Battery tech

Battery tech

Hello all.

Just read from autobloggreen about some new battery manufacturer called "Planar Energy". (

They seem to have tech for pretty good Wh/kg batteries. From one of their pdf (

"One of them combines lithium manganese oxide with other ions, and operates at about three to five volts with a charge capacity of 200 milliamp hours per gram."

Calculating that as 3.5V * 200mAh/g you get 700mWh/g or 700Wh/kg. to put that in right context: Roadster battery: 450kg. Drop 30% off as supporting structure: 315kg battery * 700 = 220.500kWh battery. Nearly four times as much as current tech is. That would allow roadster to go 200 * 4 = 800 miles with one charge.

mkat | September 27, 2010

i am interested in the model s but my only concern is the problem that i am having with my golf cart. that is the batteries that run the cart die and i have to buy new ones which cost $$ so i was wondering how ofter or if at all would you have to replace your batteries and if so does waranty cover it?

ChristianG | September 29, 2010

When I remember right the expected lifetime of the battery pack is expected to be between 7 and 10 years. At that time you will note that will not be able to drive as far as you used to.

To buy a new battery pack right now it seems to be 30'000$ and you have can buy a replace battery option and then it will cost 12'000$

If battery technology will continue to develop like in the past few years, at the time you need a new battery it will be already better and cheaper... also if you have your car for around 8 years you will consider buying a new one anyway.

That's just what I read here, didn't heard anything about the warrenty yet.

arginaut | September 29, 2010

SOLAR POWER. Wouldn't it be neat to add a solar panel somewhere on the body of a Tesla vehicle so that you can have continuous charging even away from an outlet? It would be a supplement to the outlet charging and would even allow your vehicle to go miles farther between outlet charging.

Timo | September 29, 2010

With a one square meter solar panel you might gain one to three miles if you get 10 hours of sunlight during a day. A good day. 1.5% or less increase in range. Probably less. Pretty much not worth the cost.

The Rick | September 30, 2010

Here is what I want to know and really it is THE Question when it comes to BEV's, what is the current AER for Tesla and how does it compare with other BEV's? I see precious little details on that here or anywhere, lots of claims, but no detail. Help a brotha out.

Todd Burch | September 30, 2010

The Rick,

By "AER" I assume you mean All-Electric Range? And by "Tesla" I assume you mean the Tesla Roadster?

It's published at 245 miles. It's not a claim. The car's been on the roads and has accumulated, I believe, over 6 million miles now. Thousands of people have logged anywhere in the 200s to over 300 miles in the car...hardly a claim. (Range of course varies dramatically by the hundreds of variables that come into play).

Go to if you want to directly ask Roadster drivers. That forum is crawling with them.

Other BEVs? Well, there's the Leaf at around 100 miles...and the iMiev at around 100 miles...and...

Well, currently, there's no comparison.

Timo | September 30, 2010

All other BEV manufacturers are making basically city cars with ranges varying in little over 100 to 75 miles. Tesla seem to be the only one that has realized _from the beginning_ that this is not enough. Not even with fast chargers in every corner. If you need to charge every 80 or so miles in long road trip it would become really annoying really fast.

Nicola | October 4, 2010


RE: 428 Wh/kg battery- Yeah, great density! So is Tesla working on this? When can we see these batteries in normal production and installed in a Model S?
(You seem to be a Tesla insider ...?)

Timo | October 5, 2010

I'm not Tesla insider. Just REALLY enthusiast "Tesla enthusiast". I have read these blogs pretty near from the beginning and I read all other sources I find that have any bits of information about Tesla. So, no I have no idea about what battery tech Tesla will be using in near future.

AlfredG | October 6, 2010

The immediate future is quite clear:
This is likely to push e.g. the roadster's range to a solid 500km. Beyond 5 years from now predictions are difficult to make. Martin Eberhard has stated that he expects ranges to reach 800 km within a decade: with similar technology, using essentially the current Tesla setup with just newer cells. What other cell types will be able to keep up is very uncertain. The mass-production advantage of 18650's is proving hard to match.


Timo | October 6, 2010

If they use those 3.1Ah batteries in Model S 300 mile version, and if it really is just 70kWh battery (as I derived from Model S FAQ charging times) then it is only about 100 L battery. Small. Even with extra space needed for 18650 -type batteries it would still be small. Weights about 280kg though without cooling or supporting structures, no not so light but lighter than Roadster battery.

