Slashdot Mirror


Scientists Create Battery That Charges In Seconds and Lasts For Days (telegraph.co.uk)

An anonymous reader quotes a report from The Telegraph: A new type of battery that lasts for days with only a few seconds' charge has been created by researchers at the University of Central Florida. The high-powered battery is packed with supercapacitors that can store a large amount of energy. It looks like a thin piece of flexible metal that is about the size of a finger nail and could be used in phones, electric vehicles and wearables, according to the researchers. As well as storing a lot of energy rapidly, the small battery can be recharged more than 30,000 times. Normal lithium-ion batteries begin to tire within a few hundred charges. They typically last between 300 to 500 full charge and drain cycles before dropping to 70 per cent of their original capacity. To date supercapacitors weren't used to make batteries as they'd have to be much larger than those currently available. But the Florida researchers have overcome this hurdle by making their supercapacitors with tiny wires that are a nanometer thick. Coated with a high energy shell, the core of the wires is highly conductive to allow for super fast charging. The battery isn't yet ready to be used in consumer devices, the researchers said, but it shows a significant step forward in a tired technology.

26 of 230 comments (clear)

  1. I'm going to make a prediction by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 4, Funny

    This technology will be in shops within the year.

  2. So, how often does it explode? by bistromath007 · · Score: 5, Interesting

    I'm not an expert, but I'm pretty sure that whenever energy is both very dense and very accessible, you've made an explosive. Existing battery technology is already going that direction. At what point will I need to register my phone as a destructive device under the NFA?

    1. Re:So, how often does it explode? by SumDog · · Score: 5, Funny

      https://xkcd.com/651/

    2. Re:So, how often does it explode? by CaptainDork · · Score: 5, Informative

      Electronics guy here, and I was thinking along the same lines.

      Capacitors are two plates, very close together, separated by an insulator.

      We attach power up to the two plates and a static charge occurs between the two.

      After we remove the power source the capacitor retains the static charge and would do so forever if it weren't for decay due to leakage across the insulator.

      The "capacity" of a capacitor is directly proportional to the surface area of the two plates.

      The voltage it can hold is defined by the arc-through point of the insulator quality and distance between the plates.

      Sounds like they have all that figured out.

      --

      The advance in battery consumption has bottomed not been on the battery and breakthroughs on the efficiency of the device(s) that needs the battery power have pretty much topped out, as well.

      This method could be a game-changer, but I wonder about factors that would degrade the integrity of the system, especially the distance between the two plates (punctures, blunt force, flexibility) and the shelf life of the insulators.

      Those factors have always been a concern with capacitors.

      --
      It little behooves the best of us to comment on the rest of us.
    3. Re:So, how often does it explode? by ArylAkamov · · Score: 2

      This method could be a game-changer, but I wonder about factors that would degrade the integrity of the system, especially the distance between the two plates (punctures, blunt force, flexibility) and the shelf life of the insulators.

      Hobbyist reporting in, and this is exactly what I was curious about. That better be a damn good insulator, otherwise we are in for a whole new ballgame of Note 7s.

      I very much want better battery technology, but that also invites some very destructive failure modes.

    4. Re:So, how often does it explode? by evilviper · · Score: 2

      I'm pretty sure that whenever energy is both very dense and very accessible, you've made an explosive. Existing battery technology is already going that direction.

      That's nonsense.

      NiMH and LiFePo batteries are at least 2/3rds as power-dense as Li-Ion by volume, but are EXTREMELY stable and safe... Moreso than lower density Alkaline batteries.

      Meanwhile, the least-dense battery technology being used is lead-acid, as found in your card battery, and they have a bad habit of exploding, too. Probably much more than Li-Ion batteries.

      --
      Slashdot gets worse every day... Pipedot: News for nerds, without the corporate slant
    5. Re: So, how often does it explode? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Interesting

      With tech that can charge in seconds, id probably guess it results in changes to device expectations. Something like cell phones that hold less total power, but can be charged wirelessly in a few seconds every 4 hours or something. Basically more frequent yet quicker charges.

