Why Graphene Battery Technology Is The Future Of EVs!

One of the many things that consumers and manufacturers will agree on is that Lithium-ion batteries are not good enough if we want the keep the EV revolution alive. Therefore, manufacturers have been looking for other options that can solve the problem Li-ion batteries have and offer better alternatives for EV batteries. One of these options is GRAPHENE, a material that has remarkable properties and potential applications.
So, how good can graphene batteries be? And what can they bring to the EV industry?
#Graphene #Battery #BatteryTechnology #EV
🔔 Subscribe here! ➡️ bit.ly/45vQ8TF
🚀 Turn on notifications for the latest EV news if you enjoyed the video!
👇 Let us know your thoughts down in the comment section!

[@leftcoaster67]

Samsung made a big thing about Graphene batteries, and 5 years later....

[@vipertube7182]

60 years ago people made a big deal about cheap solar, took them like 50 years to get where we are, this type of stuff just takes time

[@dougsheldon5560]

If only GMG could figure out how to manufacture it in quantity

[@teknosql4740]

Its not make sense, since technology to mass production of battery is already exist, why they dont using exist tech, instead of develop its own tech

[@hermanstokbrood]

@@teknosql4740So you want to stay on heavy and/or expensive cars? Graphene solves several problems: Range, weight and life-span, it sure makes sense.

[@evolutionschildren]

GMG is on track to do just that. Like everything, it will take some time. I give it 4 more years.

[@pohloliq2122]

@@evolutionschildren will the their stock price rise then?

[@mikep.coplin6800]

You can make a living battery out of a COMFREY ROOT (a very powerful one), if you know how to do it. Another thing, if you took a core sample of all the salt mines around the world, to find the yellow salt down deep. That is not just any salt, it is advanced battery making salts ( look for the yellow salt down deep, interesting stuff ). P.S. From the time traveler, enjoy !

[@mlrichards66]

Amazing. I saw a shorter video about this many years ago. Good to see it is still evolving. It's interesting that amidst all of the conversation about global warming, you hear almost nothing about the horrors of Cobalt mining in Africa or the potential alternatives. Companies that use rare Earth minerals for batteries should all be investing large amounts in this technology to get it across the line. It seems that evolution in the areas of nuclear energy and alternative storage are really the ideal targets to address greenhouse gases.

[@LeanNSteerKayaks]

I read several comments about the time to have an idea be tested and reach production, saying this is too long. Usually, new ideas and developments take a LONG time to go from lab tested concepts to anything producible at scale. Jet engine development stated in 1926. The jet engine is an example of something that had skeptics at first, then resistance, yet had constant development with investment by militaries. Governments will spend huge amounts of money to develop the the next big thing. Whittle started working on it in 1928, with funding. He developed a workable jet engine by 1937. Well, sorta workable. For its size, it didn't have enough thrust. Yet even after Hitler got interested in the turbojet as one of his superweapons, the return on investment was rather poor. The most workable version, produced for the ME262, finally had enough thrust to be useful, but had a short service life of only about 5 hours before a complete teardown was in order. The internal combustion engine development history is even slower. The first patent for an ICE is in 1794, with the first operational engines supposedly made about that time and certainly by 1807. More were made in the 1820-1860 period. Otto patented an engine in 1864, but didn't come up with his otto cycle 4 stoke engine till 1976. Yet even after that, the first commercially produced ICE that wasn't just a novelty took well over another decade. Electronic image collecting tubes took decades to actually develop. The idea of the transistor was first proposed in 1925, but suitable semiconductor materials had to be developed in order to make it possible. I saw a flat screen solid state COLOR monitor back in around 1973-4 in a lab. The screen was about notebook paper size and about one inch thick. I also saw a digital camera unit made for NASA, high end industrial, or military use in another lab back in 1983. (No, it didn't look much like a camera that you could use.) Imagine my impatience in the late 1990's waiting for what I was seeing was possible in labs and demos of expensive cameras through the 1980's. The nickel metal hydrate battery was invented in 1967. It would take over 20 years 1989, before one was commercially available in the consumer market. I think I first bought some in the early 1990's. Graphene Manufacturing Group say that they have made a graphene/aluminum pouch battery that has a capacity of one AH. A few months ago, it was 500ma. They have been working on the series of developments to reach this level since 2016. That includes developing technology to make graphene with natural gas, with the said by-product being hydrogen. We'll see how this goes, but unlike the impatient, it appears this is a usual time line. What could speed it up? A government seeing a military application. As to sodium-ion? Fine, as long as you are not going anywhere. Power is not even as dense as lithium. It at least appears that it will be far cheaper and suitable for cold environments. This will make them suitable for stationary use. However, a purely solid state battery technology should be much lighter, with higher energy density than either lithium, or sodium-ion.

