Slashdot Mirror
Startup Unveils Revolutionary New Rechargeable Alkaline Batteries (nytimes.com)
Slashdot reader cdreimer quotes the New York Times:
Alkaline batteries can be made far more cheaply and safely than today's lithium-ion batteries, but they are not rechargeable... Ionic Materials could change that equation with an alkaline battery the company said could be recharged hundreds of times. One additional benefit of the company's breakthrough: An alkaline battery would not be as prone to the combustion issues that have plagued lithium-ion batteries in a range of products, most notably some Samsung smartphones. Cheaper and more powerful batteries are also considered by many to be the driver needed to make the cost of renewable energy technologies like wind and solar competitive with the coal, gas and nuclear power that support the national energy grid.
The company "has demonstrated up to 400 recharge cycles for its prototypes," and it's now even investigating aluminum-based alkaline batteries which would also be lighter than lithium-ion batteries. The company is backed by Sun Microsystems co-founder Bill Joy, who also envisions the batteries being used in electric cars.
The company "has demonstrated up to 400 recharge cycles for its prototypes," and it's now even investigating aluminum-based alkaline batteries which would also be lighter than lithium-ion batteries. The company is backed by Sun Microsystems co-founder Bill Joy, who also envisions the batteries being used in electric cars.
I can't wait to buy some of these rechargeable aluminum-based alkaline batteries in 2037!
#DeleteFacebook
... run Java then? You'll never know which re-charge will break them. Plus they'll be incredibly slow and inefficient.
Please take your Perfect Solution fallacy elsewhere.
Going to be tough to beat the price and performance of Panasonic's Eneloop's. But if they can, all the better for them and us.
Passionately Indifferent
Please take your Perfect Solution fallacy elsewhere.
A battery which only lasts a few hundred recharge cycles isn't an imperfect solution, it's simply not a solution.
Let's say you charge your car once a day.
If the battery costs a fraction and weights half of a lithium-ion battery, that means longer range for your car and taking recycling into account, it could be better in every way especially if the recycling percentage is higher and the leftovers are less damaging to the environment.
#DeleteFacebook
Rechargeable alkaline batteries aren't something new, if anything battery manufacturers have tried to make the chemistry and cells _less_ rechargeable over the years to earn more. I read an article in the 90's that described charging alkaline batteries then (using cells not intended to be recharged) and also told the history of the batteries and charging with examples from the technical evolution that didn't significantly increase capacity but made the cells much harder to recharge. Can't remember where I read it sadly.
With that said I'll applaud all _real_ improvements in batteries no matter their chemistry.
400 cycles? That's maybe a year's use for a heavy car driver (which would include some trips where the car is rapid charged during the trip, thus more than 1 per day) or maybe 18 months for a light driver.
I would think for a car or any heavy use application you'd ideally prefer an order of magnitude more charge cycles but might settle for 3-5x more cycles depending on who the car is targeted at and what a new pack costs.
Of course 400 cycles may be a lot if topping off from 50%+ charge doesn't count, and the 400 number is only from 10% charge.
<Doc Brown>1300 gigawatts?!</Doc Brown>
#DeleteFacebook
No, your phone with this battery will be running vi, which will make it very efficient and it will last a whole week with a single charge.
Ezekiel 23:20
Startup unveils revolutionary new vapourware, needs more money....
Aluminium has a density of 2.7kg/l, Lithium is 0.53kg/l. Given that volume is the limiting factor (any improvement in energy density is going to go towards increased capacity, not reducing the size of the battery), I don't see how this is going to lead to lighter batteries. It seems to me to be the type of claim that would be put out by a scam startup looking for clueless investors to fleece, since to the clueless investor, Aluminium is easily associated with lightweight. Next they'll be touting Titanium Alloy Batteries as even lighter than Aluminium.
How is this news??? Rechargeable alkaline batteries have been available for over 45 years.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/...
Perhaps they have improved how many times it can be recharged, but the summary makes it sound like the feat is the concept.
Such a battery could power a Bluetooth 4 or 5 device at least a month. Which means 400 charge cycles would be good enough for 10 years.
Is it good enough for your cell phone that gets recharged daily? No and the summary is silly for indicating it.