    6. Re:So, how often does it explode? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Funny

      The advance in battery consumption has bottomed not been on the battery and breakthroughs on the efficiency of the device(s) that needs the battery power have pretty much topped out, as well.

      Lieutenant Colonel Korn, take that sentence out and shoot it.

    7. Re:So, how often does it explode? by AmiMoJo · · Score: 2

      Actually batteries are already about as good as we can reasonably charge them in most instances.

      In electric vehicles we are already getting close to the limits. Tesla charges at 120kW, but actually they pair up bays so it's 120kW shared between two. If one car is already pulling 110kW, the other only gets 10kW. Going higher is difficult because you need an even bigger connection to the electricity grid, and a charger capable of handling more heat.

      Maybe you have a 3kW electric heater in your home. If the Tesla charger is 97% efficient it has to dissipate 3kW of heat. The car also has to dissipate considerable heat as the batteries warm up, which is mostly due to the chemical reaction so does represent an area where improvements can be made.

      Even for your phone, based on the form factor, the thickness of the USB cable wiring, the need for a buck converter... If you had a capacitor that could charge in a minute the USB cable would melt and the buck converter would melt the phone. You would need to dump 650W into it, so even at 99% efficiency (impossible) you would need to dissipate 65W. Maybe you have seen what a 65W CPU cooler looks like, a large metal heatsink with a fan attached to it.

      --
      const int one = 65536; (Silvermoon, Texture.cs)
      SJW, n: "Someone I don't like, and by the way I'm a fuckwit" - AC
    8. Re:So, how often does it explode? by silentcoder · · Score: 2

      Actually, this would likely be a LOT safer than the exploding batteries, exactly because a capacitor is a much simpler device. Critically - it needs no chemically volatile liquids. Batteries are filled with highly reactive chemicals - they have to be to store energy in the form of lose ions. Lose ions only exist if the chemical is highly reactive.
      Highly reactive == potentially explosive.

      But a capacity is made of solid, non-moving parts - I actually can't see a scenario where it could explode. A huge charge with a short could possibly cause a great deal of heat, and some major sparks which could set OTHER things on fire, but I can't see a scenario where a capacitor would burn . There's no reason to put any flammable material whatsoever in one.

      Maybe somebody with more knowledge than me can show that these types contain some highly reactive/flammable materials and that this is important to their operation but I wouldn't bet on.

      --
      Unicode killed the ASCII-art *
  3. Two issues that need to be addressed by mykepredko · · Score: 2

    One: What is the capacity per unit volume? This isn't mentioned in TFAs. I would think that creating batteries with an order of magnitude (or three) more capacity should be higher priority. Why should we have cell phones that work for days when they should work for months on a charge or cars that only go a couple of hundred miles when they should be able to go thousands of miles on a single charge?

    Two: If it can be charged very quickly, it can be discharged very quickly. People were up in arms when three Teslas caught and Samsung phones caught fire. What will be the reaction when devices have batteries that can give up all their charge basically instantly which means literally thousands of Amperes of current.

    I suspect that there are applications in which these batteries will be perfectly suited for - but the typicaly ones like phones, cars, etc. will not be in that list.

    1. Re:Two issues that need to be addressed by Harlequin80 · · Score: 2

      Electric powered toys will be a huge winner if you can have half decent capacity and a high discharge. Common racing style quad copters will happily draw 130amp and could easily draw more. The limiting factor is definitely the batteries. You draw 100amp from a 1300mah battery and the batteries don't last long.....

      Current battery tech for quadcopters gives you batteries that are large and heavy for any given capacity. That is the only way to be able to draw the current.

    2. Re:Two issues that need to be addressed by CCarrot · · Score: 2

      Electric powered toys will be a huge winner if you can have half decent capacity and a high discharge. Common racing style quad copters will happily draw 130amp and could easily draw more. The limiting factor is definitely the batteries. You draw 100amp from a 1300mah battery and the batteries don't last long.....

