Sir lastnail wrote on Jan 3^rd, 2019 at 9:06pm:



From January 2015?


What exactly is meant by "high safety"? It doesn't catch fire? It only catches fire rarely?

Please feel free to pontificate.

Silly old dimwit Tweedledum is just digging herself deeper into her swill bowl as she piles more ignorance on top of the already smelly pile.

If these already rejected batteries were so wonderful then Tesla would be using them but with LOW energy density and expensive and difficult to produce reliably why would Tesla waste their time on such failed Greeny trash ?

Another stupid Greeny Tweedledum trash myth busted.


Lithium titanate stuff is rejected because of low energy density and expensive and it contains the ability to trigger a great big EXPLOSION!!!!!!


Temperature distribution of the battery module (the units are °C).

4. Conclusions
With the aid of the finite element technique, the thermal behavior of a 50 Ah lithium titanate battery
and the thermal effect of an overheated cell on the surrounding cells in a 7 × 3 battery module are
simulated. First, the greater the current rate, the higher the battery temperature and the longer the time
Energies 2015, 8 499 required for thermal balance with the environment is.

The simulation on an overheated battery in the 7 × 3 battery module shows that the temperatures of the overheated surrounding cells exceed 140 °C, which will cause the decomposition of the polymer separator, and then trigger the thermal runaway of the whole battery followed by a chain reaction in the module, leading to a potentially uncontrollable
explosion.

If the working current rate is 1.0 C, more attention should be paid to improve the battery
cooling conditions, because the cell temperature in the center of the module could rise sharply under
poor working conditions, which will cause the other adjacent cells’ temperature to rise, and thus increase
the risk of thermal runaway.

https://pdfs.semanticscholar.org/72b8/b1a54536423f39f4dd32a8d61997560e8452.pdf

Baron because they are rejected trash just like the society outcasts Tweedledum and Tweedledee.

They have LOW energy density, are difficult and expensive to make, and can develop hot spots which makes the whole thing EXPLODE!!!!!!!!

juliar wrote on Jan 4^th, 2019 at 10:40am:


You're out of luck socko the Yinlong LTO batteries don't have any of these problems. Here is the proof socko Of course if you take the LNP stance and never do anything then nothing ever changes nor improves ! Just stick to flipping houses using lots of debt and making cups of coffee. You lot will go along way doing that LOL

Sir lastnail wrote on Jan 4^th, 2019 at 3:00pm:



But if they are so much safer than other lithium batteries he must do it. Unless of course he has no regard to the punters buying the current crop of batteries.

lee wrote on Jan 4^th, 2019 at 3:39pm:


You obviously didn't watch the video then. Their version looks pretty safe to me Instead you prefer the results of a google search that agrees with your biased negativity.

Tweedledum is just too dumb to understand technical stuff. Even needs help with words of more than one syllable.

Silly fool thinks just because something is on YouTube it MUST BE RIGHT. She should stay in the extremist section.

Just goes to show how useless and uninformed Greeny fools are. What a useless waste of space that is not worth feeding.

Her batteries are of very little use like her.

But when you get the actual real working FACTS silly old Tweedledum looks even dumber and sillier and more uninformed and generally ignorant than normal. Typical empty headed full of fowl air Greeny type.

The missing practical FACTS to mention are the massive weight, space, and dollars saved by using L-ion rather than LTO. If LTO cannot come even close to competing by either cost or weight they will not be accepted by most consumers.

Lithium ion anodes have 175-455 watt hr/kg compared to 1302-1488 watt hr/kg. The result is LTO batteries end up being heavier, bigger and more expensive than if they had used a graphite anode.

The NCIB case study you posted about flammability of batteries is for an LTO anode, not a graphite one…..isn’t that the opposite of what you are claiming?

Either way I think you were right by accident because LTO’s swell due to a reaction where the electrolyte gives off gases carbon dioxide, and highly flammable carbon monoxide and hydrogen.

Graphite does not produce gasses from reacting with electrolyte. Not that safety concerns matters much for demand of L-ion batteries, they are time tested and proven safe, even if these airlines overreact to mere suspicions and ban transportation of batteries would that even be a bad thing? That just brings more battery factories and mines close to home.

The other link you posted shows that L-ion batteries are the most accepted on aircraft out of any types of battery, again I thought you were saying the opposite?: http://phmsa.dot.gov/safetravel/batteries

Did you read the end of the BIFA article you posted? The quote is below, they are not turning down business at all, just making sure they are packaged properly and restricting in shipments from Asia where there is quality control problems.

“…thousands of the batteries may be packed onto pallets and loaded into the cargo holds of passenger planes. At this point it is important to emphasise that no cargo fires aboard passenger airlines have been attributed to batteries.

United Airlines and Delta will continue to accept shipments when the batteries are packed inside or with equipment such as laptops or power tools.”


https://investorintel.com/sectors/technology-metals/technology-metals-intel/lith...