Slashdot Mirror
Battery Development Off The Beaten Path
Roland Piquepaille writes "Let's face it. Our computing devices are going faster year after year. But our laptop batteries don't show the same performance improvement. They still work only for a few hours, just a little bit more than ten years ago. Several companies want to change this, according to this UPI report, 'Nanotechnology improving energy options.' For example, mPhase Technologies plans to introduce smart batteries based on millions of silicon nanotube electrodes. These nanobatteries, to be introduced before the end of 2005, will last longer than traditional ones and will be respectful of our environment. Meanwhile, Konarka Technologies wants to reduce the weight of batteries with its flexible solar-fueled nanobatteries. You'll find more details and pictures in this overview."
I think that it's called a "complex sentence", i.e. one (modified) noun phrase with two verb phrases. Most elementary schools go over them if they teach the English language.
This is a perfectly well-formed sentence.
Why is this marked as funny? I stated the same thing but with an explanation and diagrams of how it would work. Nuclear batteries (actually radioisotope batteries since there's no actual nuclear fission occurring) are a very real, very useful, and very ignored technology. RTGs are the first generation technology. SRGs (Stirling Radioisotope Generators) are second generation, and promise to be smaller, lighter, and more powerful.
Javascript + Nintendo DSi = DSiCade
Check the nanotech article linked from the overview. Apparently they will be "Inexpensive to mass produce", which sounds like marketing speak for "bloody pricey for the first few years at least"...
This post was meant for battery power vehicles, but the tecnology applies to small devices as well. Battery technology is massively in advance of where they were 15 years ago. Viable battery powered vehicles are hear now. They're just still bloody expensive.
The current battery technologies are:
Lead acid: 200 year old technology. Give this a performance index of 1. It's cheap and simple.
NiCd: Heavy metals but good high current. Performance of 2x the lead acid. Performance 2.
NiMH: Getting rid of the heavy metals. Lighter as well. Performance of around 3x that of a lead acid battery.
LiON: Light, performance 5 x that of a lead acid battery.
They obviously get more expensive the more advanced they are. You can expect to get around 70-80miles out of a lead acid battery. Multiply that by the performance factors for the newer technologies.
New technologies, still up and coming. Used in small scale applications, mobile phones, laptops.
Li-Poly. Lighter and can handle more cycles than LiON but not much more power.
Lithium Sulphur batteries (Li-S) promise to more than double the capacity of LiON batteries, 10X that of a lead acid battery. That's a 700-800 mile range on a single charge, not even Diesel vehicles get that. I think these will do the job of killing petrol vehicles. Superior performance, superior range.
Basically. You don't discard the batteries when they wear out. Trade them in at 100,000 miles and get a "new" or refurbished set.
This *is* all nifty technology but still expensive due to manufacturing capacity.
Government of the people, by corporate executives, for corporate profits.
1. Lead acid is somewhat forgiving, and can theoretically last forever if you are mostly careful not to do a deep discharge. Most other designs have a finite number of cycles.
2. Price. It's an old technology. Car manufacturing has driven the development, and you are pretty certain to get a functional battery that does what it's supposed to.
There are two downsides.
1. No deep discharge. Once the voltage starts to drop a little, you better get back home to recharge or the battery will be dead (not sure of the chemistry involved.)
2. Low temperature functioning. Lead acid batteries cool down as you draw current from them. If you take them out for a midnight ride in the winter, you will find your voltage dropping much quicker than you expect. NiCads actually generate heat as you discharge them, and so can keep functioning even in freezing conditions.
As I understand, for these second two reasons, most commerically available bicycle lights are now NiCad. This should mean you can go for a three hour bicycle ride and draw twenty watts of light. However, it does mean that you have to replace the batteries every other year or so (depending on usage.)
Protect your liberties. Donate to the ACLU
All alternators have field coils - the alternator output is regulated by controlling the field current. Usually there is a small amount of residual magnetization that allows an alternator to self-excite. However, trying to get this process going while simultaneously asking it to power an electric fuel pump, EFI computer, and high-power ignition is pretty daunting. Back in the days of carburetors, mechanical fuel pumps, and points style ignition, push-starting a car from a dead-flat battery condition was quite feasible.
Less is more.
BTW, a few links for you:
t -02d.html
http://www.spacedaily.com/news/nuclear-blackmarke
http://www.llnl.gov/csts/publications/sutcliffe/
The end result is very few (if any) people would die from the radiological effects. Of course, maybe the public would know better if Nader had done something useful and taken the nuclear challenge.
Javascript + Nintendo DSi = DSiCade
Yes, the same public that tosses Americium-241 into the trash. Just because it's radioactive, doesn't mean it's a problem. Your backyard is radioactive. Your bar-b-que is probably more radioactive, as is the granite building you probably work in. The irrational fear of radiation has been holding back R&D for decades.
Even just using an alpha emitter like Americium, chemically bonded into a plastic and successively sandwiched between photo-electric cells to provide a "wireless" charger for existing battery technologies would be an immense (and safe) step forward. These technologies have been known and patented for a long time. Unfortunately, the monster movies of the 1950s have raised a generation that associates radiation with Godzilla, and prevents any rational use.
