Loading ...
Sorry, an error occurred while loading the content.

batteries... Re: [usa-tesla] Re: Tesla's earthquake machine

Expand Messages
  • dave pierson
    ... Largely concur, tho learning is sometimes not easy. Its easy to learn the unfactual, sometimes hard to unlearn. ... Edison cells used to be a commercial
    Message 1 of 15 , Sep 8, 2011
    • 0 Attachment
      > > > People should be experimenting with his Resonant Transformer
      > > > technology and coupling that with amorphous silicon solar panel
      > > > technology, NiFe storage battery technology

      > > Otherwise known as the Edison Cell....

      > Right. But the true identity of the inventor aside, point is that I,
      > like many others I suspect, have an interest in Tesla. I do not have
      > an obsession with Tesla. I've been courting something, most people
      > call it "a real life" and it takes up a lot of time. I have to pick
      > and choose which projects I apply myself to. Even then, I'm not always
      > interested in arguments with the resident engineers. They mean well,
      > but can be too vociferous in debunking what they correctly or not see
      > as crackpot science. Do not misunderstand: I think the bunk and hokum
      > should be identified as such but, if it only takes a fly swatter to
      > swat a fly then those bringing sledgehammers to bear should consider
      > the use of the different tool. Let those experimenters learn the hard
      > way a few times, don't chase them away by insisting that you are
      > correct, straight down the line.
      Largely concur, tho learning is sometimes not easy.
      Its easy to 'learn' the unfactual, sometimes hard to
      unlearn.

      > Truth be told, I think I can put a bank of Edison Cell storage
      > batteries to good use - and for significantly less than what an
      > equivalent bank of lead-acid storage cells would cost. If I can
      > work out the construction details.
      Edison cells used to be a commercial item. That they are
      not common implies to me that there may be a reason NiFe cells
      are not used. Cost is one angle. Environmental, another
      (lead...). Efficiency is a little mentioned one: how much
      of the power/energy put in can be got back? (Its not easy
      to characterize: for any system it varies with
      charge/discharge rate.) And temperature influences.

      Simplistic, perhaps, but my view is: if NiFe were
      'generally useful' it would be generally used. (That
      said, and i'm off into speculation land: Seems to me
      that NiCd (and relatives: Li, etc) are chemically
      Real Similar to NiFe (hydroxide electrolyte...).
      It may be the ubiquitous NiCd 'is' the 'useful' form
      of NiFe. I'M HANDWAVING. 8)>> I said 'may'. (Yes:
      tho not common in consumer use 'wet' NiCd's exist.))

      best
      dwp
    • McGalliard, Frederick B
      Since you mentioned it. I suspect that the overall reason for no modern usage is the massive nation wide grid. This lets us drop power plants in and out with
      Message 2 of 15 , Sep 8, 2011
      • 0 Attachment
        Since you mentioned it. I suspect that the overall reason for no modern usage is the massive nation wide grid. This lets us drop power plants in and out with very fine control over the totals. With hydro power, hydro storage, and many relatively small natural gas powered steam plants ready to drop in and fill, the very very large ni-fe cell is likely just too expensive for it's storage capability.


        From: usa-tesla@yahoogroups.com [mailto:usa-tesla@yahoogroups.com] On Behalf Of dave pierson
        Sent: Thursday, September 08, 2011 8:49 AM
        To: usa-tesla@yahoogroups.com
        Subject: batteries... Re: [usa-tesla] Re: Tesla's earthquake machine

         

        > > > People should be experimenting with his Resonant

        Transformer
        > > > technology and coupling that with amorphous
        silicon solar panel
        > > > technology, NiFe storage battery
        technology

        > > Otherwise known as the Edison Cell....

        >
        Right. But the true identity of the inventor aside, point is that I,
        >
        like many others I suspect, have an interest in Tesla. I do not have
        > an
        obsession with Tesla. I've been courting something, most people
        > call it
        "a real life" and it takes up a lot of time. I have to pick
        > and choose
        which projects I apply myself to. Even then, I'm not always
        > interested
        in arguments with the resident engineers. They mean well,
        > but can be too
        vociferous in debunking what they correctly or not see
        > as crackpot
        science. Do not misunderstand: I think the bunk and hokum
        > should be
        identified as such but, if it only takes a fly swatter to
        > swat a fly
        then those bringing sledgehammers to bear should consider
        > the use of the
        different tool. Let those experimenters learn the hard
        > way a few times,
        don't chase them away by insisting that you are
        > correct, straight down
        the line.
        Largely concur, tho learning is sometimes not easy.
        Its easy to 'learn' the unfactual, sometimes hard to
        unlearn.

