Slashdot Mirror


Enzyme Bio-Battery Runs on Ethanol

mpthompson writes "According to this article at New Scientist.com substantial progress is being made on enzyme-catalyzed ethanol based batteries to run cell phones and laptops. Such batteries promise to be cheaper, safer and less toxic than previously demonstrated methanol based fuel cells."

196 comments

  1. Finally! by Linux_ho · · Score: 2, Funny

    A beer-powered laptop!

    --
    include $sig;
    1;
    1. Re:Finally! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      yeah, but for those people that talk on their cell-phone incessantly at the bar it's going to be like having a third date with you...

    2. Re:Finally! by Xenographic · · Score: 2, Funny

      But how will I get any work done if the computer drinks all my beer? :[

      Oh, wait...

    3. Re:Finally! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Does it take recycle beer (i.e. after going through my body ) ?

    4. Re:Finally! by pyrote · · Score: 1

      Ya, but do you really want to put that up to your face when you 'recharge'

      --
      THE WORLD IS GOING TO END!!!! eventually.
  2. Hmmm... by EFGearman · · Score: 3, Funny

    Batteries run off of vodka or gin?

    "A charge for you, and a blast for me."

    EFGearman

    --
    Atomic batteries to power! Turbines to speed!
    1. Re:Hmmm... by abhisarda · · Score: 1

      So finally there *is* another use of Everclear [95 % alcohol] than killing yourself ;)

    2. Re:Hmmm... by errxn · · Score: 2, Funny

      I agree. Being subjected to an Everclear song certainly makes me want to kill myself.

      --
      In Soviet Russia, Chuck Norris will still kick your ass.
  3. The major problem of the next year may well be... by ketamine-bp · · Score: 5, Interesting

    Overheating.

    We all know that the enzymes hate heat - that is, they get denatured by heat. From what I feel on my lap when a laptop was put on it, I really wonder how do something as sensitive as enzyme withstand the working temperature of a computer (I guess that'll be one of the application, from the article).

    When you shrink that (from the article, they are going to.), the problem goes even more wild... ;-)

  4. What about a mixer? by dreamchaser · · Score: 1, Funny

    This is great news. Now I just need to buy a variety of mixers to carry in my laptop case. A splash of fruit juice, maybe some ginger ale, and I can drink my battery fuel!!!

    Seriously, this has been a long time coming, and yes there have been a few other Slashdot stories about ethanol powered batteries. I would love to get a hold of a laptop that runs for hours on end on grain alcohol.

    1. Re:What about a mixer? by JonTurner · · Score: 4, Funny

      >>This is great news.
      Yeah, until you try to sneak it onto an expense report:

      Taxi - $28.00
      Meal @ airport - $11.45
      Hotel - $85.00
      Eight bottles of gin - $65.00

      Something tell me that Wanda over in Accounting isn't goint to think that eight bottles of sauce looks quite so "great." ;)

      On the other hand, this may be the only case where conspicious consumption of alcohol is a justification for a promotion. "Gosh, boss, look at all these empty bottles! That's two more bottles than last week, don'cha think I deserve a raise?!?"

      Now if only someone would invent edible CDs...

    2. Re:What about a mixer? by Open_The_Box · · Score: 1

      Heh. I can see it now...

      "I'm sorry Uncle George! I WAS bringing you that bottle of whiskey I got in duty free but, like, y'know, I was watching a DVD on the plane and..."

      --
      If you can't think of something nice to say then don't say anything at all. No, REALLY.
    3. Re:What about a mixer? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      85$ for a hotel, in what city? The hotel business is struggling bad right now, I bet if you had any negotiating skills with the hotel reservationist directly you could get it down to 50$, If you are paying the price at like a hotel.com type site, I'd be willing to bet, you can secure a cheaper rate by negotiating with the hotel themself.

    4. Re:What about a mixer? by good-n-nappy · · Score: 1

      Another way to say this (for all the alcoholic techs out there):

      "Finally I can integrate two of my handhelds..."

      --
      Never underestimate the power of fiber.
    5. Re:What about a mixer? by Wireless+Joe · · Score: 1

      Eight bottles of gin - $65.00

      $8.13 per bottle? I can't imagine who would buy such cheap gin. If I were your boss, I'd see that as enough justification to fire you on the spot.

    6. Re:What about a mixer? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Ah, but he never said that they were big bottles. My first impression was that he was raiding the hotel room's mini-bar.

  5. mm.....alcoholic batteries by Scrab · · Score: 2, Funny

    So that's why my display is so screwy - my laptop is drunk.....

    --
    RoseColor red={0, 0xffff, 0x0000, 0x0000};VioletColour blue={0, 0x0000, 0x0000, 0xffff};find / -name *mybase*|chown you
  6. Wait, batteries are toxic? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I guess I need to stop eating them, then...

  7. How much safer? by HaloZero · · Score: 2, Insightful

    One of the major infirmities with the previously concieved designs was that I couldn't put it in my laptop and then take it on a plane - a plane being a major place where I'd like to have an unlimited (refillable) battery supply, as most planes don't offer 120v outlets for AC adapters. If this can overcome the safety risks involved with that venture, I'm sold.

    On another note, what else can it do? :P

    --
    Informatus Technologicus
    1. Re:How much safer? by Peter+Harris · · Score: 1

      And you can get fuel off the drinks trolley!

      --

      -- What do you need?
      -- Gnus. Lots of Gnus.
    2. Re:How much safer? by HaloZero · · Score: 1

      Steward: 'What can I get for you, sir?'
      Me: 'Rum & Coke, unmixed. I want the coke, my machine wants the rum.'
      Steward: 'Sir, you're under 21.'
      Me: 'IT'S FOR THE COMPUTER, I SWEAR!'

      --
      Informatus Technologicus
    3. Re:How much safer? by afidel · · Score: 1

      NO!!!!!
      No alchohol based fuel cell is going to be banned based on the fuel source! The amount of fuel it will take to power your laptop even on the longest of flights is less than the lush sitting next to you will be drinking. Besides we allow Butane lighters which have a much more volatile fuel in them aboard and they are intentionally designed to ignite the contents. I really, really wish the Slashdot crowd would get it's collective arse out of their head on this one.

      --
      There are 4 boxes to use in the defense of liberty: soap, ballot, jury, ammo. Use in that order. Starting now.
    4. Re:How much safer? by Jeremiah+Blatz · · Score: 2, Insightful

      First of all, ethanol isn't banned on airplanes. Hell, they hand out free bottles of it on intrnational flights. (Hello, vodka!)

      Also, new planes will soon have power on all seats. The only reason that they don't is that they can currently get people to pay for business-class upgrades in order to get juice. All new 777's have individual LCD monitors for each seat in coach class, a couple years ago, you had to crane your neck in order to see the in-flight movie. It will take a while, but as soon as one airline (I'm guessing British Air) orders it on their planes, everyone will quickly have it. Yay, capitalism!

      OTOH, a power-source that was cheap, safe, power-dense, and refillable would be really cool. THe current solution of carrying around extra LiIon packs is not really doable. If they could get power densities good enough that a couple tiny bottles of ethanol could keep your laptop going for 8 hours, it would make mobile computing much easier. The only problem would be the regulation of fuel sales. Would you have to go to the liquor store to buy more power for your laptop?

    5. Re:How much safer? by mmol_6453 · · Score: 1

      Besides we allow Butane lighters which have a much more volatile fuel in them aboard and they are intentionally designed to ignite the content... ...in a controlled, well-understood and long-tested manner. While the science is (mostly...I'm still a little fuzzy on it. Anyone have a link or two on the molecular-level behavior?) solid, there's still nothing like consumer use to work out the bugs.

      --
      What's this Submit thingy do?
    6. Re:How much safer? by mmol_6453 · · Score: 1

      Damnit! That's the second time one of my posts got compressed like that. Try this...it's easier to read.

      Besides we allow Butane lighters which have a much more volatile fuel in them aboard and they are intentionally designed to ignite the content...

      ...in a controlled, well-understood and long-tested manner.

      While the science is (mostly...I'm still a little fuzzy on it. Anyone have a link or two on the molecular-level behavior?) solid, there's still nothing like consumer use to work out the bugs.

      --
      What's this Submit thingy do?
    7. Re:How much safer? by good-n-nappy · · Score: 1

      Yeah, but there are open container laws in a lot of other places. Maybe we can add overturning these laws to the geek legal agenda.