What if it can last 4000 charge cycles? I mean we're putting a lot of what ifs in that have no relation to this battery at this point, so why not also wish for a pony, nah better still a unicorn.
OP was right. This article sounds like drummed up marketing by the numbers:
1. Reference outdated technology that has some out of context benefit like cost.
2. Talk about how made a breakthrough with this old technology but don't go into any details.
3. Mention some hot topics like safety, thinking of children, stopping terrorists etc.
4. Reference emerging trends requiring billions of these things despite having yet to commercially produce a single one.
5. Hope the reader connects the original completely irrelevant fact (cost) with something that we haven't at all demonstrated (cost).
Rechargeable alkaline batteries are pretty well established. You can even by them in a shop:
https://www.maplin.co.uk/p/map...
In fact all alkaline batteries are rechargeable at least a few times, although it may not be entirely safe to do so.
There are two problems with these batteries: they deteriorate faster than other rechargeable batteries, and the energy density is lower than the current Li-Ion batteries.
Alkaline batteries have always been rechargeable for a limited number of charges. The old Philco portable TV had a rechargeable alkaline battery, the Eveready 560. After that there were many commercial rechargeable alkalines: [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rechargeable_alkaline_battery]
400 cycles might be fine for some vehicles, if the cost is low enough and they are designed to have the packs swapped periodically. For comparison typical vehicle cells are rated for 3000 cycles, basically means that the car will probably wear out before they do, e.g. 900,000 miles in a Tesla Model S or 450,000 in a Nissan Leaf 30. And of course the rated lifetime is to 80% original capacity which in a 150+ mile range car is still more than adequate for many uses.
These alkaline cells seem suited to stationary systems where they can easily be swapped periodically and space is less of an issue.
const int one = 65536; (Silvermoon, Texture.cs)
SJW, n: "Someone I don't like, and by the way I'm a fuckwit" - AC
The battery of the week
*yawn*
There are plans to increase that by a factor of 100. Here is a link discussing how that will be done.
Alkaline batteries that last one charge cycle are pretty popular. If price was equal these would be 400 times better.
This will come to nothing. In a few months time, nobody will remember about it. Not that I am taking a serious risk - that seems to be the inevitable fate of battery breakthroughs announced in Slashdot.
If it's for stationary systems, wouldn't nickel–iron batteries be better in every way except weight?
#DeleteFacebook
Smartphones with replaceable batteries and/or higher capacity batteries would be a big thing except that manufacturers keep playing pissing contests to see whose phone is the most anorexic, even after Apple made a phone so thin that it bent in normal use. But no, we can't have a phone twice as thick that we can use all week without a recharge because fashion.
After all, those phones would last a decade of charge/discharge cycles before the battery wouldn't hold sufficient charge. Can't have that, can we? Smartphones must not go the way of desktops and laptops, where a "good enough" and "cheap enough" device can now do the job for a decade or more.
"Transparent" is a shit show that trades on every stereotype going. A man in drag is NOT a transsexual.
If the battery is lighter
If the battery costs half as much
If it's more recyclable
If if if if
I'm a good cook. I'm a fantastic eater. - Steven Brust
Depends how cheap it is. Suppose it's as cheap as ordinary nonrechargeable alkaline batteries. Then the overall cost is two orders of magnitude less than the cost of powering something with ordinary alkalines.
prototypes of a rechargeable alkaline battery that can be made using continuous manufacturing processes similar to the making of plastic wrap... has demonstrated up to 400 recharge cycles for its prototypes.
Unless they're outright lying, it sounds as though they've done enough actual development on this that it may turn into a viable technology. Yes, pie-in-the-sky battery announcements are commonplace, but the tone of this one sounds slightly different to me.
'The Economy' is a giant Ponzi scheme whose most pitiable suckers are the youngest among us and the yet-unborn.
That we could make rechargeable Alkaline batteries is pretty obvious when we already have them.
But if these are supposed to compete with Li-Po batteries in energy density they will run into the same issues that the Li-Po batteries have.