        > Truth be told,
        I think I can put a bank of Edison Cell storage
        > batteries to good use -
        and for significantly less than what an
        > equivalent bank of lead-acid
        storage cells would cost. If I can
        > work out the construction
        details.
        Edison cells used to be a commercial item. That they are
        not common implies to me that there may be a reason NiFe cells
        are not used. Cost is one angle. Environmental, another
        (lead...). Efficiency is a little mentioned one: how much
        of the power/energy put in can be got back? (Its not easy
        to characterize: for any system it varies with
        charge/discharge rate.) And temperature influences.

        Simplistic, perhaps, but my view is: if NiFe were
        'generally useful' it would be generally used. (That
        said, and i'm off into speculation land: Seems to me
        that NiCd (and relatives: Li, etc) are chemically
        Real Similar to NiFe (hydroxide electrolyte...).
        It may be the ubiquitous NiCd 'is' the 'useful' form
        of NiFe. I'M HANDWAVING. 8)>> I said 'may'. (Yes:
        tho not common in consumer use 'wet' NiCd's exist.))

        best
        dwp
      • Reese
        ... I m told that the railroads still use them extensively. There are some differences in operating characteristics but nothing that cannot be accommodated in
        Message 3 of 15 , Sep 8, 2011
        • 0 Attachment
          At 11:49 08 09 11, dave pierson wrote:

          > Simplistic, perhaps, but my view is: if NiFe were
          > 'generally useful' it would be generally used.

          I'm told that the railroads still use them extensively. There are
          some differences in operating characteristics but nothing that
          cannot be accommodated in a storage cell.

          Reese
        • Reese
          ... It is less efficient, storing about 1.2 volts per cell versus the 1.6 IIRC with a lead-acid battery (was it 2.1?). That difference in efficiency is enough
          Message 4 of 15 , Sep 8, 2011
          • 0 Attachment
            At 12:39 08 09 11, McGalliard, Frederick B wrote:


            Since you mentioned it. I suspect that the overall reason for no modern usage is the massive nation wide grid. This lets us drop power plants in and out with very fine control over the totals. With hydro power, hydro storage, and many relatively small natural gas powered steam plants ready to drop in and fill, the very very large ni-fe cell is likely just too expensive for it's storage capability.


            It is less efficient, storing about 1.2 volts per cell versus the 1.6 IIRC with a lead-acid battery (was it 2.1?). That difference in efficiency is enough to explain why some favor the lead-acid battery instead, it's only when peculiar circumstances warrant that Edison Cells are preferred to lead-acid. For my own case, my out-of-pocket cost is a factor. If I can make a bank of Edison Cells for a fraction of what lead-acids would cost, that's all I need to know.

            Reese
          • Khem Caigan
            ... Actually, interest in (as well as use of) NiFe batteries is /increasing/ in recent times. Currently, they are readily available, and they are
            Message 5 of 15 , Sep 8, 2011
            • 0 Attachment
              Fred McGalliard doth schreibble :
              >
              >
              > Since you mentioned it. I suspect that the overall reason for no modern
              > usage is the massive nation wide grid. This lets us drop power plants in
              > and out with very fine control over the totals. With hydro power, hydro
              > storage, and many relatively small natural gas powered steam plants
              > ready to drop in and fill, the very very large ni-fe cell is likely just
              > too expensive for it's storage capability.

              Actually, interest in (as well as use of) NiFe batteries is
              /increasing/ in recent times. Currently, they are readily
              available, and they are extraordinarily durable [good for
              20+ years].

