Wanted: More Battery Power; Lower Likelihood Of Explosion

from the in-an-ideal-world dept

A few years ago, I was at a conference and ended up sitting next to a research scientist who had spent many years working on and studying battery technology. We had a fascinating discussion about why it seemed like everything else in technology kept improving, but minus a few incremental advancements here and there, battery technology had pretty much topped out. His answer was both simple and memorable. It was something to the effect of: “You must realize, every battery you carry is basically a bomb waiting to go off. You can pack in more power, but that only increases the likelihood of it going ‘boom.'” That statement kept popping up in my mind over the last month or so as story after story after story appeared about exploding laptops. Now, hours after Lenovo and IBM added a bunch of Thinkpad batteries to the long list of recalled laptop batteries from Dell and Apple, Sony (makers of all of those batteries) has announced its own damn recall of batteries from a variety of laptop makers who all used its batteries. So, with that in mind, it’s really no surprise to start seeing articles looking at the state of research on new types of batteries. However, like previous times we’ve checked in on this space, there really isn’t that much to report. There are ways to get more power, but it comes at the expense of a higher likelihood of explosion. You can make batteries safer, but then you get less power. There may be an answer out there, with things like decreased power consumption or faster charges may represent temporary solutions, but it seems we’re still waiting for a real breakthrough in battery technology.

Rate this comment as insightful
Rate this comment as funny
You have rated this comment as insightful
You have rated this comment as funny
Flag this comment as abusive/trolling/spam
You have flagged this comment
The first word has already been claimed
The last word has already been claimed
Insightful Lightbulb icon Funny Laughing icon Abusive/trolling/spam Flag icon Insightful badge Lightbulb icon Funny badge Laughing icon Comments icon

Comments on “Wanted: More Battery Power; Lower Likelihood Of Explosion”

Subscribe: RSS Leave a comment
Tek'a says:


or imps. lashed to tiny little chairs connected to tiny little clockwork gears spinning up little power plants in your laptop, pda or mp3 device. or the more high tech solution? minature atomic reactors (dont forget to add water to that cooling tank every hour) or some kind of tesla-style beamed power system.

its disappointing. its getting late in the year 2006 and batteries are still lumps based around acids and metals reacting in strange and fantastic ways. plenty of people reading this right now watched shows in their childhood and young adulthood about how hydrogen fuel cells would be powering everything in just years.

im not asking for a flying jetsons bubblecar, but can we see something? anything?

sprocket power.. yeah.. thats the answer

Jim says:

Carbon Nano-fiber Capacitor

I saw an article about carbon nano-fibers being used to create a high capacity capcitor. Aside from their low energy density, capacitors are better batteries then batteries.

Maybe this is the solution we’ve all been hoping for?

Either way, I very much agree with this article. I’ve said to my friends many times that they next great breakthough in human evolution needs to be cheap energy production.

Anonymous of Course says:

Re: Carbon Nano-fiber Capacitor

No doubt that cheap energy would be a boon
to mankind.

But these batteries are not sources of energy
they’re a means of transporting and using
energy generated elsewhere- and so is hydrogen.

For greater energy storage and nearly unlimited cycles,
capacitor storage systems using ceramic capacitors
are looking really good right now. But there are some
issues. They store evergy at high voltage while electronic
circuits we love to use are increasing circuit density by
using smaller gemoeteries using lower anre lower voltage.

So you’ll need conversion electronics in the package
with the capacitor bank to drop the kilovolts down to
a vew volts. The electronics will have to be efficient.
A big capacitor chock full of delicious energy is a nasty
thing if it is short circuited.

Any sorce of stored energy that allows rapid expenditure
of the energy is dangerous. Even a block of wood if
ground to powder can explode under the proper conditions.

Better quality controls, more stable chemistry, better
safeguards built into the electronics would be nice.

David k says:

Re: Re: Carbon Nano-fiber Capacitor

I have been tracking some new battery technology using Nano tech, looks very promising, see info below, work for laptop too

Altair Nanotechnologies to Demonstrate Advances in NanoSafe Rechargeable Battery Program at Zero Emission Vehicle Symposium

Advances in the manufacture of safe, fast-charging, long-lasting batteries used to power electric and hybrid electric vehicles will be addressed by Altair Nanotechnologies Inc. at the California Air Resources Board Zero Emission Vehicle (ZEV) Technology Symposium, held September 25-27, 2006 in Sacramento, California.

On September 27, at 2:30 p.m., Evan House, Ph.D., Director of Altairnano’s Advanced Materials & Power Systems business unit, will deliver a presentation on Altairnano’s NanoSafe rechargeable nano-titanate battery program. In addition, Altairnano will demonstrate its NanoSafe battery technology throughout the Zero Emission Vehicles conference.

A leader in advanced nanomaterials and alternative energy solutions, Altairnano has forged an innovative path in battery chemistry by replacing graphite (which can cause batteries to malfunction or explode under certain conditions) with its patented nano-titanate material which is safe and reliable.

Altairnano’s nano-titanate material can be charged and discharged significantly more often than conventional batteries because of the absence of particle fatigue that plagues graphite. Conventional lithium ion batteries can be charged about 750 times before they are no longer useful. In comparison, Altairnano NanoSafe battery cells have now achieved over 9,000 charge and discharge cycles at rates up to 40 times greater than are typical of common batteries, while retaining up to 85 percent charge capacity.

“It’s an honor to be invited to present at the California Air Resources Board Zero Emission Vehicle Symposium and we look forward to providing substantive details on the role Altair Nanotechnologies is playing in making safe, powerful, long life, reliable electric vehicles a mass-market reality,” Altair Nanotechnologies, Inc. President and Chief Executive Officer Alan J. Gotcher, Ph.D said.

