New -- Dec. 21... batteries that last 10 times longer!!!!

System

Nanowire battery lasts 10 times longer

Dec. 21, 2007

Researchers at Stanford University say they've found a way to use silicon nanowires to create a new rechargeable lithium-ion battery that produces 10 times the amount of electricity of existing lithium-ion batteries.

A laptop that now runs on battery for two hours could operate for 20 hours, the university said Friday in a release.

Engineering professor Yi Cui said the lithium is stored in a forest of tiny silicon nanowires, each with a diameter one-thousandth the thickness of a sheet of paper. The nano-wires inflate four times their normal size as they soak up lithium.

Expanded capacity could make Li-ion batteries attractive to electric car makers. Cui suggested use to store electricity from rooftop solar panels.

http://www.dailyindia.com/mod/World.php

Pretty nifty, don't you think?

Here's another article mention of this:

Since the design uses technologies that are already mature, Cui reckons it will not take long to market his nanowire battery. He has already filed for a patent and hopes either to work with existing companies in order to start shipping the idea into existing products, or to form his own company.

http://gizmodo.com/336072/stanford-professor-conjures-up-10x-life-on-traditional-li+ion-batteries

"Given the mature infrastructure behind silicon, this new technology can be pushed to real life quickly," Cui said.

The electrical storage capacity of a Li-ion battery is limited by how much lithium can be held in the battery's anode, which is typically made of carbon. Silicon has a much higher capacity than carbon, but also has a drawback.

Silicon placed in a battery swells as it absorbs positively charged lithium atoms during charging, then shrinks during use (i.e., when playing your iPod) as the lithium is drawn out of the silicon. This expand/shrink cycle typically causes the silicon (often in the form of particles or a thin film) to pulverize, degrading the performance of the battery.

Cui's battery gets around this problem with nanotechnology. The lithium is stored in a forest of tiny silicon nanowires, each with a diameter one-thousandth the thickness of a sheet of paper. The nanowires inflate four times their normal size as they soak up lithium. But, unlike other silicon shapes, they do not fracture.

Research on silicon in batteries began three decades ago. Chan explained: "The people kind of gave up on it because the capacity wasn't high enough and the cycle life wasn't good enough. And it was just because of the shape they were using. It was just too big, and they couldn't undergo the volume changes."

Then, along came silicon nanowires. "We just kind of put them together," Chan said.

For their experiments, Chan grew the nanowires on a stainless steel substrate, providing an excellent electrical connection. "It was a fantastic moment when Candace told me it was working," Cui said.

http://news-service.stanford.edu/news/2008/january9/nanowire-010908.html

I totally LOVE it!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

crewzer

Re: New -- Dec. 21... batteries that last 10 times longer!!!!

Pretty nifty, don't you think?

Maybe.

Assuming the technology works, the higher energy density may well be “pretty nifty”. Note, however, that batteries do not produce electricity; they merely store electrochemical energy for later use as electrical energy. So, there will still have to be an energy source (PV modules, wind, the grid, etc.) to charge the batteries, and energy loads in excess of the energy sources will deplete the batteries.

Additionally, while the report highlights the potential increase in energy density, there’s no discussion of other important considerations such as charging efficiency, operating temperature range, high-discharge current behavior, maintenance requirements, life expectancy, or relative cost.

In other words, take note of what was said, but also make note of what wasn’t.

Having worked for many years in the R&D industry, I tend to be rather cautious about vaporware. Take Firefly Energy, for example. The four-year-old high-tech battery company, a spin-off from Caterpillar in Peoria, IL, has yet to "mass produce a single battery component", according to June, 2007, report in the Peoria JournalStar.

Regards,
Jim / crewzer

System2

Re: New -- Dec. 21... batteries that last 10 times longer!!!!

crewzer wrote: »

Maybe.

Assuming the technology works, the higher energy density may well be “pretty nifty”. Note, however, that batteries do not produce electricity; they merely store electrochemical energy for later use as electrical energy. So, there will still have to be an energy source (PV modules, wind, the grid, etc.) to charge the batteries, and energy loads in excess of the energy sources will deplete the batteries.

Additionally, while the report highlights the potential increase in energy density, there’s no discussion of other important considerations such as charging efficiency, operating temperature range, high-discharge current behavior, maintenance requirements, life expectancy, or relative cost.

In other words, take note of what was said, but also make note of what wasn’t.

Having worked for many years in the R&D industry, I tend to be rather cautious about vaporware. Take Firefly Energy, for example. The four-year-old high-tech battery company, a spin-off from Caterpillar in Peoria, IL, has yet to "mass produce a single battery component", according to June, 2007, report in the Peoria JournalStar.

Regards,
Jim / crewzer

Right, if you get a bad installation, like I did, then they could be ruined just like my gel batteries were.

But the one report talked about how much faster they could be charged... that would equate to more efficient, right?

I was just coming back to read that article again...

System2

Re: New -- Dec. 21... batteries that last 10 times longer!!!!

The save feature doesn't seem to be working, so I'll add this as a reply rather than an edit:


In terms of Firefly, Caterpillar was making soooo much money, they may have wanted to burn some... and not been as serious as would have been good for the actual product.