Yeah.. didn't hear anything that would convince me it's actually real, more lab stats. Felt pretty wishy-washy for a Munro video 😒

Cost isn't such an issue if graphite became inaccessible to the global market because China cut off supply or due to political issues limiting trade.

It’s difficult to accept when the “fake it to you make it” strategy has been overused in this “pump and dump” tech world.

Exactly.

I used to follow battery technology like a hawk and would get so excited. Then I realized that it’s relatively easy to produce a better battery in a lab, and that the hardest part of new battery tech is to scale it up and provide high cycles in real world conditions. I hope this one succeeds but it sounds very similar to many other breakthroughs that came before it. I guess it’s better than a professor in a lab announcing it at least (which generally means that it’s likely never going to become commercialized and is probably being announced to secure additional research funding).

400Wh/kg is beginning to make its way into production (still very expensive). I think a decade from now, 300Wh/kg - 350Wh/kg will be common place.

Aircraft grade today . Car in future ( Sandy mentioned the VTOL here)

This is aerospace

yeah, but when its at munro its more promising. Charging / discharging speeds? Ageging and so on...

@@OldSkoolUncleChris This would be great for stationary storage as well. Smaller footprint for the same capacity.

and cost per kWh

No you didn't, he literally said nothing. More pipe dreams as far as I can tell, not what I'm used to from Munro..

@@PhiTonics Makes you wonder if this was a sponsored presentation

Adding resin to hold together silicon likely increases internal resistance, which means less power density, not good for cars. Also likely significant cost penalty due to complex mfg process.

Cycle life won't matter for certain applications. Think rocket steering, etc.

This can change so many markets. It's insane to think about.

This is great news for us, second life battery people: maybe good cells will flood the market and we can build our home energy storage devices even cheaper!

The cost will be more than you are expecting. 5GWh is so small it will be super niche.

@@LithiumBatteryGuy absolutely. But I'm thinking huge step for electric airplanes

@@LithiumBatteryGuy If it works, there's going to be plenty of capital to build out more capacity. They will initially target the highest-margin applications - aviation and other niche stuff - but that's likely just the beginning if the tech is as good as they claim it is.

It would be interesting to know how many things mentioned, such as this beta product, VinFast, Zeta, etc. made payments to get space on Munro Live. I know Munro Live isn’t a charity and I’m fine with sponsorships to get products mentioned provided we know that. There’s difference between “I found out about this cool product and I want you to know,” and “The maker of this product says it is cool and paid me to tell you that.”

Always sounding like a sales pitch,and everything is brilliant,and impressive...shill is another term. And maybe one day munro dudes are in trouble with sec or other entities for insider trading? Or stock manipulation.

But if it costs 2x as much per kWh, your math falls apart. The battery will weigh less, but will cost much much more. This would still be a great application for ultra range vehicles and aircraft, despite the cost

@@gemini86 the optimist in me would hope for 2x cost per cell, as 2x per kwh would mean each cell would be 4x more expensive than traditional cells. Hopefully they can make it price competitive at mass scale.

@@gemini86 With a smaller battery you can offset some of that cost, as the pack will be cheaper, and you can use less aluminum/composites in the car generally to hit reasonable curb weights.

They said it will cost about 600$ per kilogramm, lithium is 42$ per kilo, please forget the 2x dream, welcome the x14 reality

same capacity Less weight mean more range . Am I right ?

Hopefully we can go take a look! Thanks for watching!

​​@@MunroLivewon't you show the fans the rest of what the CaliforniaNazis is hiding? Get your little buddy at McDonnell Douglas to show us 🇺🇸 some breakthrough classified propulsion technologies 😅? Wtfe Who's got the iron man plasma reactor tech? I know one of your elitist dark lord bosses has it.

@@MunroLive so proof of concept: ✅ Proof of scale: ?? Proof of durability: ??

​@Munro Live its probably bs does mps the firm that did the testing even exist?

Just imagining that requirement being added by an upset general who's office built of surplus battery packs burnt down after he hung a picture of his favourite M4 Carbine on the wall with a nail.

