Methanol -is- toxic. But when you dispose of the the methanol cartridge, you're not disposing of the methanol except in trace amounts. The real issue with toxic chemicals and batteries is that the toxic chemical compounds are disposed of -with- the battery, because they -are- the battery. As you use the methanol it is chemically converted to relatively safe byproducts, and is then not a disposal issue.
Gasoline is toxic too, but when you dispose of a car, I'm guessing you don't do it while the car's got a full tank of gas.
What I would really like to see is more research (and government encouragement) in ways to compress hydrogen without using pressure, such as carbon nanotubes. The tubes work like a sponge in a way, they attract hydrogen molecules to increase the density of the hydrogen in a given space. Releasing the hydrogen is a simple matter of applying heat, which can be obtained by recycling the heat released by the fuel cell.
Unfortunate, government encouragement for research in the private sector is lacking, because they would prefer to consider the military applications first, and thus hinder commercial development for use by the public.
So, what makes carrying a small AA battery-sized container of methanol any different than carrying a butane lighter onto an airplane? I don't see one. Not to mention all the other flammable products carried in small quantities on airplanes in cosmetics and toiletries.
As for the waste/disposal issue, the reason fuel cells are considered advantageous is that both production and disposal is cleaner, not containing toxic chemical compounds. The cartridges could easily be recycled into new cartridges...maybe even someday like inkjet printer cartridges.
As for the runtime on a single charge, that is certain to improve over time. The point is that they get new technology in the marketplace.
These constructs actually have significant other uses. One of the most notable is their potential to compress very diffuse gases (such as hydrogen) without the need for any sort of cryogenic or pressurized system. Essentially the nanofibres attract the gas molecules to reduce their natural diffusion under normal pressure and temperature conditions.
This has little to do with strength of such materials, but it does help to display their other uses. Don't write the stuff off.
Motorola actually has an entire museum dedicated to Motorola products, their past, how they started, interesting stories, and their preservation.
This includes car radios, cell phones, pagers, military communications equipment, processors, all sorts of things. It even includes the advertisements for Motorola (including some cool psychedelic posters from the 70s for Motorola's 8-track car stereo).
You might like that sort of thing, I can't say. It's quite fascinating for employees and their families though.
Most, if not all of the museum is online as well but it may only be accessible within Motorola, I haven't checked.
Slashdot Mirror
Methanol -is- toxic. But when you dispose of the the methanol cartridge, you're not disposing of the methanol except in trace amounts. The real issue with toxic chemicals and batteries is that the toxic chemical compounds are disposed of -with- the battery, because they -are- the battery. As you use the methanol it is chemically converted to relatively safe byproducts, and is then not a disposal issue.
Gasoline is toxic too, but when you dispose of a car, I'm guessing you don't do it while the car's got a full tank of gas.
What I would really like to see is more research (and government encouragement) in ways to compress hydrogen without using pressure, such as carbon nanotubes. The tubes work like a sponge in a way, they attract hydrogen molecules to increase the density of the hydrogen in a given space. Releasing the hydrogen is a simple matter of applying heat, which can be obtained by recycling the heat released by the fuel cell.
Unfortunate, government encouragement for research in the private sector is lacking, because they would prefer to consider the military applications first, and thus hinder commercial development for use by the public.
So, what makes carrying a small AA battery-sized container of methanol any different than carrying a butane lighter onto an airplane? I don't see one. Not to mention all the other flammable products carried in small quantities on airplanes in cosmetics and toiletries.
As for the waste/disposal issue, the reason fuel cells are considered advantageous is that both production and disposal is cleaner, not containing toxic chemical compounds. The cartridges could easily be recycled into new cartridges...maybe even someday like inkjet printer cartridges.
As for the runtime on a single charge, that is certain to improve over time. The point is that they get new technology in the marketplace.
One cracker scanning...is a partridge in a pear tree.
These constructs actually have significant other uses. One of the most notable is their potential to compress very diffuse gases (such as hydrogen) without the need for any sort of cryogenic or pressurized system. Essentially the nanofibres attract the gas molecules to reduce their natural diffusion under normal pressure and temperature conditions.
This has little to do with strength of such materials, but it does help to display their other uses. Don't write the stuff off.
This includes car radios, cell phones, pagers, military communications equipment, processors, all sorts of things. It even includes the advertisements for Motorola (including some cool psychedelic posters from the 70s for Motorola's 8-track car stereo).
You might like that sort of thing, I can't say. It's quite fascinating for employees and their families though.
Most, if not all of the museum is online as well but it may only be accessible within Motorola, I haven't checked.