https://electrek.co/2025/10/12/clear-skies-ahead-delta-partners-with-maeve-on-m80-hybrid-regional-aircraft/

It’s a start in the right direction.  Still think solid state batteries and other battery tech coming online will remove the need for combustion.

27 minutes ago, SayAgain said:

Still think solid state batteries and other battery tech coming online will remove the need for combustion.

 

Yep, ultimately.

Certainly for shorter range flights. Longer range airliners will require a very significant energy density, though. 600 Wh/kg for regional to 1,200 Wh/kg for big wide body airliners.

 

 

I'm thinking, nuclear, yes that's the ticket, small nuclear power plants, like the energizer bunny, they just keep going and going.

I've been hearing about these awesome solid state batteries and sodium batteries for years now, yet all the EVs and other devices I come across still use lithium ion batteries.

When will these batteries be ready for prime time?

Believe it or not, I'm rooting for new batteries which have twice the energy density and half the charging time of lithium.  Then EVs will become much more viable for all travel scenarios.

Dave

2027 to 2028 for mass production. Pilot production has started.

Real world testing in cars is underway. 

1 hour ago, dave2013 said:

When will these batteries be ready for prime time?

Linked you to their real world usage in other threads … if you’re not interested then not much point in me posting the links again.  The mass produced EV using hybrid SS battery is the SAIC MG4 here:

https://insideevs.com/news/771402/every-solid-state-battery-ev/

Not going to find anything in the US, we’re going back to Coal and Steam powered cars 🤪  

https://www.instituteforenergyresearch.org/fossil-fuels/coal/trump-releases-plan-to-aid-the-u-s-coal-industry/#:~:text=Key Takeaways,for projects in rural areas.

Our tax dollars hard at work …

5 hours ago, martin-w said:

Longer range airliners will require a very significant energy density, though. 600 Wh/kg for regional to 1,200 Wh/kg for big wide body airliners

Yep, that energy density will not arrive until about 2030.

Hopefully sooner, but there again, it took 30 years before ICE made it into mass production cars.  Aircraft is a bit more of a challenge.

2 hours ago, SayAgain said:

Not going to find anything in the US, we’re going back to Coal and Steam powered cars

Ha, ha.  You just can't help yourself, can you?

China and India are building new coal power plants like there's no tomorrow, 41 in India and 289 in China in 2024 alone.  I guess they're just not as smart as you, huh?

Using "clean" coal, essentially using low sulfur coal, crushing it, and capturing the carbon emissions, has been used in the U.S. for years and our coal plants are among the cleanest in the world.

With all the AI data centers coming online, your dream of tens of thousands of ugly windmills and thousands of acres of solar panels just ain't gonna cut it.  Personally, I'm for building more clean nuclear plants instead of coal plants.

Dave

 

7 hours ago, dave2013 said:

China and India are building new coal power plants like there's no tomorrow, 41 in India and 289 in China in 2024 alone.  I guess they're just not as smart as you, huh?

 

So what? That doesn't mean US should do the same. Two wrongs don't make a right.

The reason China still maintains coal fired stations is to strengthen its energy security, as a buffer. But yes, you can highlight China's continued use of coal as a buffer, if you like, while simultaneously ignoring the huge expansion in its use of renewable energy, I would expect you to do that. You can also ignore the US CO2 emissions per capita, I would expect you to do that, too. 🙂

 

China CO2 emissions per capita: 8.89 tons.     China population: 1,409 billion.

US CO2 emissions per capita: 14.21 tons.         US population: 340.1 million.

India CO2 emissions per capita: 1.89 tons.        India population: 1.451 billion.

Don't think you can use China to support your argument given the above.

 

Quote

 

But adding capacity does not necessarily translate into higher generation or emissions, particularly while the growth of clean energy is still accelerating.

Coal power generation plays a residual role in China’s power system, filling the gap between the power generated from clean energy sources – such as wind, solar, hydro and nuclear – and total electricity demand. As clean-energy generation is growing rapidly, the space left for coal to fill is shrinking.

