Connect with us


Tesla’s Battery Guru Describes A New Cell With Massive Lifetime




A recent paper on new battery chemistries published by a team including Jeff Dahn, the physics professor from Halifax who is often called Tesla’s battery guru. The claimed results suggest a cell with a lifetime of 6,000 cycles. This would translate in a large pack car to the “million-mile battery” which Elon Musk has predicted for Tesla.

Professor Dahn knows very well the difference between an interesting battery result in the lab and much more involved tests, and the further difference between the involved tests and a battery in high volume production with high quality and good prices. The latter has not been shown and is hard to predict. The paper forecasts such batteries are good for robotaxis. In addition, these batteries do well even when run on a 0-100% discharge cycle. Today’s batteries do best on a 20-80% discharge cycle, so you get 66% more range from the same pack if you can safely do 0-100%.

First of course, such a battery would be good for regular electric cars. While no car today has a million mile lifetime (Elon Musk has claimed Teslas do) more battery lifetime is always good. Even if the car falls apart after half a million miles, you could still move that pack into a second car. It also reduces the embedded energy in making the batteries and the cost of recycling them. I doubt any car interior is ready for a million miles, nor is the exterior ready in some climates. Frames and electric motors might very well last.

The important difference with the robotaxi is that its wear happens fast. Put into heavy use, it can be doing 200 miles/day or more — even more if it does a lot of highway travel. The average New York taxi is driven around 180 miles/day — average urban speeds during core driving hours are just 12 to 20 mph including stops — while the average private car does only 40.

At 200 miles/day, a car would rack up a million miles in just over 13 years. A taxi with a more normal 250,000 mile life (which is how long New York taxis last) is worn out in 4 to 5 years. If you can make the vehicle last that long, you seriously reduce the depreciation part of the robotaxi economics model and thus reduce the cost of a ride, since today depreciation is the largest cost factor in operating a car. Depreciation of the battery has been one of the largest costs of operating (and fast charging) an electric car. In fact, you can reduce depreciation so far that it becomes secondary to other costs like energy, risk, maintenance and logistics.

Robotaxis will do a lot of their work during the three weekday peaks, which are morning and evening rush hour, plus the lesser peak of lunch. You can either equip the car with enough battery for the whole day, or you can put less battery in and try to get some charging done during the day. That saves you some weight and some space, but since a larger pack lasts longer, it doesn’t save you much other money. Daytime charging can be a plus for cars that will do long highway travel, and of course night travel.

Today, night charging is the whole game. Vehicles are idle at night, and that’s when power is the cheapest. Even if you thought a 2pm recharge would let you have a smaller battery, you would not do it because electricity can cost 2x to 4x as much. Results from Tesla suggest that having the 75kwh battery only loses about 5% of efficiency from that extra weight over the 50kwh battery. You don’t save a lot.

If your choice is to put in a 200 mile battery into the taxi, and recharge only when power is cheapest, or put in a 100 mile battery (which costs half as much but lasts half as long) and charge mid-day when power is expensive, the math points to the 200 mile battery, except on the question of space.

Once private cars become robocars, they get the ability to scoot off to charging stations when not driving their owner. This actually lets the private car get away with less battery for city driving, because it can boost up mid-day while the owner works or shops — but not if the daytime price is 4x as high.

Surplus Solar in the Day

Today’s electricity prices will change. The hope is to install a lot of solar power. If we installed immense amounts of solar power (in the sunny lands) this could make noon power cheap, maybe even cheaper than at night. One of the big barriers to massive solar deployment is you need storage to go along with it — electric cars come with storage. Electric taxis that grab daytime power when it’s sunny but will accept not getting it when it’s cloudy are the dream customer for solar. The biggest problem is that they want to be out making money at lunch, which is the peak time for solar. From 3pm to 7pm they will all be at work as well, but this is also the period of maximum grid demand.

Charging cars is the perfect match for both solar and wind, if the cars have big enough batteries that they don’t have to be picky about when they get their power. Cars can start drawing and stop drawing power on a millisecond’s notice as renewables ramp up and down. It is not perfect though — a car needs to get its power sometime, and if it’s rainy or the winds are calm, some cars can be allowed to get low, but not all of them.

