To underscore the magnitude of the energy density problem a kilogram of lead-acid battery can store 0.1 megajoules whereas a kg of diesel provides 45 MJ or over 12 kilowatt hours. That's a factor of 450 times. The question is what if the promised battery breakthrough by 2015 doesn't eventuate? The methanol fuel cell may work for lap tops but so far not for cheap reliable cars. I suggest with current generation plug-in hybrid cars (PHEVs) the people who can afford them are well heeled and live close to work. The night shift worker in the outer suburbs will have to pay the going rate for hydrocarbon fuels.

With stationary applications such as solar the main consideration is cost not bulk and weight. The benchmark set by lead-acid batteries is about $200 per kilowatt hour. In nonvolcanic Australia I wouldn't rely on geothermal to provide complementary baseload power to battery stored wind or solar. I suggest as an alternative to the non advent of super batteries that we immediately consider switching heavy vehicles (buses and trucks) to compressed natural gas (CNG). With that experience under our belt if super batteries don't materialise we could then put private cars on gas. At current global oil depletion rates this will become critical by 2015.

Taswegian, 200Km's is not an unreasonable distance to get out of a battery powered car. It is an unusual person that lives 100Km from work.

That said, the article seems to be over the top. Currently batteries suffer from two problems - low power density and and the limited number of recharge cycles. The low power density means they can't be used for transport, tractors, taxies - in fact just about anything except personal commuting. The limited number of recharge cycles means their capital cost over their lifetime is equivalent to petrol at $2/litre, and this is before you start paying for electricity you put in them.

It looks to me like we will solve the lifetime problem - there are batteries around now that claim 40,000 cycles. Despite what the article says, the low power density problem seems intractable for now - the articles claims to the contrary notwithstanding.

And as for the fast charge times the article touts so highly - I can't see how it matters. A fast recharge would be nice in a laptop - but the future of the world doesn't seem to be too dependant on that. It would be wonderful in a car battery - but it is unlikely we will ever have a power grid that could deliver the burst of power needed to charge a car in a few minutes.

Taswegian might be getting confused with better performing batteries and methanol fuel cells. Australia does have residual volcanic heat which is being used to produce electricity but, far more importantly, it has the largest deposits of the most accessible and the hottest granites in the world with capacity to meet our base power needs. A useful site is http://www.geodynamics.com.au I certainly think that by 2015 a significant amount of pollution free electricity will be generated from this source.

rstuart comments are quite right when talking of lead acid batteries but lithium-ion phosphate batteries provide much more efficient storage. Application of MIT technology has been shown to increase their storage capacity by a factor of 10 as described at http://news.google.com.au/news?pz=1&ned=au&nclsd/64Y8us66nk-M Nano-technology achieves similar improvement by covering the cathode with silicon tubes vastly increasing ion storage. The national grid can provide the power but you rightly point out that we do not have the cables able to handle rapid charge of vehicle batteries at a plug-in point but they will come with availability of enhanced batteries. Over the top? Maybe.

Mike,

Your google news link doesn't for for me, it just displays the latest stories. Given it is a MIT development, you are probably referring to this:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nanowire_battery

However, if you look at the article, only 1/2 the problem is solved. In order to improve the battery capacity, you need a similar breakthrough for the cathode.

There is no doubt battery technology is moving along. By my calculations battery driven cars become cost effective when petrol hits $2..$3 per litre range, which it will obviously do soon if we continue to derive it from petroleum. The problem for batteries is petrol/diesel can also be made from coal and natural gas, and at a dammed sight less than $2 per litre.

rstuart is right. The cited URL does not work but a reasonable description of what I am on about is provided at http://mb.com.ph/articles/200094/mit-develops-quickcharge-battery

Mike,

I don't see any reference in that URL to MIT increasing the battery storage capacity. In fact it says: "The new research doesn’t address one of the biggest problems in batteries - how to fit more energy storage into a smaller, lighter battery".

Also, the MIT development isn't unique. Consider this:

http://www.autobloggreen.com/2007/05/07/autobloggreen-qanda-altairnano-ceo-alan-gotcher/

These batteries have about 30% less energy density than conventional Li Ion, but as you can see from the article they are superior in every other way. This includes charging as fast as the MIT batteries. Although they don't say so directly, they must be unbelievably efficient as well - as in the energy you put in equals the energy you get out. I say that because they claim they don't need any cooling - despite having 40Kwh pushed into them in 10 minutes.

If you look on their Wikipedia talk page, you see they are currently building these batteries for around $1 per watt hour. And what is more this cost has halved over the past 24 months, and is expected to halve again in the next 24 months.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:Altairnano

So you would expect this company to be wildly successful, yes? Well, they aren't, yet anyway:

http://systemagicmotives.com/Altairnative%20Site/Audio%20File%20Transcripts/Q4%202008%20Confernce%20Call.htm

To me that means whatever the sweet spot is for batteries, they have not hit it. Since they are operating at the bleeding edge, I'd say that means we are a little way away yet.