Slashdot Mirror
Atomic MEMS Battery has 50 Year Charge
notestein writes "Working for DARPA, a couple of Cornell researchers (Amil Lal, Hui Li ) have developed a battery that uses decaying nickel-63 to drive a flexing MEMS cantilever to generate electricity. They expect a production version to produce useful energy for at least 50 years."
The article mentions attachign a magnet to the lever to generate electricity as it moves up and down.
If the movement is caused by electric charges, why not have the lever contact an electrode, and funnel the electric charge off through whatever it is you're powering, and then back to the isotope film? Surely that would be a more efficient way to harness the power...
Or, for that matter, why does the arm have to move at all?
=Smidge=
Now, I could use this to power my night-light.. but it'd probably glow all by itself.
Hilary Rosen's speech was about her love of money and her desire to roll around naked in a pile of money.
You cannot proceed from the informal to formal by formal means
The article says it's planned on being used in small remote devices. If they get this thing down to 1mm and mass produce it, what about using it for things like laptops, cell phones, etc?
Sure, it would take alot of those 1mm cells, but couldn't it be done? I'd love to have a laptop that ran 50 years between replacing the battery, with no charging required.
Just take one of these, and one of these and you're set! But realy, the article said it could power small devices very long, but could it be very small and power a big device for an acceptable amount of time? Even if it had to be replaced every 10 years, I'd get one for my laptop if it was small enough, and cheap enough.
Uh, I don't think you'll be keeping that laptop for 50 years. Seal that in.
Just wait until the no-nuke freaks, flat-earthers, Nader kooks and other Luddites get a whiff of how this technology works. They'll try to scare the public into keeping this from becoming a reality.
Of course we could really fry their minds by reminding them that the reason the earth is still hot inside is mostly because of radioactivity.
Still, I think ignorance could be a factor in the public perception of this product. Of course, I'll be first in line to buy one.
You are in a maze of twisty little passages, all alike.
The latest pentium laptop will still only get 2 hours use out of it.
Reliable, Great Value Hosting: $7.95/mo 2.4G/120G
Now you will die before your battery does!
I know I'd never keep a laptop for 50 years, but I might keep one for 5 years. I'd be happy to have a 5 year battery. Or a flashlight, or a radio, etc. 50 years is an unintentional side effect. Besides, if they use some sort of standard cells, I can just transfer them to whatever device I end up using down the line. That would make it worth the high premium for something like this.
The quantity of energy you'd get would be less than the energy of a decaying isotope, which is not very much. Even with advances in technology, this can't be very much. Furthermore, even if sufficient densities were achieved by mass producing cells, I'd keep an atomic MEMS laptop away from my lap unless I felt like nuking my nuts off.
I strongly doubt that you would be able to (safely) generate enough energy from the radioactive decay of any isotope to power anything larger than a pocket calculator. Sure, nuclear waste gives off a significant deal of heat as it decays, but then you're talking about nuclear waste.
One detail conveniently left out of the article is how much actual *power* is generated by this device. If a 1cc device produces only 10mA sustained, you're far better off with standard batteries for most anything except devices that actually *require* a long-running power source, and don't draw any significant amount of current. Consider this: I use 4 1700mAh AA cells in my digicam. They're, what, 3-4cc each? So at 10mA per MEMS device, you get only 160mA from that same volume.
GStreamer - The only way to stream!
A 1-kilogram chunk of Nickel 63 will give off about 25 Watts of pure beta radiation -- assuming that you configure it in such a way that the beta particles aren't reabsorbed by neigboring nickel atoms. Even assuming 100% efficiency, a battery capable of powering your laptop would weigh at least a few kilograms.
This power source would knock all of our current (no pun intended) Uninterruptible Power Supplies on their collective asses. If the power goes out, no worries, my server can stay on for 50 years... Also, in all seriousness, this seems like it would be the ideal power source for robots such as the "servant" variety that have been a staple of future homes in many science fiction stories. After all, it seems like a waste of time to have Robo-Jeeves plug himself in every night. The only obstacle that is obvious to me is the question of production efficiency; basically, how cheap is it to find/produce/refine large quantities of this Nickel isotope? If it takes a tremendous amount of power and time, that translates into tremendous expense, and decreases the likelyhood that we will ever see them in commercial products.
