EV Digest 6298
Topics covered in this issue include:
1) Re: Aluminum battery chemistry
by "[EMAIL PROTECTED]" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
2) Re: Aluminum battery chemistry
by Aaron Richardson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
3) RE: PTC Heater fuse
by Rich Long <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
4) (no subject)
by "Brian M. Sutin" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
5) Re: Aluminum battery chemistry
by "[EMAIL PROTECTED]" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
6) Re: Electric Rate Increase Effective January 1
by "Roderick Wilde" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
7) Aluminum battery chemistry
by Jeff Shanab <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
8) Electronegativities
by "[EMAIL PROTECTED]" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
9) Lisbon Electric Trolley Pictures
by Bill Dube <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
10) RE: PTC Heater fuse
by Bill Dube <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
11) Charging EVs from renewables at home (was RE: Electric Rate
Increase Effective January 1
by "Peter VanDerWal" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
12) Re: How much does it cost to take-off?
by [EMAIL PROTECTED]
13) RE: Aluminum battery chemistry
by "David Sharpe" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
14) Re: Aluminum battery chemistry
by [EMAIL PROTECTED]
15) Conversion costs never change?
by "Ryan Stotts" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
16) Re: PTC Heater fuse
by "Ted C." <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
17) Re: Important dates in EV history
by lyle sloan <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
18) RE: draft
by mike golub <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
19) What to do now ...
by Steve Powers <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
20) Re: Conversion costs never change?
by "Peter VanDerWal" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
21) RE: draft
by "Peter VanDerWal" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
22) Re: Aluminum battery chemistry
by Sam Thurber <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
23) Re: Aluminum battery chemistry
by "John G. Lussmyer" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
24) Re: draft
by "Roland Wiench" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
--- Begin Message ---
Caution, no need for a flame war on the understanding of chemical
concepts. The availability of electrons has everything to do with molar
concentration from the perspective of an analytical/physical chemist; 1
mole of Li ions, 1 mole of e^- s; 1 mole of Fe, up to 3 moles of e^- s
depending upon the oxidation agent (rates of reaction are as equally
important as e^- availability). As a pharmacist refer to Fenton
reactions for a review of redox chemistry, nasty stuff for the body ...
that's why I avoid vitamin supplements with Fe, and I wouldn't recommend
it for a battery unless it was a Ni/Fe cell. While his limited
explanation may be "nonsensical" to you, what he has said is basically
correct. Every time I read this list I'm impressed with the wealth of
knowledge it contains. If I had to speculate, I'd think Tim was
European given his choice of words. Cherrio 'n g'day ... back to "Dogs
of War".
Ralph Patterson
BS Physics, Chemistry and Mathematics (yes I triple majored)
MA Teaching
Physical Chemist PhD.
(If you want to toss credentials around.)
Kenneth Dove wrote:
Complicated?
Nobody will probly understand?
Impossible to understand?
I am not sure what a "mol" is, but a mole is the equivalent of
Avogadro's number of molecules of any given element. The following
statement, "many molecules or (mols) for short of electrons per mol"
is nonsensical. Electron availability is a function of the element in
question and has nothing to do with molar concentration.
I cannot recommend anyone contacting you in regards to chemistry
related questions.
Kenneth Dove
B.S. Pharmacy - The Ohio State University
Tim Gamber wrote:
The problem is not making electricity from aluminum the problem is
finding two metals... One has to be a strong reducing agent (lithium
metal is the strongest known) and one has to be a strong oxidizing
agent (flourine gas is the strongest known). This will determine
voltage of the cell. Then you also have to find a reaction that
transfers many molocules or (mols) for short of electrons per mol of
reactants. This will determine your AH rating. This figure does not
relate to any one metal, but a combination of any two metals. This is
where it gets complicated... Nobody will probly understand this but i
will try to make it simple. As an example i am going to use flourine
gas and lithium metal. I don't want this to be impossble to
understand so i will just tell you the final equation.
F2(g) + 2Li(s) = 2F-(aq) + 2Li+(aq)
The numbers infront of the substances represent how many molucules of
each there are. As you can see after the reaction flourine becomes
negative and lithium becomes positive. Also flourine starts as a gas
and then changes into an aqeous ion. Lithium starts as a solid and
changes into an aqeous ion. 2 electrons are transfered in this
reaction. If i wanted to reverse this reaction i would need to
overcome the voltage of this cell which is 5.91 volts. That means i
would have to use at least 5.91 volts to make the reaction go in the
oposite direction.
Figuring this out isn't to hard, but the problem is reversing the
reaction safely and without producing a precipitate. If there are
impuritys in the reactants that can mess up the reaction and make a
precipitate. Like in the lead acid batery when you reverse and use
the reactions many times the reaction is not perfect and produces
sulfate as a precipitate (sulfation) and the battery continues to
store less energy everytime you use it.