Those planar energy batteries I mentioned (which are already prototype) are almost double that one. That means 600 mile version is not that far away. I don't think giant like Panasonic to stay behind in development and lose to something like Planar Energy.

Dan5 | October 9, 2010

If they could, I would like to see if they could use the Lithium Titanate batteries in these cars. The battery is the main concern for people, so if you had a battery that could go for 9,000 charge/ discharge cycles (as those types can), I think it would ease the fear of a dead battery- If you charged the battery every 100 miles, that battery would be good for about 900,000 miles. Lightning, Proterra, and Phoenix are all expected to put these batteries in their electric cars

Timo | October 9, 2010

You don't charge every 100 miles, or if you do that does count only as half-cycle for 200+ mile battery. It hurts the battery way less than full DOD charging.

Lithium titanate batteries have very poor energy density (at least currently), so they can't be used for anything else than hybrids or short range vehicles like city cars.

Timo | October 19, 2010

I pretty much believe that last one is a spam. | October 20, 2010

A small rubix cube sized mini nuclear reactor battery is what i would like in my Model S. :)

I heard some students somewhere in the world are working on one, can't remember where.

Timo | October 21, 2010

I actually think that that nuclear battery could work on a car. Not as actual reactor, but like satellite or pacemaker battery. Those are not big like nuclear reactors are and give out power for years. Nuclear batteries are already in use in various places

Something like 4L/88kg Pu-238 nuclear battery could in theory give you around 16kW of power many many years. Now that's range extender. Couple of times around world at 60mph -range extender.

Of course there is small problem with cost...

Nvbob | October 21, 2010

And the radiation.

dsm363 | October 23, 2010

I guess range anxiety would be replaced by an entirely new anxiety with a nuclear reactor on board=)

Brian H | October 25, 2010

A moderate level of background gamma is good for you! Keeps the little white (blood) cells and the DNA repair proteins tuned up.

Brian H | October 30, 2010

Herewegoagain with the inductive charging:
While aided in the UK by its development partner Arup, two of the main obstacles to the take-up of the firm's technology are standards and cost. HaloIPT estimates it would cost £3,000-£3,500 to retrofit an existing electric car with the wireless pad, and to make it affordable, car manufacturers would need to be persuaded to incorporate the technology in new cars. Last year Nissan demonstrated a similar wireless system but has yet to add it to any of its cars.

As well as wired competition, wireless charging also needs to overcome the alternative system of battery-swapping at designated electric car refuelling stations, as promoted by the Better Place project.

searcher | November 7, 2010

Dan5 and danAderhold please come back. timo, Brian H,dsm363 among others have drilled into me to the point of their exhaustion I'm sure the flaws in my concepts concerning free energy, and the dreaded words "perpetual motion machines" and belive it or not I see their premise. These guys, I believe really know their stuff and actually have full respect for all of them. They have diverted my thinking thus to a totally seperate system that just charges a battery b as the car moves down the road and I keep thinking about all the movement in the wheels. I don't know squat about cars as I have explained to them and am a totaly untechnical type. But was fascinated by your remarks concerning the wheels. {Plese see my post under "submit ideas".} Medium to longe range development what do think the componets are that would need to be adreesed or overcome to just have a entirely seperate system just to simply recharge a second battery and have it ready to go when battery a begins to run down. I mentioned something that would not effect drag on wheels {similsr to no contac in cd player etc, super light weight componets to do the overcoming dept with exception of the battery of course which semmingly would be a minimal consideration. I am not talking free energy or perpetual motion here butsome insist that I am. I may have have been talking free energy or pepetual motion in my first discussions but with the patient and persistent thoghts of the above mentioned individuals I hope my thoughts are more refined now. I know there would be points that would need devices, likely not invented yet, that would be needed to overcome certain problems involed with doing this. I am talking an entirely seperate system, with ultra unobtrusive componets, just to bounce electical charge to battery not being currently in the drive syetem in use. I know there would be probably be daunting challanges and i am talking using this system from all four wheels, just seems like so much surplus dynacism here. Your thoughts please and don't be deterred by comments to the contrary they are really quite likeable savvy guys, I have taken some lumps{well deserved I am sure} and I have given some critcisms {likely not deserved}. Your comments please.

Vawlkus | November 9, 2010


searcher, if you put something in the drive train to recapture energy from the wheels turning, the drive motor still has to turn that device AS WELL AS the wheels. That means it's drawing more power to do more work. Drawing more power means the battery runs down FASTER, giving you less range.

