Slashdot Mirror
Solid-State Battery Could Extinguish Fire Risks (thestack.com)
An anonymous reader writes: "Researchers have designed a new type of battery that, unlike traditional models containing liquid or gel electrolytes, consists purely of solid chemical compounds and is non-flammable, representing a huge boost for improving battery safety," reports The Stack. "Responding to dangers linked to traditional lithium-ion batteries, the team based at the Swiss Federal Institute of Technology in Zurich, has built a solid alternative which contains only solid-state electrodes and electrolytes." The battery is constructed with a layer of highly conductive lithium garnet, which works as a solid electrolyte between two electrodes. The researchers applied the material of the negative pole in viscous form, which allowed it to seep through the porous electrolyte layer. The team was able to temper the battery at 100C. "With a liquid or gel electrolyte, it would never be possible to heat a battery to such high temperatures," the study claims.
Because I had to click through three pages to get to the actual source:
http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com...
she never was wet but always dry. Also there is no chance she ever would be hot. So no risk for ignition!
This will come to nothing. In a few months time, it will have been forgotten. Who wants to bet against me?
I was using Catalyst Research Lithium Iodide cells in 1984.
Contribute to civilization: ari.aynrand.org/donate
Unless I'm missing something they were a little vague as to the energy density of this battery technology. The one detail they did appear to provide is that the batteries only function decently at over 200 degrees Fahrenheit. Unless they're dirt cheap or can make some major leaps in their specs I don't think we'll be seeing this technology in any real use for a while.
Hello,
As a consultant for several large companies, I'd always done my work on
Windows. Recently however, a top online investment firm asked us to do
some work using Linux. The concept of having access to source code was
very appealing to us, as we'd be able to modify the kernel to meet our
exacting standards which we're unable to do with Microsoft's products.
Although we met several technical challenges along the way
(specifically, Linux's lack of Token Ring support and the fact that we
were unable to defrag its ext2 file system), all in all the process
went smoothly. Everyone was very pleased with Linux, and we were
considering using it for a great deal of future internal projects.
So you can imagine our surprise when we were informed by a lawyer that
we would be required to publish our source code for others to use. It
was brought to our attention that Linux is copyrighted under something
called the GPL, or the Gnu Protective License. Part of this license
states that any changes to the kernel are to be made freely available.
Unfortunately for us, this meant that the great deal of time and money
we spent "touching up" Linux to work for this investment firm would
now be available at no cost to our competitors.
Furthermore, after reviewing this GPL our lawyers advised us that any
products compiled with GPL'ed tools - such as gcc - would also have to
its source code released. This was simply unacceptable.
Although we had planned for no one outside of this company to ever
use, let alone see the source code, we were now put in a difficult
position. We could either give away our hard work, or come up with
another solution. Although it was tough to do, there really was no
option: We had to rewrite the code, from scratch, for Windows 2000.
I think the biggest thing keeping Linux from being truly competitive
with Microsoft is this GPL. Its draconian requirements virtually
guarantee that no business will ever be able to use it. After my
experience with Linux, I won't be recommending it to any of my
associates. I may reconsider if Linux switches its license to
something a little more fair, such as Microsoft's "Shared Source".
Until then its attempts to socialize the software market will insure
it remains only a bit player.
Thank you for your time.
Now we have the amazing super-battery! Elon, you can close the doors of your so-called "GigaFactory".
This is the one!
Anything tiny that stores a couple of amp hours is going to do violent things when shorted out.
for trolls' clothes or be a That supports Been the best, racist? How is bloodfarts. FreeBSD hea3 spinning of progress.
Because if not then it is not suitable for these times in which we all live and work and play.
If your battery is running away just call the FBI.
dumbfucks.
Solid state, which means that it's not liquid, gas or vacuum state.
But vacuum state has a tendency to produce a nice comfortably glow when operating.
If builders built buildings the way programmers wrote programs, then the first woodpecker would destroy civilization.
"Responding to dangers linked to traditional lithium-ion batteries,"
This should read:
"Responding to dangers linked to the misuse and abuse of traditional lithium-ion batteries,"
Lithium batteries are not inherently dangerous. They only become dangerous if misused (which can also be said of most anything).
If they have made this battery you know. Does it or doesn't it?
This tech is much, much more promising than what Sweden is working on. It also has the benefit of being made by someone with a history of actually bringing products to market, as well as said person having been a NASA engineer.
Still waiting on Serviscope_minor to wake up to fucking reality and realize that Jessica Price isn't going to fuck him.
What kind of liquid or gel electrolyte is in a lipo battery?
Vacuum isn't a state of matter. The word you're looking for (associated with tubes) is plasma.
How about a battery that runs off battery breakthrough stories? Energy crisis solved right there.
They obviously are looking for gullible investors..
Good: batteries that won't catch fire.
Bad (but possibly good): batteries outgas lysergic acid during operation.
https://app.box.com/WitthoftResume Code: https://github.com/cellocgw
Never speak again faggot.
The issue is not one of liquid or gel construction -- which is an issue, to be sure... leaks, evaporation, boiling, etc. The issue with such technology is spelled:
L-I-T-H-I-U-M.
Lithium based batteries react rather poorly to being exposed to the atmosphere. Unless they've created a non-reactive lithium electrolyte, there's really nothing new here. (hint: that's not new, either.) So they've brought "AGM" to li-po technology.
They try to store as much energy as possible at least space as possible.
That's the problem, why batteries are always dangerous. There is just a lot of stored energy in there. For example enough to start a fire or to explode.