              Here are just a few corroboratory and informative links:

              *Lifetime Nickel-Iron Battery*
              http://www.zappworks.com/nife.htm

              *Solar Panel Store Forum: NiFe Batteries*
              @...
              http://tinyurl.com/3ssmguc

              *NiFe - PV power system component sizing*
              @...
              http://tinyurl.com/3zpo3hh

              *Edison Batteries*
              @SolarPanelTalk
              http://tinyurl.com/3cnuoql

              *Nickel-Iron Batteries*
              @...
              http://tinyurl.com/yzdlufb

              Cors in Manu Domine,


              ~ Khem Caigan
              <Khem@...>

              " Ships and sails proper for the heavenly air
              should be fashioned. Then there will also be
              people, who do not shrink from the vastness
              of space. "

              ~ Johannes Kepler, letter to Galileo Galilei,
              1609.
            • McGalliard, Frederick B
              I thought they have a higher self discharge than the lead acids, too. Not much of an issue if you are using the energy pretty close to the time you are storing
              Message 6 of 15 , Sep 8, 2011
              • 0 Attachment
                I thought they have a higher self discharge than the lead acids, too. Not much of an issue if you are using the energy pretty close to the time you are storing it (weeks perhaps?). Isn't their electrolyte potassium hydroxide? But it should be great for leveling a household solar array.


                From: usa-tesla@yahoogroups.com [mailto:usa-tesla@yahoogroups.com] On Behalf Of Reese
                Sent: Thursday, September 08, 2011 11:21 AM
                To: usa-tesla@yahoogroups.com
                Subject: RE: batteries... Re: [usa-tesla] Re: Tesla's earthquake machine

                 

                At 12:39 08 09 11, McGalliard, Frederick B wrote:


                Since you mentioned it. I suspect that the overall reason for no modern usage is the massive nation wide grid. This lets us drop power plants in and out with very fine control over the totals. With hydro power, hydro storage, and many relatively small natural gas powered steam plants ready to drop in and fill, the very very large ni-fe cell is likely just too expensive for it's storage capability.


                It is less efficient, storing about 1.2 volts per cell versus the 1.6 IIRC with a lead-acid battery (was it 2.1?). That difference in efficiency is enough to explain why some favor the lead-acid battery instead, it's only when peculiar circumstances warrant that Edison Cells are preferred to lead-acid. For my own case, my out-of-pocket cost is a factor. If I can make a bank of Edison Cells for a fraction of what lead-acids would cost, that's all I need to know.

                Reese

              • Reese
                ... I hadn t heard about a higher self-discharge rate, but that doesn t surprise me really. I think either KOH or NaOH, it was certainly a base and not an
                Message 7 of 15 , Sep 8, 2011
                • 0 Attachment
                  At 14:33 08 09 11, McGalliard, Frederick B wrote:


                  >I thought they have a higher self discharge than the lead acids,
                  >too. Not much of an issue if you are using the energy pretty close
                  >to the time you are storing it (weeks perhaps?). Isn't their
                  >electrolyte potassium hydroxide? But it should be great for leveling
                  >a household solar array.


                  I hadn't heard about a higher self-discharge rate, but that doesn't
                  surprise me really. I think either KOH or NaOH, it was certainly a
                  base and not an acid. I'm just now getting into a position where I
                  can have a shop in which I could make the things, I'll worry about
                  the actual design and costs once the shop is a reality. To balance
                  out a solar array or maybe, a wind turbine. Dunno yet, the turbine
                  would be more fun to build, the solar panels less fun to buy.

                  Reese
                • Khem Caigan
                  ... Actually, interest in (as well as use of) NiFe batteries is /increasing/ in recent times. Currently, they are readily available, and they are
                  Message 8 of 15 , Sep 8, 2011
                  • 0 Attachment
                    Fred McGalliard doth schreibble :
                    >
                    >
                    > Since you mentioned it. I suspect that the overall reason for no modern
                    > usage is the massive nation wide grid. This lets us drop power plants in
                    > and out with very fine control over the totals. With hydro power, hydro
                    > storage, and many relatively small natural gas powered steam plants
                    > ready to drop in and fill, the very very large ni-fe cell is likely just
                    > too expensive for it's storage capability.

                    Actually, interest in (as well as use of) NiFe batteries is
                    /increasing/ in recent times. Currently, they are readily
                    available, and they are extraordinarily durable [good for
                    20+ years].

