Li-Ion With 300% More Power, Minutes to Recharge 408
Battery Nut writes "Altair Nanotechnologies claims to have found a way to reduce Li-Ion recharge time to minutes, as well as increase battery power by 300%, according to this press release.
Seems they have received some good feedback by certain experts about thier work: "Two eminent experts in battery technology, Dr. K. M. Abraham and Dr. Vassilis G. Keramidas, have expressed strong support for Altair's work. "
So is it a new revolution in battery technology, or hopeful hype? Stay tuned, their quarterly conference call is Thursday Feb 24th at 11AM." Anyone else think snake oil?
Snakeoil? (Score:3, Funny)
Re:Snakeoil? (Score:5, Informative)
The article gives no details, but they talk about nanomaterials in the elctrodes. My best guess would be, they came up with a way to increase the surface area of the electrode, lowering the internal resistance a 100 fold or so. Expect this battery to explode in your face if shorted.
Re:Snakeoil? (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:Snakeoil? (Score:3, Insightful)
I suspect each individual cell will be built with a current-limiting device in such a way as to make such a short impossible so long as the cell physically unmolested. From an engineering standpoint, this is trivial.
Re:Snakeoil? (Score:5, Informative)
WTF are you talking about? A "fuse [that] doesn't work" is one that's already burned out. There is no such thing as a "defective" fuse that lets way too much current through. Fuses are safety devices. Fuse manufacturers are very careful for reasons of liability. Your "what if" is as irrelevant as "what if tires were TRIANGULAR?"
Re:Snakeoil? (Score:4, Funny)
I have a patent on triangular tires.
Re:Snakeoil? (Score:5, Informative)
Actually, LiIon has a low internal resistance - it's somewhere between that of NiCd and NiMH chemistries (when new). However, as it ages (i.e., the moment it leaves the factory), the internal resistance gets higher and higher until it can no longer usefully power the load (generally 2-5 years after manufacture).
The reason LiIon is slow to charge is because it requires a complex charge regimen. Plus you can't trickle charge them (destroys them). So you charge them at a constant current up around 90% or so, then switch to constant voltage until the cell stops accepting charge. Then you stop and switch off the charger until it drains to around 95% (estimated), and do a CV charge again.
The end result is you get around 90% charge very quickly, but the last 10% take forever as the charger puts in less and less current.
Charge it incorrectly and they go boom.
Re:Snakeoil? (Score:2, Offtopic)
Snakeoil???? (Score:5, Interesting)
Re:Snakeoil???? (Score:2, Insightful)
Re:Snakeoil???? (Score:3, Insightful)
Re:Snakeoil???? (Score:5, Insightful)
There's a whole school of daytraders who base their speculations on hype. Hype being more predicatble than innovation.
The only question is... do you dump the stock before the conference call, or do you expect the hype to endure?
But yeah, 6500mAh AA cells? Not in one press release.
when to sell? (Score:5, Informative)
Disclaimer: This is not investment advice, but my own personal opinion. I am not a financial advisor, I'm just an IT geek and web developer.
My two cents:
I'd sell before the conference call. In this case I would have already doubled my stake, it would be time for me to cash out. Stock is not money.
It's very very hard not to get caught up in the moment. I'd rather miss the next Google than suffer an Enron. If I'm going to speculate again, I'll do it wisely.
My rules:
Stick to your guns - if you're up by X percentage, sell. If you're down by Y percentage, sell.
Never, ever, *EVER* day trade with money you cannot afford to lose. Under *no circumstances* do you ever put all of your money into a single stock. Or even a single industry. Doing any of these is roulette, not speculative investment.
My personal opinion is that it's better to go with a stock market index fund and invest for the long term than it is to day trade. If long term investment is good enough for Warren Buffett, it's good enough for me. I don't have his savvy; hence an index fund.
Re:Snakeoil???? (Score:3, Insightful)
Re:Snakeoil???? (Score:3, Funny)
Re:Snakeoil???? (Score:4, Informative)
Note: anyone looking for SCO look up SCOXE, it used to be SCOX, but now SCOX is someone else.... very confusing.
Re:Snakeoil???? (Score:3, Informative)
Re:Snakeoil???? (Score:3, Informative)
I agree, I would be delighted to see SCOXQ.
