Slashdot Mirror

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

Iron Ferrite Batteries

Posted by CmdrTaco on from the kill-the-damn-rabbit dept.

Rustin writes "New Iron Ferrite battery may change batteries forever." I just pray that this doesn't mean a resurgence in energizer rabbit commercials.

8 of 45 comments (clear)

  1. Re:Toxicity? by shogun · · Score: 2

    rust, my friend. It decays into rust. now when was the last time rust killed anyone =)


    How about the Tin Man from the Wizard Of Oz?
    He may not of been killed by it, but it surely inconvenienced him a great deal.

  2. Story on GeekNews by Mr.+Klaw · · Score: 2

    There is a different story that's linked on geeknews that instead has 60 billion per year, which would amount to about 8 per person per year (but not all of the world uses batteries).

    Your original number could make sense with the US and how wasteful everyone here is. 8)

    --
    -- "Well, Hello, Mr. Fancy-pants. I've got news for you pal, you ain't in control but two things right now, Jack and s
  3. ferrate by noy · · Score: 3

    any idea what bulk manufacturing costs of this stuff are? if it needs to be so pure, will these batteries end up being megabucks? what about comparisons to lithium ion... i wonder... either way, sounds cool, all of our gadgetry could use more juice...

  4. Not New by Numair · · Score: 2

    I've seen this same technology about a year ago in MIT's Technology Review magazine. They said it seems as though companies aren't interested in the technology, even though this pretty damn cool.

  5. Lies, Dammed Lies, and Statistics by Solemn+Bob · · Score: 3

    "Licht said about 60 trillion primary batteries are used each year. Both dry and alkaline batteries use manganese dioxide and zinc."


    Huh. That's 30 new batteries, every day, for every man, woman, and child on the planet. I can't quite figure out what he's talking about, unless he's counting individual green plants as "primary batteries", since, after all, they do store up solar energy ...

  6. Iron Batteries are neither new nor little-used by Multics · · Score: 3

    Nickel-Iron batteries have been around a very long time. They are still available and offer considerable benefit for some kinds of uses. They have VERY long deep-cycle lives (40+ years is typical for daily use) and thus are great for un-interruptable power use. If you are in the USA, you've almost certainly talked on a public phone exchange held up with Ni-Fe cells. They also can be run totally dry and still be recovered far better than any other kind of wet cell.

    The down side of such cells is low energy density vs weight, so the volume of the cells is large compared to things like wet NiCads. These also have a higher than NiCad self-discharge rate and consume more water than Lead-Acid or NiCad cells.

    Ni-Fe technology uses a highly alkaline electrolite.

    So perhaps they've invented a new way to deal with Fe cells, but iron has been in the battery domain a very very long time.

    Need more on Ni-Fe batteries? Ask your favorite search engine.

  7. Re:How does it compare to lithium ion? by baitisj · · Score: 2

    Lithium has one of the greatest voltage half-reactions in the redox table (CRC 1995) that I have. The reduction reaction Li+ +e- -> Li renders about -3.0401 E/V. And since the other half-reaction is the standard hydrogen electrode, we end up with a battery generating 3 volts per cell for lithium, which is a real boon.

    The only greater reduction potentials are from 3N2 + 2H+ + 2e -> 2HN3 , Pr3+ + e -> Pr2+, Ca+ +e -> Ca, and finally Sr+ +e -> Sr which tops off at -4.10 E/V.

    On the other hand, if we look at our Iron FerrATE (by the way, CmdrTaco, it's FERRATE (O4) and not FERRITE (O3) !!!) Iron Ferrate is Fe04, and according to my handy dandy table:

    Fe04 2- + 8 H+ + 3e- -> Fe3+ + 4 H20 at +2.20 E/V

    Here we're charging the battery and losing a lot of water. I'm not sure how Li Ion batteries charge becuase it's been to long since electrochem, but it's clear that lithium ion is a much better technology in terms of energy density:

    1. Voltage is probably much better
    2. Fe -based batteries will weigh about 10 times more
    3. Fe - based batteries will have to deal with lots of water, which takes VOLUME becuase it doesn't reduce volume when dissolved back into solution...

    So, in all, I bet you the energy density of a Li Ion battery is about 15 times what a ferrate battery probably is.

    But I could be wrong - it's been many years since I've played a lot with electrochem.

    However, when we look at cycles, nothing beats charge-discharge of those iron-nickel batteries... so there you go...

    But I think a ferrate battery might make an interesting replacement for lead-acid batteries in cars in WARM climates, considering that all you'd need to add is some water once in a while, and that's pretty innocuous compared with sulfuric. Yipes.

    But our predecessors were smart cookies. There's a reason why we have lead-acid... cheap, dependable, doesn't freeze at 32 degrees, etc...

    Personally I like the idea of a giant iron-based UPS!!! that'd be fun... ; )
    But there you go...

    --
    Learn from your parents' mistakes: use birth control.
  8. Re:Electric cars by BeeJay · · Score: 2
    Whether people want electric cars or not is IMHO not about economy or environment. People want a car that they think sound like a car and smell like one, too.

    Also, the reason why people doesn't use public transportation, even when it's faster, is that they want to sit in their own car and pick their noses and fart, and whatnot. ;-)

    Until we understand these kinds of strangenesses that car-owners have, we're not in a good position to convince them to buy an electric car. ;-)