulating. It should absorb and discharge heat steadily. The home insulation needs to be outside of the thermal mass. By volume concrete's heat capacity is around half of water's heat capacity.
interesting stuff... your bamboo pun reminded me of the great book titled "Eats, shoots & leaves"
Enjoy your channel. A lot of great information. I believe if limited resources like nickel and lithium are needed in concrete battery storage then it will not catch on. Those resources can be better used in more efficient/recyclable battery storage devices.
I love that for your opening shots of modern cities you followed Paris by... Brisbane Australia! 0:15
Greetings from Brisbane =)
Will living inside a battery electrocute us?
04:50 Unlikely as you would be in contact with cement.
True. Until the house settles and the cement cracks, or somebody decides to hang a picture frame or a water pipe bursts and the water soaks into all the wonderfully porous cement.
Or the myriad different ways poorly maintained houses can degrade, which realistically is all of them. Generally people don't do maintenance until AFTER the damage begins to show.
Also fires happen, earthquakes, extreme weather events etc etc.
The technology is great if it works. Realistically though, this would be better suited to dedicated energy storage sites that can be properly maintained and regulated.
I love this part of RUclips. People don't just trash something; they provide realistic and constructive criticism of a idea (mind the pun).
Depends on how you design the house. Imagine 6 huge thick concrete columns which are batteries also and you use to hang the frame of the house and support the roof. This would eliminate a lot of the problems you mentioned. The concrete columns would be designed to be resistant to earthquakes. If the columns crack, you wouldn’t work about being electrocuted but the house falling on you which is a bigger concern...
I think it's brilliant, especially tying into the natural energy sources. Once made safe it would free up lots of material for batteries and create a green grid
I mean there will always be an electric/electromagnetic field around the outside of a battery without needing to be in contact, so unless you're far enough away from the battery which you wont be, then you have small amounts of electricity constantly flowing through you just being near/in your house.
Some health crazy people are already overly weary about things like being too close to your router and things because of slight health concerns and how its carcinogenic, but imagine literally living inside giant batteries.
@@1988ryan1 that's probably occurring RIGHT now right now. Cellular waves, etc...
I see all kinds of inventions and innovations on RUclips! How many are just bought up and shelved? I'd say most of them!
I don't think this will be the future. Here in the Netherlands, I saw on the news every giant contractor, will switch to wooden houses to build. Reason, nitrogen emissons slows down contstruction sides. Even in the north of the Netherlands, we pumped up, for arround 70 years of gass to heatup our homes. The effects are now little earthquakes that damage or sometimes distroy houses and buildings.
Anywhere that has access to a sustainable supply of timber should be doing their best to build everything out of wood. And that's just for the environmental concerns of the other options. Concrete is the most destructive building material, wood the least destructive.
Wood does fine in earthquakes too, if it's properly designed for it (although you'll probably get some cracks in your sheetrock). California has almost never had problems with wood houses collapsing during earthquakes. It's always the concrete and steel stuff that collapses. Even in San Francisco's 1906 earthquake where we didnt know we needed to build for earthquakes yet, most of the wood structures remained standing. That's a small part of why the fire raged so hard immediately after the earthquake.
edit: Notable exception to wood doing fine in earthquakes is the 1989 Loma Prieta earthquake. There were a lot of wood apartments in the city that did collapse, but that's generally attributed to the construction trend at the time of completely gutting the structure from the bottom floor to put parking there. In other words, buildings that were so poorly designed they stood no chance to survive anything more extreme than a mild breeze. Traditionally designed houses in the suburbs did just fine.
@@tippyc2 concrete lasts for thousands of years unless you put steel rebar into it.
@@ooooneeee But you cant build with concrete without the rebar (except for pavement).
@@tippyc2 At some point you should consider the renewable source Bamboo. Thomas Edison used bamboo to reinforce his swimming pool in Fort Myers(on the ocean) and it still holds water today. Bamboo grown in the footprint of a modern house for 2 years can build that same house. Look it up.
