• Quick note - the problem with Youtube videos not embedding on the forum appears to have been fixed, thanks to ZiprHead. If you do still see problems let me know.

Batteries ?

El Greco

Summer worshipper
El Greco
Joined
Nov 11, 2003
Messages
17,604
I like batteries. I find the idea of portable energy fascinating. So, I am not very happy with what I perceive to be a lack of significant evolution in the technology of batteries. Shouldn't we have by now batteries for cell phones that could easily last for a month with heavy use ? Why do I have to get a second battery for my digital camera if I spend a day outdoors ? Not to mention that everything with a moter literally devours batteries. I see significant advances in miniaturization, yet the energy to weight ratio for batteries doesn't seem to have improved much during the last 10 years or so. Why is that ? Are there any recent advances that may boost this technology ?
 
Yes, there have been many recent improvements in power supply technology, and it is expected that there will be many more.

Perhaps one of the most interesting technologies is the high-capacity capacitor, which stores a very large amount of energy and charges very quickly. Some are some who suggest that high-capacity capacitors will blur the line between conventional capacitors (which charge quickly but don't store much energy) and rechargeable batteries (which store a lot of energy but take a long time to charge).
 
I asked Santa for a high temperature superconductor gigawatt storage loop for Christmas. It's in the mail.

As frustrating as the lack of battery progress is the growing number of portable devices with recharger / mains power supplies- all different output voltages and all weighing three times as much as the "pocket sized ultra light" device they power.
 
I fly battery-powered model planes. Battery technology has come on a lot in the last ten years. The latest Lithium Polymer cells have a pretty amazing energy density, compared to the Nickel Cadmium cells of a few years ago.

Soon, we will have small fuel cells, for powering tools, cameras, phones and the like. All a fuel cell does is separate the chemical storage part of the battery from the chemical reaction part, so you can have a 'battery' (fuel cell) with the desired power rating, and have any amount of energy rating, by fitting it with a bigger fuel tank.

Most fuel cells still use hydrogen as the fuel, but there are experimental versions that use methane, and methanol. So you will be able to recharge your camera or phone, almost instantly, from a gas canister, or a bottle of methanol.
 
Simple math: Ni-Ca. cell 4-5 years ago = 500-600 MAH (Milli Ampére Hours - tells something about how long the cell stays charged)
Latest cell i bought is 2000+ MAH, that is some improvement AND the latest cells i bought was cheap, very cheap. One 1,2V cell, back then costed more than 4 cells + a charger costs today.:D
 
I'm using a pair of AA (penlight) Eveready Energiser rechargables (NiMH) in the digital camera, and they last a real long time on one charge - enough to fill a 64MB card with flash photos anyway (about 170 of them). They are rated at 1.2V 1850mAh.

This is WAY MORE COOL than the standard AA alkalines, which rarely lasted more than about 10 such pics. So the rechargables have already paid for themselves. Thank you, Eveready of Cleveland OH.

I have a second set of AA's kept charged, and when the ones in the camera run down, I just swap and recharge the dead ones. Too simple, works like a charm.
 
Remember the old "cars vs computers" joke? Well the advance rates in computers and other electronics often lead us to expect similar advance rates in other fields, but batteries are chemistry, and while they have improved quite a lot recently, we are talking single-digit factors, not the million time improvements seen in computers.

Hans
 
My mobile phone batteries are a lot lighter and noticeably longer-lasting than the ones I had with my original mobile phone acquired 10 years ago.

My current notebook computer batteries are a lot smaller and noticeably longer-lasting than the ones I had with my original notebook computer acquired 11 years ago.

I'd still like to see further improvement, but the fact is I can now carry my phone in my hip pocket and not notice it's there even when I sit down, and I can use my 'puter for over 4 hours without needing to plug it in, rather than just over an hour. Both sets of circumstances make my life significantly easier.

Rolfe.
 
Its the old traffic congestion problem. As in, how come there are now 6 lane highways, but the jams are worse?

My guess is that you could have a phone that only needs charging once a month, but you would have to go without the snazzy LCD colour screen, sound capabilities, some of the transmission power, increase its size back to the luggable bricks we used to carry (you forgot about that didn't you?) etc.

The truth is that battery technology has advance considerably. It is just that we want to use the additional output in ways other than increased longevity of current.
 
