Please create an account to participate in the Slashdot moderation system

 


Forgot your password?
Close
typodupeerror
×
Technology

Li-Ion With 300% More Power, Minutes to Recharge 408

Posted by CmdrTaco from the i'll-believe-it-when-i-see-it dept.
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?
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

Li-Ion With 300% More Power, Minutes to Recharge More

Li-Ion With 300% More Power, Minutes to Recharge

Comments Filter:

  • Snakeoil? (Score:3, Funny)

    by IainMH ( 176964 ) * on Wednesday February 23, 2005 @08:31AM (#11754517)
    No - It's lithium.

    • Re:Snakeoil? (Score:5, Informative)

      by khrtt ( 701691 ) on Wednesday February 23, 2005 @10:03AM (#11755276)
      Current lithium batteries are slow to recharge because they have a high internal resistance, and low tolerance for overvoltage. A typical battery cell with 3.6V idle voltage takes no more than 4.3V when charging, and the .7V drop over the internal resistance allows very little current through the battery, which is why it takes 3hr to recharge fully.

      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)

        by drinkypoo ( 153816 ) <drink@hyperlogos.org> on Wednesday February 23, 2005 @10:47AM (#11755688) Homepage Journal
        I'll just expect this battery to come with an internal fuse, instead.

      • Re:Snakeoil? (Score:5, Informative)

        by tlhIngan ( 30335 ) <slashdot&worf,net> on Wednesday February 23, 2005 @11:03AM (#11755861)
        Current lithium batteries are slow to recharge because they have a high internal resistance, and low tolerance for overvoltage. A typical battery cell with 3.6V idle voltage takes no more than 4.3V when charging, and the .7V drop over the internal resistance allows very little current through the battery, which is why it takes 3hr to recharge fully.

        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.

  • Snakeoil???? (Score:5, Interesting)

    by lecithin ( 745575 ) on Wednesday February 23, 2005 @08:31AM (#11754519)
    Not everybody thinks so. Altair's stock has gone from $2 to $4+ this past week. It topped out at over $6 last Friday. Their average volume is at 6.6 Million. Yesterday, they doubled it.

    • Re:Snakeoil???? (Score:2, Insightful)

      by no parity ( 448151 )
      Yes, we all know the stock markets are never wrong.

    • Re:Snakeoil???? (Score:3, Insightful)

      by quanminoan ( 812306 )
      Investors are by no means scientists - you should never judge a scientific discovery by its effect on the stock market...

      • Re:Snakeoil???? (Score:5, Insightful)

        by Dr. Evil ( 3501 ) on Wednesday February 23, 2005 @09:02AM (#11754745)

        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)

          by Sean Clifford ( 322444 ) on Wednesday February 23, 2005 @10:07AM (#11755313) Journal
          The only question is... do you dump the stock before the conference call, or do you expect the hype to endure?

          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)

        by Martin Blank ( 154261 )
        Exactly. Anyone who needs reinforcement on this point should go do some searches on Bre-X. I remember getting some junk mail from some investing company years ago that was really pushing them. A month later, the scandal hit the news, and the stock went into freefall. Worse than Enron, IMHO, though not of the same size.
    • If you think that is good you should check out SCOX.

    • Re:Snakeoil???? (Score:3, Interesting)

      by IO ERROR ( 128968 ) *
      I certainly hope it isn't snake oil. It would be nice to be able to watch a DVD movie on my laptop all the way through on battery alone. I always miss the ending because the battery runs out 10 minues before the movie ends!

      • Re:Snakeoil???? (Score:3, Informative)

        by OmniVector ( 569062 )
        try ripping the dvd to your hard drive first. that greatly reduces power consumption
      • Who finishes porn DVDs anyway?

  • Hmm... (Score:5, Funny)

    by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday February 23, 2005 @08:33AM (#11754526)
    "Anyone else think snake oil?"

    Someone's trying not to look so stupid this time around...