I admire your optimism of the future on energy storage. I just don't feel the same way.
Oh yeah, I think they have a shot. Everybody working in new ways to store energy is working on something esential. Even if this technology doesn't become an standard part of new skyscrapers, it could be useful for off grid homes or even something we don't have yet. Thanks for this information.
Off-grid homes were my thought, too. An extra store for whatever solar is on your roof is always appreciated.
I could see these being used as storage for emergency lighting in a building.
Having a corrosive compound in steel reinforced concrete would require constant monitoring and extremely diligent maintenance. I don't care if it's encapsulated in something, it'll get out. Concrete is amazing stuff, but if it's not properly maintained, people die.
Power Bricks. Built into standard walls. Mold Kathode and Anode into brick shaped electrolyte. Cinder Blocks too!
Many people had this idea over decades, myself included. The ACTUAL problems are not found in the cement composition that much, but in how to mitigate the problems arised from moisture entering the concrete and galvanic corrosion of the steel re-enforcement, even using it as a cathode or anode material without compromising structural integrity. In plain English if we can use the steel inside the concrete as the cathode and the cement itself as an anode, we will have giant batteries and turn ANY concrete construction into a giant battery. Although I highly doubt it would be a good idea to constantly depleting the metal in the re-enforcement, it may be possible to at least isolate it and use doping material inside the mix to facilitate the ion exchange. Moisture will be the #1 problem to tackle. Even the best concrete always absorbs some moisture, especially when it is underground in the a building's foundation. Engineers even use special ion-exchange plugs throughout the constrction to mitigate the galvanic corrosion, and given the fact that most large cities are near the sea, the problem is even bigger.
This guy gets it.
well i'd take anything said by someone who gives energy density of a battery in Wh/m² (or Wh/ft²) with about 5 truckloads of salt.
batteries tend to be 3 dimensional which makes this a really useless metric for any purpose (other than showing it in a youtube video).
to prove the point: lithium ion batteries have more than 250000000 wh/m² (if your battery is 1000m high)
not to mention that the resin between the layers probably messes up your overall strength so badly that you could never use it as structural material anyway.
And how this work with layer buildings insulation?
the way he pushed of those tens of puns with straight face amazed me lol
We are better off using the buildings and housing we already have as "batteries". Using them to store (thermal) energy when it's abundant in the form of increased or decreased temps and letting them return towards the mean when energy is no so abundant. Obviously having good thermal insulation improves the "battery". Example: Using solar energy to slightly over-cool or over-heat during the day while the sun is shining by say 3 degrees and letting the interior temp swing back the other direction at night when solar energy is not being created. The perceived comfort disruption to us is fairly minimal and the change is gradual so it's hardly noticeable. You don't even have to generate your own electricity for this to be a large-scale benefit, doing the same on-grid reduces the strain and levels off power production around the clock for energy providers. All it takes is a programable thermostat or someone willing to manually control the thermostat 2x a day.
This idea is basically free to do/use, it's available to just about everyone, and we can all do it today.
Passive solar design will do this with fewer moving parts.
@@shawnr771 Agreed, but again that usually means significant redesign and cost. When it comes to battery tech, doing the above is basically free and we can pretty much all access it.
@@ssoffshore5111 If we would alter new home designs to incorporate it start with would be a good idea.
Especially in areas it makes sense.
With the amount of battery theft we are experiencing here ins SA, this would be an awesome solution!
One danger I can see is the fact that electrolyte in batteries gets used up over time
(not consumed, but it changes its composition, that why the capacity drops down).
What would happen to my house when that happens to concrete in my walls?
Is there a risk that the used concrete electrolyte will be too weak and will just cause to house to collapse?
Interesting! Also no wordplay opportunity was missed. ;-)
Well, after seeing that the Chalmers U battery or the Lancaster battery had the electrical storage potential of a dead firefly, I will look back to Matt's enthusiasm for the rusting iron battery development from some months ago. It seems hugely more closer to commercial use than the concrete ones are. Good topic anyway. Maybe the concrete storage would be best applied to Mars?