The quantity of energy you'd get would be less than the energy of a decaying isotope, which is not very much. Even with advances in technology, this can't be very much.
Actually, this turns out not to be the case.
Consulting Ye Rubber Bible, Nickel-63 liberates about 67 KeV per decay (quite low; decays are typically in the 1 MeV range). This gives an energy density of about 35 kW/hr per _gram_ over the lifetime of the battery. _Energy_ density is far higher than anything based on chemical reactions.
It's _power_ density that's low for most practical battery materials. With a half-life of 92 years, you get about 20 mW per gram released (actually a bit more than that at first; it _averages_ to this as it emits half its decay energy over the whole 92 years).
The nice thing about Nickel-63 is that the decay produces beta rays (high-energy electrons) and nothing else. This could be shielded by a thick sheet of plywood, or a thin sheet of lead. Most radioisotopes aren't nearly as friendly (there is usually gamma emission as the decay product sheds excess energy, which is difficult to shield against). [ObDisclaimer: I'm assuming that the lead also blocks the x-rays produced as the high-energy electrons smack into the shielding.]
The other nice thing is that the decay product is stable and is a solid (Copper), and so both inert and likely to stay in the battery. Carbon-14, the other "friendly" radioisotope that I can think of offhand, has a lower power density (though a higher energy density), and produces a gas as a byproduct (Nitrogen), which could eventually cause problems if allowd to build up near your MEMS devices.
Now you will die before your battery does!
ObGhostbusters:
"Will the equipment still work?"
"It _should_. The power cells have a half-life of five thousand years..."
I have this 10 year old calculator which the battery is yet to die in. It's powered by that never ending, limitless supply of radiant energy that we seem to ignore quite frequently.
Hmmm.. what could we use this for?
Reason. They'll use this for reason.
Obscure refrence: see "snow crash"
If voting were effective, it would be illegal by now.
So how do you change the battery, when it's so small you can't see it?
I am alone, yet I also surf the universal backwash of undifferentiated Being, which is LOVE.
Can this stuff even be produced in large quantities?
If a lot of strong beta emitters were ground up and made into dust, would they be dangerous?
(Doesn't Voyager and all other longterm probes to the outer solar system use beta emitter batteries?)
Karma: Excellent (My Karma? I wish...:-( )
The above suspicion is correct.
This gives an energy density of about 35 kW/hr per _gram_ over the lifetime of the battery.
Two nits:
(Doesn't Voyager and all other longterm probes to the outer solar system use beta emitter batteries?)
No.
Radioisotope Thermoelectric Generators (RTG's)
Three RTG's provide electric power to Voyager. The generators produce about 1800 watts of heat by the radioactive decay of plutonium. The heat is then converted to about 400 watts of electric power by thermocouplers. The RTG's are mounted on a boom to protect the scientific instruments from excess heat and radioactivity.
This may have been mention earlier, but I didn't see actual numbers. My question would be, how big does this have to be to be useful. I'm assuming that a larger cantilever with a material emitting more radioisotopes (try saying that five times fast) will produce more power.
I suppose it would also be assumed that many such configurations could be joined to produce a cumulative charge? But how big would it need to be, for example, to produce a charge equivilent to a small li-ion battery, or maybe even a standard house socket?
I've seen some fairly large UPS boxes (not the postal service, the power supply). A continuous long-lasting power supply of that size would probably embraced with open arms. Enough power to fuel a small electronics array would also do wonders for areas without power lines.
I got this on my google search...
:-)
Best Free Sh*t Adult Links
I'm not sure it's about nanotechnology, but I think it mentioned midgets, does that count?