If you have anymore chemistry related questions email me at
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
_________________________________________________________________
Share your opinion and enter to win! Please complete this survey to
enter into a draw for a grand prize of $500 or one of twenty $50 cash
prizes. http://www.youthographyinsiders.com/R.aspx?a=116
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
On Sat, 2007-01-13 at 18:33 -0700, Tim Gamber wrote:
> Figuring this out isn't to hard, but the problem is reversing the
> reaction
> safely and without producing a precipitate. If there are impuritys in
> the
> reactants that can mess up the reaction and make a precipitate. Like
> in the
> lead acid batery when you reverse and use the reactions many times
> the
> reaction is not perfect and produces sulfate as a precipitate
> (sulfation)
> and the battery continues to store less energy everytime you use it.
This seems to indicate that if we created batteries that have no
impurities then the battery life would be increased. Is this the case?
Aaron
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
On Sat, 2007-01-13 at 17:32 -0800, Cor van de Water wrote:
> The easiest way to find the _actual_ resistance when hot is to
> put a known series resistance (shunt) in the circuit, switch it
> on and measure the voltage drop across the shunt.
> If your multi-meter can handle very large currents you can use
> it's built-in shunt, but the 2 Ohm you measured tells me that
> the current will spike high when you switch the heater on, if
> you use a 120V system (around 130V actual pack voltage) then
> the heater will start by drawing 65A (8kW) which will likely
> ramp down to a steady-state below 20A (less than 2.5kW) so you
> must take the peak current into account when sizing the slow-
> blowing fuse, for example at least a 32A fuse if the current
> ramps down quickly enough to stop the fuse from heating up
> from the peak which is twice its rated current. See the specs
> from your fuse and your own measurements on your heater to
> find the proper type.
>
> Did your fuse usually blow when switching the heater on?
> (Sorry if you already told this - I did not read all posts)
Yes.
So does anyone know of a slow-blow 30 amp fuse rated higher than 120vdc.
I have gotten a suggestion to use the Ferraz Shawmut TRM 30 amp but it
is rated at 250vac. Would you use it? Or keep looking.
Rich
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
> The problem is not making electricity from aluminum the problem is finding
> two metals... One has to be a strong reducing agent (lithium metal is the
> strongest known) and one has to be a strong oxidizing agent (flourine gas is
> the strongest known).
Electronegativities:
Li 1.0
Na 0.9
Ba 0.9
K 0.8
Rb 0.7
and some more radioactive elements.
So the first statement appears incorrect. Perhaps you meant per weight?
Brian
--
Brian M. Sutin, Ph.D. Space System Engineering and Optical Design
Skewray Research/316 W Green St/Claremont CA 91711 USA/(909) 621-3122
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
Yes and no. This is only part of the story. With hydrogen gas being
given off in a Pb-sulfuric acid battery the sulfate anion (referred to
below) has to have a cation to react with, in this case PbSO4
precipitates out and will eventually short the cells of a battery out if
not removed. Batteries usually die one of two ways, via shorting out
due to participates or depletion of the cathode/anode material; this is
what makes Ni/Fe batteries interesting as the KOH electrolyte itself
ends up being consumed more than the electrodes. Naturally, the less
contamination, the greater the efficiency of the battery. A good place
to start with some introductory information is:
http://www.batterycouncil.org/different2.html
This listserv really should be changed over to a BBS. I think I'm gonna
opt out given the volume to topic ratio without any way to categorize
the topics.
Aaron Richardson wrote:
On Sat, 2007-01-13 at 18:33 -0700, Tim Gamber wrote:
Figuring this out isn't to hard, but the problem is reversing the
reaction
safely and without producing a precipitate. If there are impuritys in
the
reactants that can mess up the reaction and make a precipitate. Like
in the
lead acid batery when you reverse and use the reactions many times
the
reaction is not perfect and produces sulfate as a precipitate
(sulfation)
and the battery continues to store less energy everytime you use it.
This seems to indicate that if we created batteries that have no
impurities then the battery life would be increased. Is this the case?
Aaron
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
What part of the following do you people not understand? Why not start a new
thread on why this is incomprehensible to you. It would make as much sense!
As I said before, can we please discuss EVs, otherwise I will have to go to
the Donald and Rosie site to talk about EVs :-)
In the words of David Roden, one of the list administrators: "Although we
can and should discuss the energy that our EVs use, the EVDL
isn't really an appropriate venue for discussing general alternative energy
topics. However, some of these (though probably not free energy, overunity,
and perpetual motion ;-) may be welcome on the AEDL (Alternative Energy
Discussion List), also found on the SJSU servers. To join, send a message
with the text subscribe AE firstname lastname to the address"
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Roderick
--
No virus found in this outgoing message.