Can You Say Linux? I Knew That You Could.
The actual number is 100 miles squared, which too many people take as 100 square miles. Not the same. (In fact, I have been personally misquoted as saying the latter.
That said, it's pretty clear why the utilities haven't done it...Space has not been the issue with solar panels for 15 years now. Plenty of unused roof space, brownfields, etc., etc.
It's cost...here's your math.
Bulk solar panels go for ca. $2.90 / Watt anymore, making for a residential turnkey full system cost of a little over $6.50 (say $6 commercial.) So, a 30-year lifetime electricity cost of maybe $.22 / kWh , (less for commercial - better tax depreciation treatment.)
Now, happily, we compete on the meter side, so we're competing with $.07 - $.13 /kWh instead of the $.02 that the wind people have to generate. And those prices keep going up (by perhaps 5% per year,) while ours come down (by ca. 5% per year,) but you're still not making that money back without a state or utility incentive. Check DSIRE.
With current technology cost trends, that will slowly stop being the case for individuals in the US with high electricity bills over about the next five to eight years...
Finally, there are gas and diesel powered cars that get better mileage than hybrids, and I am talking demonstratable mileage, not what you see on the EPA tag.
Yes, you see those in Europe, but those vehicles tend to be very lightweight to improve fuel efficiency even further. The Volkswagen Lupo diesel is a good example of this, but this version of the Lupo is so lightly built that I have serious worries about its highway safety.
Meanwhile, the current Toyota Prius get around 48 to 52 mpg in most people's driving styles, and it has the type of interior space you normally associate with a Honda Accord, for gosh sakes! And unlike the VW Lupo, the Prius is probably a much safer to be in case of an accident.
You're forgetting about regen braking. My Prius actually gains energy when I drive to one particular place - through some peculiarity of the steep grades and one-way streets involved I end up with more power in my batteries than I started with. If the car's already warmed up, the engine won't kick on at all for the whole ride (unless I feel the need for sudden rapid acceleration).
Anyway, since it effectively wastes zero gas on startup (crank is already spinning with valves open, startup takes far less than one second once the valves start cycling and fuel is provided) I suspect the on/off cycle is a lot more efficient than you think. Check out some of the independent write-ups of Toyota's "hybrid synergy drive" and I think you will be quite pleasantly suprised.
My concern is not only the mortal effects of heavy metals or radioactive substances, but also any chronic problems created by or exasperated by such substances.
;-)
I might suggest bolstering what I say here with some research on the Internet, but the Health effects of radioisotopes break down by the type of radiation they release.
Alpha particles are basically free protons. They have very little penetration power and can be shielded against by a sheet of paper or your layer of dead skin cells. It's slow movement and low penetration power does make it dangerous if inhaled or rubbed into an open wound, however. Whereas a more energetic particle might completely miss all the matter (or at least important matter) in your body, an Alpha particle has more time to make a critical severing of a DNA or RNA strand. In small quantities the effects aren't a big deal, but inhaled into the soft tissue of the lungs results in a large number of alpha particles getting the chance to do damage. Plutonium is generally an Alpha emitter, but is very rarely machined into a fine powder.
Beta particles are basically free electrons and share a lot of properties with electricity. (In fact they are very similar to a cathode ray.) A certain voltaic pressure is necessary to penetrate the skin, but Beta particles do have somewhat more penetration power than Alpha particles. Sr-90 is a common beta emitter that is chemically similar to Calcium. As a result it can end up being deposited in the bones where it can do damage to the sensitive marrow. A certain amount of Sr-90 is already in the biosphere from the thousands of nuclear tests during the 50's and 60's. The EPA has more info on this, but the levels are not considered dangerous.
Gamma and X-Ray radiation are high frequency radio waves with a high power of penetration. In high enough concentrations they can fry you as surely as a microwave beam. In small amounts they tend to pass directly through your body without interfering. Gamma and X-Rays are common in background radiation and have often been emitted by poor electronics in previous years. (e.g. televisions) Gamma and X-Rays are generally considered the most dangerous as they can have far more effects on your body at an external level.
Neutron radiation is a release of free neutron particles. These particles are so heavy that you can expect them to destroy just about any material in existence. A certain number of these particles is required to sustain nuclear fission. In nuclear fusion, the neutron flux is so strong that it tends to cause the reactor casing to fall apart. (This has been one of the biggest difficulties in fusion research.)
So what does all this add up to? Well, don't eat any extra Sr-90 you find lying around, don't machine any plutonium, and don't stand next to an unshielded nuclear reactor. Keep those three things in mind and you should be just fine.
Oh, and anyone who doesn't get enough Iodine in their diet shouldn't eat an Iodine radioisotope. That tends to result in Thyroid cancer as in the case of many Chernobyl residents. Most of them were treated, but they still have to make sure they receive regular treatments or they will die.
Javascript + Nintendo DSi = DSiCade