So at best, its a wash regarding batteries for our toys. Where this technology just might be really useful is in the energy storage and leveling schemes for solar and wind power. There a rechargeable battery of less energy density might just be the ticket, because extreme small size will not be an issue. Add a few more batteries to the farm. And if they are cheaper, great.
That way we can free up the demand on the not so common minerals that go into the really high energy density batteries we use now.
The shepherds did so well protecting the flock that the sheep no longer believed that wolves existed.
Of course there's a lot of "IF". Have you ever seen a program listing?
Just what we need. Alkaleaks now with increased chances of ruining equipment.
that could charge both disposable alkalines a few times and rechargeable alkalines many times.
Used it for a few years but found that getting a dozen of two charges from off-the-shelf batteries wasn't worth it and trying to track down the ones with more charge cycles was inconvenient, not to mention that they behaved more like NiCd cells in many ways (didn't like deep discharges, had a sort of memory effect, etc.)
But they were out there.
STOP . AMERICA . NOW
Except they wouldn't - there was a period when you could buy both. Guess which one people actually wanted to buy.
In fact, it's the most alkaline.
Nickel-iron needs electrolyte management and suck at efficiency.
I thought super-capacitors was where it's at? Smaller, lighter, and very quick to charge...?
Agree that rechargeable alkaline have been available for a very long time, I had a few sets, but they did tend to fail very quickly.
Yes, because buying a new battery once a year is such a hassle...
Seriously, lose the entitlement.
They tend to be rather expensive I think.
const int one = 65536; (Silvermoon, Texture.cs)
SJW, n: "Someone I don't like, and by the way I'm a fuckwit" - AC
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/... ... Following the acquisition of Sanyo by Panasonic, a fourth generation was introduced in April 2013. The number of charges per cell was increased from 1800 to 2100 cycles for both AA (BK-3MCC) and AAA (BK-4MCC) models. ..."
"Eneloop cells lose their charge much more slowly than the 0.5â"4% per day lost by older-technology NiMH batteries, retaining about 85% of their charge for a year after charging.[2] This allows them to be sold precharged and ready for use, unlike older types.
Don't have them for a drill though -- just use them in most AA and AAA applications.
A 21st century issue: the irony of technologies of abundance in the hands of those still thinking in terms of scarcity.
The 1970s had lots of handheld electronic games that sucked the life out of batteries quickly. I had an EverReady 9V Ni-Cad battery charger, but Ni-Cad batteries were just plain terrible. They took hours to charge, didn't last long, and became unusable after a few charge cycles. I knew alkaline 9V batteries could explode if you attempted to recharge them because that's what everyone said. One day I decided to test that theory. It didn't explode. It got hot, just like the ni-cad, but no boom or leak. I put it on the battery tester. WHOA! It's full! Worked for as long as the first use, too. I never went past 3 recharges per 9V battery and the performance did degrade on subsequent recharges.
I would love that to be the case, but nickel-iron are not better in cost either. ..and I haven't seen sealed options, so there are maintenance issues also.
Cheaper and more powerful batteries are also considered by many to be the driver needed to make the cost of renewable energy technologies like wind and solar competitive with the coal, gas and nuclear power that support the national energy grid.
If you have a battery that is cheap and with limited recharge cycles then would it not be better suited to handling daily shifts in load following than minute by minute, or even hour by hour, shifts in wind and sun?
Sure, the daily cycles of the sun are known, hence "daily" but there are clouds that make this more difficult. Also assume a gigawatt solar farm compared to a gigawatt coal or nuclear plant. I hear people talk about how much cheaper it is getting to build a solar farm than coal or nuclear but what of the capacity factor? Even in the best case for solar it produces power 40% of the time while coal and nuclear get 80%, so twice as much battery is needed for the solar. Given the numbers are closer to 30% and 90% then it's more like three times the battery capacity.
Then there is the matter of sun and wind being very unpredictable compared to coal and nuclear. If there are 10 coal and nuclear power plants, each rated at one gigawatt, then a utility can have a reasonable assurance of getting 900 megawatts at any given time due to maintenance and such taking any plant off line. Even if for some reason they have a few plants needing more down time then they can get 800 megawatts and no storage needed.
With wind and solar there has to be a battery or some backup power to make them viable. People don't like the lights going out randomly.