Re:Snakeoil???? (Score:3, Interesting)
Re:Snakeoil???? (Score:3, Informative)
Re:Snakeoil???? (Score:2, Funny)
Re:Snakeoil???? (Score:3, Interesting)
Re:Watching DVDs (Score:3, Interesting)
Need expert opinion here (Score:3, Interesting)
I have a Dell and I used to run the battery down all the way, and it has lasted for around 3 years. Several months ago I started to have the unit plugged in all the time with the
Re:Need expert opinion here (Score:3, Informative)
- Battery chemistry (e.g. Li-Ion vs. Ni-MH)
- Manufacturing tolerences (how well is the product built)
- Environmental considerations (temperature of storage, etc.)
- Charging methods (e.g. overcharging / charging too quickly)
- Cycle depth
It's best with Li-Ion to cycle the battery as little as possible. Depending on how deeply - and how frequently - you discharge the battery, you may e
No, it's the ISD that will get them, (Score:4, Interesting)
The real problem with new fangled almost-magic batteries is going to be the liability from ISD (Instantanious Spontanious Discharge). I've seen a video of a test with a lab rat, and all I can say is you'll want to keep these things out of reach of rodents! (And that I'm glad I wasn't there to watch it in person!)
--MarkusQ
Hmm... (Score:5, Funny)
Someone's trying not to look so stupid this time around...
Hmmm... (Score:5, Funny)
Re:Hmmm... (Score:3, Funny)
Re:cold fusion (Score:3)
Cold fusion is sufficiently real to the powers-that-be that the principal expert in the field was mysteriously murdered [pureenergysystems.com] by a mugger in rural New Hampshire. Lot of violent muggings up there, let me tell you. Then the man accused of murdering him was murdered.
BEV time ! (Score:2)
1 Hour charge?! (Score:2)
Slashdot: home of stock pumpers? (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:Slashdot: home of stock pumpers? (Score:2)
Re:Slashdot: home of stock pumpers? (Score:5, Funny)
As soon as..... (Score:2)
a) ==== dollars going out for expenses ====>
b>
As soon as (b) overtook (a) by a large enough margin.
Mirror (Score:3, Informative)
http://www.mirrordot.org/stories/2807875cb6676ed0
Genetic Experiments? (Score:5, Funny)
Re:Genetic Experiments? (Score:5, Funny)
Re:Genetic Experiments? (Score:4, Funny)
Actually, 200% more power (Score:5, Insightful)
Is it really 3 times the power? (Score:5, Informative)
However if it were 3 times the ENERGY then it'd make existing laptops run for 3 times longer.
Re:Actually, 200% more power (Score:2)
Re:Actually, 200% more power (Score:2, Funny)
Re:Actually, 200% more power (Score:2)
Re:Actually, 200% more power (Score:3, Informative)
1x: 0% more
2x: 100% more
3x: 100%+100%=200% more
And that one even got rated "informative", sheesh.
Re:Actually, 200% more power (Score:2)
Re:Actually, 200% more power (Score:2)
300 times zero is zero
Electric Cars? (Score:5, Interesting)
Re:Electric Cars? (Score:3, Insightful)
Re:Electric Cars? (Score:5, Informative)
Re:Electric Cars? (Score:5, Informative)
This is more clear when you realize that current is exactly what is needed to charge a battery. The battery needs to move electrons from one pool to another this is moving current.
Re:Electric Cars? (Score:4, Insightful)
for an Ohmic system (any sensible cable), so if you want your cables to remain cool, I must be reduced, hence V increased.
This is of course why national grids are at 10s-100s of KV.
Of course once you want to use it to charge a battery, you have to use a transformer (or equivalent) to reduce the voltage and increase the current, something that would have to happen as close as possible to where the battery is.
Having said all that, I can't see petrol station forecourts dispensing a heady mixture of petrol and 10KV high power spark machines just yet, at least not with guys like this [bbc.co.uk] around! ;-)
Re:Electric Cars? (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2, Insightful)
Re:Yes, (Score:4, Insightful)
Re:Yes, (Score:3, Interesting)
BatMax is better! (Score:4, Funny)
Re:BatMax is better! (Score:5, Funny)
-
Seems almost reasonable (Score:5, Informative)
Re:Seems almost reasonable (Score:5, Informative)
In addition, Li(z)Ti(x)O(y) is a system that undergoes phase changes during Lithium intercalation and deintercalation (as the battery discharges the "z" goes from 1 to 0). So the crystals are being made a-new with each charge discharge cycle (increasing cycle life, but this is something that also happens in the bulk, no need for nano whatnot).