No device exists in NATURE that is 100% efficient. Motors and generators are the same. While electric motors can get upwards of 90% efficiency (I think they're up to 97, 98% efficiency, but I'm not totally sure), they are still LOOSING POWER. The same holds true for an electric generator: you're only getting 90% of the kinectic energy from the wheels back, the rest is lost as heat.

Please do me a favor searcher: read and understand how Tesla's regerative braking feature works. Then you might get what Timo and I have been trying to tell you, and many others. If you've got questions, I'm sure one of us can answer them.

searcher | November 9, 2010

vawlkus, One point you are missing in my conceptualization is that the drive motor will be doing this,please read my more recent post on "submit ideas section" I am not talking about the working drive system doing anything I am talking about a totally seperated system retriveing energy from the turning wheels with as yet uninvented systems very, very unobtrusively to the working drive system. With stealthlike techology then pulling this energy{using its own power now} and multiplying the juice to run its own recapture operation and sending juice to battery b now charging and standing at the ready to take over when drive battery begins to deplete. The multiplier mechanism seems to be currently impossible,but this is something R&D could look into and maybe come up with such a mechanism. Been a blast talkng with you guys. Will be consulting off this site. I really have enjoyed talking with you guys. Will be trying to get various people to contact Tesla R&D etc. Again, it's been real. Searcher

Timo | November 10, 2010

searcher: you still don't get it: totally seperated system retriveing energy from the turning wheels with as yet uninvented systems very, very unobtrusively to the working drive system

That is using car kinetic energy to generate energy. As such it can't be "very unobtrusively" device, or if it is then it doesn't generate anything, it just sits there. That's the law of nature, the first law of thermodynamics.

If you use one energy source to transform it to other form of energy you reduce that first energy source, in this case the car movement.

battery - car engine - car movement - your device - battery = loss of movement and energy. You don't gain anything, you lose energy with that, because no energy transform is 100% efficient.

Vawlkus | November 10, 2010

Oi gevalt searcher.

There is no way in HELL that you can have a system to "stealthy recapture" energy from the drive wheels WITHOUT CREATING DRAG ON THOSE WHEELS. When you create drag on those wheels, YOU DRAIN THE BATTERY OF THE EXTRA POWER IT TAKES TO TURN THAT MECHANISM AS WELL AS THE WHEEL. I can't say it any plainer than that.

You're still trying to say you can turn the sky plaid with wishful thinking, and that's not the point of these forums. It's for examining practicle & feasable ideas that can be applied using existing, or near to existing, technology. This is not a dreamworks factory.

searcher | November 10, 2010

vawlkus, I was attempting to exit this website as graciously as I could. Sorry just cause vawlkus said it don't mean it's impossible to me. I know your answer to this is "it aint what Vawlkes said its waht the laws of physics are" but I refer you to DanAderhold's post referring something on the order of "as emgineers it was our job to do the impoosible". Dan laid his resume out there and I liked his professionlism and general attitude. I somewhat accidently ran upon Tesl'a request for certain rules they would like to see adherred to to keep this website open and unitimidating to all input, I suppose hightech, reasonable, and unreasonable alike. As I read this I know I stretched this rule with some of my sarcasm etc. Would submit to you you check out the "me to" I will call it the piling on rule. For example timo has explained to me several times your above stated law of thermodynamics yet other's have simply joined in pound on this point also. With such comments as "I've got your back". To which I expressed my feeling that "don't worry I think timos back is well covered already". Also you might check out the "no profanity" rule to. Be assured I will be talking to others who will fully back up your rule of thermodynamics. But is that not the "daunting challenge" we have to work within the soverign rules authored by the wonderful soverign. Isn't it a wonderous thing that all this creation was set up with such soverign logic which I am truly thankful for. It not there would be total chaos. But it seems to me our challenge is to work within these soverign boundries with the creativity that the same soverign has endowed us with. I fully accept what you are saying as absolute, not disagreeing with you one bit about the law of thermodynamics you restated. So you guys retain your patience and grace with ideas coming from sources less informed than yours. Keep the forum open and inviting because maybe some individuals might see some of the replys as hey those guys know their stuff and I am not going to submit my idea because I might wind up looking foolish. That idea then might have been granted by the soverign who wrote the first law of thermodynamics, I firmly beleive it can happen. So hope you see my points here at least. I fully submit to the soverign laws of thermodynamics and to you latest presentation. So any further research on my part will have to be working within the bounds of these laws as do all researchers do, so don't worry about it noone is going to change these immutable laws. So "Happy Trails" Vuwlkus and blessings to you and all the other guys I have had the pleasure of speaking with on the site.

