By Anonymous CowardPosted Tuesday 7th October 2008 16:12 GMT
Where are the Lithium Sulpher batteries for laptops? These are cheaper (material cost) than Li-Ion and claims have been made about a density of from 300-1000% greater. Which is better than a measly 30% of Zinc Silver.
By IshkandarPosted Tuesday 7th October 2008 20:01 GMT
More likely still is when a third party battery maker like GP (Gold Peak) will make them for the various laptops already in the market !! They already make replacement batteries for most mobile phone that retail for a lot less than the equivalent branded ones !!
BTW, I must state categorically that I do not own shares in GP although I wish I did !!
By Anonymous CowardPosted Wednesday 8th October 2008 04:35 GMT
... Governments fund competitions and technology demosntration projects to push these things along? I mean, they'll happily give billions in subsidies to fossil fuel companies, so how about funding development/demonstrators/competitions for this kind of technology (and, while they're at it, solar, wind, geothermal, tidal, wave, etc.)?
By ParaxPosted Wednesday 8th October 2008 08:01 GMT
They should put there money where thier mouth is and offer a warranty on the batteries! that should be enough to convince manufacturers they are serious..
By Anonymous CowardPosted Wednesday 8th October 2008 08:35 GMT
Good idea on these batteries... Replace the dangerous lithium. Just one problem - they can give off hydrogen - possibly even more dangerous than lithium. So we substitute one problem for another...
By Anonymous CowardPosted Wednesday 8th October 2008 10:15 GMT
But this battery isn't an energy production technology; its energy storage. This is only good for the environment if you have a cheap, green way of generating enough electricity in the first place.
I agree something should be done to promote technologies like this, maybe evaluate for military and other government applications where there's plenty of money available to support the R&D and a nice user base that can get it into mass production, perhaps in return a cut of the license fee for the technology. Above all we need to prevent the suppression of new technologies by their competitors.
By Anonymous CowardPosted Wednesday 8th October 2008 18:13 GMT
Not wanting to start a flame war (no, really) .... but I never said they were energy production.
One of the "obstacles" often quoted by renewable energy naysayers is storage and portability (usually of electrical energy). Hence, if energy storage and portability technologies are improved - basically density (joule/kg), cost ($/joule) and scaleable form-factor - then using renewable sources becomes that much easier.
My main point is that Governments are happy to continue to subsidise (to the tune of billions) the use of fossil fuels - how about diverting some or all of that to a whole range of R&D, technology demonstrators and competitions to push these technologies along, particularly to "prove" to potential downstream manufacturers and users (who might otherwise be reluctant) how good they can really be.
Comments on: Lithium-ion battery beater to debut in 'major' laptop release
If its so good #
By evilbobthebob Posted Tuesday 7th October 2008 15:27 GMT
So this new battery tech will be called... #
By Big_Boomer Posted Tuesday 7th October 2008 15:36 GMT
sounds good #
By Anonymous Coward Posted Tuesday 7th October 2008 16:07 GMT
LiS #
By Anonymous Coward Posted Tuesday 7th October 2008 16:12 GMT
Apparently the name "AgZn" is already in use #
By Anonymous Coward Posted Tuesday 7th October 2008 16:14 GMT
energy density? #
By Anonymous Coward Posted Tuesday 7th October 2008 16:50 GMT
Inflammable. #
By DeFex Posted Tuesday 7th October 2008 16:56 GMT
Silver Ion #
By Anonymous Coward Posted Tuesday 7th October 2008 18:32 GMT
nitpick alert #
By bandor Posted Tuesday 7th October 2008 18:58 GMT
LiS #
By David Lloyd Posted Tuesday 7th October 2008 19:54 GMT
I stand corrected re. LiS #
By David Lloyd Posted Tuesday 7th October 2008 19:59 GMT
@evilbobthebob #
By Ishkandar Posted Tuesday 7th October 2008 20:01 GMT
Contains water #
By Rich Posted Tuesday 7th October 2008 20:22 GMT
And the downside is #
By Adrian Posted Tuesday 7th October 2008 21:20 GMT
That than #
By Hate2Register Posted Tuesday 7th October 2008 21:34 GMT
Technology name #
By Neoc Posted Wednesday 8th October 2008 04:06 GMT
How about ... #
By Anonymous Coward Posted Wednesday 8th October 2008 04:35 GMT
Usual Suspects.. #
By Anonymous Coward Posted Wednesday 8th October 2008 07:49 GMT
If its so Good.. #
By Parax Posted Wednesday 8th October 2008 08:01 GMT
Hydrogen/Mercury #
By Anonymous Coward Posted Wednesday 8th October 2008 08:35 GMT
@Parax #
By Edward Rose Posted Wednesday 8th October 2008 10:07 GMT
re. How about ... #
By Anonymous Coward Posted Wednesday 8th October 2008 10:15 GMT
Re: re: How about ... #
By Anonymous Coward Posted Wednesday 8th October 2008 18:13 GMT