One man's +1 Funny is anothers -1 Troll : phorm
Heh. Maybe not, but it's close enough that it makes no odds. :)
"No problem. I have the capacity to do infinite work so long as you don't mind that my quality approaches zero."-Dilbert
I see too many issues for commercial mass production:
1. Product timelife too long: consumer market requires frequent product renewal. Excessively long lasting products saturate and stifle market growth.
2. Waste disposal: one of the most expensive and not yet completely accounted for voice in economic balances. The security requirements on such waste would impose prohibitive costs on it (I guess).
3. Accidental environmental release:no one wants to get this stuff implanted in their lungs! So how can accidental/intentional product destruction be dealt with? Say a 1 Kg battery is destroyed in a fire, can we secure the radioactive plume? (guess what... no!) Depleted U was said to be safe yet there are cases of blood tumor amongst mil operators and civilians exposed to the waste developed malformations (Iraq).
I don't think/hope this material will ever get mainstream. In certain scientific apps like sat it can be a good solution (or even an alternative: solar panels degrade quickly because of micrometeor collisions and ion implantation) or efficient deep space probes.
Mi domando chi à il mandante di tutte le cazzate che faccio - Altan
...is apparently what Americans had in the 1950s and 60s. Many projects sought to use atomic energy directly to power everyday items. A nuclear powered airplane was partially constructed but far too heavy to leave the ground. Also prototyped were a nuclear powered Bulova wristwatch, thermal underwear for diving impregnated with plutonium, and -- I am not making this up -- a nuclear powered coffee maker that would percolate for a century under its own power. Read article for all the details.
That battery only has a life span of a few more billion years. You might want to look into getting a new one before then.
That human body only has a life span of a few more dozen years. You might want to look into getting a new one before then.
Will I retire or break 10K?
"Radioactive materials can emit beta particles, alpha particles or gamma rays, the last two of which can carry enough energy to be hazardous."
Last time I checked, alpha particles couldn't even penetrate skin, and beta particles could, making them more dangerous. Isn't the penetration level series actually alpha then beta then gamma?
On a related note, this just occured to me: when a beta-emitter emits an electron, thus leaving the atom positively charged, how does it ever gain an electron again. That is, if I have a block of, say Thorium 234 (a beta-emitter) sitting on a table, will it just become more and more positive, until you have a very positive chunk of Palladium?
The best way to predict the future is to invent it.
The article says they could use the motion of the arm, which is produced in the first place by a difference in charge, to produce electricity. Don't you already have electricity by the differing charges! Why have any moving parts!
the Nuclear Resonant Battery
The idea was to create a high-Q resonant circuit, then drive the oscilation with a beta emitting isotope, and pull power out of the system via inductive coupling.
The inventor claimed to be able to pull about 100 watts out of a soup-can sized power system.
Was this later proven to be BS, or did it just die because it had the "n" word in it's name?
www.eFax.com are spammers
The article shows a cantilever developing a negative charge as the nearby radioactive metal delevops a positive charge. The charge attraction causes the cantilever to bend toward the metal until it touches, when the charges cancel and the cantilevel boings back to straight. Result - a cantilever that vibrates so long as the radioactivity remains strong.
So has anyone thought of a similar design for getting vibration from the casimir effect? The Casimir effect causes conductive material separated by small spaces to attract. Presumably it doesn't attract nonconducting materials. And certainly there are materials that can be made to change from insulating to conducting.
So: what if you put a conductive cantilever a few nanometers from a conductive baseplate? Would the Casimir effect cause the cantilever to bend until it touched the baseplate?
If it were set up that the baseplate "switched" to nonconducting when the cantilever contacted the baseplate, the Casimir effect would turn off and the cantilever would snap back. Result - a similar vibrating rod that drew its energy not from radioactive decay but from .. umm.. the vaccuum?
Can someone who actually knows QM tell if this is possible? Have people ever made MEMS devices in which the casimir effect plays a role?
I would like to know this too...
...and he grinned, like a fox eating shit out of a wire brush.