I know someone will point out that wind and solar don't need to be all the means by which we get power, and I agree. But if wind and solar are going to become the primary means by which we get power then we need batteries. If we get batteries then the big, heavy, and slow, coal and nuclear don't look so big, heavy, and slow. They can use the batteries to load follow, just like how wind and solar need batteries to follow changes in production. The changes in production from coal and nuclear are small, barring some accident. Discharge and recharge cycles can be more easily managed with coal and nuclear, making the batteries last longer. With reliable power like coal and nuclear the batteries won't have to be all that large, compared to wind and solar.
Batteries aren't just good for wind and solar, they are good for coal and nuclear. I calculate that the benefits for coal and nuclear are so much greater than that for wind and solar that a good battery technology could outright kill the solar market, no one would be able to afford it any more.
I'm sure a lot of people here would disagree with my assessment. I look forward to a counterargument.
I am armed because I am free. I am free because I am armed.
When? The big chunky ones had poor specs otherwise and/or poor build quality.
No sir I dont like it.
Fashion replaced tech twenty years ago. I don't know if this is the cause of or result of the stagnation in anything new and exciting. Currently politics is replacing fashion. I don't know where the endgame starts, just glad I got out.
So they are using aluminum instead of zinc. Zinc forms sub-oxides quite easily, but aluminum is strongly ionic, and just turns to Al2O3. (Look up the ionization energies.)
Reducing the zinc (recharging the battery) is a well-developed rechargeable battery technology. Reducing Al2O3 is, well, very energy intensive. The typical process is the Hall–Héroult process (with thanks to Born & Haber), which as I recall involves very high temperatures. So what is their trick?
If their trick is in the halogenic elements used in the Al2O3 reduction process, then they are potentially infringing on my patents. More importantly: If they can reduce Al2O3 to Al without the energy-investment of heating the thing during recharge, then they have also hit the big time. The aluminum-production market is much larger than the rechargeable battery market.
Once upon a time, we would expect fact checking, follow up questions etc. The difference between first and second tier news organizations was the former would do background research and the latter would breathlessly repeat Marketing sound bytes. Now that the NYtimes behaves more like the latter ... Just who are the first tier journalists?
So they are a re-invention of Rayovac's Renewal alkaline batteries from the 1990's?
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FEc6hzEnKfw
CAT phone. Yes that CAT, though I'm sure it's just trading on a brand and is made in China.
$600 bucks, comes with a thermal camera. Cause "you're" always looking for power going to waste, bad solder jobs, hot electric connector boxes etc. I'm guessing as much a fashion statement as hiking boots in the server room. Though I like my boots, comfortable...I digress. On the other hand, it could look through ladies dresses...but anybody can do that with an old digital camera and a bit of exposed film.
No easy replaceable battery, but you could jump start your car with one, though you'd surely void the warranty installing the pigtail.
I think I'd go with the Sony 960fps phone, if I was the kind of person to spend that kind of money on a phone, when cameras with similar function can be had for $150. Still, in a year or two? When it's $300?
John McAfee 'It was like that time I hired that Bangkok prostitute; to do my taxes, while I fucked my accountant'
Wouldn't deep cycle lead acid still be the best option? Assuming price was a factor...huge and old fashioned, but cheap. Kind of a pain in the ass to replace, which will be sooner. But when that time comes, you can look at the prices again.
John McAfee 'It was like that time I hired that Bangkok prostitute; to do my taxes, while I fucked my accountant'
They're often a good option, but they're filled with lead which is an EPA pain in the ass.
I tried rechargeable alkaline batteries back in the 90's. They used a special charger and supposedly could be recharged 100 times or something.
Not a single one lasted more than 2 or 3 charges before they started leaking all over the place. Almost ruined my Palm Pilot. I threw them all out.
A battery which only lasts a few hundred recharge cycles isn't an imperfect solution, it's simply not a solution.
Really? Then how do you explain that there is a healthy market in batteries that last zero recharge cycles?
Don't get me wrong. I'm all for rechargeable batteries. A battery that can be used 400 times is 400 times better than a battery that can be used only once.
If it weren't for deadlines, nothing would be late.