Interestingly, the energy/power density with lithium titanium oxides is actually lower than that for carbons. A battery with a lithium cobalt oxide cathode and a lithium graphite anode will have a maximum potential of 4.2 V. The battery in question in the article actually sits around 3.0 V.
Finally, the failure mechanism for lithium ion batteries is not the anode, but the area just outside the anode called the SEI layer. This is a passivation layer formed adjacent to the anode by reaction of the neutral lithium with the organic electrolyte. This layer forms initially by irreversibly consuming some lithium, but if the charge/discharge rate is moderate it becomes stable and actually protects the anode. If the charge/discharge is too high, though, the layer breaks and more lithium is consumed to repair it, thus diminishing capacity. After enough of these cycles the batter will dramatically lose capacity.
Thus, the breakthrough in question must deal with a way of maintaining a stronger SEI layer, but it is most definitely at the cost of a lower potential battery.
Laptops and Electric Cars (Score:3, Interesting)
Charge capacity? (Score:5, Interesting)
Personally, I'd be happy not having to replace a battery because it becomes useless after a while. They aren't cheap, and they lose their life too quickly. I guess 2 out of 3 wouldn't be bad, though.
Read the article? (Score:4, Insightful)
Read and judge for yourself [imaging-resource.com]
Re:Read the article? (Score:3, Funny)
It's the flux capicitor that manages the whole thing.
Hard hat required (Score:3, Informative)
They should add a warning label: "May require personal nuclear reactor, shrapnel shields and additional fire insurance payments."
Re:Hard hat required (Score:2)
Of course your laptop adapter would be MUCH bigger..
But I'd be really worried about the temperature of the battery after the charge.
Re:Hard hat required (Score:2)
Re:Hard hat required (Score:2)
Re:Hard hat required (Score:2)
But the question is, how do they get rid of all the heat that must be generated in the battery?
Re:Hard hat required (Score:5, Informative)
E = 10.8V * 12Ah = 129.6Wh = 467 KJ (3600 J/Wh)
E = P * t, so P = E / t
P = 467 KJ / (5 * 60) secs = 1555W
1555W is less than many hair driers
I think your math is wrong... (Score:5, Insightful)
This is a lot more reasonable, from my understanding of Li-ion batteries. The theoretical energy capacity isn't three times current batteries, IIRC, so trippling that is unreasonable. But three times the discharge rate is not impossible, and brings them into the range of NiMH batteries, maybe even Lead-Acid. Coupled with the superior energy density of Li-ion, that's very very nice.
This matches well with the claim of faster charging - the limiting factors for charging and dischargeing are related in batteries.
So, your sums become 4Ah in 5 minutes, or a much more reasonable 48 amps. A lot, yes, but not beyond what's currently done with medium current applications.
Reading the press relase as I did above imedialty makes is much more reasonable, although I'd love to get more details. There's a lot hingeing on the word 'power', depending whether you read it in a technical or common definition, so much so that I wouldn't want to depend on it.
Re:Hard hat required (Score:2)
Some 120 or 220 hair dryers consume 1800 watts at volts. The problem is handling 1800 watts at 12 volts.
The actual power required will be considerably more due to the inefficiencies of the various bits involved in charging a battery.
Even if the input power was practical, the wires between a 12 volt battery charger and the battery would need to be about as heavy as car battery jumper cables. A battery charger that would provide 144A at 12V would be bigger and weigh more than
I tried to RTFA but... (Score:2)
But if it's not vaporware, this would be a huge breakthrough in many fields.
Maybe you just think about cell phones or laptops or even electric cars, but when I read this I see a huge advance for renewable energy production.
That's one huge problem for solar cells since they need to store energy for use during the night. The same can be said about the wind farms.
Actually that's the big advantage of the dams, they can store water and produce energy only wh
Power or charge? (Score:2)
Perhaps that's what they mean.
Re:Power or charge? (Score:2, Funny)
Skewed? (Score:4, Insightful)
Doesn't that sort of skew perceptions a bit much? I mean, leave we dotters to trash the article, the company, the product and explain why if it ran Linux the world would be a better place. But to come right out and abjectly claim snake oil seems a bit much to me.
Next, you'll be telling me that you can't fit a GB of data on a 1 in. HHD, or that the Flood is not visiting SoCal (the Biblical Flood, not Halo2).