Timo | November 11, 2010

Would it be enough to you if few million scientist of this area of expertise say it. Because they do. They all do. DanAderholds idea didn't have anything to do with perpetual motion machines like yours do. He just plain miscalculated the benefits of extra generator in drive system.

There is one possible variation of his suggestion: use hub-motor -like lightweight generators as brakes in front wheels. That's the only place where those would really benefit the car when regenerative braking is engaged. However they either needs to be powerful enough to actually stop the wheels at high speeds, or you need to have traditional brakes there as well, and then we have unsprung weight problem.

Impossible is by definition impossible. Unlikely can sometimes made likely, but impossible stays impossible.

searcher | November 12, 2010

Epilouge II , no timo not a few million but maybe a half million or so,ha. Seriously in future discussions when anyone tells me sounds like "perpetual motion" idea "or free energy" idea I will know to shut right up and go a different route. Bet you don't believe that do you,ha. Just joking. Those turning wheels still intrigue the heck out of me though although I fully take your word and everybody else's word on it about my concept being in realm of perpertual motion and/or free energy. I know I have been a stubborn,sarcastic,benevolent,patient and impatient student but I consider us all on the same team. I was reflecting this evening on our conversations and my last post to you under submit ideas and I just want to express to you that I perceive a few things about you. Highly intelligent, well versed in what you are talking about, totally interested in electric cars along with a lot of other stuff probably. Very serious about your interests and pursuits and a person very devoid of guile and I think that taken as a whole is a person of high integrity and worth. Especilly the aspect of no guile, so rare in this day and time. I wish I didn't pocess this guile and sarcasm so ready to aim at my fellow man as I have so stupidly displayed upon my posts just because someone didn't agree with me. What really prompted me to say this to you was something from the soverign of the universe I read just the other night, please see Zechariah 8 v.16-17. I am pretty good on the no lying part which I thought the flase oaths part was talking about but some of the rest cut deeply and i saw I needed to really work on this. So I sincerely apologize for the sarcasm I have displayed. I sincerely appreciate your integrity and we will talk later, my friend. searcher

Vawlkus | November 12, 2010

I'm all for new an innovative ideas searcher. It can just be a little frustrating when people aren't reading the older threads to see their "new" ideas have already been proposed in some form or another dozens of times before, always by people who think they're the first without taking the time to read what's already there

I haven't been on these forums as long as timo has, but I've still seen the old perpetual motion machine ideas spring up every second week for a couple years now on this forum, and it's predeceasor, and it gets a little frustrating after a while.

Brian H | November 14, 2010

"Charge in seconds" Cap-battery hybrids to be revealed tomorrow:

Now quite up to automobile use yet (?), promised for next year.

Mouijdan | November 16, 2010

I hear about the expected life of these batteries beeing 10 years but I have yet to see a battery last that long. Lab results based on well designed loads and operating conditions do not neccessarily simulate real life experience. My experience with all Li-Ion batteries has been that the life does not exceed 5 years. If Tesla is serious about 10 years life, can Tesla back it up with 100% warranty for 10 years?
Another question, how in the hell are supposed to transport these batteries overseas in a timely manner when DOT does not allow for Air Transport? Logisitics nightmare. Anyone care to comment? Tkx

cablechewer | November 16, 2010

Mouijdan check

The post is from 2007, but at that time this blog gives the impression that the ESS was certified for air transport against DOT and UN standards. If they have lost the ability to fly the ESS and cars containing it I haven't heard about it.

As for the lifespan Tesla believes that regulating the environment in which the battery cell lives will enhance its lifespan. In your laptop and cell phone the batteries are not coddled with temperature controls, they can be dropped, etc.

Vawlkus | November 17, 2010

Having worked with laptop batteries, I can safely say that Tesla's not far wrong with their lifetime estimates provided the batteries are cared for properly.
Time and again, I have seen laptops brought in that have batteries that have eben burned out in less than 2 years. Why? Because users aren't taking care of them, and because laptop manufacturers DESIGN their packs to fail by not including overcharge protection & thermal cutoffs.