  • Hmmm... (Score:5, Funny)

    by clawDATA ( 758072 ) on Wednesday February 23, 2005 @08:34AM (#11754530)
    Maybe it uses cold-fusion?
    • I hope Val Kilmer can prevent the russians from stealing it!
  • If true, pure battery-electric vehicles will totally own all ICE vehicles. Although they do quite well already [evuk.co.uk] with "common" li-ions.
    • 186 Mph is great and all that, but that is on a 1 hour charge. They need to extend that to at leat 4 hours (and preferably 6 or 7 or more) in order to compete with Gas/Diesel on long distance drives. And to 4 hours at a minimum for daily commuters (rush hour sucks in some places). This may help extend Electric to the daily commuters, but it won't do for the long distance driver. Also, the long distance drivers will require a quick (less than 20 min) charging time total. The commuters can recharge their

  • Slashdot: home of stock pumpers? (Score:5, Insightful)

    by Takeel ( 155086 ) <v32gd4r02@sne a k e m ail.com> on Wednesday February 23, 2005 @08:35AM (#11754540) Homepage Journal
    When did Slashdot start posting messages from stock pumpers?

  • Mirror (Score:3, Informative)

    by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday February 23, 2005 @08:35AM (#11754543)
    Mirror:
    http://www.mirrordot.org/stories/2807875cb6676ed09 4a874986d9cdd32/index.html [mirrordot.org]

  • Genetic Experiments? (Score:5, Funny)

    by bigtallmofo ( 695287 ) on Wednesday February 23, 2005 @08:36AM (#11754547)
    I RTFA and couldn't figure out the precise technique that Altair Nanotechnologies used to breed this super-Lion with 3x the power of a regular lion.

  • Actually, 200% more power (Score:5, Insightful)

    by CrazyWingman ( 683127 ) on Wednesday February 23, 2005 @08:37AM (#11754558) Journal
    Someone needs to go back to math class. The article actually says the batteries will have "three times the power" of today's batteries. That amounts to 200% more power, not 300% more.

  • Electric Cars? (Score:5, Interesting)

    by tonywestonuk ( 261622 ) on Wednesday February 23, 2005 @08:37AM (#11754562)
    A recharge time of 2 mins is about the same time it might take me to refill my car, So this makes it quite viable as an alternative 'fuel'.... However, the cables from the 'pump' would have to be hugely thick to carry that sort of power.

    • Re:Electric Cars? (Score:3, Insightful)

      by Basje ( 26968 )
      about the size of a current fuel hose?

    • Re:Electric Cars? (Score:5, Informative)

      by Jeff DeMaagd ( 2015 ) on Wednesday February 23, 2005 @08:48AM (#11754669) Homepage Journal
      Generally, cables need to be large to carry lots of current. Power isn't directly involved. You could double the voltage, keep the current the same and significantly increase the power involved without being less safe. A cable's capacity ratings are in current and the breakdown voltage of insulation.

      • Re:Electric Cars? (Score:5, Informative)

        by forand ( 530402 ) on Wednesday February 23, 2005 @09:24AM (#11754916) Homepage
        You cannot do this while charging a battery. The voltage MUST be kept below the voltage of the battery or you will start doing funky things with the battery.

        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)

          by StressedEd ( 308123 ) <ej.grace@imperial[ ].uk ['.ac' in gap]> on Wednesday February 23, 2005 @10:30AM (#11755522) Homepage
          I think the parent poster is referring to the ohmic losses due to transmission of power. Power dissipation is proportional to current squared.

          P = I^2 R

          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: (Score:2, Insightful)

    by account_deleted ( 4530225 )
    Comment removed based on user account deletion

    • Re:Yes, (Score:4, Insightful)

      by RadioTV ( 173312 ) on Wednesday February 23, 2005 @08:55AM (#11754712)
      What does the density of transistors on a die have to do with battery power? Why is it that people who don't have any idea what Moore's law actually says think that they can use it anywhere they want. I saw a sign for two fish sandwiches for $4. Does that mean that Moore's Law has caught up with the fish sandwich?

      • Re:Yes, (Score:3, Interesting)

        by Khazunga ( 176423 ) *
        There are a lot of people who defend Moore's law is a particular case of a more general law [sergiocarvalho.com], stating that science evolves on an exponential scale. So, we might end up calling this exponential growth Moore's law, even if Moore only observed that effect in transistor density. I'd not call it wrong.

  • BatMax is better! (Score:4, Funny)

    by ghoti ( 60903 ) on Wednesday February 23, 2005 @08:37AM (#11754567) Homepage
    We don't need this crap, we have BatMax [slashdot.org]!

  • Seems almost reasonable (Score:5, Informative)

    by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday February 23, 2005 @08:38AM (#11754573)
    According to the article, they use a Lithium titanium oxide nanomaterial. Best gues, the nanocrystals typically have little or no stress and a low defect density, as well as an extremely high surface to volume ratio. All of these should improve the efficiency and speed of the battery operation. This might also increase the speed that the battery can discharge. Of course, I am not a battery specialist. Just in nanomaterials development. Might not be snake oil. Assuming all the accolades are true... well, Altair doesn't have a reputation for falsifying data. I look forward to seeing this develop.

