> That's never going to happen, I'm not that good at physics but there must be some deep thermodynamically principle involved or similar to that.
Eh? Not totally sure what you're getting at; do you believe that there's a fundamental law of physics that says that batteries can never fall in price below where they are now, or something?
Maybe not fundamental, but something similar to that, yes. I think that when coupled with economics (i.e., basically, price) there's nothing that can surpass carbon-based energy.
Carbon-based energy is basically condensed and stored solar power, i.e. some of the cheapest things there can be, taking into consideration that the "condensed and stored" part happens by default, the only money that we spend is in trying to get to those condensed and stored" resources and to transport them (oil wells, digging coal-mines etc)
I mean, even if that were the case, if batteries were free, electric cars would handily outdo internal combustion cars; car engines are _really_ inefficient compared to large gas turbines (absolute best case under 40%, realistically closer to 20%).
> the only money that we spend is in trying to get to those condensed and stored" resources and to transport them (oil wells, digging coal-mines etc)
That's a huge "the only"; we're already seeing solar beat gas on pricing in some cases.
That's the thing, I don't think that batteries will ever be free, or close to free.
> we're already seeing solar beat gas on pricing in some cases.
That's why I also added the condensed/storage part, which with carbon comes by default (or at low enough prices). Forests (including geological ones on which current carbon-energy is mostly based) are (were) world-wide solar farms which come with no costs, a human-made thing will never be able to compete with that, price-wise.
Eh? Not totally sure what you're getting at; do you believe that there's a fundamental law of physics that says that batteries can never fall in price below where they are now, or something?