Checked by AVG Free Edition.
Version: 7.1.410 / Virus Database: 268.16.10/624 - Release Date: 1/12/2007
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
I havent been following this thread too closely, but somthing in the
last post caught my eye.
Battery reactions are usually shown as a pair of 1/2 reactions, Add the
Electron voltages of each reaction together and you get the cell voltage.
ie http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lead-acid_battery
But what may need a little more discussion is the different types of
anonde and cathod reactions. The lead acid battery is a simple battery
where the chemicals change. So much so that a lead acid battery when
built has the same structure on the positive and negative. It takes a
special commisioning charge to make one the negative and one the
positive. ( lead to lead sulfate and back, sulferic acid to water and back.)
But lithium ion, for example is an intercalation battery. The lithium
ions fit into the matrix usually of carbon attach to the trode on charge
and move to the other and the electrolyte during discharge. The use of
nano particals here is of great benefit making a grid that can hold a
lot of lithium ion while rejecting crap in the electrolyte that will
plug up the matrix and reduce capacity. Nano tubes also play a role in
generating high surface ares.
There are more, Redux batteries(Usually Vandium) charge and discharge by
the different state of 2 different electrolytes.
http://www.vrb.unsw.edu.au/, More like a fuel cell than a battery.
In Nicad
2 NiO(OH) + Cd + 2 H_2 O ↔ 2 Ni(OH)_2 + Cd(OH)_2
The KOH (potasium Hydroxide) Electrolyte isn't "consumed" in the
chargeing. This reaction clearly shows why the water level chages during
charge and discharge (I wonder if that would be a good way of having
flooded nicads, A level sensor and microphone in each cell to listen for
full, judge capacity left by how far the level has dropped) AND why
flooded nicads last so long.
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
If we're gonna use titles here let's use some references too so folks
will have an idea of what we're really talking about:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Electronegativity (while there is
questionable information with wikipedia ... )
http://www.chemguide.co.uk/atoms/bonding/electroneg.html
http://www.monroecc.edu/wusers/flanzafame/PerElNegativity.pdf
http://howthingswork.virginia.edu/supplements/batteries.pdf
List of elemental electronegativity
* Francium <http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Francium> - 0.70
* Caesium <http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Caesium> - 0.79
* Potassium <http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Potassium>, Rubidium
<http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rubidium> -- 0.82
* Barium <http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Barium> -- 0.89
* Radium <http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Radium> -- 0.90
* Sodium <http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sodium> -- 0.93
* Strontium <http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Strontium> -- 0.95
* Lithium <http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lithium> -- 0.98
* Calcium <http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Calcium> -- 1.00
* Actinium <http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Actinium>, Lanthanum
<http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lanthanum>, Terbium
<http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Terbium>, Ytterbium
<http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ytterbium> -- 1.10
* Cerium <http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cerium> -- 1.12
* Americium <http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Americium>, Praseodymium
<http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Praseodymium>, Promethium
<http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Promethium> -- 1.13
* Neodymium <http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Neodymium> -- 1.14
* Samarium <http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Samarium> -- 1.17
* Europium <http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Europium>, Gadolinium
<http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gadolinium> -- 1.20
* Dysprosium <http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dysprosium>, Yttrium
<http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Yttrium> -- 1.22
* Holmium <http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Holmium> -- 1.23
* Erbium <http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Erbium> -- 1.24
* Thulium <http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Thulium> -- 1.25
* Lutetium <http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lutetium> -- 1.27
* Plutonium <http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Plutonium>, Curium
<http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Curium> -- 1.28
* Berkelium <http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Berkelium>, Californium
<http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Californium>, Einsteinium
<http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Einsteinium>, Fermium
<http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fermium>, Hafnium
<http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hafnium>, Mendelevium
<http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mendelevium>, Nobelium
<http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nobelium>, Thorium
<http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Thorium> -- 1.30
* Magnesium <http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Magnesium> -- 1.31
* Zirconium <http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Zirconium> -- 1.33
* Scandium <http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Scandium>, Neptunium
<http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Neptunium> -- 1.36
* Uranium <http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Uranium> -- 1.38
* Tantalum <http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tantalum>, Protactinium
<http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Protactinium> -- 1.50
* Titanium <http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Titanium> -- 1.54
* Manganese <http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Manganese> -- 1.55
* Beryllium <http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Beryllium> -- 1.57
* Niobium <http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Niobium> -- 1.60
* Aluminum <http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Aluminum> -- 1.61
* Thallium <http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Thallium> -- 1.62
* Vanadium <http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vanadium> -- 1.63