    • Re:Seems almost reasonable (Score:5, Informative)

      by Alceste ( 138400 ) on Wednesday February 23, 2005 @10:52AM (#11755740)
      That's actually not true. Nanometer sized crystals have large surface to volume ratios than bulk crystals, creating more surface defects per unit mass. The defects within a bulk crystal can be annealed to an equilibrium number, the same as those in a nano-crystal per unit mass. Thus, since battery performance is based on unit mass, you need the name weight of nano-crystals or bulk crystals to get the same capacity (to an order of magnitude, some papers show that surface defects actually INCREASE capacity, nifty stuff).

      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)

    by zioncity ( 862007 ) on Wednesday February 23, 2005 @08:39AM (#11754575)
    This bodes well for everything that runs on batteries that can take advantage of this.. with some exceptions like Lead Acid batteries of cars and such. Just think.... my iBook and Powerbook laptops last much longer on a fresh battery than a comparably equipped Intel Mobile Pentium based laptop or even more energy conservative chips... point being... the 5 hours my iBook can get could be well past 10 with intensive use and energry saving stuff set to a minimum. This will bode well for all. Now my PCs can run over 2-3 hours max of use when not using a DVD. Whoo hoo. Plus maybe now electric cars can get a full 300-500 miles of city driving or such, and hybrids will benefit as for smaller batteries with a similar range/capacity. Now if improvements in technology like this could spur other improvements to make life easier and more affordable for all.

  • Charge capacity? (Score:5, Interesting)

    by stanleypane ( 729903 ) on Wednesday February 23, 2005 @08:39AM (#11754576)
    Given the current state of battery life, I'm inclined to think this technology might bring along other trade-offs. Current Lithium batteries tend to lose their full charge capacity after using them for a while. If these batteries charge faster and retain more power, what's to stop them from losing that capacity just as quickly?

    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)

    by jsimon12 ( 207119 ) on Wednesday February 23, 2005 @08:39AM (#11754584) Homepage
    As long as this is NOT some sticker that creates a magnetic flux in the battery via the Hotzman effect, then I will be willing to say it might not be snakeoil.

    Read and judge for yourself [imaging-resource.com]
    • As long as this is NOT some sticker that creates a magnetic flux in the battery via the Hotzman effect, then I will be willing to say it might not be snakeoil.

      It's the flux capicitor that manages the whole thing.

  • Hard hat required (Score:3, Informative)

    by bo0ork ( 698470 ) on Wednesday February 23, 2005 @08:39AM (#11754585)
    Assume your laptop has 4000 mAh (or 4 Ah). Triple that is 12 Ah. If my old memory serves, recharging 12Ah in 5 minutes would then require 144 ampere.

    They should add a warning label: "May require personal nuclear reactor, shrapnel shields and additional fire insurance payments."

    • Generating this power is not such a big deal.
      Of course your laptop adapter would be MUCH bigger..
      But I'd be really worried about the temperature of the battery after the charge.
    • That 4000 mAh is at 12V, surely. So at 120 or 220V it's closer to 10A, which is much more reasonable... if still fairly heavy for normal mains circuits.
    • But that would be done at a much lower voltage. Stepping down from 110 to, say, 11 volts (to make it easier) would mean the power supply would only draw about 15 Amps from the mains (if it was 100% efficient). So that should be doable.

      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)

      by pong ( 18266 ) on Wednesday February 23, 2005 @09:02AM (#11754747) Homepage
      My laptop battery has a voltage rating of 10.8. The amount of energy in Joules on a battery with a voltage of 10.8V and power rating of 12Ah, would be

      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)

      by DarkMan ( 32280 ) on Wednesday February 23, 2005 @09:05AM (#11754764) Journal
      I don't belive that the claim is that thier new batteries have three times the capacity of a current Li-ion battery. They are claiming three times the power, which I read as meaning that the peak discharge power is three times greater.

      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.
    • 144 amps x 12 V = 1728 watts

      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
  • It's only a 'press release' so I'm not convinced...

    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
  • I don't want more power, I want more charge supplied at the same power.

    Perhaps that's what they mean.