Timo | November 17, 2010

...and not having any cooling sitting in bottom of the very hot computer.

Roblab | November 18, 2010

Toyota RAV4EV NiMH batteries: 10 years, many still on road today.
Toyota Prius NiMH batteries: 10 years, mine still running fine.
Mouijdan, you said you have yet to see *a battery* last that long. They do. LiIon are being warranteed 8 years by several mfg.
Also, I have good ol' lead acid SMA batteries, so far 8 years on my solar grid tie, expected life 18. Maybe you meant something else by "last".

kiekens | November 23, 2010

I know this is not a real research area and just a place for comments for people who are not informed.
The science here is really old, ancient even.
You said: -
“There is no way in HELL that you can have a system to "stealthy recapture" energy from the drive wheels WITHOUT CREATING DRAG ON THOSE WHEELS. When you create drag on those wheels, YOU DRAIN THE BATTERY OF THE EXTRA POWER IT TAKES TO TURN THAT MECHANISM AS WELL AS THE WHEEL. I can't say it any plainer than that.”
This is definitely Brian H, and Timo think., it’s a shame too. This means that a technology called Maglev could never work. I’m glad you told us but I’m afraid those pesky researchers and engineers worked on it and actually did some research and got the bugs out and got it working. Despite the Brian H and Timo think. Time to stop mouthing off and actually start doing some real research there brian H and Timo. Oh, But the government doesn’t give you any money to do real research, Only money to drink and mouth off? I’m surprised. You see the magnetic field on those rails and drive mechanisms do create a drag, but at high speed it is actually helpful to the train’s motion. Shocking. And the Phrase “TANSTAAFL” was first noticed by Rudyard Kipling, and his comment was not negative but originally it was a positive thing. The bars in San Francisco gave out ‘all you can eat’ if you bought a drink. R. Kipling said people should remember that if they were out on their luck and could have as much food as they wanted, cheap. As well When Jesus fed the 5000 men who had not eaten in three days as well as many women and children he used 5 fish and a few loaves a little boy was carrying for his own lunch. Where did all the extra food come from, obviously a LOT of extra free energy and mass there? You mention the second law of thermodynamics. That law is proof that evolution is impossible, where the very forces that would be randomly created would be destroyed by that random energy so no random positive improvement is possible. All changes are destructive... So you misuse even the second law of thermodynamics. So you don’t know what you disagree with and you don’t know what you affirm there Brian H and Timo.
So brian H and Timo the back covering tag team of enthusiasts. It may be true but enthusiasts for what.. The oil industry? Your idea of perpetual motion not being possible is at least 100 years old. So your science knowledge is backward by at least 100 years. Now you two may have 50 PhDs between the two of you. That would be too bad for me and for you and for those who would hire you because there or undergraduates in China that are doing more advanced research than you two think is possible. You can have your doubts but please don’t let them be so pathetic so you are “knee jerking’ and ‘mouthing off’ and have to keep changing your story. You guys are ripe for “1984”, just keep changing history and you will be OK.
So sad really. So what is the great America focusing its research on?? Oil and how to get it; and AIDS. Well its time for America to stop sinning and start doing some real industrial research before the smallest and poorest and least educated countries pass it and leave it behind in the dust or piles of condoms which ever comes first.

qwk | November 23, 2010

u mad?

Timo | November 23, 2010

He probably is. Ignorant definitely. He doesn't even know how maglev works, refers to ancient bedtime stories as actual facts, and doesn't understand one bit how evolution works, much less anything about thermodynamics. Some nutjob.

searcher | November 23, 2010

Hello kiekens and timo, OK obviously both of you know something about this maglev stuff. So in as lay terms as possible explain it to me. Timo you know I consider you my friend and have great respect for you and kiekens you obviously know I found your post very interesting. So timo I humbly hope you are doing scientific research into some of the areas I recommended to you, I promise you will be utterly fascinated with your probing mind.

kiekens I mentioned several post back about building revoluntionary safety in ssmall cars which are in Tesla's overall plan down the road a ways. timo patiently explained that the gforce situation in collisions was where the problem was and I was interested to know if you knew whether or not any research with possible solutions to this problem was being carried out or had been carried out. I guess the problem was the gforce effect on the internal organs of the body irregardless if the person inside the car was in a totatly protected interior or not. Any comments will be appreciated. Again I really enjoyed your post. Please see mine concerning safety in small car I called it my "ball bearing" concept.

searcher | November 23, 2010

I know I have seen some discusion about USA power grid and this question has probably already been addressed more than you maybe somewhat jaded people that have been on this site awhile care to see again but could someone tell me about how our power grid breaks down as to percentages of hydroelectric, coal fired, and nuclearz? Any information will be appreciated. Also any opinions or research on how quick the USA could adopt its power grid if massive and quick move to EV's was required for national security etc.