      Current battery tech for quadcopters gives you batteries that are large and heavy for any given capacity. That is the only way to be able to draw the current.

      Yep. Approximately 47 seconds, to be precise. 36 seconds at 130A.

      That can't be the steady-state draw, or those quadcoptors would barely be able to take off...and what the heck gauge wiring are these things using, if they're seeing that even as a peak? I sure hope it's #2 or better, or battery capacity could be the least of your worries...

      --
      "I love animals! Some are cute, others are tasty, what's not to like?" - Betsy Schroeder, Jeopardy contestant
  4. yay math by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Informative

    A quick search tells me a phone battery typically has a capacity of something like 1500 mAh, so "charge your mobile phone in a few seconds and you wouldn't need to charge it again for over a week" sounds like something on the order of adding 5000 mAh in 30 seconds.

    That would mean a current of 600 amps, assuming 100% efficiency. For reference, USB 3.0 has a max of 0.9 amps, Lightning is a little over 2, a refrigerator draws 6 amps, and your household circuit breaker will trip at 15 amps.

    1. Re:yay math by Waffle+Iron · · Score: 3, Informative

      Without giving the voltage, those numbers are pretty meaningless. Power = Volts * Amps

      Lightning has a huge power at 2A because it's millions of volts.

      A high-end microprocessor can draw about 100A, but only at a little over 1 volt.

      Your circuit breaker will trip at 15A, but at 120V. That's 1800W. If this capacitor is only charged to about 1.5 V like a typical battery, the 600A would only be 900W.

      Thus, you could easily charge it from a standard outlet. It would require a beefy power supply similar to those in large servers, though. I think that most people would opt for a cheaper power supply that could still charge their phone in a minute or two.

  5. Super cap or super crap? by frovingslosh · · Score: 3, Insightful

    ...about the size of a finger nail and could be used in phones, electric vehicles ...

    Wow. A battery the size of a finger nail that can power an electronic vehicle for days! I'm impressed. At least I'm impressed by the quantity of bullshit that the Slashdot editors will let be packed into a lame summary.

    --
    I'm an American. I love this country and the freedoms that we used to have.
  6. How many times... by NormAtHome · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Over the years how many announcements / articles that promise some revolutionary technology have been talked about on here and yet years later they're still nowhere near being on the market. We're still waiting for those rollable / foldable displays that have been on the horizon for years, the closest that I've seen is a video of an LG prototype at this years CES show, you couldn't even hold it as they only had one and it was behind plastic; no shipping products use it yet.

    There have been articles on here before about some university saying they have working nano-tube enhanced capacitors that will replace conventional batteries and promise unlimited and very quick recharges and yet still not on the market. When this gets on the market it'll be a revolution for mobile devices and probably electric cars too since they currently take 6 to 8 hours to charge, the Tesla high power wall charger promises to recharge in 3.5 hours but it's not like you can take that with you on the road.

    1. Re:How many times... by thegarbz · · Score: 2

      And yet on a daily basis we have a huge amount of technology trickling down to consumers. Try and run your phone on the battery technology of 15 years ago and see how it goes.

      As for the foldable displays, that isn't a technology problem, it's a WTF do we need that for problem combined with a moving goalpost problem. We've had foldable displays in research labs for years, and just before they hit the market the market itself decides to go all touchscreen.

  7. NOT A BATTERY by amoeba1911 · · Score: 4, Insightful

    A capacitor is not a battery! They can fulfill the same need sometimes, but it's entirely different principle of operation. Next, the article is all about how lithium batteries suck, but doesn't talk about how this new capacitor compares to other capacitors or batteries. Before you can tell if this is useful at all or just junk, you have to know at least these four key metrics:

    energy density per mass
    energy density volume
    power density per mass
    power density per volume

    The article is useless, doesn't list anything relevant.

