AFAIK in every US state it is some type of violation or crime to sell remanufactured goods as "new", and a "used goods" license
is sometimes needed separately from the one to sell new goods. So if what you were told is correct, there could be major problems.
But what's to "remanufacture" in a battery? Open the case, swap out a bad cell? It might be enlightening to ask CALB themselves what the deal is. As well as the US vendor.
"Li ...all the basic physics are understood "
Basic physics, yes. But the finer points, like how far to cycle the discharge, are still up for debate. Or at least, still being frequently and extensively debated. As are the number of charge cycles. But then again, the same questions were asked about LiOn batteries in laptops and Ni-whatever in hybrid cars, a decade after the basic physics were known. The difference with lead acid is that there's an additional hundred years of physics being documented, not "just" a decade.
Not a stopper, certainly, but an issue, which may be keeping some of the major vendors from risking a premature entry. Especially if that means committing big bucks to any product that won't be the one right product, however they define right.
"The issue of which Li chemistry as being the best, is a mis direction."
So who is misdirecting? Not me. "Best" is always a relative term that cannot be taken outside of a specific context. Here, it was used for a specific context, that of drop-in replacement for car batteries. You think LiFePO4 is best for that? Maybe it is, but others would say a higher energy density is really best, because that literally "gets the lead out" and if it makes fifty million cars each five pounds lighter, that's a lot of fleet fuel
savings when the day is done. Lighter batteries mean lighter springs, lighter chassis...a whole larger deal. And of course, tweaking different charging systems and whole new inventories of parts. "Best" will mean doing that once, not changing it every couple of years. With perhaps zero tolerance for accidents, failures, or explosions.
"Li technology is significantly more robust then LA,...Equally LA technology has plenty of examples of explosions, fire , leakage. Etc. "
I said that. I said that thousands of lead acid batteries explode in "normal" car charging every year.
"The explosion issues is also a misnomer. "
As Boeing and Japan
Air will tell you, that's correct. Stubborn fires yes, explosions no. (VBG)
All(?) the lithium technologies use flammable petrochemicals for the electrolyte, which adds an extra Class-D metals fire risk if the battery is broached during an accident
. Right now there's a lot of attention being paid to exotic fires and hybrid power packs in the emergency
responder community in the US. If you call 911 to report a car fire, they'll specifically ask you if it is a hybrid so they can warn the responders. There's also been a lot of effort to require AGM
batteries instead of conventional wet lead, because so many responders have gotten acid burns from broached wet lead batteries.
If you smash a lithium-anything battery in a crash, will it be as polite as an AGM
? If not...it may never see that market.
"We are seeing two things happening. ...where in the past these were overlooked or poorly understood or implemented by product engineers. "
The Lockheed Electra was originally seen as a flying death trap after a couple of incidents where the wings broke off. Yeah, "oops" doesn't quite cover that. As the engineering caught up and they were revised, they became "the" classic aircraft for decades, I think seeing 50 years of service
in the US before being shuffled off to South America
You miss the point here. It is not whether Li technology will mature or will take over, but rather, the question and response, was why major battery makers may not be committing to this technology right now.
Elon Musk may be willing to commit a couple of billion bucks in a joint project
, but he's a maverick. One would hardly expect industry stalwarts to do what he does.
"The issues for us as boaters, is that we are applying technology into a small niche market with little engineering expertise."
Wait a minute, I thought there was a decade of experience? Boats aren't all that
"Li is not ... the system must respect the underlying chemistry. "
Charging systems for boats, where an external regulator
for deep cycling is really the way to go, should be a simple black-box job. remove Pb regulator
, drop in Li regulator, job done. Today they could even be the same regulator, microprocessor controlled, with just a different flash to a control table. Except...well...what vendors are willing to commit to marketing
ANY product when there's still no consensus about what a BMS needs to do, how it needs to be done, or even if it is needed?
This is one reason why I say the "lithium companies" are their own worst enemy. Till they line up and start chanting the same song, no one will give much credibility to any
of them. They can't all be wrong, and every one of them says that they are the only one who knows what they are doing.
"Expecting a drop in solution is somewhat misplaced. ...Li is mainstream, but it's not idiot proof and is unlikely ever to be ..."
Heheh. Maybe that's what the domestic industry has simply been diplomatic enough not to say.(VBG)
"Imagine in the morning you have has a megawatt/kg density. You think that should be a " drop-in" for LA ??? "
Oh hell, Dave. In grade school
Reddy Kilowatt promised us all that we'd have home nuclear piles the size of home hot water
heaters, that would provide all the electricity we could ever need. I'm still waiting.