* Zinc <http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Zinc> -- 1.65
* Chromium <http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chromium> -- 1.66
* Cadmium <http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cadmium> -- 1.69
* Indium <http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Indium> -- 1.78
* Gallium <http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gallium> -- 1.81
* Iron <http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Iron> -- 1.83
* Cobalt <http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cobalt> -- 1.88
* Copper <http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Copper>, Technetium
<http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Technetium>, Rhenium
<http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rhenium>, Silicon
<http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Silicon> -- 1.90
* Nickel <http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nickel> -- 1.91
* Silver <http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Silver> -- 1.93
* Tin <http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tin> -- 1.96
* Mercury <http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mercury_%28element%29>,
Polonium <http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Polonium> -- 2.00
* Germanium <http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Germanium> -- 2.01
* Bismuth <http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bismuth> -- 2.02
* Boron <http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Boron> -- 2.04
* Antimony <http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Antimony> -- 2.05
* Tellurium <http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tellurium> -- 2.10
* Molybdenum <http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Molybdenum> -- 2.16
* Arsenic <http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Arsenic> -- 2.18
* Phosphorus <http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Phosphorus> -- 2.19
* Astatine <http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Astatine>, Hydrogen
<http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hydrogen>, Iridium
<http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Iridium>, Osmium
<http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Osmium>, Palladium
<http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Palladium>, Ruthenium
<http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ruthenium> -- 2.20
* Rhodium <http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rhodium>, Platinum
<http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Platinum> -- 2.28
* Lead <http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lead> -- 2.33
* Tungsten <http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tungsten> -- 2.36
* Gold <http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gold> -- 2.54
* Carbon <http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Carbon>, Selenium
<http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Selenium> -- 2.55
* Sulfur <http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sulfur> -- 2.58
* Xenon <http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Xenon> -- 2.60
* Iodine <http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Iodine> -- 2.66
* Bromine <http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bromine> -- 2.96
* Krypton <http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Krypton> -- 3.00
* Nitrogen <http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nitrogen> -- 3.04
* Chlorine <http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chlorine> -- 3.16
* Oxygen <http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Oxygen> -- 3.44
* Fluorine <http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fluorine> -- 3.98
... if we are going to be academically correct we should strive to be
equally complete and syntactically correct. Communication between the
sciences is paramount to understanding. So this southern hick can feel
absolved, I'll let you west coasters argue this topic ... nitpicking
isn't productive. I'm going to bed ... and opting out of this listserv
tomorrow. I think I'll build my own web page ... n call it
evmechanic.net ... lets see if that will attract some users.
Brian M. Sutin wrote:
The problem is not making electricity from aluminum the problem is finding
two metals... One has to be a strong reducing agent (lithium metal is the
strongest known) and one has to be a strong oxidizing agent (flourine gas is
the strongest known).
Electronegativities:
Li 1.0
Na 0.9
Ba 0.9
K 0.8
Rb 0.7
and some more radioactive elements.
So the first statement appears incorrect. Perhaps you meant per weight?
Brian
--
Brian M. Sutin, Ph.D. Space System Engineering and Optical Design
Skewray Research/316 W Green St/Claremont CA 91711 USA/(909) 621-3122
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
Listers,
I put up a series of pictures of the very scenic Lisbon electric
trolley system on my website.
http://www.killacycle.com/photos/lisbon-trolley-pics/
Click on the thumbnails for a larger picture. Click on the large
picture for a HUGE picture if you want.
My wife Joanne and I visited Portugal last November and we had a fun
time riding the antique electric trolleys around Lisbon. A great way
to see the city and cheap too. Ten bonus points for anyone that can
figure out the time and date we were on the trolley from looking at
the pictures. :-)
Be sure and catch a Fado music performance if you visit Lisbon.
Better yet, go to a Fado nightclub and have the best fish dinner you
could imagine.
Obrigado,
Bill Dube'
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
I think all you need do is read a couple of the previous post in this
particular thread to have your answer.
Yes.
So does anyone know of a slow-blow 30 amp fuse rated higher than 120vdc.
I have gotten a suggestion to use the Ferraz Shawmut TRM 30 amp but it
is rated at 250vac. Would you use it? Or keep looking.
Rich
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
> what about using a wind turbine or solar panels to charge your car if alot
> of people had those they would get cheaper and become standard ways to
> charge your car.
I doubt that increased demand would make these products significanty cheaper.
Wind turbines are already fairly cheap. Plus, only a few people live in
the right locations, with enough room, AND enough desire, to use wind
turbines.
Increased demand for Solar panels would probably make them MORE expensive.
As I understand it, currently most of the monocrystal solar cells are
made from silicon wafer "seconds" that don't pass muster for other
semiconductors. If demand increased enough, then they would have to start
using the more expensive first rate wafers.
