An interesting article on battery developments: This week in batteries (TWiB): What’s all this hubbub about a Hub?
Graphene foam batteries have been quoted as having similar performance as Lithium, but the charge times are quoted to be as low as 15 minutes, which sounds like a big step forward in usabilityI keep hearing amazing thi gs about graphene and what it can do for batteries. All in the lab though - never in high st
I remember in the early days of Li-polymer Toshiba quoting 3 minutes charge time prospects. But here we are taking 4 hours to charge same.Graphene foam batteries have been quoted as having similar performance as Lithium, but the charge times are quoted to be as low as 15 minutes, which sounds like a big step forward in usability
Oh, I think back to the utterly dreadful pocket-money-robbing experiences I had as a lad with the awful Ever-Ready carbon dry cells and realise the modern NiMh (especially the LSD) is a fantastic bit of gear. We get so used to what we've got we lose sight of how wonderful it is.No research area is so deserving of the "take it with a pinch of salt" comment as batteries and all the claims I've seen over the last 60 years have failed to be realised.
Primary cells are a different thing though, you are comparing chalk with cheese, rechargeable with single use.Oh, I think back to the utterly dreadful pocket-money-robbing experiences I had as a lad with the awful Ever-Ready carbon dry cells and realise the modern NiMh (especially the LSD) is a fantastic bit of gear. We get so used to what we've got we lose sight of how wonderful it is.
Sometimes it's more a matter of physics, and that's particularly true with batteries.I believe it is a matter of political will and resources.
The necessary sciences need to come together under one roof or as they call it a 'hub'. The targets may be difficult to accept or believe but remember that we got a man on the moon in less than 10 years. Such projects need massive commitment; something on the scale of the moon landing or the Manhattan project.
Those who market them will regard the second as an improvement - - - - - - - in profitability!I don't expect the hub to achieve the stated goal but it hopefully may make some major improvements in weight and price.
I'm not comparing chalk with cheese at all. I'm comparing what was available then to what is now and that's all finest cheddar, innit?Primary cells are a different thing though, you are comparing chalk with cheese, rechargeable with single use.
I'm speaking only of secondary cells, i.e. rechargeable.
You are Dave, single use primary cells are a very different technology to rechargeable secondary cells. Whether one or the other wasn't available for a particular use isn't relevant, rechargeable lead-acid was around and that is the relevant secondary cell comparison with NiMh.I'm not comparing chalk with cheese at all. I'm comparing what was available then to what is now and that's all finest cheddar, innit?
Yes, I know what primary and secondary cells are, thank you.You are Dave, single use primary cells are a very different technology to rechargeable secondary cells. Whether one or the other wasn't available for a particular use isn't relevant, rechargeable lead-acid was around and that is the relevant secondary cell comparison with NiMh.
Primary cells have made progress in their own right, the zinc-carbon of yesteryear that you mentioned should be compared with today's alkaline batteries for example, but that progress isn't relevant to rechargeables.