      --
      Never underestimate the power of fiber.
    8. Re:How much safer? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Informative

      if it's below 140 proof (70% strength), ethanol (and methanol) does not burn, but could still be useful in such power cells.

      Way back when F1 and Indy cars ran on ethanol. The danger with them was that if there was a fire, the flames were not visible. You would occaisionally see a driver hop out of a car doing the funky chicken, because he was on fire, and not see any flames...

      But fighting them with water was much easier than with gasoline fires.

      Of course, now everyone is back to gasoline. I wonder what would happen to diesel technology if F1 or somesuch changed to diesel engines?

    9. Re:How much safer? by Jeremiah+Blatz · · Score: 1
      AC writes:
      Of course, now everyone is back to gasoline. I wonder what would happen to diesel technology if F1 or somesuch changed to diesel
      Interesting question. I mean, theoretically, they should. Diesel has a greater energy density than gasoline, which would mean that the cars could be smaller and lighter. (I imagine they'd do that, rather than increase the sinage, since AFAIK tire wear is the limiting factor.)
    10. Re:How much safer? by SpaceJunkie · · Score: 1

      The battery does not necessary need to be an open container. Ie a topup spout with a recessed valve or something, making spillage pretty unlikely.

      --
      OrionRobots.co.uk - Robots From sol
    11. Re:How much safer? by good-n-nappy · · Score: 1

      Open Container doesn't literally mean open container, it means "a container which is other than in the manufacturer's sealed condition." Take a look at this US Traffic Safety Administration page, for example.

      It says: An "open alcoholic beverage container" is any bottle, can, or other receptacle that contains any amount of alcoholic beverage, and that is open or has a broken seal, or the contents of which are partially removed.

      Anyway, it was originally supposed to be a joke, albeit not the laugh-out-loud kind.

      --
      Never underestimate the power of fiber.
  8. Re:Wrong! by dreamchaser · · Score: 1

    It said ethanol (non-toxic, the stuff in beer wine and liquor), NOT methanol (toxic, used primarily as a fuel additive for internal combustion engines).

  9. Buzz by YokuYakuYoukai · · Score: 1, Funny

    Now you might really get a buzz from licking a nine volt.

  10. Wrong Dept. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Funny

    This should've been from the one-for-you-one-for-me dept.

    Can't you just see stressed out managers popping out the battery, tossing down a shot, and plugging it back in?

  11. This isn't news by the_other_one · · Score: 5, Funny

    Ethanol powered phones have been arround for decades.

    I have talked to God on the porcelin telephone many times.

    --
    134340: I am not a number. I am a free planet!
    1. Re:This isn't news by idfrsr · · Score: 1

      I usually call my uncle ralph....
      sometimes he was interesting things to say like why are there always carrots in there...

      --
      "The large print giveth, and the small print taketh away" -Tom Waits
    2. Re:This isn't news by No+Such+Agency · · Score: 1

      "If you talk to God on the porcelain telephone it's alcoholism, if God talks to YOU on it, it's schizophrenia."

      --
      Freedom: "I won't!"
    3. Re:This isn't news by Richy_T · · Score: 1
      Not soviet russia?


      Rich

    4. Re:This isn't news by Suidae · · Score: 1

      "If you talk to God on the porcelain telephone it's alcoholism, if God talks to YOU on it, it's schizophrenia."

      or bad mushrooms.

  12. i also run... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Interesting

    I also run off of Ethanol(everclear). I can only imagine the fun that would come out of this.... but seriously if these batteries were meant to be rechargeable how could this been done at all with current alcohol laws?

    "yes I'd like to buy some everclear for my 'er laptop" *hic

  13. Cheaper? Only because of the war on drugs by corebreech · · Score: 2, Insightful

    Let us grow hemp and use it to make methanol. Then methanol will be cheaper.

  14. This makes perfect sense... by Fritz+Benwalla · · Score: 4, Funny

    "We have actually run our cells off vodka and gin."

    That's kept Liza Minelli running for close to sixty years, no reason it can't run my laptop for a few hours.

    -----

    --

    Believe me, I'm as surprised by my comment as you are.
    1. Re:This makes perfect sense... by Fishstick · · Score: 2, Funny

      My first thought on seeing this thread was Bender.

      Olde Fortran malt liquor, was it?

      --

      There is much cruelty in the universe, John.
      Yeah, we seem to have the tour map.

    2. Re:This makes perfect sense... by Open_The_Box · · Score: 2, Funny

      Fry: But why would a robot need to drink?
      Bender: I don't NEED to drink. I can give it up any time I want!

      --
      If you can't think of something nice to say then don't say anything at all. No, REALLY.
  15. use hydrogen fuel cells by stonebeat.org · · Score: 1

    i know huge amount of amount of electricity is required to extract hydrogen. But this can be easily generated using Nuclear Power Plants - a very clean source of electricity.

    use hydrogen fuel cells in the cars, and you will take care of the pollution problem.

    1. Re:use hydrogen fuel cells by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Insightful
      Nuclear Power Plants - a very clean source of electricity.
      As long as "clean" is redefined as "generates huge quantities of enormously dangerouas waste that we have no way to get rid of", you're right.

      Also, nuclear power is incredibly expensive.

      Other than that, good idea.
    2. Re:use hydrogen fuel cells by kiatoa · · Score: 2, Interesting

      Nuclear plants may be clean in responsible hands. Unfortunately Corporations and Governments often seem to prove themselves rather less than responsible and careful. Too bad really. There would be no need for constrictive environmental laws if people (individuals, Corporations and Governments) would be conscientious in their actions.

      As for those batteries, I wonder what will be more efficient: My wood fired steam power plant (2kW, under construction) or farming some grain or plant that can be easily converted by fermentation to alcohol and putting the alcohol into one of those batterys. I'd be delighted to get 15% overall effiency from the steam system (80% if you count the waste heat heating the pool!).

      --
      90% of the wealth is in 2% of the pockets. Bummer to be in the majority.
    3. Re:use hydrogen fuel cells by julesh · · Score: 2, Informative

      i know huge amount of amount of electricity is required to extract hydrogen. But this can be easily generated using Nuclear Power Plants - a very clean source of electricity.

      use hydrogen fuel cells in the cars, and you will take care of the pollution problem.


      Actually, the best way of producing hydrogen isn't electrical. You catalyse a hydrocarbon into (usually) hydrogen and CO2. The CO2 production is very small and can be easily captured and recycled in processes that require CO2 as an input (eg photosynthesis).

      In fact, that's precisely what this fuel cell does. I think they're calling it a battery because people think fuel cells are like four foot high things that cost thousands....

    4. Re:use hydrogen fuel cells by mezelf · · Score: 1

      Just a few comments on this one.

      Nuclear power doesn't generate huge quantities of waste. At least not compared to power plants burning oil or coal. The amounts of CO2 and sulfur emitted by those plants is something one could call huge (although the sulfur and other not-so-healthy gasses can be filtered out). And most of the waste produced by power plants is only lightly radioactive.

      The waste produces by power plants is not as dangerous as you say (in my opinion). It can be easily contained and is only really harmful if thing like our drinking water get contaminated. The biggest problem is that the most dangerous elements last for several thousands of years before their radioactivity wears off.

      Nuclear power isn't incredibily expensive. The plant is expensive, but once it is running, it is actually rather cheap. Uranium is expensive, but only little is neaded, compared to the trainloads of coal for a coal plant.

      So, I know nuclear power is dangerous, but by now means that dangerous.

    5. Re:use hydrogen fuel cells by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I don't know about you, but when was the last time you walked down the street and into a cloud of Uranium fumes? Oh don't get me wrong, high grade nuclear waste is nasty stuff, but "No way to get rid of it"? Please; there are plenty of ways to properly dispose of it, however our power companies and governments are apparently too cheap to pay the sort of money that is required.

      Now having said that, I'll be jumping up and down with the rest of you when Hydrogen or Ethonol cells power our cars and computers, and Fusion plants power our homes. Until that happens though, the waste produced by nuclear plants is neglible and managable, and I'll take it any day of the week over four coal fired plants.

    6. Re:use hydrogen fuel cells by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Yadda Yadda Hydrogen is a bitch to store Yadda Yadda

    7. Re:use hydrogen fuel cells by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      True, but the whole point of going into renewable energy sources is to reduce dependence on hydrocarbons.