Of the two, I think wind turbines are the better choice for charging
EVs...if you live in a windylocation with enough room. I think you'd need
a 2kw turbine in order to charge up an EV overnight.
--
If you send email to me, or the EVDL, that has > 4 lines of legalistic
junk at the end; then you are specifically authorizing me to do whatever I
wish with the message. By posting the message you agree that your long
legalistic signature is void.
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
In a message dated 1/13/2007 5:17:56 PM Pacific Standard Time,
[EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
the second reason makes it a small miracle that
you can gain between 5 and 10% range with regen braking.
It all depends on your driving conditions. The above statement is true if
your on flat roads with few stops. If your in an area with many stop lights
and
steep hills this number can change dramatically. A Solectria Force AC
system can recover up to 30 percent. Depending on the terrain and driving
conditions of an overall trip up to 10 to 15 percent recovered can be normal.
I prefer to adapt my driving style to minimize braking by
anticipating long in advance,
This is definitely the most efficient when there are no ICE drivers behind
you. I try to retain as much momentum adjusting the regen as needed to achieve
this. That way if the light changes you retain more energy than you would
with regeneration. This is best though if there is no ICE vehicles behind you.
I found that if you mark your vehicle as being ICE you have all kinds of
people trying to set themselves up to pass you. Say your waiting at a stop
light
I have had people get over to the slow lane when they figure out they are
behind an EV. Even getting behind a transit bus thinking it will out
accelerate
an EV. Then when I take off with traffic they are frustrated they figured
wrong and get back to the fast lane.
It will be interesting when more vehicles are on the road with regeneration.
What will happen when more drivers are holding back rushing up to a stop
light?
Don
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
Please don't ask for a receipt.
-----Original Message-----
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On
Behalf Of Kenneth Dove
Sent: Sunday, 14 January 2007 1:43 PM
To: [email protected]
Subject: Re: Aluminum battery chemistry
Complicated?
Nobody will probly understand?
Impossible to understand?
I am not sure what a "mol" is, but a mole is the equivalent of
Avogadro's number of molecules of any given element. The following
statement, "many molecules or (mols) for short of electrons per mol" is
nonsensical. Electron availability is a function of the element in
question and has nothing to do with molar concentration.
I cannot recommend anyone contacting you in regards to chemistry related
questions.
Kenneth Dove
B.S. Pharmacy - The Ohio State University
Tim Gamber wrote:
> The problem is not making electricity from aluminum the problem is
> finding two metals... One has to be a strong reducing agent (lithium
> metal is the strongest known) and one has to be a strong oxidizing
> agent (flourine gas is the strongest known). This will determine
> voltage of the cell. Then you also have to find a reaction that
> transfers many molocules or (mols) for short of electrons per mol of
> reactants. This will determine your AH rating. This figure does not
> relate to any one metal, but a combination of any two metals. This is
> where it gets complicated... Nobody will probly understand this but i
> will try to make it simple. As an example i am going to use flourine
> gas and lithium metal. I don't want this to be impossble to understand
> so i will just tell you the final equation.
>
> F2(g) + 2Li(s) = 2F-(aq) + 2Li+(aq)
>
> The numbers infront of the substances represent how many molucules of
> each there are. As you can see after the reaction flourine becomes
> negative and lithium becomes positive. Also flourine starts as a gas
> and then changes into an aqeous ion. Lithium starts as a solid and
> changes into an aqeous ion. 2 electrons are transfered in this
> reaction. If i wanted to reverse this reaction i would need to
> overcome the voltage of this cell which is 5.91 volts. That means i
> would have to use at least 5.91 volts to make the reaction go in the
> oposite direction.
>
> Figuring this out isn't to hard, but the problem is reversing the
> reaction safely and without producing a precipitate. If there are
> impuritys in the reactants that can mess up the reaction and make a
> precipitate. Like in the lead acid batery when you reverse and use the
> reactions many times the reaction is not perfect and produces sulfate
> as a precipitate (sulfation) and the battery continues to store less
> energy everytime you use it.
>
> If you have anymore chemistry related questions email me at
>
> [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
> _________________________________________________________________
> Share your opinion and enter to win! Please complete this survey to
> enter into a draw for a grand prize of $500 or one of twenty $50 cash
> prizes. http://www.youthographyinsiders.com/R.aspx?a=116
>
>
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
From a reliable source I have heard that the company (Europositron)
actually has a hard time to comply on the proto promises.
I would not be surprised if the operations of the company would be
stopped soon. Does not sound very legal to me.
So far it raised million or so euros of capital with the promises.
Imagine how much bad will it generated among small investors and how
much harder it has made other battery related small companies to raise
money.
Something positive: It seems this area of technology is getting
required interest and that can really speed things up.