I will have a look at the papers, but I suspect I will be in for some heavy reading. It's a hard problem, but this should be a solid foundation for future research.
"what if we could turn our houses themselves into batteries?"
You mean surround people with insane amounts of potential energy that if failes does so spectacularly and releases massive amounts of "heat" energy into said structure.
Ya.... No..
excellent content and delivery, will share. thank you.
Great video. Anything has the potential to become a safe everyday item that we use for a designated purpose. Have you described the Concorde to the people building a steam locomotive, they would have said you are crazy and it is utterly impossible. Maybe a battery will be designed with high energy density and without a finite number of discharge cycles.
Love the idea of turning buildings and roads into batteries
This is pretty cool, but my biggest question is does it affect the load bearing capability of the concrete or the overall stability? If it doesn't, then even if it has a pitifully energy density, it would be worth the additional cost to build into the structure
You might want to look up channels that talk about tartaria and "the inheritors". They have been talking a long time about two possibilities. That those really old buildings were built as batteries. And that they were built to harness sound. That wells at the center of the house were important to making them good batteries is one of the theories.
Matt uses the terms "cement" and "concrete" interchangeably. Cement is the binding agent within concrete. Concrete is usually a mixture of portland cement, gravel, sand, and water. It's only one of the ingredients in concrete, he might as well have called it: gravel, sand, or water.
Thanks. Now I don't have to say that.
Yes, completely agree with you, Cornpop … that loose language was killing me!
Are you the guy Biden stood up to at the community pool?
@@christianpervert525 Yes he is, and he's a bad dude.
Thank you, I was wondering if anyone was going to respond. As an engineer this drives me crazy. Cement and concrete are not the same!
As always very well researched and informative content
That's interesting. Does it affect the concrete either positively or negatively? (Pun intended) Does it shorten the life-span or weaken the concrete?
I'd say yes because of the volumetric expansion of anode and cathode during charging and discharging. And because of different thermal expansion of the anode and cathode metals. The reason why iron is used to reinforce concrete is because its thermal expansion very closely matches that of concrete. But nickel....I don't know.
Also I know that at least in lithium ion batteries the charge carrying lithium ions in the electrolyte plate on the surfaces of the two electrodes over the battery life. And in this type of battery the plaster is the electrolyte. So similar kind of reaction could weaken the plaster over time. But I am not sure
My biggest question, disappointed he didn't address it.
Im planning on a post and beam style concrete garage. using these as the wall fill is viable. better is a way to use the existing rebar in CMU to act as the anode and merely add nickel
It's great seeing concrete thinkers getting energized over a solid foundation and building from there!
☝️ brilliant play on words here
It is solidly revolutionary!!!
Yeah, great idea, let's replace lithium with a material that's even more destructive to the environment, cement.
I can't imagine this would work for buildings anyway, the constant battery activity would degrade the concrete too quickly. There's two mechanisms that will break down the concrete: volumetric expansion of metal oxides in the battery components, and heat cycling during charge/discharge, both of which will lead to microcracking of the concrete. Potentially there could be decomposition of the actual cement bonds as well. And if there's any water being electrolyzed by the process, that would definitely degrade the hydrated cement, and you might even see hydrogen embrittlement of the reinforcing steel as well.
For very large structures like freeways, overpasses, bridges etc. this makes sense to store electricity inside the structure it would be a micro grid within a Macro grid urban setting yes has potential
Problem: cement and concrete when saturated or even surface wet is conductive, which would short out the battery and could electrocute a person. Likely not with a lethal voltage, but the amperage would burn the flesh at the contact point. Concrete and cement are listed as conductive flooring under electrical code because of the danger when it gets wet. The low voltage is the only way this could be safe, but rebar would become part of the circuit and could become part of a circuit when equipment is anchored to the concrete. Some electrical code would need to be written for this to be used.