      Converting hydrocarbons to hydrogen and then using the hydrogen is less efficent than simply burning the hydrocarbon..The CO2 emmissions is identical to the CO2 released by combustion (per mole of hydrocarbom), and actually greater if you're looking at CO2 emissions per joule of energy released since the process is less efficient... And not to mention that there is a finite supply of fossil fuels, 100 years from now we will have to switch to renewable energy

      Nevertheless, converting hydrocarbons to hydrogen for fuel cells is a usefull stepping stone that allows current peteroleum intfrastructure to be used and new fuel cell technologies to be developed.

      In the long term, the only reason to switch to hydrogen is if the hydrogen is produced with renewable energy sources such as solar, wind, nuclear, etc.

  16. Re:Wrong! by dreamchaser · · Score: 1

    Here I am correcting people and I didn't even take the time to properly understand why he was referring to methanol. My bad!

    He was still wrong about methanol not being toxic...

  17. Biotech Ethanol by airuck · · Score: 3, Interesting

    Novozymes Biotech in Davis, California is selectively breeding better enzymes for converting the cellulose in corn by-products to fermentable sugars. Who knows, maybe some day Kansas will power your calls.

    --
    First entomology, then virology, and finally bioinformatics systems. Bugs follow me wherever I go.
    1. Re:Biotech Ethanol by warpSpeed · · Score: 2, Funny
      Who knows, maybe some day Kansas will power your calls.

      Toto, I don't think we are using non-biodegradable power sources anymore....

    2. Re:Biotech Ethanol by A+Swing+Dancing+Dork · · Score: 1

      Think about the current state of technology. Nanotech is sort of biotech (think flagella motors), material science's self assembling structures are really bio-tech. Eventually all companies in the manufacturing category will be biotech companies.

      When your batteries are bio/nano tech based, your screen is organic, and your RAM is nano/chemo-electric, you might have to worry about a whole different brand of viruses than you're currently used to.

  18. So will they last longer? by drdanny_orig · · Score: 2, Interesting

    I don't care if they make batteries out of peanut butter. All I want to know is when do we get a wireless phone that only needs recharging once a month or less? Thanks, I'll take the answer off-line.

    --
    .nosig
    1. Re:So will they last longer? by phorm · · Score: 1

      Well, I suppose you could modify your phone to use a car battery... but that might get a little heavy. Maybe you should just give alternative technologies a chance - eventually we'll get lasting charge and recharge ability.

      Until then... think of how buff you'll get after lugging around that car battery...

    2. Re:So will they last longer? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I don't care if they make batteries out of peanut butter.

      Do your research, drdanny.

      "George Washington Carver made the first computer! Out of a peanut! A PEA-NUT!" -- Conspiracy Brother, Undercover Brother

  19. Bio-engineering by panurge · · Score: 4, Interesting
    It makes sense. The development of life actually demonstrates that carbon-chain based molecules are a good place to start when you want to do something. Until the twentieth century the main source of applied energy was animal movement, an incredibly complicated way of obtaining movement from the breakdown of sugars, starch and fat. Even now, most cars don't last as long as a horse, so clearly the longevity problem is soluble. It's just that we have only very recently been able to start using that kind of technology deliberately instead of finding it by accident.

    Now excuse me, my fuel cell needs a shot and then it wants to go to the bathroom.

    --
    Panurge has posted for the last time. Thanks for the positive moderations.
    1. Re:Bio-engineering by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
      Even now, most cars don't last as long as a horse.

      In years sure, but not in miles or any other measure I can think of. Also, if I drove a horse like I drive my car it wouldn't last one day.

    2. Re:Bio-engineering by DrSkwid · · Score: 1

      Made me think what life would be like if *everyone* who had a car instead had a horse. Pandemonium to be sure.

      Not to mention that the waste products of horses don't conveniently blow away in the wind.

      --
      There are places where the networks are not touching,and there are places where they are-Boeing's Lori Gunter
    3. Re:Bio-engineering by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      My last car did 150,000 miles before I sold it. What's the total mileage on your horse? :)

      Longevity can be measured in many ways.

    4. Re:Bio-engineering by Milo+Fungus · · Score: 2, Interesting

      The thing that keeps living systems living is that they have mechanisms in place to repair themselves. From what the article said, no self-regenerating systems are in place in the fuel cell. They're counting on the original build to last. Your horse lives so many years and walks so many miles because it can regenerate damaged muscles. Unless the fuel cell were equipped with the enzyme's gene and the machinery to translate the information in the gene into newly synthesized enzyme, this fuel cell will not last as long as your horse.

      That raises an interesting question. We're a long way off from having a fuel cell that could synthesize new enzyme, but supposing one were invented should it be patentable? The best way to build one would be to start with a living organism and tweak it. But if it were built from scratch would it be patentable? (I realize that living organisms are patentable, thanks to the ineptitude of the USPTO, but all patented organisms are tweaked versions of natural organisms. This would be something different.)

  20. mmm... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I need to go 'Recharge' my bio-enzyme system with some ethanol too.

  21. Product name? by trikberg · · Score: 1

    I hope they call the batteries Bender.

    --
    This post is free (as in cheese in a mousetrap).
  22. Scientists Choose Ethanol by mattyohe · · Score: 2, Funny

    Evidently they prefer it over competing fuels. This seems like a bad move on NewScientist's part.

    --
    - what is the definition of simultanagnosia?! I've been meaning to look it up!
    1. Re:Scientists Choose Ethanol by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
      Evidently they prefer it over competing fuels. This seems like a bad move on NewScientist's part.

      I think either you are reading way to much into this or you have a sence of humor that's on a different level than mine.

  23. Customs by rf0 · · Score: 1

    Woo no longer do I need to say that I'm bringing booze back over the English Channel for my own personal consuption. I can just smuggle in laptops :)

    Rus

  24. Re:The major problem of the next year may well be. by Rich0 · · Score: 5, Informative

    I really wonder how do something as sensitive as enzyme withstand the working temperature of a computer

    There is a whole industry based on developing crosslinked enzyme crystals which are useful in industrial applications as catalysts. The crystals are literally poured out of plastic bottles as a powder and many can function in organic solvents (which would completely denature ordinary enzymes). The cross-linking holds together the overall tertiary structure of the enzyme, and the enzyme tends to hang onto water where it needs it to maintain secondary structure.

    I don't know exactly how thermally stable they are, but I imagine they can take quite a bit. While the technology probably hasn't been applied to the enzymes in question I imgaine that if the money was there it could be done.

  25. How about..... by Chris_Stankowitz · · Score: 2, Insightful
    "Such batteries promise to be cheaper, safer and less toxic than previously demonstrated methanol based fuel cells."

    Ok, great, now how about Last Longer? Especially Laptop batteries, I can't seem to keep a charge on any of them. They all seem to degarde rather fast.

    1. Re:How about..... by Rob+Simpson · · Score: 1
      That probably depends on how much ethanol you want to carry around with you. ;-) A nice thing about these is that they might be more versatile. A big 2L bottle would probably last a good while.

      OTOH, if they'd build laptops to be more efficient, rather than making them blazing fast multimedia entertainment centers (insert a few more buzzwords here), they might be useable for more than an hour or two. Even most PDA's last a few hours at best, unless you get a good monochrome one running on AAA's which will last you weeks to months - but they're getting harder to find. The only ones that spring to mind are the PEG-SL10 and Handera 330. It's ironic how many "technical innovations" like colour screens, StrongARM processors, lithium batteries, etc. seem to reduce usefulness.

  26. Virtual Beer-Goggles? by RobotRunAmok · · Score: 1

    I wonder if people I meet in chatrooms will appear more witty and charming if my laptop is running "fully juiced up?"

  27. A possible end to crop subsidies? by Bonker · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Man, it would be really great if you could walk into a grocerie store and buy 'Ethanol Packets' next to the Duracells, Energizers, and Ray-o-Vacs.

    No, not to drink, you lushes. It would mean that there would be a new demand for vegetable crops, Corn in particular. While the DoA is one of the most corrupt branches of our government, one can't help but think that a new demand for corn in the form of a non-perishable liquid would cut the amount of money currently being used for subsidies.

    An ethanol economy is not quite as desirable as a hyrdrogen economy, but it can still be very good.

    --
    The next Slashdot story will be ready soon, but subscribers can beat the rush and slashdot the links early!
    1. Re:A possible end to crop subsidies? by gpinzone · · Score: 1

      I don't know if creating a fuel dependency on vegtable crops is a good idea. I'd imagine it would be a lot easier for a terrorist to destroy crops than destroy oil fields.

    2. Re:A possible end to crop subsidies? by Bonker · · Score: 2, Insightful

      You can always replant a vegetable. Let's see you replant oil reservers.

