Many of the posts shared today are from links in this article.
- Article on flow batteries. I am yet to see a commercial flow battery product that is more economically viable than other metal ion batteries. However, this article suggests that flow batteries will be more economically viable. They are certainly safer, as well as being easier and more economical to scale. It also outlines a safer flow battery technology using “a family of carbon-based molecules called quinones”, as opposed to acidic solutions of metal ions, such as vanadium. This technology seems like it has the most potential as a stationary storage solution that I’ve seen so far. It wouldn’t work as a mobile storage solution, e.g. in vehicles.
- http://www.power-technology.com/news/newsduke-energy-tests-new-battery-ultracapacitor-system-north-carolina-substation-4838656: economic viability is not discussed in detail
- http://www.greencharge.net/solutions/ similar solution to a battery system plus energy trading with IT, similar to Reposit Power
- https://cleantechnica.com/2015/06/21/flow-battery-vs-tesla-battery-smackdown-looming/. A vanadium flow battery vendor that uses a mixture of hydrochloric acid and sulfuric acid as an electrolyte to result in a 70% increase in capacity (compared to just sulfuric acid as is conventional in flow batteries).
- http://ecomento.com/2015/03/10/nimh-batteries-will-have-10-times-more-energy-density-basf/ Research on Nickel Metal Hydride (NiMH) batteries to get costs down to $150/kWh. By comparison, lithium ion batteries are currently $300/kWh, and Tesla’s Gigafactory is pushing to get that cost down to $200/kWh. Details in the article are lacking on how the battery could get to 10 times the energy density of today’s batteries at half the cost of today’s batteries.
Note that where no comment on the link is provided, it is typically because I scanned the site to find that there did not seem to be much worth commenting on that differentiated the site in terms of innovation.