  • Skewed? (Score:4, Insightful)

    by Dausha ( 546002 ) on Wednesday February 23, 2005 @08:44AM (#11754635) Homepage
    "Anyone else think snake oil?"

    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?

  • Article on Yahoo (Score:4, Informative)

    by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday February 23, 2005 @08:47AM (#11754654)
    More detail and not yet Slashdotted; http://biz.yahoo.com/iw/050210/080729.html [yahoo.com]

  • Patents (Score:3, Informative)

    by Halo1 ( 136547 ) on Wednesday February 23, 2005 @08:47AM (#11754655)
    They do have pending patents [tinyurl.com] on things like that all over the world, but of course that doesn't really mean anything (anyone can have a patent pending on pretty much everything, and even if granted that doesn't really mean all that much...)

  • Not a Hype (Score:4, Informative)

    by Compile 'em all ( 834137 ) on Wednesday February 23, 2005 @08:49AM (#11754675)
    The site is already down. And it doesn't look like another hype(at least to me). It seems that those guys have actually done something. Read on :

    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]
    • Heres the kicker: It says 3 times the power at the same PRICE. Not the same weight or volume They've basically found new materials that allow them to produce 3 batteries for every 1 they used to produce, and these batteries have fast recharge capabilities. Nothing to see here, move along...
  • Here's the press release on a different site:
    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
  • Comment removed based on user account deletion
  • Perhaps they should get together with the battery life extender nanotech guys
    (http://slashdot.org/article.pl?sid=05/01/28 /03192 39&tid=126&tid=100&tid=137&tid=1) and make a battery that you charge up once for two minutes and it runs for the lifetime of the battery or yourself (which ever is longer)...

  • 300% More Power or Last For 3x Times the Charges (Score:3, Interesting)

    by the_crowbar ( 149535 ) on Wednesday February 23, 2005 @08:59AM (#11754731)

    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)

    by DFJA ( 680282 ) on Wednesday February 23, 2005 @08:59AM (#11754732)
    Can't RTFA because it's /.ed, but it looks to me like they have increased the power capability by increasing the surface area within a given volume so that it can produce a larger current, much in the same way that the lungs can produce a large exchange of O2 and CO2 due to their large surface area.

    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)

    by Raleel ( 30913 )
    How come I cannot find anything on the two guys mentioned above? Very very little that doesn't relate directly to the press release. I found a little on Dr. Kerimidas at http://www.valence.com/BoardMembers.asp but hardly anything on the other. If they are so eminent, why aren't there any papers? Citation?
  • Will the battery lifetime drop to 6 mos?

    I'm not so keen on my iPod dying quicker..

  • 3x max current, not capacity (Score:5, Informative)

    by fhage ( 596871 ) on Wednesday February 23, 2005 @09:20AM (#11754877)
    According to http://www.evworld.com/view.cfm?section=communique &newsid=7681 [evworld.com] "The nanomaterials Altair is developing are the next generation of electrode materials for lithium-ion batteries and Altair's research and product development is laying the ground work for a new generation of ultra high power lithium ion batteries," commented Dr. K. M. Abraham. "A key requirement to the above applications is the ability to recharge the battery very quickly, for example in a few minutes. Current Li Ion batteries are incapable of such quick charge times because of the chemistry of the anode materials. Altair has found a solution to this with their nano-sized lithium titanium oxide."

    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.

  • Like every 5th word in the press release is "nanotechnology." Back in the day, when you mixed a bunch of chemicals up in a lab, it was called "Chemistry". Does anyone else smell a new dot bomb cycle coming? Are venture capitalists going to start pouring their money in every company with "nanotechnology" in their name? Guess I should wait a few weeks and start selling short.

  • "Two eminent experts' (Score:5, Insightful)

    by exp(pi*sqrt(163)) ( 613870 ) on Wednesday February 23, 2005 @09:34AM (#11755002) Journal
    Nobody writes a phrase like that unless they're bogus. That's the kind of language you get in endorsements for the latest diet fad or transcendental meditation technique.

  • Power vs. Capacity (Score:5, Interesting)

    by mike449 ( 238450 ) on Wednesday February 23, 2005 @09:47AM (#11755119)
    They carefully avoid the word "capacity" in the press release. This and the claim about faster charge makes me think that they somehow managed to reduce the internal resistance of the battery, but the capacity (measured in Ampere-hours) hasn't changed.
    "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.

Slashdot Top Deals

Brain off-line, please wait.

Close