      Even if there's a bio-engineered virus that targets your specific species of corn, you can always switch to a different variety or even a different vegetable. Having a diverse plant population would not only make diseases or natural disasters less effective, it would also limit the effectiveness of terrorism.

      --
      The next Slashdot story will be ready soon, but subscribers can beat the rush and slashdot the links early!
    3. Re:A possible end to crop subsidies? by Open_The_Box · · Score: 1

      Why? They both burn.

      And... if you can't get ethanol to power your laptop then, um, just plug it into the wall until the shortage is over? I'd guess that the bigger problem of crop fields being burnt (at least to the extent that no crops were available to provide fuel) would be people starving. Just a thought...

      --
      If you can't think of something nice to say then don't say anything at all. No, REALLY.
    4. Re:A possible end to crop subsidies? by mdielmann · · Score: 2, Funny

      An ethanol economy is not quite as desirable as a hyrdrogen economy, but it can still be very good.
      I would imagine you could find at least a billion people who desire an ethanol economy over a hydrogen economy, and they seem to think it is very good.

      --
      Sure I'm paranoid, but am I paranoid enough?
    5. Re:A possible end to crop subsidies? by Muad'Dave · · Score: 1

      Yeah, but an ethanol economy won't make my voice sound like Mickey Mouse (tm).

      Can you imagine singing the Munchkin song using hydrogen? You'd be calling dogs and dolphins for miles.

      obdef: Munchkin song: Song sang by the "Lollipop Guild" to Dorothy when she landed in Oz.

      --
      Tiller's Rule: Never use a word in written form that you've only heard and never read. You will end up looking foolish.
    6. Re:A possible end to crop subsidies? by gpinzone · · Score: 1

      Try replanting them when your crops are hit by a nuclear blast. All that stuff about giant mutant corn growing from radioactive soil is just in the movies and TV. (Please, no Tommaco jokes.)

    7. Re:A possible end to crop subsidies? by gpinzone · · Score: 1

      The oil is miles underground and essentially protected from attack. The corn is not. Who cares about laptops? We're talking about replacing oil for some other alternative fuel.

    8. Re:A possible end to crop subsidies? by Suidae · · Score: 1

      The corn (or whatever, you can make alcohol out of damn near any crop) is spread out over thousands of square miles. Nothing short of a fairly difficult biological attack would have much impact, and even that could be repelled by making sure that a wide variety of crops are used.

      Oil would be easier to attack, its much more plausible to attack a few hundred wellheads than 10,000 square miles of farmland.

    9. Re:A possible end to crop subsidies? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      subsidies for who? Crop subsidies for farmers, as an incentive to keep growing the right kind of corn, or tax breaks for the developers for this new technology? They're both subsidies...

    10. Re:A possible end to crop subsidies? by DietHacker · · Score: 1

      "Yeah, but an ethanol economy won't make my voice sound like Mickey Mouse (tm)." Neither will hydrogen - maybe Helium.

    11. Re:A possible end to crop subsidies? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
      "Yeah, but an ethanol economy won't make my voice sound like Mickey Mouse (tm)."

      Neither will hydrogen {snip}

      Sure it will. The effect is the same as with helium -- faster speed of sound in a gas other than air.

      However, helium is an inert gas, and hydrogen is a flammable, oxygen-reducing gas, so I wouldn't want to breathe it.

    12. Re:A possible end to crop subsidies? by DietHacker · · Score: 1

      Thanks for the education. Good info.

    13. Re:A possible end to crop subsidies? by Muad'Dave · · Score: 1
      Excerpt from "Newton's Apple":

      Why Helium Makes Your Voice Go Up:

      Why does inhaling helium gas make your voice go up? Well it really doesn't! It only sounds that way because helium gas changes the resonant frequency of your vocal tract. Every tube, regardless of whether its a piece of pipe or your vocal tract, has one natural frequency at which it vibrates most often. We call this the resonant frequency and it is controlled by two factors; the length of the tube and the speed at which sound moves through it. Since helium is less dense than air, sound travels through it faster, about 2 1/2 times faster. This is what apparently makes you voice go up. The faster moving sound waves causes your vocal tract to resonate at a higher frequency which enhances the high pitched sounds.

      The same physics applies to hydrogen. Here are some data points using hydrogen. Point 1 Point 2

      --
      Tiller's Rule: Never use a word in written form that you've only heard and never read. You will end up looking foolish.
  28. Cost by Stripsurge · · Score: 5, Interesting

    Yes, ethanol is cheap to make but expensive to buy. There'd have to some law changes to avoid having to pay the taxes associated with buying consumable alcohol. Using ethanol in the chem lab is pricy.

    1. Re:Cost by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Dont worry, as soon as the energy companies catch on that theres money to be made, the taxes will be cut faster than a very fast thing. We won't even need to have a war, either!

    2. Re:Cost by Avakado · · Score: 2, Interesting

      There'd have to some law changes to avoid having to pay the taxes associated with buying consumable alcohol. Using ethanol in the chem lab is pricy.

      Maybe that's one of the reasons why spirits not meant for consumption have added stuff that makes you vomit if you drink it?

      --
      The world will end in 5 minutes. Please log out.
    3. Re:Cost by afidel · · Score: 1

      yes but methanol might well break down the enzymes (or more likely the enzymes will break down the methanol and its byproduct including formaldihyde will poison them). I would guess this is why they didn't just use cheaper methanol to start out.

      --
      There are 4 boxes to use in the defense of liberty: soap, ballot, jury, ammo. Use in that order. Starting now.
    4. Re:Cost by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
      Maybe that's one of the reasons why spirits not meant for consumption have added stuff that makes you vomit if you drink it?

      There's no need to add stuff to ethanol, as long as you're sure you drink enough of it.

    5. Re:Cost by aNiceGuy · · Score: 1

      Cornell University Professor David Pimental clearly shows how creating Ethanol (gas for tractors, refining, delivery, nitrogen fertilizer, etc...) uses more power (and pollutes more, btw) than you can yield from it:

      http://www.news.cornell.edu/releases/Aug01/corn- ba sedethanol.hrs.html

      http://healthandenergy.com/ethanol.htm

      Ethanol is a scam as an "alternate fuel source" for gasoline. It ends up polluting more because of the gas used in all the growing and distribution of corn. And all the CO2 produced during the refinement.
      Never heard of it for use in fuel cells, but in other areas Ethanol is a total scam.

    6. Re:Cost by treat · · Score: 1
      Maybe that's one of the reasons why spirits not meant for consumption have added stuff that makes you vomit if you drink it?

      Actually, they usually use deadly poisons and not something that harmlessly makes you vomit.

    7. Re:Cost by Pejorian · · Score: 1

      So, can anyone comment on this? If this is true ("uses more power (and pollutes more) than you can yield from it") for combustible fuel purposes, as aNiceGuy and Pimental claim it is, does that mean the whole ethanol thing is a red herring for fuel cells?

      --
      - Murphy's Corollary: - It is impossible to make things foolproof because fools are so ingenious.
    8. Re:Cost by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      There would be a lot of legal controversey. Unless the ethanol can be denatured (with methanol or another denaturant, rendering it undrinkable and negating the non toxic benifits of the ethanol fuel cell) than it will be taxed as consumable alcohol. The exception might be 100% pure lab grade ethanol, but the armoured vehicles required for shipping it (no joke!) makes the shipping more expensive then the product.

      And then what happens? Kids under 19 in canada 21 in the US can't fuel up their phones? Perhaps a specialzed package will be developed that can't be opened, but that doesn't work for me as I would like to refill my own.

      *I'm done here, I'll be out back firing up the still if anyone needs me.*

    9. Re:Cost by purdue_thor · · Score: 1

      Those figures don't apply here, though. His calculations are probably correct for ethanol as a burnable fuel. The problem in making Ethanol comes from the need to get almost all of the water out of it so it can be burned. That takes a lot of energy. In fact, you can't even get it all out. Around 95% alcohol is as good as you can get with distillation (ever wonder why Everclear is 190 proof, ie. 95%?). This is a classical azeotrope, or constant boiling mixture. To achieve greater than 95% you need to do extra things to get the water out.

      Anyway... with these enzymes you needn't get all that water out since they're not burning the ethanol. In fact, I would assume that the enzymes work on a relatively low percent of ethanol in water -- which would be very cheap to produce (up to ~13% can be done without any addition of energy, ie. wine!).