From December 2024, coal power generation declined for five straight months before ticking up slightly in May and June, mainly to offset weaker hydropower generation due to drought. Coal power generation was flat overall in the second quarter of 2025.

 

https://www.carbonbrief.org/guest-post-why-china-is-still-building-new-coal-and-when-it-might-stop/

 

7 hours ago, dave2013 said:

With all the AI data centers coming online, your dream of tens of thousands of ugly windmills and thousands of acres of solar panels just ain't gonna cut it. 

 

Beauty, or ugliness is in the eye of the beholder. And in your case shaped by your political bias. There's nothing ugly about either wind turbines or solar panels, only because you want that to be the case.

 

7 hours ago, dave2013 said:

Personally, I'm for building more clean nuclear plants instead of coal plants.

 

I'm not particularly a fan of nuclear, but yes, there may be a role. But no, they are not "clean" you may mean "cleaner than coal in terms of air pollution and CO2 emissions." 

Edited October 13, 2025Oct 13 by martin-w

18 hours ago, SayAgain said:

https://electrek.co/2025/10/12/clear-skies-ahead-delta-partners-with-maeve-on-m80-hybrid-regional-aircraft/

It’s a start in the right direction.  Still think solid state batteries and other battery tech coming online will remove the need for combustion.

 

Actually, if they achieve their objectives, the range is pretty good. I think that's a bit above the range of the ATR 72-500, if I recall. 

 

Quote

The Maeve M80 hybrid-electric aircraft is designed with a range of approximately 920 to 1,200 nautical miles (1,482 to 2,222 km), though the specific range can vary depending on the configuration. Recent updates suggest the target range has increased, with some sources stating up to 1,200 nm.

 

 

 

12 hours ago, dave2013 said:

You just can't help yourself, can you?

Facts are facts, are you denying the link and US using tax payer money to subsidize coal?  Yes or No? 

And here’s a truck for your power backup needs:

https://www.washingtonpost.com/climate-solutions/2025/10/12/electric-vehicle-battery-blackouts/

 

6 hours ago, martin-w said:

The reason China still maintains coal fired stations is to strengthen its energy security, as a buffer.

So, it's OK for China to build, not just "maintain" as you stated, coal power plants to strengthen its energy security, but not OK for the U.S. to do that?  Are you kidding?  I think we'll pass on frequent blackouts like Spain is having recently, and we know what path they chose for energy....

BTW, you do realize that all the trees, and plants, and crops, need CO2 to survive, right?  It's not a "pollutant".  There are scientists who think more CO2 is a good thing, you just choose to ignore them.  Obviously you can have too much of a good thing, but there is evidence and research that CO2's greenhouse effect influence has its limits and we've likely reached that limit already.  I'm sure you'll ignore that as well.  Again, I could make a very long list of all the failed predictions by folks like you over the past 50 years, but you just keep on a comin as if you're never wrong.

Yes, the average American pollutes and consumes more than the average person in China, but China has 4 times our population, so even with the smaller per capita emissions, the overall emissions are much higher and do far more damage to the earth, that is, according to folks like yourself.  So why no criticism of China, or India?  It seems as if you only like to criticize the USA.  Is this perhaps because you're in competition with us and wish to bring us down a notch or two?  I wonder. 

Anyway, U.S. pollution has been decreasing for decades, and we have the cleanest air and water in 50 years, probably cleaner than the UK.

Literally every day I'm watching a slow motion train wreck in Europe, and it gets worse every day.  We all know the various reasons why it's happening, but can't discuss it here, and many don't want to admit it due to pride or whatever.  Well, folks like me will prevent that from happening in my country for as long as we can.  I think it's inevitable in the long run due to infiltration of the education system and mass brainwashing, but for now, at least, we've managed to stop purposefully hurting ourselves and ruining our economy.

There is a middle ground vis-a-vis the issue of you-know-what and energy sources, but it appears that those on your side are unwilling to compromise and listen to reason.  This uncompromising, all or nothing game won't end well.

Dave out for good on this discussion.