[@wasslic]

Admittedly a novice at understanding all of this, but the development by GMG interests me the most. Unfortunately I have never seen an Australian government with the balls to get behind companies like this and financially support them.

[@clasico2.044]

20 years after the Nobel, the Amazing possibilities for so many Graphene solutions are barely realized. Minimal traction. Begs Why? 🤯 Good, informative video that's actually a Rerun

[@nunagoras]

Explained actually on the video: Too expensive for mass production. Sodium batteries seem to be, for now, the, even if provisional, answer for the EV mass deployment on the next few decades to come.

[@TUHANbukanorangARAB]

BIG OIL COMPANIES COMPLAIN.

[@daxtonbrown]

The company I work for manufactures graphene and I do both sales and product development. We have brought down the price substantially.

[@anonymousman4419]

​@@daxtonbrownyeah, I don't think it's as tough to make the transition as they make it seem to be. But you know, we can't risk closing the lithium mines.

[@DavidSeekTruth]

​@daxtonbrown what is the company name

[@joeforeman3027]

What’s holding it back?

[@issakhlayel627]

A start up company name carbonext Inc develop a process to produce a 3D graphene in a big quantity but they need investors to move up to the next stage commercial production of graphene

[@shareefmd7469]

Rip oil..!

[@jellyboy123]

i can buy graphene AA battery are they fake?

[@davidperry4013]

Eventually gasoline cars will go the way of floppy disks.

[@aaronpingol1566]

Their saying that for years now but nothing's happening

[@hermanstokbrood]

If the price stays high graphene is useless for vehicles which already are too expensive.

[@DiLee-xr1yc]

Why do cars only why powering a house and electrical goods.

[@colbalt95]

Any type of large-scale power usage is going to require the use of some form of power generator. I work as an engineer on ships. Batteries are really only used as a backup supply for critical systems

[@prestonhensinger598]

graphene batteries are... graphene batteries are... graphene batteries are... MY HEAD IS GOING TO EXPLODE IF YOU SAY "graphene batteries are..." AGAIN

[@sreesub]

why are all the videos from these channels sound like marketing material from some startup who will probably never mass produce anything !!! Unless any company is ready to mass produce any new tech its irrelevant.

[@dorzsboss]

The usual bullshitting.

[@livangooday]

you got layers of "broken" graphene and silicon in tesla batteries already... lithium ions sits on pure graphite and silicone, the C atoms creates bonds naturally between them and creates layers upon layers of Graphene , this video and channel is as shallow bullshit as graphene itself... if anybody wants depth go to the limiting factor videos...

[@Ollieys]

I agree, way too good to be true. If what GMG is saying is even close to be true we would have politicians begging to be in on it.

[@teknosql4740]

They always disable comment column in their channel, if the video show battery

[@neorock6135]

Graphene, the miracle thats a few years away, every freakin year. - At this point, this video should be labeled Clickbait or at minumum, pointless!

[@allenmoses110]

Nothing more nothing more boring than another battery video.

[@PK-pp3lu]

You're pretty dense

[@user-rj5cr8bi9s]

If I hear one more time graphene I m gonna 🤮🤮🤮🤮🤮...every 3 secs you say graphene...wtf?