    1. Re:NOT A BATTERY by BenFranske · · Score: 4, Informative

      Note that TFS states that "The high-powered battery is packed with supercapacitors..." see the definition for battery responsible for why we call groups of electrochemical cells batteries... "a set of units of equipment, typically when connected together" which is based on the traditional usage for artillery batteries. So if there are multiple supercapacitors working together it's absolutely correct to call it a battery (specifically a battery of supercapacitors, instead of a battery of electrochemical cells). Note that I doubt that the author was actually thinking along these lines when they wrote the piece, but I would argue it could still be correct.

  8. Same questions as always.... by gestalt_n_pepper · · Score: 5, Informative

    What's the volumetric energy density compared to lithium batteries or liquid hydrocarbons?
    What's the storage price per unit of energy?
    How easy is it to scale up production?
    Is it dependent on rare or difficult to obtain materials?

    These questions are the ones that *matter*. All else is detail.

    --
    Please do not read this sig. Thank you.
  9. It's a bad summary by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Informative

    This isn't a new battery at all, it isn't a new supercapacitor either, its a method of making nanowire supercapacitors by growing them from 2D substrates.

    But how do you explain that to Telegraph newspaper readers? Those readers won't understand that supercapacitors is already a mass market product, or that replacing batteries with them is already a niche thing.

    So the Telegraph writes it up as 'magic battery', and Slashdot submitter echoes that.

  10. It isn't a battery by jandjmh · · Score: 2

    It is a capacitor. That means the voltage is directly proportional to the charge. That doesn't make it useless, but to extract most of the stored energy you need a load that can work over a 5:1 or more voltage range. (at 20% of peak voltage you have extracted 96% of the energy because the store power is proportional to the square of the voltage.) A Tesla battery pack can supply more than 1500 amps at 300 or more volts even when it is at 100% charge, and almost just as much current, at almost the same voltage, when it is at 10% or less of full charge. A giant supercapacitor that was designed as a replacement, might, just for example, have a full charge voltage of 600 volts, and be designed to work down to 120 volts, and would have to supply, in this scenario, 750 amps at 600 volts, increasing to 3,750 amps at 60 volts to deliver constant power. A challenge to the power control circuits indeed.

    1. Re:It isn't a battery by ledow · · Score: 2

      Just about every device you have contains a Wheatstone bridge and a transformer or other power circuitry to come down to 3, 5, 9, 12v or whatever. The kinds of size that fit into a plug itself, most of the time.

      110V or 240V. Large or small. Powerful or not. Pretty much everything has that kind of voltage conversion going on already.

      Sure, you won't find one in your mobile phone just yet, but that's no different - batteries are often 3.7V and then pushed up to 5V for USB etc. and even laptops push their 19V higher for screen displays in even the cheapest of devices.

      The question is not how do you convert the voltage, but how big is the battery already, how much power is in it, and what kind of current can it pump out. Past that, voltage is really at the bottom of the list of things to worry about.

  11. Scientists Create Battery That Charges In Seconds by HeisenbergSaint · · Score: 2

    I hope they do make this supercapacitor concept into reality, rather than just talk about it. For those of you who want to know what problems researchers of today are facing with producing these supercapacitors, then read this more indepth article here. http://saintlad.com/supercapac... Here are some recommended readings to further understand how these work and the current market situation for supercapacitors. Official Research Paper by University of Central Florida http://pubs.acs.org/doi/abs/10...

  12. Been there, done that... by undefinedreference · · Score: 2

    On a government project a number of years ago, we used a bank of supercapacitors to launch something very quickly off an average vehicle battery every minute or so.

    It sounds great, but we also had the damned things explode quite spectacularly. And by that, I mean, if we didn't have it inside a very tough metal box, shrapnel might have killed the tech that was near it when it went.

    Not that lithium batteries are much better; I've seen some really exciting fires when the LiPo batteries in R/C race cars fail... If you thought a phone battery bursting into flame was exciting, you have never seen one of these go up.