Sony To Unveil New Fuel-Cell Prototype

Nakeot writes "On Friday, Sony plans to unveil their newest portable fuel-cell technology, aimed at a variety of mobile applications. From the article: "The system contains both a methanol fuel cell and a Li-on battery" and can "intelligently switch between power from the battery, fuel, or even both under high-draw circumstances." Sony intends to show off two models claimed to power your cell for a week or a month, respectively, as well as the latest developments with their sugar-batteries that can now run purely off your favorite cola beverage. This model builds on Sony's 2008 model, their first commercially-demonstratable prototype, and could make waves with Sony's OLED devices, but will Sony be able to avoid another battery recall?"

Comments

Methanol is toxic and reacts with metals...

[Zymergy]

Not sure this is the best alcohol fuel to oxidize (burn) in a fuel cell use? http://fscimage.fishersci.com/msds/14280.htm
Ethanol is a less toxic and less reactive to metals (and much safer) alcohol to use. https://fscimage.fishersci.com/msds/89308.htm
From another methanol MSDS: "Releases flammable vapors below ambient temperatures. When mixed with air and exposed to ignition source, vapors can burn in open or explode if confined. Mixtures with water and as little as 21% (by vol.) methanol are still flammable (flash point less than 104F). Under some circumstances, may corrode certain metals, including aluminum and zinc and generate hydrogen gas. A methanol fire may not be visible to the naked eye."

Aren't many laptops made of aluminum and zinc and magnesium? What happens when the lithium battery decides to cook off? Hummmm?
(In any case, I am sure the TSA will let us all board planes with our alcohol-fueled laptops.)

Re:Methanol is toxic and reacts with metals...

[Gibbs-Duhem]

(I study this for a living.)

Methanol is better because there aren't any carbon-carbon bonds to cleave. This makes it easier to find catalysts that will functionally convert it into CO2 and H+ ions. Smaller molecules are just generally simpler to work with.

In the end, methanol based fuel cells exist. Ethanol based fuel cells don't. I'm working on it, but it'll be a while =)

As far as safety, methanol is mostly dangerous because if it is ingested or inhaled, it will be converted into formaldehyde in the body and cause blindness. Methanol is not particularly more corrosive than ethanol/water, and while it has a lower vapor pressure than ethanol, the quantity of methanol present in a battery form factor is likely to be far too small to produce a serious hazard.

Re:Methanol is toxic and reacts with metals...

[Gibbs-Duhem]

Sorry, apparently my first paragraph is based on an urban legend, not facts. Ethanol does usually have a very tiny amount of methanol in it, and ethanol will compete for the alcohol dehydrogenase that will make the methanol toxic, but ethanol is not sufficient treatment by itself to make the methanol safe.

I think. I'm not totally sure I trust wikipedia more than the postdocs in my lab. Meh. Better safe than sorry though.

Re:These are still vapor

[Eziril]

There are many corners to pass for a technology to become mainstream. Fuel Cells have already passed several of these. They've gone from an idea on a blackboard, to a gadget in a lab, and now multiple large companies have put out prototype devices. The Honda fcx clarity car being and portable batteries being just two. Fuel cell buses are already prowling the streets of several cities. Probably the biggest advances yet to come are cost, large scale production, and wide scale distribution of fuel for the fuel cells. The fact is fuel cells are here now and already working hard, they just need more improvements to be mainstream.

Re:These are still vapor

[TapeCutter]

The Top Grear crew are not exactly a bunch of tree-huggers, yet even they have repeatedly called it the most important car in 100yrs.