What is Digg?56 Comments
- aprigliano, on 10/12/2007, -0/+11"This message sponsored by Dell - Bringing you safer batteries since last week."
- Spaz007, on 10/12/2007, -5/+14Just double? Damn that sucks...
- carve, on 10/12/2007, -0/+6Batteries have been pushing the limits of physics and chemistry for a long time. It isn't a matter of just making transistors smaller and closer together. You can't just say Moore's "Law" and expect it to happen. That is like saying your car should weigh half as much and have twice as much power every 18 months. Not gonna happen- they're already a mature technology. Double the capacity in 10 years is actually a pretty decent goal for something like a battery.
- doctechnical, on 10/12/2007, -0/+6Why put your eggs all in one basket? Multiple lines of research sounds like a better idea to me. And keep in mind that battery life isn't the only factor here - there's cost/benefit to take into consideration. Example: A 2x battery (twice the lifetime) that costs only 50% more than 1x, and a 4x battery that costs 1,000% more. There will be a market for both.
- jinexile, on 10/12/2007, -0/+5Those were Sony batteries, they are blowing up in Apples and Sony laptops as well.
- miles01110, on 10/12/2007, -0/+4MIT's nanofiber batteries supposedly last much longer. IMO, development should be focusing on battery technology such as this that more than simply doubles capacity.
- doctechnical, on 10/12/2007, -0/+4From TFA: "But energy is constrained by chemistry and the periodic table."
Rats. There go my plans for building a Phaser. - MacSuxWindozSux, on 10/12/2007, -0/+4You're right in the consumer market there is no real incentive to build longer lasting batteries. However in the Industrial, and Military markets there are huge incentives to build longer lasting battery technology.
Also there is foreign competition. Korean and Chinese competitors are trying to surpass American technology giants in almost all fields.
This isn't simply about people buying AAA's for their cameras, that view is short sighted. - carve, on 10/12/2007, -0/+4Jeez you guys...we're talking hard physics here- not computer science. The first 80 years of battery technology saw very little improvement at all, and only with the advent of L-ion and NiMh batteries have we seen any real gains recently, and those are fairly new. Even the GM EV-1 used lead acid batteries at first! Double in 10 years is beyond my expectations, and is a very good goal for a technology like batteries. If they can do it affordably, this'll make electric cars practical!
- inactive, on 10/12/2007, -0/+3If we can double battery capacity in 10 years, that gives the Tesla Roadster a 500 mile range at the same volume/weight of the current battery pack. If prices for the pack (at that size) remain constant, you could alternatively get 250 mile range at half the weight/size/cost as far as the pack goes (actually realistically a bit more than 250 given that you'd be saving some weight).
- inveterate, on 10/12/2007, -0/+3zeblith@ "Tritium is an isotope of Hydrogen(2 neutrons), and simply IS radioactive. One source of it is "heavy water", which can be found in magma, where high heat and pressure nurture its creation. It's the critical ingredient in the H-bomb."
So, you're saying Sony is working on their next gen batteries? - Dhalgren, on 10/12/2007, -0/+3They just need to tap the technology behind Viagra for longer lasting batteries.
- FilteringCraig, on 10/12/2007, -0/+3I am still going to hold out for the tritium battery!
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/7843868/ - crunkykd, on 10/12/2007, -0/+2Saying runtime improvements for future electronics depends on bigger batteries is like Detroit saying automobile driving ranges can only be improved with larger gas tanks.
- cwcheang, on 10/12/2007, -2/+4yea. this guy is short sighted. =D
10 years = double?
it's obvious it's gonna be safer, technology is constantly improving. but doubling it in 10 years is ...... a bit unimpressive..
and even i can safely say it'll be safer in the future. i mean, isnt it a bit obvious?.... i dont need an MIT battery expert to tell me. lol. - doctechnical, on 10/12/2007, -0/+2How do you figure? Name-brand batteries like Energizer and Duracell may last longer but they're expensive as hell compared to generic brands. I'd much rather buy a "HappyValueTime" battery with 80% of the capacity if it's one third the price.
- inactive, on 10/12/2007, -0/+2Tesla has addressed that. You arent going to run as many cycles as you think. The packs are good for 100k miles, and even at that point retain capacity.
From the Tesla Motors faq:
"Li-Ion batteries are good for 500 complete charge/discharge cycles. One cycle consists of discharging the pack from 100% state of charge (SOC) to 0% SOC. Realistically, drivers will not completely discharge their pack. More likely, drivers will drive the car for 50 or 100 miles then plug it back in to charge it up to 100% SOC. Driving only 50 miles is only a partial discharge, roughly using 20% of the charge. If a driver continues to drive 50 miles every day and recharges every night, then after 5 days they would complete the equivalent of one charge/discharge cycle.