@@DUIofPhysics I think it's just generally to test punctured batteries, but your storie is much more. Believable.

Challenge Accepted , captain HAMMER will test.

Whow that’s some increase, let’s hope it’s for the real world as that really does start to change everything.

Seems like a bad, committee-driven requirement. If i mad a battery with 5 times the density then it would be useful even if flammable.

Thanks for watching! Hopefully there will be more to come.

It's not up to Sandy, it's up to his CaliforniaCluxClan bosses 😅 as to what he gets to show and gets "briefed" on.

​@@MunroLive better be more to come, like I've been saying THOUSANDS of pages of declassified r and d reports going back to the 1950s from your California nazi buddies in aerospace and automotive proving you and Elon musk is blowing smoke up the publics azz, everything from high density next level battery technology, to high density hydrogen technologies to new exotic propulsion technologies. If you and your team don't know about these things it's because you are a compartmentalized tool and have no business being a youtube influencer. Tired of you guys gaslighting the public.

​@@MunroLiveI highly doubt sandy Munro knows much outside the number of bolts 🔩 on a 1984 Ford F150 because the truth is 99% of the "engineers" of these scum bag black budget corporations and companies are all compartmentalized and don't know much of anything outside of their own programmed positions but he obviously is in on the narrative of what the elite bring out to market and say. I'm sure their are a number of advanced battery and hydrogen technologies he knows about but isn't allowed to mention. It's a Shame, I thought the old man was human lol 😆 😂 😅 boy was I fooled It's funny to listen to Munro bring on old timer guests who are usually senior engineers inside these corporate public scam companies complain about how the "elite" would not allow any changes to the way things are built and done. Innovation was frowned upon. NO 👎 NO! you can't do that is what I've heard over and over and over from these guys. Why do you think that is? 😅behind the scenes they are funelling trillions into secret r and d of exotic propulsion and energy generation technologies. Who wants to give up that power, money and secret? Lol 😄 😆 you let the public monkey 🐒 engineers innovate 💡 too much they might figure all this out and we can't have that so we must make sure for the next 100 years we make one man pop rivet by hand 1000000000 different pieces of beer cans together we call 📞 a aircraft so they are too busy and programmed to think of anything else. 😉 It's a sad reality that even the people I'm supposed to look up to for mentorship, inspiration and integrity, I'm always finding out they aren't the people I thought they were. Very curious I wrote this on my own channel nearly 24 hrs before you dropped this video and wouldn't you know it... Ole sandy and the CaliforniaNazis decide to go balls to the wall 🙄 BREAKING NEWS AND BALLS 😅 with a new higher density battery chemistry ⚗ CaliforniaCluxClan can do better than 200% 😅but I'll take it, but I expect more "classified" energy storage and generation technologies to be rolled out, This secrecy of these technologies is RIDICULOUS Thanks Munro for further concreting my suspicions of you. Can't trust anybody can you?

Still this kind of high power low cycle life is perfect on military drones! Most of them are single use only.

@@AdlerMow - then primary cells, or other chemical energy sources have all the advantage, totally different use case, ie. not the rechargeable world - noting that the single use devices you mention are more in the arena of guided munitions, not true RPA/UA's.

Getting a CAR to last a million miles is MUCH harder. By the time you drive that many miles you've replace the vehicle at least once with all the parts replacements, probably at least one or two wrecks with today's driving and no not even driverless tech can get you out of every bad situation that other drivers create, so you've even replace body panels. I could care less about a one million mile battery pack because I'll NEVER get more than about 150,000 on a vehicle, except once in my life where I inherited a family vehicle from my brother who got it from my Dad and it made it up to about 200,000. So, if you have a battery pack that gets you 250,000 miles you've met the needs of probably 95% of the population and for the people who expect 1 million miles from a battery pack, WTH you driving now that will last 1 million miles? NOTHING.

@@johndoh5182 True, but we're talking about batteries. You can rebuild a car around a battery pack, just like any long lasting drivetrain.