-Jukka
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
My yet to be bought items:
$4900 * 13" WarP
$4850 * Zilla
$1550 * PFC-20 (minimum, PFC40/50+ likely, 75 even..)
$2250 * Odyssey PC680 (30ct) ($5040 for 60, 2 strings @ 360V total)
---------
$13,550
Will these prices never be any lower?
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
a Bussmann SC-30 is a time delay 30 amp fuse rated at 300vdc. For time delay
it looks like 50amp takes 100 seconds to blow. 100amps takes 5 seconds to
blow. 200 amps takes 0.15 seconds to blow.
That is a slow blow fuse.
http://www.bussmann.com/library/bifs/1024.PDF
Ted
Olympia, WA
N47 02.743 W122 53.772
Thank GOD for Thomas Edison. Without him we would all be watching TV by
candle light.
----- Original Message -----
From: "Bill Dube" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: <[email protected]>
Sent: Saturday, January 13, 2007 9:36 PM
Subject: RE: PTC Heater fuse
I think all you need do is read a couple of the previous post in this
particular thread to have your answer.
Yes.
So does anyone know of a slow-blow 30 amp fuse rated higher than 120vdc.
I have gotten a suggestion to use the Ferraz Shawmut TRM 30 amp but it
is rated at 250vac. Would you use it? Or keep looking.
Rich
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
There are several electric vehicle history sites out
there. Pick and choose the dates from them. There is
enough info out there to have a new trivia blip for
everyday of the year and then some.
Some of my favorites:
http://www.econogics.com/ev/evhistry.htm#Introduction
a list member's from france which you will have to use
babelfish.altavista.com to translate
http://pboursin.club.fr/velec/velec.htm
That should get you started. All this info in a daily
calendar format would make an excellent fund generator
for any of the clubs.
--- David O'Neel <> wrote:
> Greetings, I am in the process of adding important
> dates to my online
> calendar (google/gmail feature) and wanted to add
> dates/anniversaries for
> important EV happenings. Here's what I have so far
> for ideas off the top of
> my head:
>
> Tesla roadster unveiled: 07/19/2006
> EVA founded:?/?/1967
>
> Technology:
> invention of relevant battery technology
> invention of relevant controller technology
>
> Corporate/Govt:
> EV1/Impact unveiled
> CARB hearings
> EV1 ended
> AC Propulsion founded
>
>
> I know this is far from exhaustive and I have
> probably overlooked some very
> important events, which of course is why I am
> throwing this out to you all.
> Please reply with additions, with a specific date.
> If we can come up with a
> comprehensive list, I'm sure lots of us would add it
> to our personal
> calendars or club calendars.
>
> Thanks,
> Dave O.
> Redmond Wa
>
>
____________________________________________________________________________________
Now that's room service! Choose from over 150,000 hotels
in 45,000 destinations on Yahoo! Travel to find your fit.
http://farechase.yahoo.com/promo-generic-14795097
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
You are the second EVer who came up with the 50% DOD
to make this calculator accurate.
I was going to get one of those old and used electric
kilowatt meters to figure how much Watts it takes to
charge.
When is 100% DOD? Is it when you are driving and you
can't accelerate anymore? Or is it when you are doing
2 mph?
thanks for checking the site.
--- Cor van de Water <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Hi Michael,
>
> It would be good to add units to all fields.
> For example "weight" is in pounds, which is quite
> uncommon in most of the world - the standard way to
> enter weight is in metric units (kilograms)
>
> Entering the values for my vehicle I see some
> deviations,
> using 6 ft wide and 5 ft height for an S10 I see it
> calculates
> to need 24.6 kW at 60 MPH while I can drive 60 using
> about 55A
> at 312V, so about 17kW.
>
> Range calculated is a disappointing 33.5 miles,
> while I have
> taken my vehicle up to 63 miles on a charge at
> freeway speeds,
> so either you intend to indicate the safe 50% DOD
> range but
> forgot to tell that, or your calculator is too
> negative about
> the available energy at my temperature (which temp
> did you use?)
>
> The cost to recharge of $4.29 suggests that I should
> put 43 kWh
> back in the batteries (at the entered $0.10) which
> seems way too
> high for the 33.5 miles as I expect my
> wall-to-wheels consumption
> to be closer to 0.5 kWh/mi than the calculated 1.3
> kWh/mi and
> this is in part due to my current inefficient
> charging setup,
> I hope to get even better cost figures once I have
> my on-board
> charger based on high frequency PFC conversion.
> Note: I based my numbers not on actual measured
> consumption at
> my charger, but on the increase of about 350 to 400
> kWh per month
> of EV charging while I average 25 miles per day of
> driving, which
> cost an average 12.5 kWh or $1.25 at the $0.10 rate.