Sam says:

Yeah I’ve been keeping up with this kind of thing for a while. Sadly the advances are being made by people who don’t know anything about business and never patent their discoveries for fear of it being stolen…or are completely psycho and want 100% control over the production and all of the profits from their product, which means it’ll be 30 years before they are able to produce commercially.

So only people with business sense(which is few and far between with scientists) or working for big corporations(which are few and far between) are actually making their work known.

Are you not entertained?? says:

Broken promises....

I agree with you Tek’a. Seems we were promised a hi-tech future which never arrived. We’re no closer to the bubble car than when we were still watching the Jetsons. I’m reminded of this every morning while my rolling vehicle is stuck to the ground by gravity in single file with all the other George’s who are trying to get to work so they can put in their three hour day at Spacely’s Sprockets. The good news, so I hear, is Apple plans on powering their next generation nano-iPod with Hydrogen fuel cells. Those darn chemical batteries keep wearing out too quickly as I try to listen to my mp3’s stuck in traffic!

Dudebro says:

Battery Life

Why would battery manufacturers want to extend the life of their product?
They basically have the whole world in their firm grasp. The only improvements on batteries are minor (I believe) to make the bottom profit margin greater.
It’s just like Edison’s light bulb… we can manufacture a light bulb that stay lit constantly for 100 years +, but we don’t. Why?
To sell more lightbulbs of course.

Anonymous Coward says:

Re: Re: Battery Life

John Gietzen, dont underestimate entirely what he said.

Products have lifecycles, and I dont know how old you are, but there are tools and pumps and basic things my grandfather had, bought in the 20s & 30s, that work today just as well as they did then. You’re insane if you think a single damn thing in my entire average american house will work 80-90 years from now.

So yes, why sell extremely long-lasting products, especially if you can’t offer something improved enough technologically relatively soon? If it doesn’t break, that kills the first chance for a business cycle, and if technology is utterly stagnant like batteries have been of late and therefore a new hot model won’t come out next year then that avenue too is closed.

Therefore, the best thing is to cut costs to the bone, which of course results in ‘cheap’ quality products, which drives the next cycle.

Lay Person says:



The more power the bigger the explosion?

What Kinda crap is that? Look, as a kid, I used to deliberately make bombs. I also know that if you put a hole, regardless of the type of material of the casing or the amount of explosive, the bomb won’t explode but just fizzle like a bottle rocket. If built correctly there’s not even a chance of fire.

Maybe me and this battery guy should get together…he designs the battery, I design the housing.

One caveat, the housings need to be made of metal or non flammable material.

Anonymous Coward says:

Batteries are up against physical limits. Chemistry allows a maximum energy density of a few kJ/moles – more than that and the bonds start breaking, often explosively. Batteries, flywheels, little springs; they all have this same limit.

Energy can be stored in electric and magnetic fields – capaictors and inductois – but doing this produces pressures proportional to the energy density. You can’t do much better than batteries this way without producing pressures high enough to shatter any possible material, because of the limited strength of chemical bonds.

The only feasible way to do significantly better is to go nuclear. Use radioactive istopes as your power source and can achieve energy densities of several MJ/mole – a thousandfold improvement on chemistry.

However, I suspect radioactive batteries would met considerable consumer resistance, even if they allowed laptops to run for five years without recharging.

Lay Person says:

Re: #19

Yeah but then with nuclear you not only burn down your house but the city as well.

Then that’s not even considering the fallout.

Seriously, I remember reading somewhere where some manufacturer had a hydrogen cell about the size of a pen light. You fill it with butane and it converts hydrogen in the butane to electricity. They already have a working model.

Here is an excerpt:

“Motorola announced that it has demonstrated a prototype of a fuel cell powered by methane gas. The company said it could be used for any portable electronic device. It should provide power to a cellphone for a month between charges.

The fuel cell is slightly bigger than a typical cellphone battery. It contains a chemical reactor that releases oxygen, heat, and electricity. The cell can power the device directly, but in Motorola’s design it keeps another battery charged. This would keep the power supply constant, similar to a UPS for a computer.

Motorola joins others such as Sony and NEC in the consumer electronics industry in the quest for better portable power sources. Methane power has multiple advantages. It is plentiful and cheap and can even be obtained from renewable resources. It is also easily compressed from a gas to a transportable liquid.

The industry feels that the engineering concept is now proven and all that remains is to design and engineer the mass production capability that will be required. Production is two to four years away.”

Anonymous Coward says:

… with nuclear you not only burn down your house but the city as well. – not possible, nuclear batteries don’t contain minature nuclear reactors, merely radioactive isotopes like those that naturally occur in your body. However, this is just the kind of scaremongering that would slow the take-up of that solution.

Hydrogen is not a significant improvement on current batteries. It may be environmentally cleaner, but you can only get a few hundred KJ/gram out of it, in a tradeoff between power and lifespan. Nuclear is a thousand times better.

Add Your Comment

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Have a Techdirt Account? Sign in now. Want one? Register here

Comment Options:

Make this the or (get credits or sign in to see balance) what's this?

What's this?

Techdirt community members with Techdirt Credits can spotlight a comment as either the "First Word" or "Last Word" on a particular comment thread. Credits can be purchased at the Techdirt Insider Shop »

Follow Techdirt

Techdirt Daily Newsletter

Techdirt Deals
Techdirt Insider Discord
The latest chatter on the Techdirt Insider Discord channel...