@@johndoh5182 Ive driven a dozen vehicles past 1/4 million miles, its not hard

No the $64,000 question is how much more will u end up paying when the ev tax gets implemented...meanwhile I'm still rolling in my 80s and 90s jap cars STILL more reliable than anything in the last 10-15 years ..and since I'm not paying $64000 for a ev how much driving can I do for that ..I estimate 7-9 years of non stop driving for $64000

Scaling to levels the army can afford for larger vehicles is already a big step.

Only Army could afford to create a GPS space system. I think everyone can afford to use GPS now

@@UshankaShow A lot of technology which has civilian benefit was jump started by though military investment to achieve economy of scale. You won’t find me arguing against that. My question was how long is it going to take? In the case of GPS, it was almost 25 years from the beginnings of development until the civil sector had a fully useable product (When Clinton’s executive order decommissioned selective availability in 1999). I’m not sure exactly when the design decision was made, but it was pretty early in the development of GPS that it was decided to have both as coarse civil sector bit stream and a precision enciphered military bit stream. As a side note, the first civilian GPS receiver I owned was in the late 1980s, was expensive, took about 30 minutes to acquire satellite lock, and could be off by up to 1/4 mile randomly due to selective availability. The selective availability really messed up urban street use and even made GPS somewhat risky to rely upon for staying in a channel for maritime navigation. We’ve really come a long way for satellite assisted navigation in the last 35 years.

Not for another 30 years.

🤯

Hopefully not!

@@patreekotime4578 🤣🤣

re: "looking forward to the Lucid teardowns!" which ironically has already been done by CEO Peter Rawlinson himself.

not really, a 20 ton battery insetad of a 40 ton battery isnt really that relevant

400 is where large electric planes are feasible. 500 means long haul flights are coming much sooner than expected

@@thomasreese2816 sir, this is factually incorrect even for excavators, batteries are simply too big and take too long to recharge, hence hydrogen cells or hydrogen combustion is under development. JCB in the UK in in the advanced stages of testing Hydrogen ICE for their heavy machinery batteries have their limits, for electronics - sure, for small cars - it's already a stretch, imagine something bigger perhaps the overly optimist source you are quoting from refers to niche smaller planes (by calling them large they mean not 2 seater planes)

my BET is on Tesla HIGH NICKEL 4680 for Aircraft.

​@Stewie Griffin the real stewie would just retrofit all airports with antimatter power generators and 50 cable power inputs for plane batteries.

Sandy been honestly keeping most of you in the dark 😂

Maritime long range patrol will be habilitated by this.

That's what I expect within 3-5 year's from today. Top spec evs all over 500-600+ miles of rated range inc truck's and suvs. Smaller segments are focused on affordability to go with small pack's and 220-270 miles of range but just 8-10mins charging. The catl quilin pack claims up to 1000kms of range(cltc though so likely 800kms wltp and less for epa. Anyways what's astounding is a 70% charge of the 144.3kwh pack in 10mins. That's gonna take a 600kw charger and a sustained up to 6c charge rate. 😀👍🏻

@@4literv6 1000 Kms is 600 miles. Forget WLTP. EVs won't be 100% efficient so forget that range. 600KW charger isn't planned for with any EV charging infrastructure.

@@ScubaSteveCanada actually 480kw chargers exist in china since gac demonstrated them in summer 2021. 350+kw chargers have been widely available since 2021. 600kw Huawei chargers are going in right now in China further teslas v4 just started deploying in the EU at 1000v and over 600kw max. And the tesla semi takes 750kw right now from the Pepsi megachargers. Nice try though you poor misinformed little troll. 👍🏻😎

More likely they'll use fewer cells to get the sane range and faster charge times.

Well, these cells arent likely to be the path to cheaper anything.

and form factor

I thought someone else did the same thing but didn't tell anyone the cycle life sucked until their stocks went up. I think it was QuantumScape.

Hey you with the questions, you're harshing my vibe. Devil's always in the details.

@@banme2784 well that's the end of that. It was fun while it lasted.

Its hard to match lithium iron phosphate's 4000 charging cycles. I wonder if an independent lab has verified their claims.

@@greggmcclelland8430 It there a claim about Cycle life? I didn't hear it in this video.