    10. Re:Cost by AnotherBlackHat · · Score: 1

      Cornell University Professor David Pimental clearly shows how creating Ethanol (gas for tractors, refining, delivery, nitrogen fertilizer, etc...) uses more power (and pollutes more, btw) than you can yield from it:


      That report assumes that the ethanol is refined to 99.8% purity, is produced using the same level of quality we insist on for food, and that fertilization of the fields is necessary.

      Fuel cell methanol doesn't need purity, and fertilizier is only added when it's economically viable.
      Remove subsidies and corn would still be grown, we just wouldn't grow as much per acre.

      Don't ignore the reality of food production either.
      We intentionally overproduce food right now because a food shortage is so disasterous.
      It's better to convert the surplus to ethanol and store it in a long term reserve than to let the food rot on the ground.

      Overall, water+sunlight+carbon -> corn -> methanol -> water+carbon
      produces an excess of oxygen and carbon.

      -- this is not a .sig
    11. Re:Cost by DanDwig · · Score: 1

      Basic themoduanmics require that any produced fuel is going to take more energy to produce than it will yield. This does not mean the process should be neglected. The issue is portability of ethanol versus the portability of the fuel going into making it. While this does not counter all the arguments made in this article it does counter some. Since some of the energy required for generation could come from non-mobile, renewable sources (solar for heat in ethanol distillation, wind for grinding corn, etc.) the process may still have some economic and enviromental viability.

    12. Re:Cost by Suidae · · Score: 1

      Wine yeasts are generally produced to make good wine, I wonder if strains of yeasts could be produced to jack the percentages up significantly higher? If you could hit 25% just with a couple of fermentation stages it might make a big difference in the amount of energy required to get a useable product.

    13. Re:Cost by Rob+Simpson · · Score: 1
      yes but methanol might well break down the enzymes (or more likely the enzymes will break down the methanol and its byproduct including formaldihyde will poison them). I would guess this is why they didn't just use cheaper methanol to start out.

      I doubt it - ethanol is preferred over methanol as a target for alcohol dehydrogenase. So much so that ethanol is a treatment for methanol poisoning (along with sodium bicarbonate for acidosis). Methanol (or other impurities) may very well gum up the works somehow, though.

      I suspect that at least part of the reason for this is that ethanol is much less toxic, so there is less concern with getting poisoned. You can also buy denatured 70% or 99% ethanol in any drugstore, so it'd be easy to get - even if this thing were released right now.

    14. Re:Cost by armb · · Score: 1

      Wine yeasts already tolerate significantly higher alcohol levels than most yeasts. Google suggests you are going to be lucky to get above 15% from straight fermentation. Genetic engineering of yeasts might get it a bit higher, but probably not very much.

      --
      rant
  29. Damn Kids! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I've taken to locking up my batteries. The damn kids keep drinking them up. They think they're so smart topping them off from the tap, but those pesky enzymes seem much less willing to steal the hydrogen from water.

  30. Re:Cheaper? Only because of the war on drugs by Peter+Harris · · Score: 1

    Why is hemp any better for making methanol than plain old grass? Anyway, methanol is really toxic. Ethanol is safer.

    As for the hemp, let us grow hemp and use it to get stoned! At least we won't buy it from drug dealers. But that's off-topic...

    --

    -- What do you need?
    -- Gnus. Lots of Gnus.
  31. biomaterials by A+Swing+Dancing+Dork · · Score: 0, Redundant

    Think about the current state of technology. Nanotech is sort of biotech (think flagella motors), material science's self assembling structures are really bio-tech. Eventually all companies in the manufacturing category will be biotech companies. When your batteries are bio/nano tech based, your screen is organic, and your RAM is nano/chemo-electric.

  32. Re:Cheaper? Only because of the war on drugs by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Don't forget we can also use it to make paper, cloth, and the only natural sails & ropes that withstand salt water. If it wasn't for the hemp plant the New World would never have been found by Europeans! Sorry for threadjacking. To be on topic I'll wonder what if we (The US) didn't give our farmers so many subsidies, and instead worked on putting that surplus of food to good use? Imagine if a corn farmer would know each season he could sell all of his corn, because there was a demand for methanol!

  33. I have one question by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0, Funny

    Who is going to take away the energizer bunny's keys? That fucker has some teeth. Last guy that tried to stop him from driving home lost 3 fingers.

    And don't remind me about that last call incident. Do you know what that pink fucker did when he didn't get that last boilermaker? Sure it's in nice little balls, but it's still shit nonetheless.

  34. Re:Cheaper? Only because of the war on drugs by corebreech · · Score: 1

    Hemp produces more usable biomass per acre than anything else out there.

    And nobody is asking you to drink the stuff. Besides, ethanol is toxic too... close to 50,000 people die from its ingestion every year.

    How many people die from methanol ingestion?

  35. Sugar in my tank by devinjones · · Score: 0

    So instead of putting sugar in my fuel tank to kill the engine, you would put gasoline?

  36. Re:In Soviet Russia... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Funny

    This may be dangerous. Russians won't be able to call for a ride (after a good drunk) because they drank their phone battery.

  37. Honest officer... by sayerofno · · Score: 1, Funny

    The bottle of vodka is only for charging my laptop!

    1. Re:Honest officer... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Hmmm, future Slashdot headline: War-driving curbed by open bottle laws. After all, in many US states it is illegal to have an open bottle of alcohol in a car. I even know someone who was prosecuted for driving while intoxicated even though she was in a parked vehicle and didn't have the keys in the ignition! She was parked along the side of the road outside of a party and had gone to the car to get a cigarette.

  38. social implications by frovingslosh · · Score: 3, Interesting

    So here is the next question: a denaturing agent destroys the fuel cell. The (US) tax on non-denatured methanol is so excessive that it prohibits the use of these fuel cells in laptops, not to mention much better uses of the fuel cells, like clean running cars (where even with a road tax the tax would be much lower). So the question is, do we change the law to support this new clean technology, or do we keep an aribratary tax that is both about raising excessive revenue as well as about telling people how to live their lives? And if we get rid of a tax on alcohol to permit these fuel cells, what other rediculous law can replace it to show people that big brother can run their lives better than they can? And can I get laptop methanol without paying a road tax on it? And do methanol and programming really mix?

    --
    I'm an American. I love this country and the freedoms that we used to have.
    1. Re:social implications by shis-ka-bob · · Score: 1

      I'll bet its still going cheaper - a bottle of everclear that lasts a year is not all that expensive, even with with the tax. If undergrad can afford it, cost is not an issue ;-)

      --
      Think global, act loco
    2. Re:social implications by frovingslosh · · Score: 1
      I'll bet its still going cheaper - a bottle of everclear that lasts a year is not all that expensive, even with with the tax. If undergrad can afford it, cost is not an issue ;-)

      Actually, I should have said ethanol, not methanol, but otherwise the argument holds and you really miss the point. Maybe if you don't use the laptop much a bottol of everclear will last a while, but in heavy use this is just not the case. More importantly, should this fule cell technology be limited to just geek laptops, or should we be able to use it in our cars as a renewable clean "burning" source of power to replace the dwindeling and dirty oil supplies? Say a car gets 30 mpg on gas. Even with a highly efficent fuel cell it's not likely to get more than 60 mpg, particularly when the energy content of ethonol is lower than gasoline (12,800 btu/lb vs 20,000+ btu/lb). So unless you like the idea of a fuel for your car that will cost over $100 per gallon ($1500+ a fill-up), I submit that the tax on ethanol is a serious issue.

      --
      I'm an American. I love this country and the freedoms that we used to have.
    3. Re:social implications by sisukapalli1 · · Score: 1

      I wonder how these things will play out by the time dubya gets done with Iraq and drilling Alaska...

      I am sure the media can always convince 70% of americans that not using oil would be unamerican.

      S

  39. Progression by limekiller4 · · Score: 1

    You know, if this keeps up, the logical conclusion is a hamster and a wheel, Flintstones style.

    Yabba Dabba Doo.

    --
    My .02,
    Limekiller
  40. Re:The major problem of the next year may well be. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Funny

    We'll do what biology does: install sweat glands into the laptop!

    Following that, we'll see various laptop deodorants come to market...

  41. A glimpse of the Future(rama) by jakedata · · Score: 3, Funny

    Bender the robot uses Ethanol for power. A couple bottles of 'Old Fortran' kept him going for hours.

    Now if I could only run my cell phone off of cigarettes, we could re-purpose the entire vice industry. We all know how useful hemp is too...

    1. Re:A glimpse of the Future(rama) by pyrote · · Score: 1

      Ya but if ya run it off hemp, your calls would be all distorted and delayed.