(Another perfect user of renewables is the pool pump. Pool owners need to pump a large volume of water every day but they don’t care what hour they do it. I pump mine at night when the power is cheap. We’re also seeing air conditioners that make ice when the power is cheap and cooling is easy, and use it to cool when the thermometers rise and the power price soars.)

When power in the day starts costing a similar price to power at night, another resource becomes important — charging stations, especially fast ones. It might be wasteful to have a charging spot only be in use at night, so with low cost daytime power, you can and should make use of it most of the day. On the other hand, if a charging station is really just a parking spot with a box on the ground, it can be utilized as parking during the day, and charging at night.

Very long range robotaxis are their own problem. If somebody expects to go 300 miles in one, it needs a bigger battery, perhaps bigger than you want to install. One solution, aside from fast charging which still takes time and is not good for battery life, is to have one taxi drive 200 miles, and transfer the rider to another taxi that does the rest of the way while the first one charges. But it still wants to charge in the day.

Grid storage

Batteries with improved lifetime also make sense for grid storage, which is what we need to make use of solar and wind. While most people in the battery world focus on total capacity in kWh per dollar, or energy density in kwh/kg, one of the most important statistics for a battery in both cars and grid storage is “lifetime kWh” per dollar. That is to say, how many kwh will you put in and out before the battery is no longer useful? It is this number which determines the cost per kWh of storage, and today it’s higher than we would like.

This even starts to make “vehicle to grid” systems practical. I have been skeptical of the v2g concept, because for private car owners and fleet operators, energy in their car batteries is precious. It represents range they paid for and plan to use, and putting it in and out eats up battery life. If the usable capacity increases, and the cost of putting it in and out decreases, it can make more sense to handle grid peaks with cars. Especially if the cars, being robots, and rush off to plug in when the grid has a sweet offer for the power inside them. Unfortunately, the time the grid needs power most — about 7pm on a hot day when all the solar panels shut off and all the loads are on — is the time when many cars are still driving or have their batteries at the lowest point of their day, at least today.


Continue Reading
Click to comment

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *


Nintendo is adding paid memberships to Animal Crossing: Pocket Camp




Animal Crossing

Nintendo plans to launch paid subscription memberships for its smartphone game Animal Crossing: Pocket Camp later this week, according to an in-game news update. The company says one plan lets you “appoint one lucky animal as your camp caretaker and get some extra help around the campsite,” while with another you’ll “receive fortune cookies and store your furniture and clothing items in warehouses.”

Nintendo released its latest mobile game, Mario Kart Tour, last month with a surprising optional subscription: a $4.99-a-month “Gold Pass” that unlocks a faster speed mode and gives users access to more in-game items. The company says it will reveal more information about the Animal Crossing memberships in videos that are due to be released on Wednesday.

Despite the hype surrounding Nintendo’s belated decision to start making smartphone games after years of pleas from investors, mobile remains a small part of the company’s overall business. Nintendo doesn’t break out specific mobile sales figures, but in its most recent earnings report said that first-half revenue for mobile and IP licensing totaled 19.9 billion yen. which is up 6.4 percent year-on-year but represents less than five percent of the company’s overall sales.

“[Mario Kart Tour] earnings are also off to a good start,” president Shuntaro Furakawa told investors at the financial results briefing after commenting on the game’s download figures. “In addition to randomized items, we have created opportunities to generate revenue such as the Gold Pass subscription to meet the various needs of consumers, allowing them to enjoy the game. By including these mechanics and multiplayer functionality, we want to make it an attractive application that will be enjoyed by consumers in the long-term.”

Nintendo’s mobile games have been hit and miss in terms of both their quality and their financial performance, but if subscriptions are a model that turns out to work, you can expect to see more of them in future titles.


By Sam Byford

Continue Reading


Web & Domain Protection Software Market SWOT Analysis by Key Players: Leaseweb, Namecheap, SiteLock, Verisign, Sucuri





The Latest research study released by HTF MI “Global Web & Domain Protection Software Market” with 100+ pages of analysis on business Strategy taken up by key and emerging industry players and delivers know how of the current market development, landscape, technologies, drivers, opportunities, market viewpoint and status. The research study provides estimates for Global Web & Domain Protection Software market Forecasted till 2025*. Some of the Major Companies covered in this Research are ZeroFOX, Comodo,, GoDaddy,, Leaseweb, Namecheap, SiteLock, Verisign, Sucuri, Cloudflare, Pointer Brand Protection, Sasahost, WebARX, AppRiver,

Click here for free sample + related graphs of the report @:

Browse market information, tables and figures extent in-depth TOC on “Web & Domain Protection Software Market by Application (Large Enterprises & Small and Medium-sized Enterprises (SMEs)), by Product Type (, Cloud-Based & On-Premise), Business scope, Manufacturing and Outlook – Estimate to 2025”.