6 hours ago, dave2013 said:

Dave out for good on this discussion.

This is why I have a hard time taking you seriously … you don’t answer questions, you just divert to something else as a “justification”.  

So when I linked you to many articles showing China is moving away from coal to renewable energy like Solar, you just came back with you usual statement of “pathetic” and “naive” rather than try to provide anything to demonstration the information I provided was not accurate.

You’re happy to point out “Solar” is subsidized (which I agreed with you that it is and for a good reason, human survival), but when it comes to high pollution energy sources like coal and oil being subsidized, you just avoid or divert.  In many of your statements you’ve said China is the highest polluter with more coal mining than any other country, but now when the US does it, it’s not pollution?  China is righting their wrongs, they have huge solar farms, they’re moving away from coal and I’ve linked you to existing solar farms in China 160 sq/mi here: https://www.reuters.com/world/china/worlds-biggest-solar-farm-comes-online-chinas-xinjiang-2024-06-03/#:~:text=BEIJING%2C June 3 (Reuters),China's densely populated eastern seaboard.

As far as criticism, I’ve been very consistent with high polluting countries, be it China, Indian, Pakistan, Russia, etc.  The environment impacts every form of life on this planet (that’s why it matters to all not just a few), yet when I mentioned “one planet” you once again went into meaningless characterizations.  As Martin pointed out, 1 bad or 10 bad, doesn’t make a good.  The rest of the world is waking up to the environmental issues, the US is going backward, especially what the whole scale firing of most of the EPA and having it run by completely unqualified individuals … removing drink water standards is good how?  

https://www.epa.gov/newsreleases/epa-launches-biggest-deregulatory-action-us-history

And the current administration is putting a positive spin on this list?  Read it, actually read it … the lack of environmental standards for big business is staggering.  It’s one of many reasons we’re leaving the US under this current administration … can’t fathom how those with children are going to fair in the US.  But hey, to each his or her own right … if this is what you want in life, great.  But it’s not what we want and we have no interested in paying federal taxes to support the current administration, hence relocating outside the US.  This administration has caught onto the exodus and is now trying to stop ex-pats by trying to figure out a way on how to tax them … good luck with that.  They hate us Democrats/Liberals, but don’t want us to leave (I feel sorry for those who aren’t financially able to leave the US).  

I stopped auto racing in 2014 because what I was doing was VERY bad for the environment, leaded high octane fuels, nasty brake pad materials, frequent oil changes, coolant flush, brake bleeds (that stuff is incredibly toxic).  I’m guilty and I own the guilt.  I changed my ways because I can change, I can learn, and I can adapt, and I can admit when I’m wrong.  I loved auto racing, but there are many more things in life to love that aren’t environmentally toxic.

Just like above, I asked you a simple “yes” or “no” question to the current administration subsidizing coal with tax payer money … again, you just ignore it.  You seem to think you’re “debating”, but you’re really not … you’re doing exactly what a politician does, avoids simple Yes or No answers.

I highly doubt you’ll leave this thread without getting “the last word” (wasn’t that a game show?)

 

EDIT: I’ve screen captured this just for posterity as I’m sure you’ll find a way to have it removed.

Edited October 13, 2025Oct 13 by SayAgain

On 10/12/2025 at 5:10 PM, SayAgain said:

in the US, we’re going back to Coal and Steam powered cars

Coal doesn't work very well in gasoline or diesel cars, but is a major contributor in powering cars made by Tesla and BYD.

As for steam, the pinnacle was the Doble steam car.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Doble_steam_car

To keep even somewhat on topic, that article mentions this:

Quote

They undertook further development work with Abner Doble and created an interurban car, a railcar, and a steam aircraft. The brothers modified a Travel Air 2000 bi-plane by replacing its petrol engine with a steam engine. The plane was successfully test flown on 12 April 1933 at Oakland Municipal Airport, California.

 

10 hours ago, SayAgain said:

are you denying the link and US using tax payer money to subsidize coal?

The US subsidizes fossil fuels and THANK GOD they do.  I hope they never stop.

Hook

IBTL. 😁