@@TheKjelan 100 cycles ))))

SO, safety is not IMPORTANT ? you want USA jets Exploding mid air ?

You can forget about semis. That is a non-starter for perfectly legitimate reasons.

@@artysanmobile There are already electric Semis in the marketplace and they are doing fine although some have very low range right now, but its early days and range, weight, and charging will improve as the technology matures/evolves.

@@strykerace re: "There are already electric Semis in the marketplace" indeed, but hold onto that thought cause in 1 years time I want you to count how many there are in operation...? and then in 3 years time I want to do another count how many there are in operation...? and then in 5 years time I want you to COUNT AGAIN how many there are in operation...? turns out, the passage of time has a way a forcing people to "bump up against the hard wall of reality". because: SOBRIETY.

Glad you enjoyed it!

BIG OIL hate it....

Well, battery research is evolving quickly. Which is great. But what actually makes it into applications lags by 10 years or so... as it should.. we need to make sure batteries are safe and stable before putting them everywhere.

Problem is ramping to volume production. That's always the hard part and where most "breakthroughs" falter. This looks promising but I wouldn't get too excited yet.

No. That kind of range is just not needed in 90% of cases. Focus on small, compact, and light vehicles instead. 20KWh is PLENTY for typical daily usage. At that rate with this kind of density, EVs can actually be competitive with ICE vehicles on weight.

I remember when I was a kid everyone in school kept saying how we're going to run out of oil in 50 years and there will be a Global international catastrophe... Now it 40 years later turns out we may never run out of oil because there will be alternatives that will be cheaper and easier and more environmentally friendly in the next 10-30 years - for everything except for aircraft... Like you, until it comes into production I'm going to basically ignore it...

Only thing is sandy n team has some credibility here to know what he is talking about, not pnly in terms of the underlying science, but also the practicality of legit production at scale

The simple answer is more range than you had. Every vehicle has a figure of merit. Long ago I had a GM EV 1 for every sixty pounds of weight added or subtracted I gained or lost 1 mile of range. The basic physics hasn’t changed It take energy to accelerate mass Force = Mass X Acceleration. Once the mass is at speed on a flat straight road with no wind The energy required is just the energy to overcome friction. EVs today consume between 200-400 watt hours of power. Cars on the lighter/smaller size require fewer watt hours per mile. Using really rough arithmetic The mass of the car might go down by 20%. Force required to accelerate will be 20% lower. Friction loses will go down, but not by the 20% that the force required for a given acceleration does. Rolling resistance and other loses dominate below 60 miles per hour air resistance dominates above 60 miles an hour. If the The vehicle size and shape is unchanged then the air resistance will be unchanged. So range will improve by something less than 20%

Not so.

but they seem closer to production than QS do they not?

That and how it ages.

​@@pawpawbandit3871 and Enovix seems closer than Amprius. Who is first to market? Who knows better than Mr. Lithio

@@guidedbygreen1480 I'm betting it's Amprius but time will tell I guess; but probably not a lot of time - probably like a year or 18 months. The context clues and fact they're trying to build a plant asap, etc. I think they have a "real" producable, fly-able/ drivable battery. Also, the energy density is incredible, but seems realistic for the market for the near term, not like some company that was started last week and claims some incredible breakthrough

their website claims only the silicone anode is different. The rest of the battery is same old tech. So there is no insurmountable barrier into mass manufacturing

If it provides a feasibility function the entire aerospace sector needs and they licence the formula/design out to a separate veteran manufacturer (like say LG chem or Panasonic corp.) they could own a large portion of the battery market for not only aerospace but also wheeled EVs without needing the heavy investment on their end for production to meet demand.

Well said.

Why? Do you drive 500 miles between meals?

How often do people drive 800 miles NON-STOP?