In estimating the life of our batteries, you can multiply the number of cycles by the range. Thus, 500 cycles times 250 miles/charge works out to 125,000 miles, but our estimate is a more conservative 100,000 miles. However the cycle life of 500 cycles is based upon performance that is more challenging to the battery cells than our application. We believe that our pampered batteries will achieve more cycles due to temperature control of the batteries and minimizing the maximum charge voltage." - doodlebumm, on 10/12/2007, -0/+2Nanotube capacitors, not nanofiber batteries. Good capacity, but the best thing, only a few seconds to recharge. That will be sweet!
- doctechnical, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1The key phrase here being "-slightly- radioactive" - it doesn't put out much energy at all (I have a tritium powered glowring on my keychain, your average firefly is brighter).
You're not going to be powering your favorite electronic gadgets with tritium batteries anytime soon. Current draw is too high. - crunkykd, on 10/12/2007, -1/+2If an athlete wants to run faster and farther, she doesn't spend her time trying to eat more snickers bars in order to consume as many calories as she can. She figures out how to make her muscles stronger, and lose the baggage she doesn't need for the task at hand. The answer is to set yourself up to use energy more efficiently. Moore's law is indeed needed to double the amount of computing/talktime/videoplayback/etc of whatever device we are using. It completely possible and we as consumers should demand it, reward it, and expect it every 18 months.
- doctechnical, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1We of the Secret Cabal are using them to power our flying cars.
- phaed, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1Yes unimpressive. Especially since they will become redundant. New nanotechnology advances have already been able to make capacitors with a large surfice area, using carbon nanotubes, that can hold enough current to rival battery capacities. Plus they can be recharged in a second. So this article and the people doing the research are going nowhere with their "two fold" increase to old, about to be replaced, technology.
- inveterate, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1No - same song, every year - in ten years.....
- DaffyDuck, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1doc, can you tell me where you got the glowring? I want one of those.
- ddpruitt, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1Where are my nuclear batteries they promised me!
- khafra, on 10/12/2007, -1/+2Don't worry, there's still supercapacitors and fuel cells.
- sponeil, on 10/12/2007, -2/+3We need to introduce the battery designers to Moore's law.
Seriously though, he seems to be talking about conventional chemical batteries. I have high hopes that super-capacitors will make them obsolete before 10 years passes. They are far superior to batteries in almost every way except for power density. Researchers have made breakthroughs in solving the power density issue using carbon nano-tubes to drastically increase the surface area of the electrodes without increasing the size of the capacitor. I don't remember where the link is, but one article I read predicted that capacitors with power densities to match chemical batteries could hit the market in 5 years. If that happens, I'd bet money on super capacitors improving more quickly than chemical batteries. - zeblith, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1Tritium is an isotope of Hydrogen(2 neutrons), and simply IS radioactive. One source of it is "heavy water", which can be found in magma, where high heat and pressure nurture its creation. It's the critical ingredient in the H-bomb.
- tmcdigg, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1Yeah, I too wish they could do better.. but there really is a max limitation of 1.5-9.6 volt cells in all your portable devices... now if they were designed around 12-24 volt architectures, maybe they could squeeze more power per square centimeter into the cells, if I got the point of the article correctly.. also, smarter designs for electronics would cut down on energy consumption of products.. like smart lcd screens, auto shutdown of features/motors when not in use, and making products sip energy instead of guzzle it (think small lcd portable analog tv tuners and AA batteries).
You can also look at two faces of the same coin here, if other systems of technology keep up, this won't be a problem.. hydrogen cars with your charging port (12v car plug) and ultra-short recharge times go a long way to making these problems less of an issue.
If they can shave a few more minutes off of those 8-15 minute chargers without all that heat buildup, that would be cool.. - doctechnical, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1"Just curious, does anyone know how biological energy storage compares with something like a li-ion battery?"
Somebody's watched The Matrix way too many times ;)
If you want to call alchohol "biological" (I Am Not A Chemist) there have been booze-powered fuel cells in the works for some years now - from what I remember reading the power density sounded better than what we have today (I could be wrong, you'd be better off Googling it). To "recharge" you just inject more alcohol and away you go. Downside: It "breathes" - it needs air to run and gives off water vapor. In a closed place like a briefcase that could be a problem.
Does that help? - doctechnical, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1Agreed (although I don't know why your Sniclkers comment got modded down). A couple of examples come immediately to mind:
1) Get cracking on that Electronic Paper! If you have a display which draws power only when it's updated, and is readable in ambient light like real ink on real paper, you can dump those energy-sucking backlit displays.
2) If a breakthrough in Flash memory can make it stand orders of magnitude more write cycles before burning out, you can replace that lo-tech spinny spindle hard drive.
Moore's Law doesn't apply to batteries, but there's still work to be done in making devices less hungry for power. - donolsen1155, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1Of course they're going to be longer lasting and safer.
