Smaller, Cheaper Flow Batteries Throw Out Decades-Old Designs

Re:Smaller, Cheaper Flow Batteries Throw Out Decades-Old Des... by Schroedingersat on Sunday January 29, 2023 @05:39AM (#34566863)

Trucks are weight limited with LFP, costs already favour electric even with NMC but the tradeoff is payload.

Trains maybe, but surely the money is better spent on overhead wire? Even if tunnels/bridges/etc. can't take it you're better with just the power-buffer battery and no flow battery.

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:Smaller, Cheaper Flow Batteries Throw Out Decades-Old Des... by m463 on Sunday January 29, 2023 @08:01AM (#34567694)

Isn't the costs and recurring costs of railroad infrastructure orders of magnitude larger?

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:Smaller, Cheaper Flow Batteries Throw Out Decades-Old Des... by Schroedingersat on Sunday January 29, 2023 @11:14PM (#34575710)

Full electrification is expensive, but overhead wires where it doesn't require rebuilding anything isn't.

And rail is far cheaper to operate once built per unit capacity than trucking. If you don't inflate it with endless feasibility studies and contracts that get paid regardless of output the initial building costs are about double a 4 lane highway, but it carries a lot more and maintenance is lower.

[ Parent | on HN ]