Assuming you're right with the snake oil. At least they're only hurting stock holders and not the Open Source community by suing IBM. Stock holders by the nature of buying stock assume the risk. If this is a press release to induce a pump-and-dump, as seems to be hinted, then the SEC will be looking for them.
But, if they can get faster charging, higher capacity battries, then maybe my laptop can weigh less. I mean, if most car's MPG and tank capacity give them roughly 300 miles of range, why should the industry let you get away with using your laptop unplugged for more than 2 hours?
Re:Skewed? (Score:4, Insightful)
Article on Yahoo (Score:4, Informative)
Patents (Score:3, Informative)
Not a Hype (Score:4, Informative)
RENO, NV--(MARKET WIRE)--Feb 10, 2005 -- Altair Nanotechnologies, Inc. (NasdaqSC:ALTI - News) announced today that it has achieved a breakthrough in Lithium Ion battery electrode materials, which will enable a new generation of rechargeable battery to be introduced into the marketplace, as well as create new markets for rechargeable batteries. These new materials allow rechargeable batteries to be manufactured that have three times the power of existing Lithium Ion batteries at the same price and with recharge times measured in a few minutes rather than hours.
The technical achievements are being praised by the battery community as truly remarkable and will likely enable a new generation of rechargeable battery to be produced. Altair has confidentiality agreements in place with some of the world's leading battery development companies to evaluate and commercialize these battery electrode materials.
Altair's research and development efforts were allowed two new patents (announced on January 7th and 14th, 2005) and a National Science Foundation grant was successfully completed in January, 2005, by Altair. New markets for fast charging batteries will include the handheld power tools market increasing the productivity of, for example, construction workers while lowering their overhead costs. Other markets include hybrid electric vehicles, portable electronics and medical surgery tools -- solving the problem of electrical wires all over the operating room floor.
Rest of article can be found here
http://biz.yahoo.com/iw/050210/080729.html [yahoo.com]
Hype (Score:2)
Coral cache couldn't catch it BUT... *MIRROR* (Score:2, Informative)
http://press.arrivenet.com/aut/article.php/584418. html [arrivenet.com]
Feel free to rip this server a new asshole as well.
Slashdot better not be teasing me with vaporware again! I get angry when teased!
--
Fairfax Underground [fairfaxunderground.com]: Where Fairfax County comes out to play
Re: (Score:2)
More Nanotechnology miracles! (Score:2)
(http://slashdot.org/article.pl?sid=05/01/2
300% More Power or Last For 3x Times the Charges (Score:3, Interesting)
The only article I could get to said that the technology "will allow a tripling of battery life." That would seem to indicate that it will make the batteries last for three times as long rather than hold 3x more power at once. It would be nice to have a battery that held 3x the power, but a battery that needed replacing every ~3 years vice every year would be great as well.
Any one else interpret it the same way?
Cheers,the_crowbar
300~% more power is good, but I want more capacity (Score:4, Interesting)
This has nothing to do with capacity, which presumably is unchanged from more conventional technology.
Not a bad thing in itself of course, if it expands the market for which LiIon is suitable.
Eminent? (Score:2, Interesting)
Yes...but (Score:2)
I'm not so keen on my iPod dying quicker..
3x max current, not capacity (Score:5, Informative)
Current Li batteries are very limited in their max current. This make them poor choices for high current applications, like electric motors. It won't make your laptop run any longer, but you'll be able to charge it 3x faster.
Nanotechnology? (Score:2)
"Two eminent experts' (Score:5, Insightful)
Power vs. Capacity (Score:5, Interesting)
"3 times the power" probably means that the battery can yield 3 times higher current when discharged into a short circuit (before exploding). But the energy storage capacity is the same. I believe that battery technology is already pretty close to the theoretical limit here.
This new development may allow to replace NiCd batteries in very high current applications, which is good.
Re:Seems about due (Score:4, Informative)
For those that don't want to take the time to look at the article (and before it gets /.'ed), here is the meat:
Sounds promising (though if I hear the nano prefix again it'll make me barf). So no, it's not a new way to recharge batteries Li-Ion batteries, it's new batteries that can be recharged faster.
Let's hope that they can manage the lawsuits after the first batch starts to catch fire.
