Donut Lab alleged Solid State Battery launched at CES 2026

[Analog Kid]

I think if they want to play with the big boys in this field, they need to change name, "Donut Lab" just not cutting it.

Ah, but grasshopper, we're in the upside-down bizarro age of the 21st century, where the company with the goofy name wins.
Like "Google".

[Andy Chee]

Glass used to be recyclable at this facility (Waste Management). But a couple months ago they took away their big collection bin and put up notices saying they were no longer accepting any glass.
They said you could take your glass to a county facility, but guess what happens to it there?
It gets crushed and used as roadbuilding material. Kinda-sorta recycling, I guess.
I just don't bother with it any more. Into the landfill!

Because an empty glass vessel is mostly air, you should crush your glass bottles so they don't take up as much volume if sent to landfill.

But crushing glass poses a safety hazard!  This is a good reason NOT to send it to landfill yourself.

I persist with rubbish sorting because it's zero effort by me, but pays big dividends at the recycling facility.  Even if the sorted material goes to landfill, it has NOT wasted my time.

[Randy222]

Glass used to be recyclable at this facility (Waste Management). But a couple months ago they took away their big collection bin and put up notices saying they were no longer accepting any glass.
They said you could take your glass to a county facility, but guess what happens to it there?
It gets crushed and used as roadbuilding material. Kinda-sorta recycling, I guess.
I just don't bother with it any more. Into the landfill!

Because an empty glass vessel is mostly air, you should crush your glass bottles so they don't take up as much volume if sent to landfill.

But crushing glass poses a safety hazard!  This is a good reason NOT to send it to landfill yourself.

I persist with rubbish sorting because it's zero effort by me, but pays big dividends at the recycling facility.  Even if the sorted material goes to landfill, it has NOT wasted my time.

A glass recycling truck can easily carry a glass crusher. Problem solved.

Recycling has become more expensive for same product. I am not paying $1 more for 8 rolls made from "recycled materials" to wipe my butt.

Also, Li is just too costly. Went to a store today to get some 9v batts for smoke detector, the Li items were 3x more expensive. My current no-name batt lasted 4 years, I can buy 12yrs worth for same cost as the Li batt.

[Andy Chee]

A glass recycling truck can easily carry a glass crusher. Problem solved.

Which still requires the consumer to separate their glass waste from their landfill waste!

[Analog Kid]

Recycling has become more expensive for same product. I am not paying $1 more for 8 rolls made from "recycled materials" to wipe my butt.

Hell, that's not even available--anywhere--where I live.
I had a hard time finding it even when I lived in the Bay Area.

And yes, I'd pay that buck extra for recycled. (Post-consumer, not pre, which is BS.)
Why wipe one's butt with virgin pulp? Makes no sense.

[Andy Chee]

Why wipe one's butt with virgin pulp? Makes no sense.

On that note, people should shift away from toilet paper and use bidets.  Sure, the energy capital to manufacture a bidet is extremely expensive compared to paper.  But over (albeit long) time, the resource savings will add up.

[AVGresponding]

Please provide citations for your claims. A cursory search reveals global resources to be around three times what you claim, and increasing.

30mil metric ton is what's there.

I over-estimated the total,.... my bad. Also, current world extraction (2023) is only a dismal 180k ton. From extraction to application, Li does not scale.

Did the Canad folks get it wrong?
https://natural-resources.canada.ca/minerals-mining/mining-data-statistics-analysis/minerals-metals-facts/lithium-facts

You need to learn to cite multiple sources; three different ones are generally considered a minimum. You also need to learn to interpret trends. 2024 world production was around 244k metric tonnes (an increase of around 33% over 2023), and is set to continue to increase, as demand rises.

https://ourworldindata.org/grapher/lithium-production?tab=line
https://thundersaidenergy.com/downloads/global-lithium-production-by-project-by-country-by-resource/
https://www.iea.org/reports/lithium-2

[Electrodynamic]

On Lithium and rare earth minerals.

It's only a short term issue because superior technology has already been developed and proven. We have super capacitor and battery technology which doesn't require lithium and brushless rare earth free electric motors and generators.

So the notion anyone needs to take over a corporation or country to secure these resources is BS. It's just a short term problem with a proven alternate solution.

The problem where to invest is bigger than most think. For example, if you enroll in a four year university tech course much of what you learned may be obsolete by the time you graduate. That's how fast technology is making progress.

[Randy222]

You need to learn to cite multiple sources; three different ones are generally considered a minimum. You also need to learn to interpret trends. 2024 world production was around 244k metric tonnes (an increase of around 33% over 2023), and is set to continue to increase, as demand rises.

Ok, I did digging, 30mil tons (the easy to get to stuff) is about same number everywhere.
If we take the existing 2024 of 244k/yr, that's just 122yrs worth of mining. As the yearly rate increases the totla years of availability will decrease substantially. If the demand to mining rate equalizes, say tech can only pull out 500k per year, the supply of Li will soon not be able to meet demans, and at some point within next 50-100yrs the Li supply has been depleted.

I can analyse Li from all angles, it's not scalable, and, not cost effective. Supercaps do a way better job.

[Marco]

Proven reserves are a moving target.

[Randy222]

Proven reserves are a moving target.