@@mikafiltenborg7572 🤣👍👍

My last 2 gasoline vehicles had "ranges" of about 400-450 miles. The 2 before before that only got about 350 (I think gas tank sizes must have increased in the last 20 years because fuel economy was about the same on all of them). And unlike most of the armchair afficianados Ive actually timed myself taking rest stops on road trips. My average stop time for gas, snacks, and bathroom was about 30ish minutes... not the 5 minutes everyone SEEMS to think it takes. And at the minimum I have to stop for bathroom and snacks every 200 miles or so, and on longer road trips I get out and eat a sit down meal at least once. Theres a guy on KZfaq Bjorn Nyland who does 1000km road trips as fast as he can on just about every EV he can get a hold of, and for most of them he doesnt even eat a sit-down meal, usually he just chokes down a hotdog and hes off again. And it seems HIGHLY UNLIKELY that anyone will ever ship an EV with a 800 mile range. From a general engineering perspective its better to reduce the overall vehicle weight. Lighter batteries means the vehicle needs less structure to HOLD the batteries, less structure to meet safety requirements, less beefy suspension, less beefy brakes, smaller and cheaper tires etc. So the overall weight of vehicles would be reduced far more than just the savings on the battery pack weight.

After taking several 2000 vacations in an EV, range is very important. Charge stations don't exist everywhere yet. Tried to go to Big Bend NP in Texas and actually couldn't because of range in our Y. Don't forget these cars are sold in other countries that don't have the infrastructure.

no word on Formfactor Cylindrical, Prismatic or Pouch.

Reducing the battery cell weight by 50% will only decrease the vehicle weight by maybe 10-20% and increase the range by 5-10%, since the rolling resistance is usually only about 1/3-1/2 of the energy loss.

Weight doesn't have a big impact on range at the speeds cars travel. Rolling resistance is just a rounding error compared to wind resistance.

@@gasdive it's a big impact, it's probably roughly 10%; think about how big of an impact that is if you take 500M cars and drive them for 25 years

@@pawpawbandit3871 we can calculate that. A Model 3 pack weighs 450 kg. If batteries are 90% of the mass of the pack, that's 400 kg of batteries. If you cut that in half, that's 200 kg. Coefficient of rolling resistance for a good car tyre like the ones on electric cars is about 0.0062 200 kg x 9.8 is 1960N. 1960 x the CoRR 0.0062 = 12.152 N 12.52 x 1000 gives the energy used in 1 km 12152 J Divide by 3600 to get Wh. That's 3.755 Wh per km. For comparison a Model 3 is rated at 165 Wh/km, so about 2.2% decrease in consumption. The average driving distance in the USA is 13500 miles. Google tells me that's 21726 km. Multiply consumption by distance... So that's 73,337 Wh, or 73 kWh. About 7 dollars worth of electricity at off peak rates, about 30 dollars at a supercharger. So if you charge at superchargers, and the car lasts 25 years, you could save 750 dollars. 500 million cars (a bit over a third of all cars on earth) would use 36 TWh per year. That's equal to about 90 minutes of world energy consumption. Over 25 years that's 916 TWh. That's equal to just over a day and a half of world energy consumption over 25 years. Or a bit under 0.002% of world energy consumption. Not nothing. Not world changing. About like fitting wheel covers.

It looks good in the video for sure, would love to see that tested on a "more than 1 test cell" level

Agreed...no point having 1000k range if it takes 24h...no car sits for 24h.

Good for ICE to EV conversions.

These are a different chemistry. Do you mean producing the same size and shape as 4680?

@@georgesackinger2002 I mean I hope they use coated nanowire silicon cathodes with Lithium Iron Phosphate (or Lithium Manganese Iron Phosphate) chemistry. This should increase their battery cycle life from around 1000 cycles (currently) to over 3000 cycles.

Charging speeds should NOT be ramped up, the speeds these retarded chinese phone companies are doing is extremely unsafe and it blows my mind that samsung etc are following the trend

Also cycle life/degradation.

Did you watch? Did you listen?

^lmao, I see what you did there.^ 🤣

6:05, i clocked it.

re: "Always focus on what a battery company doesn't say about their product." ikr...? per the wisemen "the devil is in the details", and conspicuously the "details" are the FIRST THINGS to get left out of the discussion, yeah you can "set your watch by it". I guess the hope is that we will not only be ignorant about how Battery Science works...? but ALSO ignorant about how Language and Communication works (which sadly most are).