                    Here are just a few corroboratory and informative links:

                    *Lifetime Nickel-Iron Battery*
                    http://www.zappworks.com/nife.htm

                    *Solar Panel Store Forum: NiFe Batteries*
                    @...
                    http://tinyurl.com/3ssmguc

                    *NiFe - PV power system component sizing*
                    @...
                    http://tinyurl.com/3zpo3hh

                    *Edison Batteries*
                    @SolarPanelTalk
                    http://tinyurl.com/3cnuoql

                    *Nickel-Iron Batteries*
                    @...
                    http://tinyurl.com/yzdlufb

                    Cors in Manu Domine,


                    ~ Khem Caigan
                    <Khem@...>

                    " Ships and sails proper for the heavenly air
                    should be fashioned. Then there will also be
                    people, who do not shrink from the vastness
                    of space. "

                    ~ Johannes Kepler, letter to Galileo Galilei,
                    1609.
                  • Michael Riversong Education
                    At the Philadelphia Tesla Days conference, Michael Manning and others described a number of battery technologies. One of the most efficient types is NiMH --
                    Message 9 of 15 , Sep 10, 2011
                    • 0 Attachment
                      At the Philadelphia Tesla Days conference, Michael Manning and others described a number of battery technologies. One of the most efficient types is NiMH -- Nickel Metal Hydride. They were used in some of the electric cars made during the 90s -- mostly the ones put out by major manufacturers that were leased and then crushed. Unfortunately in a complex business deal, the Chevron/Texaco oil company now owns the patent. They are not manufacturing, not allowing anyone else to manufacture, and also not allowing any further research.

                      Not a drop of Chevron gas will ever go into my tank!

                      -----Original Message-----

                      From: Khem Caigan

                      Sent: Sep 8, 2011 1:01 PM

                      To: USA Tesla List

                      Subject: RE: batteries... Re: [usa-tesla] Re: Tesla's earthquake machine

                      Fred McGalliard doth schreibble :

                      > Since you mentioned it. I suspect that the overall reason for no modern

                      > usage is the massive nation wide grid. This lets us drop power plants in

                      > and out with very fine control over the totals. With hydro power, hydro

                      > storage, and many relatively small natural gas powered steam plants

                      > ready to drop in and fill, the very very large ni-fe cell is likely just

                      > too expensive for it's storage capability.



                      Actually, interest in (as well as use of) NiFe batteries is

                      /increasing/ in recent times. Currently, they are readily

                      available, and they are extraordinarily durable [good for

                      20+ years].



                      Here are just a few corroboratory and informative links:



                      *Lifetime Nickel-Iron Battery*

                      http://www.zappworks.com/nife.htm



                      *Solar Panel Store Forum: NiFe Batteries*

                      @...

                      http://tinyurl.com/3ssmguc



                      *NiFe - PV power system component sizing*

                      @...

                      http://tinyurl.com/3zpo3hh



                      *Edison Batteries*

                      @SolarPanelTalk

                      http://tinyurl.com/3cnuoql



                      *Nickel-Iron Batteries*

                      @...

                      http://tinyurl.com/yzdlufb



                      Cors in Manu Domine,



                      ~ Khem Caigan

                      <Khem@...>



                      " Ships and sails proper for the heavenly air

                      should be fashioned. Then there will also be

                      people, who do not shrink from the vastness

                      of space. "



                      ~ Johannes Kepler, letter to Galileo Galilei,

                      1609.









                      -- Michael Riversong
                      Tesla Academy
                      Fort Collins, Colorado
                      www.teslaacademy.info
                      rivedu@...
                    • Ed Phillips
                      I m not sure where you got that idea but it s dead wrong - NiMH cells are pretty much replacing NiCad cells and very widely available.
                      Message 10 of 15 , Sep 10, 2011
                      • 0 Attachment
                            I'm not sure where you got that idea but it's dead wrong - NiMH cells are pretty much replacing NiCad cells and very widely available. 

                        http://www.onlybatteries.com/?cat1=14&sid=goog-nimh-battery&gclid=CJzsxLSllKsCFSBCgwod8wjOtA

                        http://www.batteryspace.com/ni-mhbatteries.aspx

                        http://www.all-battery.com/ni-mhbatteries.aspx

                        http://www.onlybatteries.com/

                        http://www.amazon.com/Energizer-Rechargeable-NiMH-Batteries-8-Count/dp/B0002DUQCM

                        etc. etc. etc.

