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."

16 of 70 comments (clear)

  1. Power supply? by Smidge204 · · Score: 4, Interesting

    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=

  2. It'll never happen... by ConceptJunkie · · Score: 3, Interesting

    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.
    1. Re:It'll never happen... by BitGeek · · Score: 4, Insightful


      That's a good point. They'd better not call it "Atomic" They should call it "nano"-- we haven't yet breed a fervent religious movement that hates nanotechnology for defying god, etc. Those types are still stuck on outlawing human cloning ( which is a right, by the way, you the right to reproduce-- who has the right to tell you *how* to reprorduce? Nobody)--- now that they have finally gotten over test tube babies.

      --
      Yeah, and you guys panned the ipod too: http://apple.slashdot.org/article.pl?sid=01/10/23/ 1816257
    2. Re:It'll never happen... by Myco · · Score: 3, Informative

      There's plenty of anti-nanotech freaks, though. Google "grey goo" and you'll see what I mean.

    3. Re:It'll never happen... by global_diffusion · · Score: 3, Interesting

      They'd better not call it "Atomic"

      Definitely not. I work in the Nuclear Physics Lab (now known as CENPA) at my university and I can't tell you how much shit I get from people. They go nuts when they hear the word "nuclear" (or nucular to them ;). It's sad that people don't even understand physics enough to know that nuclear physics is the physics of the nucleus (and related thingies, of course). So sad....

  3. It won't make any difference by darkov · · Score: 3, Insightful

    The latest pentium laptop will still only get 2 hours use out of it.

  4. the battery is still alive by u19925 · · Score: 3, Funny

    Now you will die before your battery does!

  5. Re:A laptop for 50 years? qjkx by Klaruz · · Score: 3, Insightful

    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.

  6. Re:What about other uses? by Lord+Sauron · · Score: 5, Funny
    Other uses for a nuclear battery:

    Microwave replacement

    Heater

    Photographic film eraser

    Electromagnetical warfare

    Rodents killer

    Hair remover

    And I'm sure Al Qaeda can think of more wonderful uses.

  7. In this house, we obey the laws of thermodynamics by cryptor3 · · Score: 3, Interesting
    This technology is applicable to things as power hungry as cell phones or laptops. This power source is has good longevity, but not power density.

    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.

  8. Re:A laptop for 50 years? qjkx by Omega+Hacker · · Score: 5, Informative

    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!
  9. Theoretical Limit by Will_Malverson · · Score: 4, Informative

    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.

  10. Plenty of energy here. by Christopher+Thomas · · Score: 5, Informative

    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.

    1. Re:Plenty of energy here. by Guppy · · Score: 3, Interesting

      "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 proportion of secondary X-rays (bremsstrahlung) generated by beta particles of a give energy is proportional to the atomic number of the adsorbing material -- so your best bet would be to use both, with the plywood facing the emitter and the lead on the outside.

      My experience is in the biological sciences, which use a lot of beta emitters for radiolabeling. We used commercially made beta shielding available from scientific supply places (VWR, Fisher, etc.), and they were all made of a plastic such as acrylic. I don't think I ever saw any heavy lead shielding anywhere in our labs.

  11. hooray for technology by friedman101 · · Score: 3, Funny

    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.

  12. Re:How much/ton of the isotope? Is it safe as dust by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Informative

    (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.