• QuandaleDingle@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    23
    ·
    edit-2
    11 months ago

    1k mile or kilometer range? Which is it? I’m inclined to believe it’s kilometers. Time to read the article, I suppose. It’s enticing either way.

    • betabob@lemmy.dbzer0.com
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      15
      ·
      11 months ago

      A bit misleading but yes, 1000km is what they are talking about. Also the article doesn’t address scalability.

      • metallic_substance@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        5
        ·
        edit-2
        11 months ago

        Well, there’s a lot the article doesn’t address. I can say this with complete confidence, even as someone who hasn’t read the article

        Edit: don’t freak out, I eventually did read the whole article. Every word. And I was right.

    • AA5B@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      9
      ·
      11 months ago

      They demonstrated 40% increase in energy density.

      The stuff about the range appears to be simply applying that percentage to common EV ranges, which is nonsense. It’s probably more likely that an increase in energy density would be used to decrease battery size, leading to cheaper and lighter EVs

    • nilloc@discuss.tchncs.de
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      6
      ·
      11 months ago

      The title says “1000 miles”, the the subtitle right below says “moving closer to 1000 kilometers” which is only 621 miles and pretty close to what we already could do with a ridiculously big battery in a Lucid Air or Tesla (if they didn’t bother with the plaid speed bullshit and just build for single motor range).

      Stupid editorial work for maximum click bait.