      You'd make a call and it would 'maybee' dial in 30 seconds, then it would hang up and flash a message..."uh, what number did you want to dial?"

      --
      THE WORLD IS GOING TO END!!!! eventually.
  42. Enzyme Rights by dfn5 · · Score: 1
    How would you feel if you woke up one day and realized that your only purpose in life was to produce power for some higher life form's cell phone or pocket Pokemon? I know I'd demand to be free of that opression. And when that happens the entire world will shut down. It will be worse then Y2K.

    Let us instead look for a better cleaner form of power, like harnessing the energy contained in the sound of ripping velcro.

    --
    -- Thou hast strayed far from the path of the Avatar.
    1. Re:Enzyme Rights by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      "like harnessing the energy contained in the sound of ripping velcro"

      Wouldn't you need an energy source to do that [rip the velcro]?

      Unless you just hook it to a bunch of Gilligan's Island bikes that people pedal... DOH... then it goes back to your original argument against only existing for the Pokemon... *sigh* I know, we could burn hippies, which seems like a limitless supply.

    2. Re:Enzyme Rights by Diphthong · · Score: 4, Funny

      Erm, an enzyme is just a huge molecule, isn't it? It isn't alive in any sense. Don't worry, you won't be oppressing any bacteria or anything -- never mind the millions of 'em each of us slaughter daily by breathing. :)

  43. Alky by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Where can I buy Duff batteries? D'oh!

  44. Laptop life shortened! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I can see this being a problem.

    This is going to shorten my laptop's battery life.

    -alcoholic

  45. Buying new batteries or refills by irving47 · · Score: 1

    At the convenience store: "I'm sorry sir, I need some proof you're 21 to sell you this battery."

    I suppose they will have to chemically treat this stuff the same way they do with Isopropyl rubbing alcohol to prevent people from trying to get drunk off of it.

    --
    I had a sucky sig.
    1. Re:Buying new batteries or refills by mcpheat · · Score: 1

      They don't have to treat isopropyl alcohol to make it poisonous, it is poisonous already.

  46. You Fools! by Gatton · · Score: 2, Funny

    Soylent Battery is made from people! It's PEOPLE!!! /PhilHartman

  47. recharging? by bobba22 · · Score: 1

    simply fry with bacon and eggs in the morning, leave for the rest of the day to dry out and top up again in the evening. As the cell gets older it will only be able to perform its function twice - maybe three times a week. Constant soaking, however ensures permanent power.

  48. Re:Cheaper? Only because of the war on drugs by mark_lybarger · · Score: 1

    Well, .... a quick google search turns up tha------------ NO CARRIER

  49. Glad to know that the ethanol is going there... by geesus · · Score: 0

    Because im sick of seeing it in such high levels in Australian petrol!

    --
    Gnome wasnt built in a day.
  50. Drink your batteries, get the shits... by iiioxx · · Score: 4, Insightful

    All non-regulated (as in BATF) ethanol is required by law to be denatured. There are two types of denaturing: complete and specical. Complete adds 5% methanol, rendering the mixture toxic for human consumption. Special denaturing adds a non-toxic additive to render the alcohol undrinkable. This is often done by adding phenopthalein, which (aside from being a pH indicator) is a powerful laxative. Drinking it will cause "severe gastrointestinal distress". Most consumer applications (like rubbing alcohol) use special denaturing (so they don't kill stupid alcoholics).

    Just FYI for anyone thinking about using your laptop as a wetbar.

    1. Re:Drink your batteries, get the shits... by MarvinMouse · · Score: 1

      You'll get the shits after you go blind and die. Yeah.

      Phenopthalein doesn't instantly give you the shits. If you are a stupid alcoholic drinking rubbing alcohol, you'll likely go blind and probably die before you get the shits. After which, It's more of a insult that you shit yourself than a preventative measure.

      --
      ~ kjrose
    2. Re:Drink your batteries, get the shits... by iiioxx · · Score: 1

      You'll get the shits after you go blind and die. Yeah.

      Phenopthalein doesn't instantly give you the shits. If you are a stupid alcoholic drinking rubbing alcohol, you'll likely go blind and probably die before you get the shits. After which, It's more of a insult that you shit yourself than a preventative measure.


      1. Phenopthalein isn't poisonous. Until a few years ago, a lot of laxatives were phenopthalein-based, including Ex-Lax. The only reason it was dropped as an ingredient in laxatives was because there were some links to colon cancer. One drop of phenopthalein was about the amount used in a single Ex-Lax tablet. Denatured ethanol is approximately 5% phenopthalein. You can do the Ex-Lax math...

      2. You've got your alcohols mixed up. Ethanol is the drinkable stuff found in alcoholic beverages. Methanol (wood alcohol) and isopropyl alcohol are the toxic varieties (methanol far moreso than isopropyl). Even a small amount (1/4 ounce or more) of methanol can cause blindness and death if ingested or inhaled. Because of that, methanol is generally only used for fuel, solvents, anti-freeze, or as a denaturant for ethanol in industrial applications.

      Rubbing alcohol comes in two varieties: isopropyl alcohol and non-toxic, denatured ethanol. If you drink phenopthalein-denatured ethanol, you will simply get the shits (and possibly become dangerously dehydrated). If you drink isopropyl alcohol, then yes, you could die or experience severe secondary symptoms similar to acetone poisoning (acetone is a break-down product of isopropyl alcohol).

      The article was referring to the use of ethanol for fuel cell purposes. As required by federal law, any non-licensed ethanol must be denatured to prevent ingestion. A standard denaturant for consumer-use ethanol is phenopthalein. However, should the fuel cell manufacturers use ethanol denatured with 5% methanol, then yes, drinking the batteries would cause death and blindness, but not the shits. But given the fact that methanol can be toxic from even inhalation and skin contact, I doubt they would use it as a denaturant in fuel cells intended for personal devices like laptops, PDAs, and cell phones (too much risk of contact from accidental leaking).

  51. Under 21's at local liqor store by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Imagine under 21's at local liqor store saying...
    I want this for my laptop... why do I need an ID ?

  52. Re:The major problem of the next year may well be. by ketamine-bp · · Score: 2, Interesting

    But then the major problem is that the enzymes are replacable in the industrial container, but as I would believe, the battery would probably be disposible (i.e. you can't possibly add enzyme into it)

    Moreover, the cross-linked enzyme crystals are able to withstand organic solvents but they are not that heat-stable - and if they are overheated, we can just hope that they don't go denatured, but their specificity to temperature will not change, i.e. Power goes down when temperature goes up or down, ooops.... ;-)

  53. Re:The major problem of the next year may well be. by Sgt+York · · Score: 3, Informative
    The article was fairly scarce on details, but there are thermostable enzymes. We use some that are perfectly fine after sitting at 90+ degrees (C) for hours. These are from bugs that live in hot areas (geothermal vents), and therefore need thermostable enzymes. The most common example is the Taq polymerase used in PCR.

    There are other enzymes that tolerate boiling, and other extreme conditions. They are inactive in the severe condition, but have such a stable tertiary structure that they snap right back when put into the proper environment again. Mammalian RNAses are notorious for this.

    From the article, however, the restriction of the enzymes to these pockets may help. For those that don't know, enzymes have a structure like a ribbon (or several ribbons) that fold back on themselevs in a particular way. By thermodynamics, as you add heat, you add entropy and the ribbon moves around too much to stay in its functional orientation.

    Keeping the enzyme in a small, restrictive pocket may restrict its random motion enough to help keep the ribbon from unfolding, allowing the enzyme to function at a higher temperature than it normally would.

    --

    There is a reason for everything. Sometimes that reason just sucks.

  54. drink by justo · · Score: 1

    and now you can drink the contents of your battery...

  55. My favourite quote: by SolemnDragon · · Score: 1
    ...coated the electrodes with a polymer that has specially tailored pores. These maintain a neutral pH, while being small enough to trap the enzymes yet big enough to let the alcohol pass through. "The enzymes have lasted over two months now and they are still functioning," she says.

    Not the power charge, but the enzymes? So here we have reached the point of being concerned over not just the charge, but the rapid breakdown of the fuel cell itself. And that's actually a good thing, so long as they keep it cheap and don't sell the darned thing in a non-recyclable plastic package. I've seen it happen a lot where products which could be really envronmentally friendly came packaged in something utterly inappropriate.

