Lithium-ion battery pioneers win Nobel Prize in Chemistry

Discussion in 'Amateur Radio News' started by N4QX, Oct 9, 2019.

ad: L-HROutlet
ad: l-rl
ad: abrind-2
ad: Subscribe
ad: L-MFJ
ad: Left-2
ad: Left-3
  1. N4QX

    N4QX Platinum Subscriber Platinum Subscriber QRZ Page

    K0UO, WB9VPG and W0PV like this.
  2. KJ6ZOL

    KJ6ZOL Ham Member QRZ Page

    The lithium ion battery has literally brought a county in Nevada, Esmeralda, back from the dead. Around 1905 gold was discovered 25 miles south of the silver lode at Tonopah. The site would become Goldfield, which was briefly a city of 30,000 people, with an ornate movie theater and a fine hotel. The gold ran out a few years later, and Goldfield and its satellite camps were largely abandoned and, after the enactment of Prohibition, taken over by moonshiners. A moonshine still blew up in Goldfield in 1923, during a windstorm. The result was that there would be no second act for Goldfield as there was for Virginia City. Lithium was discovered decades ago up in the hills in the center of the county, but was little more than a geologic curiosity-until Tesla selected Fernley for its battery Gigafactory due to the "Nivloc Deposit" as it's known. Now the county is full of miners again.
    WA4CZD likes this.
  3. W1YW

    W1YW Ham Member QRZ Page

    Note the OP reference to 'chemical --and-- engineering...'

    This is important work. But is it SCIENCE? This year's Nobel in chemistry seems to blur the line between technology and basic science. As someone who works in battery innovation, my feeling is that this should have been a KAVLI prize (actually has a higher payout) but not a Nobel-- BECAUSE the Nobel is intended for basic science.

    Your opinion may differ--and that's ok, so no haters please:)
  4. N4QX

    N4QX Platinum Subscriber Platinum Subscriber QRZ Page

    No hate here, Chip. It's a valid point.

    This is an interesting pick for several reasons--the earliest work is as old as I am. I suspect most of the pure science was done well before the first 1991 commercialization, and was focused on the task of taming lithium and lithium compounds for the purpose.

    The lapse of time has allowed for a great deal of subsequent engineering activity. which has proved the value of the underlying work.
    W1YW likes this.
  5. SM0AOM

    SM0AOM Ham Member QRZ Page

    Since the inception of the Nobel Prize, this has been an eternal cause for argument.

    One may just recall the turmoil that was caused by awarding the 1909 physics Prize to
    Braun and Marconi, or the awarding of the 1912 Prize to Gustaf Dalén...

    WA8FOZ, W0PV, N4QX and 1 other person like this.
  6. W1YW

    W1YW Ham Member QRZ Page

    At some point soon it will be cheaper to extract lithium from sea water than to mine it. The good news is we won't run out of lithium:)
  7. WB9VPG

    WB9VPG XML Subscriber QRZ Page

    I'm just happy it wasn't a biochemistry award for a change! (analytical chemist's rant over)
    N4QX likes this.
  8. K0RGR

    K0RGR Premium Subscriber QRZ Page

    Back in the Bush I presidency, I heard a speech by a fellow who'd been an Undersectary of Commerce under Reagan and Bush I. He talked about existence of some amazing technology that was being held back by fears surrounding patents. While American firms had developed these basic technologies, Japanese firms were poised to pounce on them and file patents for all imaginable uses of the technology as soon as the basic patent was applied for.

    One of the technologies he mentioned was a rechargeable battery that could store enough energy to power a car. I've long since speculated that he was talking about Lithium batteries. Apparently, the patent issues were assuaged in this case.

    I don't recall the third miracle tech he mentioned, but #2 was room temperature superconductors.

Share This Page