                         Ed

                        Michael Riversong Education wrote:
                         

                        At the Philadelphia Tesla Days conference, Michael Manning and others described a number of battery technologies. One of the most efficient types is NiMH -- Nickel Metal Hydride. They were used in some of the electric cars made during the 90s -- mostly the ones put out by major manufacturers that were leased and then crushed. Unfortunately in a complex business deal, the Chevron/Texaco oil company now owns the patent. They are not manufacturing, not allowing anyone else to manufacture, and also not allowing any further research.

                        Not a drop of Chevron gas will ever go into my tank!

                      • dave pierson
                        ... happens i m a railfan, and an EE. Older RR tech magazines, etc, ( I collect) Include NiFe, Current ones, not that I ve noticed. Most notable distinction
                        Message 11 of 15 , Sep 11, 2011
                        • 0 Attachment
                          > > Simplistic, perhaps, but my view is: if NiFe were
                          > > 'generally useful' it would be generally used.
                          >
                          > I'm told that the railroads still use them extensively. There are
                          > some differences in operating characteristics but nothing that
                          > cannot be accommodated in a storage cell.
                          happens i'm a railfan, and an EE. Older RR
                          tech magazines, etc, ( I collect) Include
                          NiFe, Current ones, not that I've noticed.

                          Most notable distinction is fundamentally
                          lower voltage for NiFe: 1.2 as compared to
                          2.2 for Lead. More cells can be used, however
                          added complexity, etc...

                          A casual glance at Wiki mentions higher cost,
                          poor charge retention, low charge per volume.
                          Obviously that would want checking. 8)>>

                          best
                          dwp
                        • Ed Phillips
                          Probably correct. The only advantage I can see is their very long life and reliability. Problems include low initial voltage and relatively high internal
                          Message 12 of 15 , Sep 11, 2011
                          • 0 Attachment
                            Probably correct.  The only advantage I can see is their very long life and reliability.  Problems include low initial voltage and relatively high internal resistance.  I used to have a string of 12 which came from a Pacific Electric Compan 'Red Car [streetcar]' about 1940.  It was sitting behind the garage of a friend of mine for about 20 years and then he gave it to me.  The thing still was operative but eventually a couple of the cases corroded and leaked and I pitched it because regular 12V lead acid batteries gave better performance.  In looking for info on the web I find that they seem to be much higher in price than equivalent lead acid cells designed for the same use and would really like to know more about modern operational experience.

                            dave pierson wrote:
                             


                            > > Simplistic, perhaps, but my view is: if NiFe were
                            > > 'generally useful' it would be generally used.
                            >
                            > I'm told that the railroads still use them extensively. There are
                            > some differences in operating characteristics but nothing that
                            > cannot be accommodated in a storage cell.
                            happens i'm a railfan, and an EE. Older RR
                            tech magazines, etc, ( I collect) Include
                            NiFe, Current ones, not that I've noticed.

                            Most notable distinction is fundamentally
                            lower voltage for NiFe: 1.2 as compared to
                            2.2 for Lead. More cells can be used, however
                            added complexity, etc...

                            A casual glance at Wiki mentions higher cost,
                            poor charge retention, low charge per volume.
                            Obviously that would want checking. 8)>>

                            best
                            dwp

                          • lawrence rayburn
                            Edison batteries are NOT Tesla technology....BUT, you can feed such batteries pulsed DC through a Tesla Coil and stimulate the batteries to greater output and
                            Message 13 of 15 , Sep 12, 2011
                            • 0 Attachment
                              Edison batteries are NOT Tesla technology....BUT, you can feed such batteries
                              pulsed DC through a Tesla Coil and stimulate the batteries to greater output and
                              longevity. 
                               
                            • McGalliard, Frederick B
                              Odd that the price would be higher. Nickel, Iron, and potassium hydroxide, are not expensive chemicals. The plate construction is not as complex as that of
                              Message 14 of 15 , Sep 12, 2011
                              • 0 Attachment
                                Odd that the price would be higher. Nickel, Iron, and potassium hydroxide, are not expensive chemicals. The plate construction is not as complex as that of lead batteries, as I recall anyway. Could it be just because the production volume is so much higher for the lead?