>
> (I get less than $0.06 rate for nightly consumption,
> but the
> baseline tariff allows about 350 kWh per month,
> which I exceed
> by about 300 kWh due to the EV recharging.
> I have asked PG&E to increase the baseline for homes
> which have
> EV charging, but they say that offering the E9 rate
> already
> allows me to recharge cheaper at night. This is a
> bit fake
> statement, because the E9 rate structure was
> designed to be cost
> neutral to the utility - reduce night rate but
> increase day rate
> so the bill stays the same, only there is a drive to
> move loads
> to the cheaper night rate.
> Alternative is a second hookup for the EV, with a
> new meter
> and new baseline, but the cost of that is higher
> than paying
> the out-of-baseline rates on my existing hookup.
>
> I did not know how to assess the battery efficiency,
> so that
> may be all that is needed to bring the results in
> line with
> what I expect to reach (between 0.4 and 0.5 kWh/mi
> for my
> S10 truck)
>
> Hope this helps,
>
> Cor van de Water
> Systems Architect
> Proxim Wireless Corporation http://www.proxim.com
> Email: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Private:
> http://www.cvandewater.com
> Skype: cor_van_de_water IM:
> [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Tel: +1 408 542 5225 VoIP: +31 20 3987567
> FWD# 25925
> Fax: +1 408 731 3675 eFAX: +31-87-784-1130
> Second Life:
>
www.secondlife.com/?u=3b42cb3f4ae249319edb487991c30acb
>
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Behalf Of mike golub
> Sent: Friday, January 12, 2007 10:58 PM
> To: [email protected]
> Subject: draft
>
>
> I'm looking for input for this range calculator:
>
> If you a chance I made this calculator on this page:
>
> http://community.uaf.edu/~ffmig/power.php
>
> and I'm using this formula:
>
> http://community.uaf.edu/~ffmig/force.htm
>
> Thanks,
>
> Michael Golub
> Fairbanks, AK
>
>
>
>
____________________________________________________________________________
> ________
> Bored stiff? Loosen up...
> Download and play hundreds of games for free on
> Yahoo! Games.
> http://games.yahoo.com/games/front
>
>
____________________________________________________________________________________
TV dinner still cooling?
Check out "Tonight's Picks" on Yahoo! TV.
http://tv.yahoo.com/
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
Well, It's been a month of hard work trying to get the Festiva running. I
finally got the new set of batts in and the charger working. But, when I went
to fire it up this morning after 5 - 6 years of sitting (new batts in and all
wires cleaned up) ... nothing ...
The main contactor pulls in and the vac pump starts, but that is it.
Nothing out of the old Curtis 1221B ... Nothing at all.
I checked the pot box. It has a switch and 5k pot. The switch is off
normally, like it should be. So, it isn't locking out or anything. Or, is it
??? Why knows after 5+ years of sitting ...
What now?
Where should I send that thing for test and repair? Is it even worth it? I
had wanted to upgrade anyway ...
What tests should I run to even try to figure this out?
The problem is that the controller is pretty well burried under a lot of
stuff and the wires are short. It is going to be very hard to get that thing
out of there or even access it to check it out.
I'm open to suggestions ...
Steve
---------------------------------
The fish are biting.
Get more visitors on your site using Yahoo! Search Marketing.
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
Simple economics.
Inflation usually drives costs up. Generally one of two things have to
happen in order for costs to go down. Either the item goes into mass
production where the economies of scale can reduce costs, or the item
become obsolete and is replaced by a newer, better, product. The
remaining old stock of obsolete items sells cheap until they are all gone.
The batteries are already mass produced, so that won't change their price,
and PbA batteries haven't become obsolete in the last century, so I doubt
they will any time in the near future.
The rest of the items listed are all hand made and it's doubtfull they
will ever go into mass production. Also, since they are hand made,
basically to order, even if they do become obsolete, there won't be any
old stock to sell off.
So, my guess is, these items will only go up in cost and not down.
> My yet to be bought items:
>
> $4900 * 13" WarP
> $4850 * Zilla
> $1550 * PFC-20 (minimum, PFC40/50+ likely, 75 even..)
> $2250 * Odyssey PC680 (30ct) ($5040 for 60, 2 strings @ 360V total)
> ---------
> $13,550
>
> Will these prices never be any lower?
>
>
--
If you send email to me, or the EVDL, that has > 4 lines of legalistic
junk at the end; then you are specifically authorizing me to do whatever I
wish with the message. By posting the message you agree that your long
legalistic signature is void.
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
Just out of curiosity, why are you developing this calculator?
Is it an intelectual exercise, or do you feel there is a need for another
online EV calculator?