    I agree that the other issue is- how expensive are these going to be able to run here in the US, wehre it's probably going to have to be made AND sold as a non-drinkable alcohol class- which isn't necessarily convenient OR cheap. Are they going to try to create a market for the fuels first by promoting the cell? It seems like they'd HAVE to make it run on things like gin first, since that's a tough push to get the fuel out there without anything to put it in... entertaining little cycle. I'd like one that can recharge from household compost- anyone remember Back to the Future movie series, with Mr. Fission?

  56. Futurama by SnuSnu · · Score: 3, Funny

    Stick one of these in a robot and voila: Bender!

  57. New Biofuel Cell Runs on Vodka by rpiquepa · · Score: 2, Informative

    In fact, the article from the New Scientist needs to be completed by reading this press release from the American Chemical Society. You also can read this article from Boston.com to get more information.

  58. Re:The major problem of the next year may well be. by ketamine-bp · · Score: 2, Informative

    Yes, as I'm also involved in biochemistry/mol. genetics, there are Heat-stable enzymes, but remember, field-conditions are not like lab conditions, where we can add as much and replace as much enzyme as we want, and it's not that the enzyme is stop then it's stopped.

    When it comes to laptop, we need a stable power supply.. who wants a supply that only work in 20oC < x < 40oC (the actual margin may well be stricter)... ;-)

    but a Li-Ion backup will fix this...wait.. isn't that a big weight added on it.. oh...

  59. Some industrial enzymes are from "hot" bacteria by Ungrounded+Lightning · · Score: 1

    Moreover, the cross-linked enzyme crystals are able to withstand organic solvents but they are not that heat-stable - and if they are overheated, we can just hope that they don't go denatured, but their specificity to temperature will not change, i.e. Power goes down when temperature goes up or down, ooops.... ;-)

    I recall that there has been quite a bit of work being done to industralize the enzymes from the bacteria that grow in sulphur mudpots in places like Yosemite, and to understand what makes them tick so it could be applied to other enzymes. Those function nicely up to the temperature of boiling mud.

    While I don't know that these are what the enzyme fuel-cells are based on, if they ARE one might expect them to work BETTER as they heat up - just what you want. (And cross-linking for stability at high temperatures sounds just like the sort of thing that would be discovered by analyzing such enzymes.)

    (Then there's the bacteria, tube worms, and shrimp from the subocean vents, which are running nicely WAY above sea-level boiling point. But you probably wouldn't want your laptop battery getting TOO far above boiling point - especially if it's full of ethanol.)

    --
    Bantam Dominique roosters crow a four-note song. Once you've heard it as "Happy BIRTHday" you can't NOT hear it that way
    1. Re:Some industrial enzymes are from "hot" bacteria by pyrote · · Score: 2, Funny

      Those function nicely up to the temperature of boiling mud.

      You obviously haven't tried a P4 laptop out recently.

      --
      THE WORLD IS GOING TO END!!!! eventually.
  60. Re:In Soviet Russia... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Redundant 3 minutes after a "first post"? Is there any mercy here?
    Besides,it was a correct "Soviet Russia" jock with sufject reversal.

  61. Re:Wrong! by afidel · · Score: 1

    Both methanol and ethanol are toxic, just in different degrees and ways. Methanol is very bad because its breakdown products include nasty things like formaldihyde, but alchohol poisoning from ethanol ingestion is almost as deadly. The big difference is that your liver is fairly well designed to handle removing ethanol and safely break it down whereas it is not for methanol.

    --
    There are 4 boxes to use in the defense of liberty: soap, ballot, jury, ammo. Use in that order. Starting now.
  62. Re:The major problem of the next year may well be. by Black_Logic · · Score: 1

    Wouldn't a ceramic shell casing pretty much solve that problem?

    --
    Ansi's and stupid tricks!
  63. And we have a winner! by sokkelih · · Score: 1

    Here in Finland it is very common to have "drinking competitions". I gues there are vey few of us who could beat pdp-1 in this competition! :)

  64. edible CDs by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Funny

    AOL could solve world hunger.

  65. also for Islam Countries ?? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    How about bringing such fuelcells in some islam countries, where you cant even import one drop of alcohol ?!?

    (people get punished if they bring cherry bonbons to their relatives)

  66. ethanol vs methanol by slide-rule · · Score: 1
    Such batteries promise to be cheaper, safer and less toxic than previously demonstrated methanol based fuel cells.
    Not to mention having an extra carbon atom per molecule... and the one thing we all know is: chicks dig carbon.
    (In fact, they seem to insist on getting a fairly costly form of it to agree to marry. ;)
  67. DoA? How about the BATF? by Ungrounded+Lightning · · Score: 1, Insightful

    While the DoA is one of the most corrupt branches of our government [...]

    Department of Agriculture? That's nothing.

    Do you REALLY want your laptop regulated by the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, and Firearms (BATF)? (Maybe with a little assistance from the FBI and the National Guard?)

    I can see it now: Some kids are holding a LAN party. A sniper takes out the dogs in the yard. Then cattle cars full of ninja-suited jackbooted thugs pull up, blocking the view of the front door from the tipped-off press held at bay a mile away. They knock on the door. The homeowner answers, and is shot first in the arm and then the chest. The house is stormed, the cats stomped to death. Helicopters appear and fire into the upper floors, while a group brakes into the second-floor window and the last one throws a grenade in after them. The people not shot are herded into the upper floors or the underground basement sideroom by teargas. Then tanks crush the passages to the sideroom, take out the stairs to the second floor, smash much of the building to tinder, and open ventilation holes to the wind. Once the solvent has evaporated from the injected teargas (so the remaining dust is thoroughly flammible) a few pyrotechnic-based teargas grenades light it off. The teargas dust lights off the tinder, setting the building on fire, while producing Hydrogen Cyanide gas. And anyone not already dead is poisoned the first time they take a breath of smoke while trying to make it out (or just sitting trapped in the basement room).

    And at the press conference they tell us that they really HAD to go after these low lifes, because, even though they had a license to make high-capacity laptop batteries they were suspected of not paying a $200 tax on one of 'em. And they were teaching their kids to download MP3s.

    --
    Bantam Dominique roosters crow a four-note song. Once you've heard it as "Happy BIRTHday" you can't NOT hear it that way
  68. Coincidence? by Schrodinger's+Mouse · · Score: 1
    Hmm.

    This research was performed at St. Louis University.


    "For many years, Anheuser-Busch as well as our family have been firmly committed to helping Saint Louis U. become the top Catholic university in the U.S., and we're proud to once again provide support for the school, its faculty and the students," said [August] Busch IV, who earned a bachelor's degree in finance and a master's degree in business administration from SLU.


    Now consider Anheuser-Busch's main source of revenue...
    --

    *****

    There are many people in this country who, through no fault of their own, are sane.

    1. Re:Coincidence? by Pejorian · · Score: 1

      I hope people don't try Bud Lite in their laptop batteries. They'll only get 2 minutes of power per bottle.

      --
      - Murphy's Corollary: - It is impossible to make things foolproof because fools are so ingenious.
  69. Yeah, but.... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Would it power one of these?

    Besides. Imagine a Beowulf cluster of barmonkeys.

  70. methanol not that toxic by avandesande · · Score: 2, Informative

    Methanol is simply not that toxic. If you drink large quanities (ie, ounces), it causes a condition called acidosis, which leads to blindness and death (among other things). Trace amounts are easily eliminated from the body. If you don't drink it or bathe in it, you will be fine.

    --
    love is just extroverted narcissism
    1. Re:methanol not that toxic by Kris+Warkentin · · Score: 1

      This article describes in detail methanol and ethylene glycol toxicity. People have died from drinking as little as 40ml of a 15% solution of methanol. Interesting thing about using methanol for denaturing ethanol: ethanol is actually listed as the antidote for methanol poisoning.

      --

      In Soviet Russia, hot grits put YOU down THEIR pants.
    2. Re:methanol not that toxic by supertsaar · · Score: 2, Informative

      Ah, good old methanol. My friend from the lab that helped me wash those gels full of coomassie brilliant blue and get rid of the excess color. Must have inhaled grams of the stuff in the two years I worked with it. Still I don't recommend drinking it folks. All those blind russians got where they are from drinking badly distilled home-made liquor. That's why they put methanol in ethanol: the boiling points are so close enough (ethanol:78.3 C, methanol 65 C) to make homegrown separation by distillation difficult.

