RE:RE:RE:RE:RE:RE:RE:RE:Remember this?Boob, here is a summary of the work the USDOE is doing on this project: • Objective: Demonstrate scalability and manufacturability of ABR technology and enable a domestic supply chain for large format battery manufacturing • Approach: Utilize DOE Battery Manufacturing R&D Facility (BMF) at ORNL for extensive large scale manufacturability study – Extensive equipment – Industrial collaborations with extensive WFO portfolio to understand industry needs – Extensive expertise and capabilities • Technical: – Demonstrate coating and processing in continuous 8” wide roll to roll operation on 12” web – Scale pouch cells from 150mAh to 3Ah – Control process and repeatability – Test processing limits • Collaborators: Extensive collaborations with national laboratories, lithium-ion battery manufacturers, raw materials suppliers, and coating producer. • Commercialization: Highly engaged with industry and all ABR PIs; high likelihood of technology transfer because equipment compatibility and understanding of needs. Boob, go back and read it again. Get out of the fog now.
zen2twenty wrote: Boob, these are the future plans for this project in 2015, • FY15 – Widen collaborator network – Standardize processing and manufacturing procedures – Include new chemistries from ABR and BATT – Provide scaling expertise for renewable carbon materials, silicon materials, sulfur, thick electrodes, reducing solvents
zen2twenty wrote: Boob, look at this impressive list of partners working on this USDOE project:• Partners – National Labs: Argonne National Laboratory, Sandia National Laboratories – Battery Manufacturers: Dow Kokam, A123 Systems, Navitas Systems – Active Material Suppliers: Phostech Lithium, TODA America, Superior Graphite, Zenyatta Ventures – Inactive Material Suppliers: JSR Micro, Solvay Specialty Polymers, Timcal, XG Sciences – Equipment/Coating Suppliers: PPG Industries, Frontier Industrial Technology • Collaborative Activities – Provide access to manufacturing facilities, expertise, and scale up – Enable domestic supply chain by being unbiased advisor and independent facilitator – Benchmark against commercially available materials – Scale-up logistics and manufacturing cost savings of processing with key battery developers and raw materials suppliers. WOW, BOOB, now go back and read this again, slower. Look at all the knowledge Zen is gaining, from these multi-national companies.
BobGreenfield wrote: Zen2twenty, I can only speculate on the DOE inclusion of Albany graphite in that study. The DOE found the Albany tout for quality and purity of a natural graphite quite compelling so they accepted the submission for the study.
One doesn't need to speculate on why end-users expectations have not yet been met for Albany samples submitted to them. The samples simply didn't live up to the tout to this point.
One doesn't have to speculate on why in the last presser there is talk of "a potential range of purity" if one uses logic and relates that outlook to the fact the company states they are still trying to meet the purity expectations of customers. A range is more easily attained than the holy grail.
I don't believe the DOE was interested in a range of purity, do you?
zen2twenty wrote: Oh Boob, your common sense is chit, you swim in chit, all that chit comes from your brain, so Boob, you have chit for brains. So yes, you swim in common sense. Did you figure out why USDOE is using graphite from Albany yet?