If you didn't know, there are severl online calculators out there, the
best of which is probably Uve's EV Calculator:
http://www.geocities.com/CapeCanaveral/lab/8679/evcalc.html
It has many more variables than yours. If you are looking to simplify his
calculator, I believe he lists all of the formulas he uses. You could
borrow them and modify them for your page.
Or you could finish what he started. He never did finish the acceleration
portion of the calculator.
> I'm looking for input for this range calculator:
>
> If you a chance I made this calculator on this page:
>
> http://community.uaf.edu/~ffmig/power.php
>
> and I'm using this formula:
>
> http://community.uaf.edu/~ffmig/force.htm
>
> Thanks,
>
> Michael Golub
> Fairbanks, AK
>
>
>
> ____________________________________________________________________________
> ________
> Bored stiff? Loosen up...
> Download and play hundreds of games for free on Yahoo! Games.
> http://games.yahoo.com/games/front
>
>
--
If you send email to me, or the EVDL, that has > 4 lines of legalistic
junk at the end; then you are specifically authorizing me to do whatever I
wish with the message. By posting the message you agree that your long
legalistic signature is void.
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
Not to nit-pick but Lithium (after elemental hydrogen) is actually the weakest
reducing agent, Francium is the strongest. The larger the molecule, the easier
it is to lose it's lone electron in the outer shell, therfore reducing agent's
strength go from hydrogen to Francium. Oxidzer's on the other hand want that
last electron to complete their outer shell and their reletave strength goes in
the opposite direction with Astatine being the weekest and Fluorine being the
strongest.
http://www.corrosionsource.com/handbook/periodic/
Tim Gamber <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
The problem is not making electricity from aluminum the problem is finding
two metals... One has to be a strong reducing agent (lithium metal is the
strongest known)
---------------------------------
Don't pick lemons.
See all the new 2007 cars at Yahoo! Autos.
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
At 08:32 AM 1/14/2007, Sam Thurber wrote:
Not to nit-pick but Lithium (after elemental hydrogen) is actually
the weakest reducing agent, Francium is the strongest. The larger
the molecule, the easier it is to lose it's lone electron in the
outer shell, therfore reducing agent's strength go from hydrogen to
Francium. Oxidzer's on the other hand want that last electron to
complete their outer shell and their reletave strength goes in the
opposite direction with Astatine being the weekest and Fluorine
being the strongest.
Hmm, sounds like a Fluorine/Francium battery could be, umm, exciting...
--
John G. Lussmyer mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Dragons soar and Tigers prowl while I dream....
http://www.CasaDelGato.com
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
The Uve's Calculator is missing a lot of data. I input my data for my EV,
it said I can go 167.635 miles at 20 mph at a battery ampere of 38.6271
amps.
There should be a DC-DC power requirements and accessory motors loads added
to the total battery load.
If I turn on all my accessories units, power steering, DC-DC, DC-AC, vacuum
pumps, A/C, water pumps, and fans, I can draw another 30 amps off the
battery pack.
So if I increase the load another 30 amps, it still gives me 138.380 miles
range. Reduce this to half or 69.18 miles for 50% DOD.
Using Michael calculator and in a second, it become 68.3 miles, how about
that.
Roland
----- Original Message -----
From: "Peter VanDerWal" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: <[email protected]>
Sent: Sunday, January 14, 2007 10:07 AM
Subject: RE: draft
> Just out of curiosity, why are you developing this calculator?
> Is it an intelectual exercise, or do you feel there is a need for another
> online EV calculator?
>
> If you didn't know, there are severl online calculators out there, the
> best of which is probably Uve's EV Calculator:
> http://www.geocities.com/CapeCanaveral/lab/8679/evcalc.html
>
> It has many more variables than yours. If you are looking to simplify his
> calculator, I believe he lists all of the formulas he uses. You could
> borrow them and modify them for your page.
>
> Or you could finish what he started. He never did finish the acceleration
> portion of the calculator.
>
> > I'm looking for input for this range calculator:
> >
> > If you a chance I made this calculator on this page:
> >
> > http://community.uaf.edu/~ffmig/power.php
> >
> > and I'm using this formula:
> >
> > http://community.uaf.edu/~ffmig/force.htm
> >
> > Thanks,
> >
> > Michael Golub
> > Fairbanks, AK
> >
> >
> >
> > ____________________________________________________________________________
> > ________
> > Bored stiff? Loosen up...
> > Download and play hundreds of games for free on Yahoo! Games.
> > http://games.yahoo.com/games/front
> >
> >
>
>
> --
> If you send email to me, or the EVDL, that has > 4 lines of legalistic
> junk at the end; then you are specifically authorizing me to do whatever I
> wish with the message. By posting the message you agree that your long
> legalistic signature is void.
>
>
--- End Message ---