Re:Seems about due (Score:2)
Re:Seems about due (Score:5, Interesting)
This all sounds like BS to me. Our lab is part of a nation-wide program to develop new battery technologies and I have no idea why they claim lattice strain as the main cause for eletrode fatigue... The problem with ANY battery is that ions have to move as the battery is charged/discharged. These ions are all lithium in lithium-ion batteries (AKA lithium rocking chair or rocker batteries). The material between the electrode compartments has to be a insulator able to transport Li+ reliably. Since liquids in batteries are not such a good thing they use various gel mixtures for this medium (and the rate of ion diffusion is inversly related to viscosity). Every charge/discharge cycle more an more ions get stuck and hence lower the capacity of the battery over time.
The "problem" electrode as far as I know is actually the graphite (like the stuff in pencils) end which get's reduced and forms a lithium salt. When you hook up battery the graphite re-oxidizes, sending the electrons through the circuit and Li+ through the insulating medium. Most "nanomaterials" focus on increasing the surface area of this electrode to allow for more efficient (and rapid) charge storage/discharge. At the other electrode is some (probably cystalline) inorganic oxidant which does break down over time. My guess is that they just found some new inorganic electrode material that is slightly better and they, like EVERY other lab, are claiming they've "solved" the Li-ion battery problem. I've seen way too many talks from people claiming essentially the same thing to put my grains of salt away just yet.
But hey, I'm not on the nanobattery (did you barf?) project and am by no means an expert, so someone please correct me if I'm wrong... FYI "nano" makes me want to puke too. Every week there is some jack-ass giving a talk about "nanomaterials" that are MICROns in size and characterized with MICROscopy. In chemistry land (where I live) a nanometer might as well be a mile (except electrons tunnel more frequently) 'cause atoms are really freaking tiny and that's what we've been using to build our materials for over 200 years : )
Re:Seems about due (Score:4, Informative)
So, it doesn't appear to be a true ionic salt, in the sense that something like lithium chloride would be. This sort of intercalation is a good demonstration of how while "chemical bond" usually conjures up an image of solid spheres connected by a rod, like in those plastic model sets, in actuality a bond can be delocalized. In particular, there is a fascinating group of substances known as the metallocenes which feature a metal ion sandwiched between planar carbon rings. Not bonded to a carbon, but instead complexed with the entire aromatic ring structure. Graphite consists of planes of these carbon ring systems fused together to form a planar sheet (graphene). While strong covalent bonds hold carbon atoms in a graphene plane together, far weaker forces hold the planes together, so that lithium ions can squeeze in between and take up residence. As such, lithium ion batteries are quite different from, say alkaline batteries in that rather than the production of current by a reduction/oxidation reaction between a pair of substances. In Li-ion batteries, the potential is provided by lithium ions themselves shuttling out of the graphite lattice- as the grandparent noted, they are sometimes referred to as "rocker" or "swing" batteries because of the back-and-forth movement of Li ions through use and recharge cycles.
In general, carbon has some rather limited and screwy ionic chemistry, owing to its place on the periodic table- there's a distinct preference for covalent rather than ionic bonding - even carbon halides are generally considered covalent. Carbocations and carbanions are both important species in organic chemistry reactions, but in most cases are not very stable- they tend to be transition states that end up as an uncharged final product. There are of course many known organic ion compounds- acetate ion, from acetic acid (vinegar) is a familar example- but generally it ends up being other atoms in the compound, usually oxygen or nitrogen, which can actually be said to carry the charge most of the time. Even in organometallic compounds, generally the metal-carbon bond has covalent character- there are some important exceptions though, usually brought about using very strong nonaqueous bases like sodium amide. Even "carbide" compounds are generally network solids, which is to say, covalent. Calcium carbide, CaC2, might qualify, though if you try to dissolve it in water, you do not get carbide ions in solution, but rather acetylene gas. You can of course make ionic compounds out of any element- just provide the
Re:Insta-flip (Score:2)
Re:sweet! (Score:5, Funny)
Re:Some hard facts (Score:4, Informative)
Not only they blurr the line intentionally between power and capacity, but also they liberally use the nano-* buzzword.
A three-fold increase in the battery capacity would be an enormous advancement. LiIon is already the highest energy-density type of battery, so it would matter a lot.
Maybe they merely found a way in decreasing the internal resistance; advanced LiPoly batteries already do this and there are 2000mAh types rated at 15-20 C discharge rate.
Charging them, however, still requires no more than 2 C. Chemistry has its own reaction rate and no amount of snake-oil will speed it up.
If this thingie has any value, it may be for miniature batteries, but don't hold your breath.