2.5 years later I still don't see much progress. Newer cellphones need recharging every 1-2 days while older ones (2-3 years ago) could go 6-7 days without recharging (that's when they are simply on standby, without using features like cameras or mp3 playing). The greater energy consumption can probably be attributed to larger screens with more colors, but the batteries seem to have remained stagnant. Same goes for cameras, video-cameras and laptops.
 
El Greco said:
2.5 years later I still don't see much progress. Newer cellphones need recharging every 1-2 days while older ones (2-3 years ago) could go 6-7 days without recharging
Click to expand...

Haven't noticed that. My brand new phone has the same the battery life as the old one, while the battery is smaller and lighter.

(that's when they are simply on standby, without using features like cameras or mp3 playing).
Click to expand...

All those extra gizmos cost power, even on standby.

The greater energy consumption can probably be attributed to larger screens with more colors, but the batteries seem to have remained stagnant. Same goes for cameras, video-cameras and laptops.
Click to expand...

As I say, I have not noticed battery life shortening. Perhaps you are using the phone more, or you are using it in an area with poorer signal coverage. ... Or you just happen to have a crappy battery.

Hans
 
El Greco said:
I like batteries. I find the idea of portable energy fascinating. So, I am not very happy with what I perceive to be a lack of significant evolution in the technology of batteries. Shouldn't we have by now batteries for cell phones that could easily last for a month with heavy use ? Why do I have to get a second battery for my digital camera if I spend a day outdoors ? Not to mention that everything with a moter literally devours batteries. I see significant advances in miniaturization, yet the energy to weight ratio for batteries doesn't seem to have improved much during the last 10 years or so. Why is that ? Are there any recent advances that may boost this technology ?
Click to expand...

battery technology is at the forefront of chemestry, and last I heard, was more advanced than much of modern chemestry. Li Poly batteries being an especially incredible development. battery technology isn't going to get much better without a signifigant advance in chemestry itself, and is going to be the limiting factor in technology until something else comes along.

My money is on ultracapacitors, but I've always liked those micro combustion engines. at least as a curiosoty that is. I've seen other sited that go into more detail on the wankel style ones.
 
I'd say batteries, at least for small devices, are doing fine. The first digital camera I saw took 320x240 pixel (or so) images, was slow, had no zoom, and took 4 AA alkaline batteries (which didn't last long).

My latest camera (smaller than a 35mm point and shoot) has physical zoom (motors eat power), flash, works much faster and for much longer. On 2 AA Lithium Ion batteries that cost less than an hour's wage.

We ask the devices to do far more, and they do, with approximately the same (or less) volume used by the batteries.

I'd say we're doing ok.

(P.S. Wait for the cool polymer ones that can be arbitrary shapes... fun!)
 
My first cell phone was from about 10 years ago. It had a battery more than twice the size of a modern cell phone, it took over 12 hours to fully charge and would only last 4 hours stand by or 45 minutes talk time. Plus, you couldn't recharge and talk at the same time.

Batteries have improved, just not at the same rate as electronics.
 
El Greco on December 29th said:
I like batteries. I find the idea of portable energy fascinating. So, I am not very happy with what I perceive to be a lack of significant evolution in the technology of batteries. Shouldn't we have by now batteries for cell phones that could easily last for a month with heavy use ? Why do I have to get a second battery for my digital camera if I spend a day outdoors ? Not to mention that everything with a moter literally devours batteries. I see significant advances in miniaturization, yet the energy to weight ratio for batteries doesn't seem to have improved much during the last 10 years or so. Why is that ? Are there any recent advances that may boost this technology ?
Click to expand...

El Greco on June 13th said:
2.5 years later . . .
Click to expand...
I vote El Greco as the Forum's Most Patient Poster.

I think batteries in general have come a long way of the past few decades, but what really irks me are electrical devics with built-in NON-REPLACEABLE rechargable batteries like powered screwdrivers and mini-vacuum cleaners wherein you have to toss the device once the batteries no longer hold a charge.
 
Cut 'em open and splice in a new Nimh, if it's a standard size. My gripe is rather with specifically shaped Lithium cells that can only be replaced from the equipment manufacturer at high markup.
I do wish some standardisation could be achieved in power supplies for portable devices, so all d-cams, laptops, etc used a combination of standard cells as was the case for flashlights and radios.

I suppose there will come a point with portable power storage where storage becomes high enough and maximum discharge rate fast enough to turn the battery into a bomb, at which point Homeland Security will ban them and laptops will start coming with a hand cranked generator.

Actually- as this has been done for radios, why not for other portable electronics? How much cranking is required to run a laptop for an hour?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top Bottom