At last, all parts of the Global Web & Domain Protection Software Market are quantitatively also subjectively valued to think about the Global just as regional market equally. This market study presents basic data and true figures about the market giving a general assessable analysis of this market based on market trends, market drivers, constraints and its future prospects. The report supplies the worldwide monetary challenge with the help of Porter’s Five Forces Analysis and SWOT Analysis.

On the basis of report- titled segments and sub-segment of the market are highlighted below:
Global Web & Domain Protection Software Market By Application/End-User (Value and Volume from 2019 to 2025) : Large Enterprises & Small and Medium-sized Enterprises (SMEs)

Market By Type (Value and Volume from 2019 to 2025) : , Cloud-Based & On-Premise

Global Web & Domain Protection Software Market by Key Players: ZeroFOX, Comodo,, GoDaddy,, Leaseweb, Namecheap, SiteLock, Verisign, Sucuri, Cloudflare, Pointer Brand Protection, Sasahost, WebARX, AppRiver,

Geographically, this report is segmented into some key Regions, with manufacture, depletion, revenue (million USD), and market share and growth rate of Web & Domain Protection Software in these regions, from 2012 to 2022 (forecast), covering China, USA, Europe, Japan, Korea, India, Southeast Asia & South America and its Share (%) and CAGR for the forecasted period 2019 to 2025.

Informational Takeaways from the Market Study: The report Web & Domain Protection Software matches the completely examined and evaluated data of the noticeable companies and their situation in the market by plans for different clear tools. The measured tools including SWOT analysis, Porter’s five powers analysis, and assumption return debt were utilized while separating the improvement of the key players performing in the market.

Key Development’s in the Market: This segment of the Web & Domain Protection Software report fuses the major developments of the market that contains confirmations, composed endeavors, R&D, new thing dispatch, joint endeavours, and relationship of driving members working in the market.

To get this report buy full copy @:

Some of the important question for stakeholders and business professional for expanding their position in the Global Web & Domain Protection Software Market :
Q 1. Which Region offers the most rewarding open doors for the market in 2019?
Q 2. What are the business threats and variable scenario concerning the market?
Q 3. What are probably the most encouraging, high-development scenarios for Web & Domain Protection Software movement showcase by applications, types and regions?
Q 4.What segments grab most noteworthy attention in Web & Domain Protection Software Market in 2019 and beyond?
Q 5. Who are the significant players confronting and developing in Web & Domain Protection Software Market?

For More Information Read Table of Content @:

Key poles of the TOC:
Chapter 1 Global Web & Domain Protection Software Market Business Overview
Chapter 2 Major Breakdown by Type [, Cloud-Based & On-Premise]
Chapter 3 Major Application Wise Breakdown (Revenue & Volume)
Chapter 4 Manufacture Market Breakdown
Chapter 5 Sales & Estimates Market Study
Chapter 6 Key Manufacturers Production and Sales Market Comparison Breakdown
Chapter 8 Manufacturers, Deals and Closings Market Evaluation & Aggressiveness
Chapter 9 Key Companies Breakdown by Overall Market Size & Revenue by Type
Chapter 11 Business / Industry Chain (Value & Supply Chain Analysis)
Chapter 12 Conclusions & Appendix

Thanks for reading this article; you can also get individual chapter wise section or region wise report version like North America, Europe or Asia.


Continue Reading


Social networks have been weaponized for the impeachment hearings




facebook, instagram whatsapp also affected

Impeachment hearings got underway in the House of Representatives this week, as you likely noticed from the wall-to-wall coverage. The process involves the sort of high-stakes, highly partisan events that naturally dominate social feeds. What television was to impeachment in the 1970s and 1990s, Facebook and Twitter — and YouTube and maybe TikTok — will be to impeachment in 2019.