NiCd 9V chargers were 7.2V. Each of those cells in a 9V are considered dead at 1.2V full at roughly 1.5V. There are 6 of them in series, so at their 'dead' level they're matching the charger output voltage and the charger could not push their voltage any higher. You would have never charged your alkaline 9V off of that charger.
Still waiting on Serviscope_minor to wake up to fucking reality and realize that Jessica Price isn't going to fuck him.
Do tell me what $150 camera takes 960 frames per second. Im not sure I even care about the resolution or it isn't is in color.
I had a number of sets of rechargeable Alkaline batteries made by Rayovac. These were alkaline batteries that could be recharged in a special charger. The issues with them were shorter cycle life than a standard NiMH, and a very strange susceptibility to cold. I used them in my walkman back at college (holy crap I'm old). If the batteries were exposed to the cold winters of Michigan they would bottom out immediately even if they were fully charged. Rayovac killed the product after a few years.
Not sure they've solved the issues with this technology. I'd rather see NiZn instead. Same 1.5V per cell but compatible with NiMh and NiCad chargers.
Really? Then how do you explain that there is a healthy market in batteries that last zero recharge cycles?
They're different markets. When you talk about rechargeable batteries you're talking about either making smartphones and similar devices have replaceable batteries to compensate for the limited recharge cycles (unlikely due to slim form factors) or laptops and similar devices to have throw-away batteries (unlikely due to the frequency of use and expense of such large batteries) or preppers to buy them in place of standard-sized LiIon batteries (unlikely since they aim for longevity, and it's a small market anyway) or people who buy rechargeable batteries for the eco factor to use throw-away batteries (a possible sell due to the toxicity of LiIon batteries, but a very small market.)
The short of this is that the market is laughably small, so small that a vastly superior energy density and non-toxic semi-rechargable Magnesium-based battery has been around for years and hasn't made any headway.
The issue with Li-Po batteries is that everyone tries to force more electrons in, a process that could be termed "compression" or "injection".
I have a new plan. We are forcing Li-Po batteries and they don't like to be forced. The key is to get Li-Po batteries to want electrons, to invite them in.
I call my invention Li-Po Suction. Investors, call me!
There has been a scam going around social media regarding Cobalt and Lithium-Ion batteries. There exist many Lithium-Ion batteries chemistries that don't use Cobalt. Cobalt formulations produce the highest capacity batteries but not the most durable. These batteries could be made to function for over 1200 charge/discharge cycles and had the capacity and cost of current Alkaline batteries than they could be made viable for vehicles. Lower voltage per cell (1.5v vs 3.7v) would make them harder to use in call phones and laptops.
I used to have a Psion Series 3 handheld computer that lasted between 1 and 4 weeks, depending on use, on a pair of AA alkaline batteries. A battery that lasted 400 charge cycles would have lasted longer than the device.
The lithium-ion battery in my 2008 MacBook Pro was advertised at 300 charge cycles (it actually lasted about 130 before dying, but Apple replaced it out of warranty). There are a lot of places where this kind of life is perfectly adequate.
I am TheRaven on Soylent News
Topping off with distilled water every now and then isn't difficult.
Time to offend someone
You never throw out lead acid batteries, because while lead is cheap the cores of a lead acid battery pack is trivial to recycle.
Heh. I read this and thought.. the 80s and 90s want their headlines back.
I remember back in the 80s or 90s when I was active in Scouts being gifted a Buddy - L Super Charger. I used it often to recharge the Alkaline batteries and extend their life sometimes 10 times. I still have it and it still works great. (yes its not a longer term solution as eventually the battery won't accept recharging, but it did wonders for my battery budget.) It amazes me how many people forgot about that little piece of tech.
Casio Exilim EX-FH20
Used from the Japanese market. I've had good luck with that source. The Japanese replace electronic things insanely quickly. Had no problems with previous purchases, though this one hasn't gotten here yet.
John McAfee 'It was like that time I hired that Bangkok prostitute; to do my taxes, while I fucked my accountant'
The recyleability of lead-acid batteries approaches 100% (the lead is perfectly suited to making new batteries), so the only time the EPA needs to get involved is when someone's being a dickhead about disposal.