It's not quite as simple as just the cost equation. It's also energy density, distribution and charging. All surmountable problems, certainly, but all quite large undertakings that can't be ignored.
A lot of electrons are pushed around to fill a theoretical 200KwH battery pack in a short enough time to make mass use practical. You have to have silicon to control that. You need very thick, massively paralleled or dramatically lower resistance conductors. You also need all of the other infrastructure components such as remote generation, distribution, "filling" stations.
I forgot another very important result: the 35 mile range on battery power. This is, in fact, the same real-world range we have seen from electric cars all along.
It's imperative to keep the truth up front, and to discount or preferably ignore the hype altogether. Pursuing battery electrics continues to be questionable at best.
No reason to get stuck on the battery idea only. There are other ways, arguably much better ways, to become rid of internal combustion engines, than to rely on battery storage. Which, incidentally, still requires the electricity to be generated somewhere, somehow, even if not locally in the car itself.
I think the most important result of this cross country trip is the reported 30 mpg realized. And the knowldge that the utterly equivalent, non-hybrid, Chevy Cruze Eco would have gotten 42 mpg instead, and driven better.
Politicians are not the ideal people to rely on, for predicting the correct path to the future.
If we could create a super light weight, smaller high capacity battery tomorrow, what will the safety profile look like for it? It will have a rather large energy density by definition.
It may not be a problem since weight-for-weight, a candle contains more energy than dynamite, it is just that dynamite releases its energy at a much faster rate than the candle.
I have to agree. There is no one technology more important now than energy storage. As for how close we are to a superbattery I wish I was as positive as you.
I hate conspiracy theories but if the breakthrough should ever come it will not be to the energy companies favour.
A superbattery would put too much power(please forgive corny joke)in the hands of the individual.
One minor comment - the US actually put 12 men 'on the moon' - 2 each from Apollo 11, 12, 14, 15, 16, and 17. No one can deny the benefits to mankind from the US space program and the resulting technology bonanza that surrounds each of us today. Investment in R&D, and its resulting applied science, has the power to free all of us from the economic and political chains which current bind us.
If America can really do it ( make an affordable Super Battery) then it will prove to the world that it is not just a military super power but also an Innovation leader. Such technology will really a boon that can create an alternative to the oil.
As we unveil EE Times’ 2015 Silicon 60 list, journalist & Silicon 60 researcher Peter Clarke hosts a conversation on startups in the electronics industry. Panelists Dan Armbrust (investment firm Silicon Catalyst), Andrew Kau (venture capital firm Walden International), and Stan Boland (successful serial entrepreneur, former CEO of Neul, Icera) join in the live debate.