Remove ads

What is the best idea for an advanced type of battery for my future sci-fi world?

M

Maximum7

Location
New York
What kind of battery would an advanced sci-fi world use, that has basis in real science (something we only speculate about today). When I say battery, I mean things that power devices not laser gun arrays. We currently use lithium-ion batteries. Basically, what would be the next upgrade after that?
 
It's not a traditional battery but one form of energy storage that might become common in future is the supercapacitors. They seem to have less energy storage overall than comparably advanced batteries, but charge lot faster, and discharge extremely rapidly. They could become very common for applications where you need bursts of power or as a backup power source that can instantly kick in.
 
Last edited:
Chemical-based energy storage is too limited for the high energy needs of a future technological society. Instead, we can rely on thermal, mechanical or electromagnetic storage systems.

Thermal systems keep a storage medium at high temperature, and use the temperature gradient to convert the heat back into electricity. Unless the temperature gradient is extreme, this is a very inefficient storage system.

Mechanical systems use the kinetic energy of a rotating device to store electricity. It can efficiently be converted back into electricity by hooking it up to a dynamo.

Electromagnetic system store the energy as a strong magnetic field.
 
From what I've read as of late, solid state batteries will be the next step up from what we've got now, which should allow batteries to last a few times longer than what we've currently got. In the next few years, you'll see them rolled out in electric cars.

Superconductors might come into play at some point, but we'll have to see just how useful they'll actually be as they have lower energy density. A hybrid battery+capacitor might be useful though.

Superconducting loops might work at grid scale, but refrigeration is no mean feat in small electronics. Obviously that would be a moot point in the face of room temperature superconductors, but we don't seem to be getting any closer on that front. Even if we did, I'm not sure what carrying around a superconducting loop would do. I don't even begin to know what would happen if one broke.
 
Last edited:
Maybe, but at least from what I've read we don't seem to be getting any meaningfully closer to that. Even if we were, would we want the average person carrying around a charged magnetic field? Would breaking your phone cause a mini EMP or something? I don't know.
 
Volt Cruelerz said:
Maybe, but at least from what I've read we don't seem to be getting any meaningfully closer to that. Even if we were, would we want the average person carrying around a charged magnetic field? Would breaking your phone cause a mini EMP or something? I don't know.
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...

Superconducting loop batteries would likely be reserved for larger applications that require very high energy densities, such as a laser weapon or a suit of power armor.
 
Orion's arm has a nice idea:
Nano-flywheels
Nano-flywheels, instead of one large flywheel it has a matrix of microscopic ones. Not long term storage but still usefull

Hydrogen fuel cells are something that's happening around now, incoming electricity splits water into oxygen and hydrogen then it can be recombined to get the energy back, impractical in many situations and somewhat lossy but has high energy density and power density.

Next not batteries but could reduce the need for them there's wireless power and beamed power for low and high energy uses respectively, perhaps drones bringing batteries on the go.
 
@Evonix
Flywheel energy storage is constrained by material specific strength; making them smaller does not improve that property, so the power density is not improved.
 
matterbeam said:
@Evonix
Flywheel energy storage is constrained by material specific strength; making them smaller does not improve that property, so the power density is not improved.
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...
No but it does make them more convenient and space efficient to a degree. Anyway it's not my idea, personally I'd make them with a reasonable size, perhaps graphine for structure and osmium or something for weight.
 
You could store hydrogen in the structure of a device it's fueling, they power the standard MS in Gundam 00 like that
 
IIRC you can make a low powered battery by sandwiching slightly radioactive material between tiny solar panels.

It stands to reason that more radioactive material would generate more power, but would need a casing to prevent the radiation from, you know, killing you.

Something along the line of a thick lead case, radiation-absorbing panels, and a nuclear core could plausibly work, though I'd leave it to the scientists to figure out how to pull it off without killing people.
 
Vindictus said:
IIRC you can make a low powered battery by sandwiching slightly radioactive material between tiny solar panels.

It stands to reason that more radioactive material would generate more power, but would need a casing to prevent the radiation from, you know, killing you.

Something along the line of a thick lead case, radiation-absorbing panels, and a nuclear core could plausibly work, though I'd leave it to the scientists to figure out how to pull it off without killing people.
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...
Very late but it's worth mentioning that diamond batteries are basically that
 
matterbeam said:
Chemical-based energy storage is too limited for the high energy needs of a future technological society. Instead, we can rely on thermal, mechanical or electromagnetic storage systems.
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...
I have to disagree. There is a point where the square cubed law tells you to make things less energy intensive and more efficient or you'll get cooked. So its very likely that we will see incremental improvements in chemical-based energy storage while the focus shifts to making the technology using it more energy efficient. This process is already under way.

By the way you are seriously underestimating chemical based energy storage. It is very high density and why alternative energy sources such as solar have such a hard time making it to market. Likewise even rail guns and lasers- Personnel scale fire arms development has basically come to a halt already because you can't really make guns stronger without breaking the person wielding them. Raiguns have a hard time competing with missiles because rocket fuel is so much more energy dense than capacitors.
 
Doomsough said:
I have to disagree. There is a point where the square cubed law tells you to make things less energy intensive and more efficient or you'll get cooked. So its very likely that we will see incremental improvements in chemical-based energy storage while the focus shifts to making the technology using it more energy efficient. This process is already under way.

By the way you are seriously underestimating chemical based energy storage. It is very high density and why alternative energy sources such as solar have such a hard time making it to market. Likewise even rail guns and lasers- Personnel scale fire arms development has basically come to a halt already because you can't really make guns stronger without breaking the person wielding them. Raiguns have a hard time competing with missiles because rocket fuel is so much more energy dense than capacitors.
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...
When people talk about chemical batteries I think they usually mean directly chemical>electrical as opposed to chemical>thermal>electrical. I'm not disagreeing but I think fuel cells just weren't discussed much rather than being dismissed. Any particular types you were thinking of?
 
Evonix said:
When people talk about chemical batteries I think they usually mean directly chemical>electrical as opposed to chemical>thermal>electrical. I'm not disagreeing but I think fuel cells just weren't discussed much rather than being dismissed. Any particular types you were thinking of?
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...
I didn't say anything about fuel cells. I don't know enough about chemistry to make speculate, but even batteries like lithium ion batteries will be used for much longer than you've think. We might see more polymer or gell electrolytes rather than liquid ones as time goes on.
 
Doomsough said:
I didn't say anything about fuel cells. I don't know enough about chemistry to make speculate, but even batteries like lithium ion batteries will be used for much longer than you've think. We might see more polymer or gell electrolytes rather than liquid ones as time goes on.
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...
Alright, I misunderstood however some of your comment is a bit misleading, like comparing rocket fuel to capacitors when it wasn't really relevant. On a different yet related topic I did some research and apparently fuel cells do go from chemical straight to electrical, the converter is just pretty complex. Anyway one big complaint with lithium ion batteries is that they loose capacity over time, is this changing?
 
You must login or register to reply here.
Remove ads
Back
Top