                                From: usa-tesla@yahoogroups.com [mailto:usa-tesla@yahoogroups.com] On Behalf Of Ed Phillips
                                Sent: Sunday, September 11, 2011 11:16 AM
                                To: usa-tesla@yahoogroups.com
                                Subject: Re: batteries... Re: [usa-tesla] Re: Tesla's earthquake machine

                                 

                                Probably correct.  The only advantage I can see is their very long life and reliability.  Problems include low initial voltage and relatively high internal resistance.  I used to have a string of 12 which came from a Pacific Electric Compan 'Red Car [streetcar]' about 1940.  It was sitting behind the garage of a friend of mine for about 20 years and then he gave it to me.  The thing still was operative but eventually a couple of the cases corroded and leaked and I pitched it because regular 12V lead acid batteries gave better performance.  In looking for info on the web I find that they seem to be much higher in price than equivalent lead acid cells designed for the same use and would really like to know more about modern operational experience.

                                dave pierson wrote:

                                 


                                > > Simplistic, perhaps, but my view is: if NiFe were
                                > > 'generally useful' it would be generally used.
                                >
                                > I'm told that the railroads still use them extensively. There are
                                > some differences in operating characteristics but nothing that
                                > cannot be accommodated in a storage cell.
                                happens i'm a railfan, and an EE. Older RR
                                tech magazines, etc, ( I collect) Include
                                NiFe, Current ones, not that I've noticed.

                                Most notable distinction is fundamentally
                                lower voltage for NiFe: 1.2 as compared to
                                2.2 for Lead. More cells can be used, however
                                added complexity, etc...

                                A casual glance at Wiki mentions higher cost,
                                poor charge retention, low charge per volume.
                                Obviously that would want checking. 8)>>

                                best
                                dwp

                              • Ed Phillips
                                I suspect low volume is indeed the final price driver but the other factors are probably primary.
                                Message 15 of 15 , Sep 12, 2011
                                • 0 Attachment
                                  I suspect low volume is indeed the final price driver but the other factors are probably primary.

                                  McGalliard, Frederick B wrote:
                                   

                                  Odd that the price would be higher. Nickel, Iron, and potassium hydroxide, are not expensive chemicals. The plate construction is not as complex as that of lead batteries, as I recall anyway. Could it be just because the production volume is so much higher for the lead?


                                  From: usa-tesla@yahoogroups.com [mailto:usa-tesla@yahoogroups.com] On Behalf Of Ed Phillips
                                  Sent: Sunday, September 11, 2011 11:16 AM
                                  To: usa-tesla@yahoogroups.com
                                  Subject: Re: batteries... Re: [usa-tesla] Re: Tesla's earthquake machine

                                   

                                  Probably correct.  The only advantage I can see is their very long life and reliability.  Problems include low initial voltage and relatively high internal resistance.  I used to have a string of 12 which came from a Pacific Electric Compan 'Red Car [streetcar]' about 1940.  It was sitting behind the garage of a friend of mine for about 20 years and then he gave it to me.  The thing still was operative but eventually a couple of the cases corroded and leaked and I pitched it because regular 12V lead acid batteries gave better performance.  In looking for info on the web I find that they seem to be much higher in price than equivalent lead acid cells designed for the same use and would really like to know more about modern operational experience.

                                  dave pierson wrote:

                                   


                                  > > Simplistic, perhaps, but my view is: if NiFe were
                                  > > 'generally useful' it would be generally used.
                                  >
                                  > I'm told that the railroads still use them extensively. There are
                                  > some differences in operating characteristics but nothing that
                                  > cannot be accommodated in a storage cell.
                                  happens i'm a railfan, and an EE. Older RR
                                  tech magazines, etc, ( I collect) Include
                                  NiFe, Current ones, not that I've noticed.

                                  Most notable distinction is fundamentally
                                  lower voltage for NiFe: 1.2 as compared to
                                  2.2 for Lead. More cells can be used, however
                                  added complexity, etc...

                                  A casual glance at Wiki mentions higher cost,
                                  poor charge retention, low charge per volume.
                                  Obviously that would want checking. 8)>>

                                  best
                                  dwp

                                Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.