<?xml version="1.0"?>
<feed xmlns="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom" xml:lang="en">
	<id>https://wiki.opensourceecology.org/index.php?action=history&amp;feed=atom&amp;title=Talk%3AWhy_Batteries_will_Never_Compete_With_Fuels</id>
	<title>Talk:Why Batteries will Never Compete With Fuels - Revision history</title>
	<link rel="self" type="application/atom+xml" href="https://wiki.opensourceecology.org/index.php?action=history&amp;feed=atom&amp;title=Talk%3AWhy_Batteries_will_Never_Compete_With_Fuels"/>
	<link rel="alternate" type="text/html" href="https://wiki.opensourceecology.org/index.php?title=Talk:Why_Batteries_will_Never_Compete_With_Fuels&amp;action=history"/>
	<updated>2026-05-05T16:35:19Z</updated>
	<subtitle>Revision history for this page on the wiki</subtitle>
	<generator>MediaWiki 1.39.13</generator>
	<entry>
		<id>https://wiki.opensourceecology.org/index.php?title=Talk:Why_Batteries_will_Never_Compete_With_Fuels&amp;diff=241552&amp;oldid=prev</id>
		<title>Eric: Added some thoughts of mine</title>
		<link rel="alternate" type="text/html" href="https://wiki.opensourceecology.org/index.php?title=Talk:Why_Batteries_will_Never_Compete_With_Fuels&amp;diff=241552&amp;oldid=prev"/>
		<updated>2021-01-03T14:04:07Z</updated>

		<summary type="html">&lt;p&gt;Added some thoughts of mine&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;&lt;b&gt;New page&lt;/b&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&lt;div&gt;I agree completely!  ESPECIALLY for aviation.  &lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
With fueled aircraft, be it conventional kerosine with [[P2X]] / Biofuel - Fuel, or some of the newer designs for [[CNG]] / [[LNG]] , or even cryogenic [[Hydrogen]] ,  You gain eficiency as the amount of fuel left goes down.  With batteries you can never take off &amp;quot;light&amp;quot; which will lock you in to that &amp;quot;full tank&amp;quot; take off mass, allowing less flexability in runway length, as well as less potential cargo for the same airframe (you could do less fuel, more cargo on some runs in a fueled aircraft due to not HAVING to use the full tank)&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
Also (i need to expand on this a bit in [[Technological Lock-Down]] ,  but) those &amp;quot;Grid Scale Tesla Battery Banks&amp;quot; make almost NO SENSE short of the low cost due to those batteries&amp;#039; economy of scale; Lithium batteries are a fire hazard to some degree, it doesn&amp;#039;t scale well (same ammount of cost /kwh for the most part) [[Pumped Hydro]] ,  [[Compressed Gas Storage]] or [[P2X]] -&amp;gt; Tanks/Salt Domes, and other similar storage technologies get very cheap storage once you get the initial &amp;quot;converters&amp;quot; going.  As long as you have enough compressors/valves to get the flow you want, you can always add more tank volume.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
And if you want to go off of conversion efficiency [[FES]] should win (need numbers), and can have more charge/discharge cycles, and needs no lithium/other semi-rare materials. (Also as density isn&amp;#039;t a huge issue for grid scale, huge banks of [[Supercapacitors]] may actually work)&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
I think once (if allowed...electric could cause some serious [[Technological Lock-In]] ,  especially on the governemet investment side) [[FCEVs]] catch on, electric will decline short of [[LSEVs]] , and some other niche cases (electric Glider Tows / Trainer Airplanes can make some sense, need to see if fuel cell options become even cheaper despite more maitnence)&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
The only advantage of [[BEVs]] is their low maitnence (short of battery swaps), but for larger/more used vehicles this is less of an issue (swapping a [[Semi-Permeable Membrane]] on a FCEV isn&amp;#039;t that bad in the case of a car that also needs a breakpad swap, new tires, etc, but for a cheap LSEV it may be &amp;quot;a bit much&amp;quot; &lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
That&amp;#039;s just my two cents&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
--[[User:Eric|Eric]] ([[User talk:Eric|talk]]) 14:04, 3 January 2020 (UTC)&lt;/div&gt;</summary>
		<author><name>Eric</name></author>
	</entry>
</feed>