Power density maybe low but in an apartment building or business complex building scale it would certainly be enough to run all the community lighting and possibly help out with elevators
What is the functional energy density of material science jokes? 🙄
You Sir deserve a medal for this joke. Live well in the knowledge that you created one of the finest jokes of our time and that will undoubtedly go unnoticed by the many! When you are dead and gone, perhaps a young researcher will rediscover this fine example of human thinking and hold it up, on a pedestal for all the appreciate the sheer genius of construction. ;-)
Could be used for parking lots with EV charging for temporary storage and to remove peaks from the grid.
This is great! just more of research in the corrosion potential of the reinforce steel will be needed!
Non-starter for use in structural applications. Would be limited to use in peripheral areas due to the fact that applying a voltage gradient across a concrete structure full of steel rebar is a superb way to accelerate corrosion. In which case, may as well bolt a more effective battery to the wall.
Enough retained charge to evacuate a building when the power fails, or enough charge to provide a basic level of lighting off roof top panels would be a very good thing. LED lighting would use very low power yet probably give a soft "Navigation" level of lighting in halways 24/7 I wonder how much lload that would take off the grid? A lot of tall buiuldings have to pump water to maintain pressure, having a means of pumping water in a power failuire situation might be a good thing too. It would add a lot of resilience to structures and self sustainability too.
Yes please make a video about concrete and carbon and carbon capture! Thanks Matt
Talk about a power wall, I like the idea of a cinder block battery, build a small cabin or shed with them, throw a couple solar panels on top and your lighting is taken care of, maybe not much else, but it's something. Given time and development it has potential.
This is awesome , great content and research !! Thx for providing this very informative video.
Re: "That sounds edifying..."
Good one, 👏 bravo.
high density mean high temperatures
so if you charge or discharge the wall and floor of your apartement in summer it heat the inside
and considering solar panel more eficient by summer day than winter night its again the reverse that is needed
Every home should have it's own energy system including storage. The same way homes will store chords of wood for the winter, we can store electrical energy in many ways.
what about the battery structrural resistance compared to regular concrete ? I though that would be the first answer, because you know, main concrete usage is in STRUCTURES, to HOLD things. If you plan to change that and add some other functionnalities (here energy storage) you should compare how it performs on its first objective first. If overall you need to pour like twice the same amount of concrete in order to achieve the same structural resistance, leading to bigger buildings for the same usable space, that's not good at all.
Another great content! Thanks!
Metal rusts and if used as battery inside a concrete where it supports the intire structure . Idk it might weaken the structure over time and fail.
There is a company here in Texas, Italy Texas to be exact that builds Monolithic Dome Homes, if you were to build that home and have a flexible wire grid added to layers of the concrete, your house in the long run could really be energy saving at that
Informative Shows
Perhaps the modern slab home or concrete superstructure of a building would behave more like a battery "backup" or buffer for when you experience "brown-outs" or "black-outs" that are temporary in nature. That way your refrigerators and medical equipment stay on even when your TV doesn't. Maybe the house becomes a giant surge protector.
Thank you for having awesome (correct) captions!!
You're welcome 😊
Thank you sir.
great video Matt!
A-Class puns!
We come for the puns, and you utilize them to teach us things. Amazing!
It's interesting to considering that unlike other battery systems, people already use concrete.
So what is the cost difference between existing concrete, and battery concrete?
A Very Interesting idea, Matt.
Does the study mention the thermal range of the experimental prototypes?
As long as it's not bad for your health this can be revolutionary. Even if the energy density is garbage you still need to build houses and right now concrete is the go-to material. Might as well use the otherwise static walls for something else too.
Thanks!
Hi Matt. I have been a fan for some time. I hope you are well.
Concrete track and magnetic field events? The Step Potential Olympics? How about a High Voltage Jump?
Could be great for roads
We're on the right track!
Large scale storage coupled with a worldwide interconnected power grid will be necessary.