      --
      The Bigger The Headache The Bigger the Pill
    3. Re:methanol not that toxic by Lil'wombat · · Score: 1

      Alchol Dehydrogenase converts methonal to formaldahye which attachs the rod structure of the eye causing blindness. The treatment for methonal poisoning is large quantities of ethanol administered for days. The reason: alcohol dehydrogenase preferentially binds ethonal over methonal. By having a large quantity of ethonal arround, you inhibit the formaldahyde production. Methonal is than removed by the kidneys.

      Biochem 305 folks.

      --

      Truth: If it's not one thing, it's another

    4. Re:methanol not that toxic by Muad'Dave · · Score: 1

      Yeah, but it'll save you from the Andromeda Strain!

      Sterno Rules!

      --
      Tiller's Rule: Never use a word in written form that you've only heard and never read. You will end up looking foolish.
    5. Re:methanol not that toxic by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Entertainigly enough, the best way to deal with methanol poisoning before you make it to the hospitial is to drink ethanol

  71. Re:The major problem of the next year may well be. by Surak · · Score: 1


    More info here:

    http://www.wileyeurope.com/cda/cover/0,,04714992 69 |excerpt,00.pdf
    </karmawhore>

  72. Re:The major problem of the next year may well be. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
    you can't possibly add enzyme into it

    Why would you need to? Enzymes by definition don't get consumed in chemical reactions.

  73. Re:The major problem of the next year may well be. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Informative

    The cross-linking holds together the overall tertiary structure of the enzyme, and the enzyme tends to hang onto water where it needs it to maintain secondary structure.

    For those of you that don't know anything about proteins, tertiary structure refers to the way a protein folds. Since for proteins, shape is critical to function, if the bonds holding the tertiary structure are broken, the protein won't function properly.

    Just for thoroughness, primary structure is the sequence of amino acids, secondary is a shape adopted before folding, and quaternary is the way multiple polypeptide chains join together.

  74. Re:Wrong! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    try the MSDS's ...

  75. Whatabout the OS! by pyrote · · Score: 1

    From the looks of it, the development team at Microsoft has been sauced on this technology for years now!

    --
    THE WORLD IS GOING TO END!!!! eventually.
  76. Re:Cheaper? Only because of the war on drugs by gilesjuk · · Score: 1

    Indeed, here in the UK we pay farmers not to grow crops. Surely it would be better to pay them to grow fuel? oh but then the government wouldn't get extortionate tax revenue from all the North Sea oil we produce.

  77. horse pollution by No+Such+Agency · · Score: 2, Interesting

    I remember reading a letter to a Victorian science journal complaining about the problem of horse waste in London's streets. The writer declared it an aesthetic and health menace. Fact is, the removal of horse poop was a HUGE problem in pre-automotive urban societies. So they polluted too, just in a relatively non-toxic way (in the sense that horse poop is biodegradable and doesn't give you cancer). I have no data on hand but I assume they solved the problem by having people who cleaned it up and sold it as fertilizer.

    And if you think that car pollution "blows away in the wind", you've obviously never been to a REALLY big city with poor emission laws, like Mexico City...

    --
    Freedom: "I won't!"
  78. Re:The major problem of the next year may well be. by mykepredko · · Score: 1

    I would have thought that the major problem next year is that Russia would be a bigger energy supplier than Saudi Arabia...

    myke

  79. And since ultimately corn is solar powered... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Who knows, maybe some day Kansas will power your calls. ...we can all say, "Carry on, my wayward Sun!"

  80. Re:DoA? How about the BATF? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    It's sad how even though I know you're exagerating, I can name the incidents that were the sources for 90% of violent acts you listed. The BATF is just plain psychotic at times.

  81. Waste? by zemkai · · Score: 1

    What about the "other stuff" in {vodka | whiskey | gin | etc}? Do the extraneous bits collect over time to gunk up the works? Do these things need cleaning from time to time?

  82. Re:The major problem of the next year may well be. by protein+folder · · Score: 1
    Enzymes by definition don't get consumed in chemical reactions.

    Well, assuming perfect catalysis, no denaturation/degradation, this is true, but those aren't necessarily good assumptions. (Textbook simplified definition vs. real life behavior). In living things, proteins get made and destroyed all the time. I don't really know much about the system they're using here, but even though it should be a lot less complex than the cellular environment, things are still going to degrade over time. Diamonds aren't forever either.
    --
    Your mind is squeezed by a blast of pain!
  83. mmmmm.... beer by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    is there anything ETOH can not do?!

  84. hamster power by g4dget · · Score: 1
    Until the twentieth century the main source of applied energy was animal movement,

    Well, so the solution to our laptop power problems is easy: get a hamster, a wheel, and a little generator. That biological generator runs on lettuce, food pellets, or, in a pinch, airline food (not recommended for long term power generation because it may damage the generator), and it produces mostly carbon dioxide and some (hopefully) solid waste.

    1. Re:hamster power by Suidae · · Score: 1

      and some (hopefully) solid waste.

      I just about spit coffee on everything laughing at that.

  85. I have a question about fuel cells by Glonoinha · · Score: 1

    I went to read the article, but it was down. No surprise there. /.)

    I am guessing the ethanol is 'consumed' by the fuel cell and the energy that is released by the process is available to power your laptop (et.al) ... and needs occasional replentishment - but - question here :

    Does replentishing the ethanol provide the fuel cell with a full charge, or does the fuel cell still need to be recharged by the proper application of electricity?

    If adding ethanol removes the need to plug it in (ever) to recharge the battery (at the expense of alcohol, of course) I think I am going to really, really like fuel cell based toys (laptop/cell phone/etc...)

    --
    Glonoinha the MebiByte Slayer
    1. Re:I have a question about fuel cells by DeComposer · · Score: 1

      So does an ethanol-powered laptop become more unstable, the more ethanol it consumes? The last thing I need is my laptop getting all slobbery and telling me how much it loves me and then puking a spreadsheet all over the keyboard.

      So, between this technology and Intel's new overclock-prevention technology, are we giong to have some sort of computer cops pulling over laptops?

      "Do you know how fast you were going back there, Sparky? Whoa! What's that I smell? Step out of the car, please. I'm going to need you to draw a straight line..."

      --


      Karma
  86. Well... by Goonie · · Score: 1
    It'd be like trying to attack the citizens of rural Montana. It's just too diffuse a target to be of interest, unless you mount a biological attack with some kind of (probably genetically engineered) disease or pest. If terrorists have the sophistication to pull such an attack off, we've all got bigger problems - for instance, where are we going to get, um, food, for which we are entirely dependent on vegetable crops?

    Worry about real threats, not super-terrorists hiding under the mattress.

    --

    Any sufficiently advanced technology is indistinguishable from a rigged demo
    --Andy Finkel (J. Klass?)
  87. "Pwered by your liquor cabinet" by penguin_bear · · Score: 1

    http://www.slu.edu/readstory/newslink/2474

  88. Re:"Powered by your liquor cabinet" by penguin_bear · · Score: 1

    Sorry, just too unfocused to post properly. The above mentioned link is the press releas from St. Louis University, where Dr. Minteer and her colleagues have done some of the work. That sure teaches our alcohol taskforce! "But ociffer, I was just charging my cell phone!" Cheerio!

  89. not if you are an Arab by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Arabs are above their own laws and mandates. They believe that if you drive to small islands on the weekends that Allah will not see you with the whores, drugs, alcohol and porn. Then they can come back to their areas and take turns oppressing certain groups (i.e. anyone not Muslim and not of their tribe). What an enlightened group they are. Perhaps they will dutifully bring up the crusades to both cover up their own CURRENT stupidity as well as ignore that the crusades were just as much their evil and murderous campaign than of the westerners. Who cares about historical facts when you can have mindless zealotry! Yay extremists!

  90. Make your own! by vfxpro · · Score: 1

    Make your own! They've been doing it in the south and apalachia for years. (And it's actually legal in New Zealand )

    --
    Steal this sig.
  91. I went to St. Louis U. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    it makes sense that this was developed at SLU....all we did was drink.

  92. Re:The major problem of the next year may well be. by SpaceJunkie · · Score: 1

    You would actually be topping up the fuel not the enzymes. Enzymes do not actually "burn up", although they are occasionally denatured.
    Think of an enzyme as a protein based catalyst - it speeds up or engineers a reaction - although it manipulates the other chemicals, the enzyme comes out of the reaction chemically the same as it went in.
    Topping up methanol does not seem that far fetched. I like the sound of this technology- but i can see it being replaced by H2 fuel cells. although maybe enzymes could be used to convert readily available fuel into hydrogen for use in the fuel cell..

    --
    OrionRobots.co.uk - Robots From sol