[HN Gopher] Researchers make a supercapacitor from water, cement...
       ___________________________________________________________________
        
       Researchers make a supercapacitor from water, cement, and carbon
       black
        
       Author : ranit
       Score  : 96 points
       Date   : 2024-06-11 10:55 UTC (1 days ago)
        
 (HTM) web link (www.bbc.com)
 (TXT) w3m dump (www.bbc.com)
        
       | jakelsaunders94 wrote:
       | I'm not sure if I've misread the article but it seemed unclear as
       | to whether the concrete needed to remain soaked in potassium
       | chloride? Surely keeping a whole foundation soaked indefinitely
       | would be impractical?
        
         | rini17 wrote:
         | Some electrolyte is certainly required for a supercapacitor.
         | Hopefully battery research(solid electrolytes) carries over so
         | that there will be no need for soaking concrete in corrosive
         | solution.
        
       | amarant wrote:
       | I don't want to be a naysayer, but I do have to wonder, are there
       | any risks associated with making the walls themselves store large
       | quantities of energy?
       | 
       | I'm thinking fire hazards or shorts associated with, say, hanging
       | a framed picture on the wall (or anything else that would involve
       | drilling in the concrete)
        
         | teraflop wrote:
         | I mean, one way to look at it is that the energy density of
         | this concrete supercapacitor, when fully charged, is about 4
         | orders of magnitude smaller than the chemical energy density of
         | wood.
         | 
         | So depending on the design, electrical shorts might be
         | something to worry about, but I have a hard time worrying about
         | it as a significant fire hazard when compared to all of the
         | other flammable things you might find in a house.
        
         | killingtime74 wrote:
         | 300 watt-hours per cubic meter is not large by any means. You
         | can get 300wh portable batteries and they are the size of a
         | loaf of bread, this is at least 1 magnitude bigger/less dense
        
         | kwhitefoot wrote:
         | It's only half the energy associated with raising the
         | temperature of the same mass of concrete by one kelvin.
        
       | kallistisoft wrote:
       | I'm happy this invention is still in the news cycle after the
       | initial announcement 10 months ago...
       | 
       | [0] https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=36958531
       | 
       | [1] https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=36993411
       | 
       | [2] https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=36951089
       | 
       | While I'm fairly dubious about the proposed dual-purpose
       | structural implementation of this material -- if this works at
       | scale it would be a boon for low cost DIY local energy storage in
       | the developing world and remote areas in other places.
       | 
       | The idea that someone with minimal education/training can
       | construct a durable electrical storage solution using commonly
       | available materials and techniques is an absolute game changer!!
        
         | westurner wrote:
         | - "Low-cost additive turns concrete slabs into super-fast
         | energy storage" (2023)
         | https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=36964735
        
       | imtringued wrote:
       | Why not use this for a way more obvious application such as
       | corrosion protection? You can then mix in the sacrificial anode
       | as a powder instead of having discrete anodes.
        
         | contingencies wrote:
         | At least in a nautical context, sacrificial anodes wear out
         | every few years and have to be swapped out for new material.
         | That will be impossible if the anode is embodied within the
         | material. But yeah, it probably has applications somewhere.
        
       | abdullahkhalids wrote:
       | > larger versions, including one up to 45 cubic metres (1,590
       | cubic feet) in size that would be able store around 10kWh of
       | energy needed to power to power a house for a day.
       | 
       | 45 cubic meter is a cube with side 3.56 meter. That is not large
       | at all. Especially, if it can be sunk into the ground. I assume
       | septic tanks are also about the same size.
       | 
       | Paper, if anyone interested:
       | https://www.pnas.org/doi/full/10.1073/pnas.2304318120?doi=10...
        
         | kwhitefoot wrote:
         | A septic tank is usually only a few thousand litre. In the UK a
         | house with a maximum occupancy of six would have a septic tank
         | capacity of about 3 000 litre, that is, 3 cubic metre. A cube
         | of just under 1.5 m on a side.
         | 
         | See https://www.ukseptictanks.co.uk/size-septic-tanks
        
         | idiotsecant wrote:
         | That is quite an expensive battery if you're just sinking it
         | into the ground as a cube, though. Concrete is pretty expensive
         | and I'm sure carbon black makes concrete look cheap.
         | 
         | I imagine the benefit would be if you can use it to build your
         | foundation and get energy storage for 'free' in which case
         | that's quite a lot of foundation.
        
       | abeppu wrote:
       | > For now, the concrete supercapacitor can store a little under
       | 300 watt-hours per cubic metre - enough to power a 10-watt LED
       | lightbulb for 30 hours.
       | 
       | > The power output "may seem low compared to conventional
       | batteries, [but] a foundation with 30-40 cubic metres
       | (1,060-1,410 cubic feet) of concrete could be sufficient to meet
       | the daily energy needs of a residential house", says Stefaniuk.
       | 
       | This made me suspicious, because it sounded too low. But it turns
       | out it's true ... for an average British home that's heavily
       | dependent on gas.
       | 
       | 40 m^3 * 300 watt-hours/m^3 = 12 kwh. I.e. 500 watts for a whole
       | day.
       | 
       | Apparently the average American residential electricity use is
       | 10,791 kwh/year, which is ~1,231 watts, whereas the average
       | British home is only 2,700 kwh/year which is ~308 watts. I had no
       | idea that the difference was so large.
       | 
       | https://www.eia.gov/tools/faqs/faq.php?id=97&t=3
       | 
       | https://www.britishgas.co.uk/energy/guides/average-bill.html
        
         | tombert wrote:
         | I'm saying this with no data, but could it be because energy is
         | just cheaper in the States? I have been using considerably less
         | electricity since moving to NYC, since the price-per-KWh is
         | about double what my costs were when I lived in Texas.
         | 
         | Also, I'd be curious how much of this could be due to electric
         | car usage increasing?
         | 
         | This of course is anecdata, but I think a large percentage of
         | it might come down to the fact that UK houses don't seem to run
         | AC nearly as much. I spent two weeks in York a few years ago,
         | during an extremely hot summer, and I was missing my AC very
         | very much.
        