The hearings on President Donald Trump’s apparent attempted bribery of Ukraine won’t be the first time a president has had to contend with, or benefit from, a hyper-partisan media. Conservative talk radio and Fox News were in full swing when Bill Clinton was impeached in 1998, even if their rhetoric looks quaint by today’s standard. But the World Wide Web was in its infancy, and the world was then still innocent of algorithmically sorted news feeds, partisan bot armies, and state-sponsored meme warfare.

Not anymore. If the first day of hearings is any indication, social networks promise to play a powerful role in shaping the way that impeachment hearings are understood by Americans. They are also playing a powerful role in shaping the hearings themselves.

As Ryan Broderick documented at BuzzFeed, Republican lawmakers used their time during Wednesday’s hearing to promote discredited conspiracy theories that are popular on right-wing message boards:

There is one America that believes what was in former FBI director Robert Mueller’s report, that there was coordinated Russian interference in the 2016 presidential election, which helped the Trump campaign. But there is a second America that believes that in the summer of 2016, the Democratic National Committee colluded with Ukrainian nationals to frame the Trump campaign for collusion with Russia, implicating a Ukrainian American DNC contractor, Alexandra Chalupa, in the collusion and the California-based cybersecurity firm CrowdStrike in the subsequent cover-up.

This unfounded theory has been propped up by a 2017 Politico story; reporting from right-wing political commentator John Solomon published earlier this year in the Hill; Attorney General Bill Barr’s summer travels; the yearlong personal investigation into Ukraine conducted by Rudy Giuliani, a lawyer working for Trump; and coverage from Fox News and conservative news sites. All of that came into play during Wednesday’s hearing, sometimes implicitly and sometimes explicitly.

After Republican members of Congress promoted these various smokescreens, right-wing media universally dismissed the hearing — either as an absurd exercise led by clowns, or as an outrageous abuse of power. Brian Stelter described the atmosphere on cable news:

Here’s what else I heard: Wednesday’s hearing was a bust. It was all just hearsay. It was a “disaster” for the Democrats and a “great day” for the Republicans. Impeachment is “stupid.” Impeachment is “fake.” There’s nothing impeachable here. There’s no reason to hold hearings. This inquiry needs to stop right now.

The message was one-sided and overwhelming. Every host and practically every guest said the Republican tribe is winning and the Democrat tribe is losing. I’m sure the president loved watching every minute of it. That’s one of the reasons why this right-wing rhetoric matters so much — because it is reassuring and emboldening Trump.

Meanwhile, if you’re reading the New York Times or watching CNN, you’re getting the sense that the case against Trump is a slam dunk, with multiple people having heard the president directly pressure his ambassador to the European Union to pursue a bribery plot. As Ezra Klein wrote recently, this impeachment is “the easiest possible test case for can our system hold a president accountable.” And yet with something like 40 percent of the country living in an alternate media universe, the basic, actual facts of the case may never penetrate into their reality.

Of course, that fear was one of the best reasons for Democrats to initiate impeachment proceedings in the first place: Show people real witnesses answering important questions over a long enough period of time — train everyone’s eyes on the same set of facts — and maybe a greater consensus will emerge.

Time will tell if they succeed. In the meantime, impeachment has proven to be big business on Facebook — where politicians are taking out highly partisan ads consistent with their respective worldviews. Emily Stewart and Rani Molla have a thorough walkthrough of how impeachment is playing out on Facebook, with Trump and Sen. Elizabeth Warren using ads to fire up their base and build their donor rolls; Tom Steyer using impeachment as a signature issue to promote his presidential candidacy; and a spice company buying tens of thousands of dollars worth of pro-impeachment advertising because they spread farther on Facebook than non-impeachment ads, resulting in a better return on investment.

Much of the debate about whether Facebook should allow political advertising noted that it represents a small fraction of the company’s business. But as the Vox writers note, that doesn’t mean it’s an insignificant business:

Facebook itself has grown into a formidable political platform in recent years, with campaigns and outside groups spending $284 million on the platform during the midterm elections, according to a report by Tech for Campaigns, a nonprofit that helps political campaigns with digital tools. While that’s just a small share of Facebook’s overall ad revenue, it’s a growing chunk of what campaigns are spending to reach constituents.

As impeachment hearings intensify, it seems likely politicians’ spending on Facebook ads will increase. And a good number of those ads, like so much about impeachment in 2019, will seem to have been created in a parallel world. In many ways, they were.



read more

By Casey Newton

Continue Reading