How much does the world have easy access to today, and how much land destruction is required to get that Li.
How much Li is in places we can't mine just yet, like oceans, and how long will it take to innovate the tech needed to get it?

We must remember, we are not reducing the amount of kJ we humans use on a daily basis, that # just goes up day after day, and Li or caps or even H makes no diff in that math. We can perhaps reduce wasted kJ, but those efforts cost more money, AND, the math does not indicate that any new tech makes a big dent in savings.

2nd, NASA already proved much of Earth's temp rise is from sun solar flares. Humans cannot fix that problem. With Earth getting warmer the weather pattern (bandwidth) increases, cold seasons colder, hot seasons hotter. Maybe one day some whack scientists get to cover LEO with aerosol of aluminum microdust, which will reflect UV and some side bands, then after that all the crops die and other weird stuff happens.

Anyways, Dunking caps are neat, but nothing exciting there.

In that vid, is the 270A passing through #14 wire?

[SteveThackery]

2nd, NASA already proved much of Earth's temp rise is from sun solar flares. Humans cannot fix that problem. With Earth getting warmer the weather pattern (bandwidth) increases, cold seasons colder, hot seasons hotter. Maybe one day some whack scientists get to cover LEO with aerosol of aluminum microdust, which will reflect UV and some side bands, then after that all the crops die and other weird stuff happens.

It lifts my soul to read such an optimistic and inspiring vision of the future! 

Nice one, mate!

[sleemanj]

Were we not discussing the merits or otherwise of a solid state battery, how did this thread get to arguring about lithium reserves, glass recycling, and the causes of climate change.

Good grief.

[Analog Kid]

Thread drift "Я" us!

(pronounced "thread drift ya us")

[Randy222]

Were we not discussing the merits or otherwise of a solid state battery, how did this thread get to arguring about lithium reserves, glass recycling, and the causes of climate change.

Good grief.

I think because of it's applications, and that Li is dead tech, while supercaps have good future before all that dies for H.
The other issue is, they calling it a "solid state battery", and it's neither a battery nor solid state. The Dunkin folks need to call it what it is, a supercap, AND, considering what Chery and others already have out there, the Dunkin stuff does not appear to be breakthrough tech. Although I will admit, to-market and %market are meaningful metrics, and can make/break a company when there's competition in the field.

[thm_w]

Thread drift "Я" us!

At a certain point its not drift, its conspiracy and anti-EV nutters shitting on good quality technical threads.

[Bud]

I think if they want to play with the big boys in this field, they need to change name, "Donut Lab" just not cutting it.

Just look at their CEO, the company name is a good match.

[Randy222]

I think if they want to play with the big boys in this field, they need to change name, "Donut Lab" just not cutting it.

Just look at their CEO, the company name is a good match.

[rteodor]

Thread drift "Я" us!

At a certain point its not drift, its conspiracy and anti-EV nutters shitting on good quality technical threads.

Ofc. And the Hindenburg zeppelin disaster was a terrible sabotage of a really good tech.

[AVGresponding]

Thread drift "Я" us!

At a certain point its not drift, its conspiracy and anti-EV nutters shitting on good quality technical threads.

Ofc. And the Hindenburg zeppelin disaster was a terrible sabotage of a really good tech.

In a way, it was. The US was the principal supplier of helium at the time, and refused to sell any to Germany due to the actions of the Nazi party. Hence they had to use hydrogen instead.

[rteodor]

Thread drift "Я" us!

At a certain point its not drift, its conspiracy and anti-EV nutters shitting on good quality technical threads.

Ofc. And the Hindenburg zeppelin disaster was a terrible sabotage of a really good tech.

In a way, it was. The US was the principal supplier of helium at the time, and refused to sell any to Germany due to the actions of the Nazi party. Hence they had to use hydrogen instead.

That I didn't knew. Thanks.

[SteveThackery]

The Dunkin folks need to call it what it is, a supercap, AND, considering what Chery and others already have out there, the Dunkin stuff does not appear to be breakthrough tech.

So, are we absolutely certain that the Donut Lab battery definitely is a supercap? And if so, is it feasible that it performs as claimed?

[Electrodynamic]

The Dunkin folks need to call it what it is, a supercap, AND, considering what Chery and others already have out there, the Dunkin stuff does not appear to be breakthrough tech.

So, are we absolutely certain that the Donut Lab battery definitely is a supercap? And if so, is it feasible that it performs as claimed?

It does not need to be either and can be both.

If there is a chemical reaction it's a battery
If energy is stored as an electric field it's a capacitor
If there is a chemical reaction and energy is also stored as an electric field then it's both

[Marco]

It's almost certainly just a scam, with Nordic Nano using existing EU research directions (non toxic, abundant minerals, biological sourced carbon, etc) to position itself.

A durable 100+ Wh/kg electrode material for metal ion supercaps would be revolutionary.

[Randy222]

Putting a smidge of chemical reaction into a a graphene supercap, does not make it a battery. It makes it a supercap with a smidge of chemical reaction.

Given the size and density of the item, how could it not be a supercap? Can an alkaline-like or Li batt be made to that size & density?

From all the definitions I can find, they all talk about "primary operating mechanism". So if the supercap is 2% chemical and 98% cap, then it's a cap.