Timo | November 24, 2010

There are a very good wiki pages about maglev trains and maglev in general. Read them:

Maglev has nothing to do in transforming one source of energy to another in a car. If you move a maglev train it requires power, just like it requires power to move a car. It is not free energy any more than dynamo is in your bike. Same effect maglev trains use to move is used inside electric motor to make things move. It is not magic and nothing weird and definitely doesn't break the law of conservation of energy.

kiekens doesn't understand thermodynamics at all, he is probably some ignorant creationist that has read a lot of creationistic propaganda ignoring all real sources of knowledge, because I have seen his claim about thermodynamics second law proving evolution impossible before. Using that argument no child could grow to adulthood, which they obviously can do (to make it obvious how bad that claim is). This is not a forum for that debate, so I leave it to that, but to you, searcher, would be wise not to hold this person very high respect. Don't trust those kind of people, they are either ignorant or liars or both. Or nutjobs.

searcher, don't consider me as your friend, I'm not. I'm not enemy, nor friend, I'm just person you don't know anything about in the net that happens to write in same forum you do. More like a friendly stranger you see in your local grocery shopping.

dsm363 | November 24, 2010

This forum is starting to make my head hurt. I think it's getting to the point it might need to a moderated forum but not sure anyone at Tesla has the time or desire to do that.

Kevin Sharpe | November 24, 2010

I would have to agree... it takes a lot of effort to trawl through the noise

searcher | November 24, 2010

timo, very logical statement on the friend thing. I fully agree. Just trying to act in a less antagonistic manner after reviewing some of my own post . I am very cool with your friends statement and absolutely no offense taken. Just trying to lower the antagonism level as I may have a lot of questions to people as i stated, more jaded fromm having been on the website for awhile and have heard my questions and exceptions perhaps too many times. Trying to lower my self admitted arrogance level and really get into posts where immediate but mostly in my case things in the medium to long range can be bounced off each other without involving the egos. Just thowing stuf, ridulous and otherwise and see what sticks. Sometimes it may have to get a little ridculous to some at times to keep a creative discusion going. And not just a series of post of what somebody has read in a techno magazine which is all important but not entirely exclusive for creative conversation. and timo my suggestion for research I hoped you would get into I wanted to submit in nothing but very humble manner so as not to offend you in hope that you would seriouly investigate if you have not already, just did not want to make these suggestions in any way that could be considered angry or arrogant. Thanks for the websites, I will check them out. Was intrigued by one of your posts where you explained what formats things might eventually evole to motors in each wheel etc, etc. Also understood one post someone made the immediate thing for Tesla is to get in the middle of the market and create revenues right now, fully agree here and think their overall strategy is very sound.

searcher | December 4, 2010

What is the fusion thing that BrinH or somebody mentioned that would make plenty of energy available and probably relatively cheap at the same time? What will be the most probable size and weight of the battery in the "Bluestar" series coming down the pike.

Timo | December 5, 2010

DPF or Dense Plasma Focus, if viable, has around 5MW reactor that could fit in the lawnmower but it needs heavy duty shielding against neutron radiation. Relatively cheap to build, easy to operate, flip a switch and it turns on, flip it again and it is off.

Nobody knows anything about bluestar yet, not even Tesla. Only that it is supposed to be cheaper than Model S.

searcher | December 5, 2010

Thanks timo, fascinating stuff.

Vawlkus | December 6, 2010

Searcher: check the Ford Fusion website, they've been toying with fusion stuff for a couple years now, although I didn't find a lotta hard facts and figures on their website.

Timo | December 6, 2010

You probably mean Focus Fusion, not Ford Fusion. ;)

LPPX has managed to produce fusion in their reactor, but that doesn't yet mean that it is profitable. OTOH it looks like it is only engineering challenge, not scientific anymore, to get it in profitable state. Final goal is aneutronic fusion, but tritium-deuterium (like in tokamak reactors) is also possible.

Vawlkus | December 7, 2010

Whups, thanks for catching that timo.