11–20 of 89 posts
For context a number of surface area improvements in Lithium-Ion anodes have failed at scale due to the creation of lithium dendrites (metal 'wires' that grow during recharge) which have either rendered large sections of the anode worthless and reduced the capacity of the battery, or created rapid exothermic reactions (aka fires) in the battery.
To be clear: high power density, but similar energy density to current batteries.
This is a classic case of a submission title taking liberties with the meaning of the article it links. This submission's title: "New lithium-ion battery 2000 times more powerful, recharges 1000 times faster" The actual title: "New lithium-ion battery design that’s 2,000 times more powerful, recharges 1,000 times faster" The missing word is "design", a word that is crucial to the meaning of the article. The article d…
> So far, the researchers have used this tech to create a button-sized microbattery, and you can see in the graph below how well their battery compares to a conventional Sony CR1620 button cell. That sounds like a battery to me. The new design has actually been built and tested. The quote you pulled out refers to scaling it up to things like lasers and F1 cars. A button-sized battery sounds fine for a lot of electron…
Yield probably is low, and the current process will likely be way too labour intensive.
"The energy and power density of our microbattery cells (A–H) at low to high C rates, along with previous microbattery cells having 3D electrodes (MB1 through MB3). The plot also includes the performance range of conventional power technologies and commercial batteries from A123 (high power) and Sony (high energy)."
Where C rates stand for charge rates, with 1C being able to charge the full capacity of the battery in 1 hour.
The key take away for the new design's performance isn't the one quoted in the title (of the submission or the article), but rather "Compared with conventional supercapacitors, our microbattery delivers 10 × the power of a supercapacitor at comparable energy density, delivers 10 × the energy of a supercapacitor at comparable power density or has 10 × smaller volume than a supercapacitor at comparable performance".
Just by glancing at the graph, you can see that the design is orders of magnitudes less energy dense than today's lithium-ion batteries. This advancement will make high-power applications more feasible, but will probably not do very much to increase your phone/laptop's battery life.
To be clear: high power density, but similar energy density to current batteries.
At some level, it doesn't make too much sense to go that much higher in the power (which I'm assuming is the same as discharge rate, since voltage is fixed). Current lipoly batteries are rated at 30C (Amps per watt*hour). Essentially this means that the battery can be fully discharged in a minimum of two minutes. It doesn't seem like there are that many applications that require higher power output.
To be clear: high power density, but similar energy density to current batteries.
At some level, it doesn't make too much sense to go that much higher in the power (which I'm assuming is the same as discharge rate, since voltage is fixed). Current lipoly batteries are rated at 30C (Amps per watt*hour). Essentially this means that the battery can be fully discharged in a minimum of two minutes. It doesn't seem like there are that many applications that require higher power output.
Ah here we go: http://xkcd.com/678/
Earlier quoted context omitted.
If HN would not force you to reduce titles to The original is 95 characters. "design that’s " and two comma's in the numbers get dropped and we're down to exactly 78. Dropping words from a title in order to fit the 80 char limit is a bit of an art if you don't want to change the meaning, and making a new title is frowned upon because then you care not using the original title. Effectively you can't post an article wi…
"New lithium-ion battery design 2000x more powerful, recharges 1000x faster" fits with out altering the meaning at all.
GGP says
> copy the article's title, do not invent your own.
Unfortunately you can't always do that. Dropping words is one technique to shorten the title, rewriting it is another, both techniques are employed.