           | dgacmu wrote:
           | Some quick checking:
           | 
           | Average (well, median) US house size: 2000 ft^2
           | 
           | Average UK house size: 68 m^2 = 740 ft^2
           | 
           | That makes for a very, very different HVAC bill.
           | 
           | Numbers vary a lot by source but the relationship (2x+ larger
           | in the US) holds. For example:
           | https://www.zigguratrealestate.ph/post/how-big-is-a-house-
           | av...
        
             | tombert wrote:
             | Yeah, that does not surprise me. The apartment I stayed at
             | in York was absolutely tiny. It was decent, and big enough
             | for one person, and it was pretty cheap, so I'm not
             | complaining really, but I've never seen an apartment that
             | small in the US.
             | 
             | Also there was just no HVAC there to begin with, so I guess
             | even less of an HVAC bill.
        
             | oersted wrote:
             | From my anecdotal experience, residential HVAC is fairly
             | uncommon in EU. Lived in northern Spain and Netherlands for
             | many years.
        
           | idiotsecant wrote:
           | There's lots of places in the US that don't have natural gas
           | infrastructure and do all heating electrically. The UK has a
           | much higher population density so services like natural gas
           | are more widely available, I'd guess with no evidence to back
           | that up.
        
             | londons_explore wrote:
             | In the UK, places without natural gas almost all use oil
             | for heating instead.
             | 
             | A small chunk of buildings built in the 60's use
             | electricity because we thought that would be cheap in a
             | post-nuclear world. We were wrong.
        
           | londons_explore wrote:
           | The big differences are:                 * UK requires
           | appliances to be eco friendly - that means for most
           | appliances they only take a quarter of the energy to do the
           | same job.   Dishwasher/washing machine/etc.            * UK
           | housing has really high insulation requirements for new
           | builds.   Your body heat will keep it warm most of the year.
           | They are starting to require retrofits for old buildings too.
           | * Widespread use of LED lighting and expensive electricity
           | * Smaller houses - less rooms etc.            * Tumble driers
           | aren't widespread (big energy user).            * Electric
           | water heating is rare (most houses use gas or oil).
           | * Air conditioning isn't widespread, despite the climate
           | kinda needing it in the middle of summer.
        
         | bitlevel wrote:
         | Simplest explaination - air conditioning - which isn't much
         | used in the UK.
        
         | mathsmath wrote:
         | Keep in mind that the UK is much smaller and has a colder
         | climate in general. If you look at a state like Colorado, the
         | energy usage is _vastly_ different than Florida or Texas with
         | lots of heat and humidity.
         | 
         | I would bet that the southern states skew the results quite a
         | bit for the entire USA.
        
           | salty_biscuits wrote:
           | Here in Australia the coldest state (tas) uses more energy
           | (8600) than anywhere else (e.g. qld 5500). They have
           | basically 100% hydro power and use reverse cycle AC for
           | heating. Not sure what else is going on there.
        
           | johngalt wrote:
           | >If you look at a state like Colorado, the energy usage is
           | vastly different than Florida or Texas with lots of heat and
           | humidity.
           | 
           |  _Electricity_ usage yes. _Energy_ usage no. Household energy
           | usage is lower in the warmer states, and higher in colder
           | states. I would expect that CO household energy consumption
           | would be higher than FL or TX.
        
       | kwhitefoot wrote:
       | That's a very poor article. It doesn't explain what the potassium
       | chloride is for.
       | 
       | It's interesting but you can store a lot of thermal energy in
       | concrete. The heat capacity is 1050 J/(kg.K). One cubic meter of
       | concrete is about 2 400 kg and the heat capacity is roughly 1 x
       | 10^3 J/(kg.K) so raising the temperature by just 1 degree C would
       | store 2.4 x 10^6 J. That's 666 Wh.
       | 
       | Twice the energy storage for only one kelvin temperature rise
       | with no technological breakthroughs needed. Granted it's not
       | electricity but in temperate and colder climates a lot of the
       | energy needed in a home is heat.
       | 
       | Still a very interesting idea and if it can be made to work
       | cheaply enough even at the storage capacity they quote it would
       | add a lot of flexibility to the energy system.
        
       | ranit wrote:
       | This is the research paper linked in the article.
       | 
       | https://www.pnas.org/doi/10.1073/pnas.2304318120
        
       | swores wrote:
       | > " _Supercapacitors are not perfect. Existing iterations
       | discharge power quickly, and are not ideal for steady output,
       | which would be needed to power a house throughout the day._ "
       | 
       | Could someone kindly explain to me how this works?
       | 
       | For example, if you had an empty lithium battery which can store
       | X amount of power, and a fully charged supercapacitor which holds
       | 10X, can you charge the lithium battery to full and leave 9X in
       | the supercapacitor?
       | 
       | If no, why not and how do you (both safely and usefully) get
       | energy out of a supercapacitor? Or if yes, could a relatively
       | small battery between the SC and a house act as a buffer to stop
       | it mattering that the SC discharges "too quickly and unsteadily"?
        
       ___________________________________________________________________
       (page generated 2024-06-12 23:00 UTC)