Degraded Electrodes Observed In Aging Batteries

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

Degraded Electrodes Observed In Aging Batteries

Posted by timothy on Wednesday October 20, 2010 @12:02AM from the taking-away-all-the-mystery dept.

schliz writes "Scientists have identified nanoscale changes in aging lithium-ion batteries that could be responsible for their degradation over time. By dissecting and examining dead batteries, they found that some lithium was irreversibly lost from the positive to negative electrode of dead batteries, and no longer participated in charging and discharging. They discovered that finely-structured nanomaterials on dead batteries' electrodes had coarsened in size, and theorise that the coarsening of the cathode may be responsible for the loss of lithium."

10 of 108 comments (clear)

Min score:

Reason:

Sort:

Keyword slapping strategy. by 140Mandak262Jamuna · 2010-10-20 00:14 · Score: 2, Insightful

Every decade they find some keyword and the slap it on everything in sight. In the past they have indiscriminately slapped "motor" "radio" "jet" "aero" "bio" "e-" ... Now it is "nano".
Gimme a break. These batteries are based on electro-chemistry. You know, interactions between molecules. Everything that goes on in batteries, all batteries, are nanoscale, by definition. Corrosion in the electrodes had been known and studied for ages. It is a damn chemical reaction that will happen at molecular level.

--
sed -e 's/Chuck Norris/Rajnikant/g' joke > fact
1. Re:Keyword slapping strategy. by Lord+Byron+II · 2010-10-20 00:25 · Score: 3, Insightful
  
  Sure, the net effect is at the macro-scale. But we now have the ability to look at these systems at the nano-scale and investigate why the "damn chemical reaction" gets going in the first place. "Nano" here says more about the equipment used to look at the battery than the battery itself.
2. Re:Keyword slapping strategy. by shadowofwind · 2010-10-20 01:29 · Score: 2, Insightful
  
  Some others...hi-fi, cyber, eco....
  Other words are also used for their positive or negative connotation, stripped of other meaning. An example that comes to mind is when people say that something rocks. A song, a radio station, a musician, or a band can rock. Nothing else can rock, sorry.
  I've noticed that many people with "good" language skills wield words easily because that's how they think. When they hear a new phrase they get some sense of its meaning, and subsequently use it where it seems to be appropriate. But it seems they don't actually have thoughts aside from their collection of phrases. If an idea doesn't map neatly to the syntax of whatever their primary language is, its not even real to them. On the other hand, some people who are slower with words struggle with language because they're not thinking in cliches, and have the challenge of figuring out how to contort their thoughts into words. These people appear stupid to those in the glib class, but in a substantial way they're actually smarter. (Of course, lots of really smart people are good with words, and lots of people who have trouble with words are stupid in other regards also.)
3. Re:Keyword slapping strategy. by russotto · 2010-10-20 02:24 · Score: 2, Insightful
  
  Gimme a break. These batteries are based on electro-chemistry. You know, interactions between molecules. Everything that goes on in batteries, all batteries, are nanoscale, by definition. Corrosion in the electrodes had been known and studied for ages. It is a damn chemical reaction that will happen at molecular level.
  They're not talking about the chemistry, though. They're talking about structural changes. So while the "nano" may be annoying, it's appropriate. Still, this doesn't sound any different than already well-known mechanisms in lithium and nickel batteries. But being a good Slashdotter I only looked the summary, and that I only skimmed.
Re:Planned obsolescence by Lord+Byron+II · 2010-10-20 00:23 · Score: 2, Insightful

Apparently, you've never owned an Apple product.
Re:News? Not news. by nedlohs · 2010-10-20 00:38 · Score: 3, Insightful

And instead of just taking the "attributed" reason they bothered to do some work and report on what they suspect is the actual physical/chemical cause rather than just a catch-all "disorder". Since that helps with trying to reduce the problem.
Why didn't you do that sometime in the last 20 years if it was so damn obvious?
Re:News? Not news. by my+$anity++0 · 2010-10-20 01:25 · Score: 2, Insightful

Oh, I'm sorry, discovering WHY and HOW things happen suddenly isn't science. The only thing that's science is doing "real work". Strangely, I used to call that engineering.
Re:Solar backup by Anonymous Coward · 2010-10-20 02:13 · Score: 1, Insightful

You should probably be quiet. If you think solar power is good for overnight trickle charging, you don't understand the technology.
Re:Planned obsolescence by sakdoctor · 2010-10-20 03:09 · Score: 2, Insightful

Do I need to remind you that you have a choice in what products you buy?
Buy something that is open/hackable/geek friendly.
Buy batteries that can be rebuilt by the user using only a screw driver and soldering iron.
Buy laser printers that have a toner refill port.
Buy routers that can be reflashed with your choice of firmware.
Who gives a FUCK about apple. Why does /. even have an apple section?
Battery Mythbusters by jones_supa · 2010-10-20 03:43 · Score: 2, Insightful

People usually have many opinions on how you should use laptop or phone batteries to maintain maximum longevity. Keep it plugged in always when possible, discharge it to 50% every now and then, or always run it from full to empty, etc.
It would be cool if we had some "battery mythbusters" who would systematically test these things with different machines and usage patterns so we could get more solid data on the subject. :)