Ask Sony! - Aninhumer, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1Dynamos on the springs?
- doctechnical, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1"In estimating the life of our batteries, you can multiply the number of cycles by the range. "
That strikes me as a very poor idea considering the way most cars are used. Do you really think people are going to exaust, or nearly exaust the batteries before recharging? Not usually, the inconvenience (to say the least) of being stranted on a highway with a dead battery is going to insure those cars are recharged every night.
As the wise man once said, "Your milage may vary". - sponeil, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1ToddML - Li-Ion batteries are good for 500 "complete" charge/discharge cycles.
My laptop disagrees with that statement. ;-) In order to save my battery, I try to make sure I never use it when it's not plugged in if I can help it. I may have drained the battery completely 10 times in the past year, and almost as rarely drain it 50% (or even 25%). That hasn't stopped the battery lifetime from dropping quickly from 3 hours to 30 minutes. I'm not saying I don't believe you, because there may be a defect in the battery, the charger, the laptop, etc. causing its life to be drastically reduced. I'm just saying that I'll believe it when I see some statistics on those cars after they've been on the road for 5-10 years. - Ansible, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1Just curious, does anyone know how biological energy storage compares with something like a li-ion battery? If you could store the energy in a sort of artificial fat, it seems like that would be a lot safer than a battery that explodes. I wouldn't expect something like that in 10 years though.
- HonoredMule, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1Most laptop batteries get screwed over time without intentional use because cheap-ass manufacturers don't actually SWITCH power sources (like a GOOD UPS does). The battery is always connected to the power drain, and the power source when it's present. Thus, it's getting used even when it's not. :P
- carve, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1yeah...fat. Or, better yet, how about a carbohydrate. Or...lets go out on a limb here...how about a hydrocarbon!
We already do that. - cwcheang, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1@ carve
we know but with the advent of all the nanotechs in batteries and its promises you cant blame us to expect much more in 10 years. - paulgibson, on 10/12/2007, -0/+0"Where are my nuclear batteries they promised me!"...lol...that would be amazing!!....yeah i did know what Tritium was (in depth actually) but i didn't wanna bog down the point i was making...oh and i had a friend who used to swallow batteries....would be a bad idea to do that with these (actually with any battery).
- CuriousII, on 10/12/2007, -0/+0Whatever company makes the breakthrough with the next best battery will make a killing.
One such company is http://www.millenniumcell.com Give it a couple of years. - sponeil, on 10/12/2007, -0/+0You're forgetting about the "other" big problem with lithium-ion batteries, and that's how many power cycles they can go through before they lose their ability to hold a charge. That car will have extremely high maintenance costs every 1-3 years when you have to replace all the batteries.
That's one of the many reasons why super-capacitors would be a great replacement. They would outlast the car. As long as they weren't damaged, you would be able to remove them and put them in your next car, and the next one, and so on. When higher-density capacitors came out, you could trade them in instead of putting them in a land-fill.
They can also be charged up to maximum capacity more quickly than it takes to fill up your gas tank (unlike lithium-ion, which take a long time to recharge). - NightRush, on 10/12/2007, -2/+2Am I the only one getting tired of news abour batteries?
- Tabris, on 10/12/2007, -1/+1I don't think Jack would let the battery live that long, even if Chloe opened another socket.
- klang, on 10/12/2007, -5/+5In the same time, Moore's Law will have doubled processors peeds and ram sizes at least 6 times. More speed and more space takes up more energy. Double will not cut it!
- triden, on 10/12/2007, -0/+0They already use capacitors as batteries in many types of telecom equipment. The guys at a university (forget) are making a way to store WAY more energy in a cap that will put it on par with a battery. Since it is essentially a capacitor, it will be able to charge in a few seconds and have no memory at all.
- DaffyDuck, on 10/12/2007, -3/+2I was thinking the same thing. More than double is needed, but I guess I'll settle for double. That would give me 6 hours of listening on my 3G iPod. :)
- latova, on 10/12/2007, -1/+0It goes without saying that technology will be better and safer. I always make fun of my friends "20 minute battery" laptop.
- paulgibson, on 10/12/2007, -1/+0yeah i agree with sponeil, I heard recently that some engineers were messing around with the idea of using Tritium batteries!....im not sure how they do that but i know that Tritium in certain forms is slightly radio active. But fairly safe, unless you ingest the stuff lol.
Nano technology has also been considered to increase the efficiency of charge carrying electrons at the nodes of the batteries too....some cool things out there! - josegutz, on 10/12/2007, -2/+1"How Future Batteries Will Be Longer-Lasting and Safer"
They will be made in the USA... -
Show 51 - 56 of 56 discussions
Check out the new & improved 
© Digg Inc. 2009
— Content created and posted by Digg users is