New battery said to last decades

[5614]

We all know there's been a long wait for a new, vastly improved battery that could potentially revolutionise electronics by supplying higher currents for vastly longer periods, well now that may have come closer to reality...

 

News article here: http://www.world-science.net/othernews/050513_batteryfrm.htm

The gas tritium, used in the newly developed batteries, is an isotope, or variant, of hydrogen. It consists of two neutrons, a proton and an electron. Because of its radioactivity, one of the neutrons quickly releases an additional electron[/b'], turning itself into a proton in the process. The released electrons can be harnessed to create an electric current.

 

This is a process know as betavoltaics and has been around for a long time, however it produced very low current because many of the electrons produced were released at random angles and missed the 'electron-collecting-surface'.

 

In the new design silicon (the 'electron-collecting-surface') has been made with pits and inside each pit is the radioactive gas, due to the gas being inside the pits far, far more electrons are captured and thus more current is produced.

[H2SO4]

its absolutely ingenius ( the thought of using nuclear decay to generate electricity).

[Insane]

The real question is, Can it power a Gameboy? (obviously not, just a cool idea)

[RedAlert]

The real question is, Can it power a Gameboy? (obviously not, just a cool idea)

 

I am sure that the more research that is done, the smaller the batteries will become. This is absolutely awesome!

[akcapr]

if they are gonna use it in pace makers like they said, it would kinda suck if any of that radiation leaked

[blike]

Unfortunately, as pointed out on slashdot, people are afraid of the word nuclear.

[RICHARDBATTY]

Did they give any ideas on physical size and weight. I think any one who uses note books would love this. They seem to be restricting it to medical or space exploration, this may mean the costs are very but they also mention using current technology and production methods. Have any projections on cost been given any where. I want one.

[aaronmyung]

This wont make space travel or anything any easier will it?

[5614]

umm, NO! It's just a new revolutionary battery.

 

Just like the normal Duracell stuff you get in shops, just a bit 'bigger and better' in that it can supply energy for significantly longer time periods.

[mmalluck]

I want a nuclear-powered-atomic-watch! It might sound redundant, but it's not. We just use Cs for both the power source and the oscillator.

 

This wont make space travel or anything any easier will it?

 

They already use nuclear batteries in deep space satellites (Voyager) because they can't use solar panels because they're so far away.

 

These batteries are just more efficient as compared to the old way they were manufactured.

 

Unfortunately, as pointed out on slashdot, people are afraid of the word nuclear.

 

Yeah, that is very true. I don't think we'll see this technology out on the consumer markets for several other reasons as well:

 

There's laws on the books in the US that make the frivolous use of nuclear material illegal. Otherwise we'd have cool things like trasers here in the US.

 

There's the question of what to do with a slightly radioactive used up batteries.

 

There is also the fact that most high-technology devices are manufactured with a projected lifespan around 18 months (IE you don't need the battery in your cell phone or laptop to last decades if you're going to be buying a new one in a year or two).

[ed84c]

Reveloutionary? What took them so long? I thought of the same idea (exept using Uranium) during a physics lesson i had once of Radioactive Decay.

[-Demosthenes-]

These Beta particals, how dangerous are they. I know they can be blocked by thick clothing, or glass, usually, but what can it do to human tissue? It doesn't seem like it would be too dangerous, what about cancer concerns??

[ed84c]

they IONISE things, thats bad.

 

They can ionise chemicals in DNA, causing cancer, as the chemicals do wierd things.

 

BTW i think these batteries of for nuclear bunkers and the like, not your gameboy demos.

[swansont]

They already use nuclear batteries in deep space satellites (Voyager) because they can't use solar panels because they're so far away.

 

 

Different technology, though. RTG - radioisotope thermoelectric generator. It uses the heat of decay and thermocuples create the potential difference to drive a current.

[Redrang604]

The battery in question uses tritium, the particles are not terribly energetic. They are weak enough that a simple metal case (similar to that of current batteries) can make them suitable for such uses as pacemaker batteries.

[mmalluck]

Wikipedia says that the radiation given off by tritium isn't even strong enough to penitrate the skin and for the most part is safe. You just shouldn't breath it or eat it. Only then it may cause you problems.

[swansont]

Wikipedia says that the radiation given off by tritium isn't even strong enough to penitrate the skin and for the most part is safe. You just shouldn't breath it or eat it. Only then it may cause you problems.

 

Tritium decay is of sufficiently low energy that there is no photon that accompanies it. The beta is contained, and nobody cares about the antineutrino.

[JohnB]

Try a google for "nucell", I heard about this type of battery in the late 1980s. The nucell used Strontium 90 as the alpha and beta generator and produced AC current.

[swansont]

Try a google for "nucell", I heard about this type of battery in the late 1980s. The nucell used Strontium 90 as the alpha and beta generator and produced AC current.

 

I did, and I have to call BS on this. Can you post a link to anyone who has a working device, anywhere, in use?

 

Sr-90 does not alpha decay, and neither does its daughter in the decay process, Y-90. That is the least of the problems.

 

The claim here is that the battery would produce 7500 W per g of Sr-90. That's some trick, considering that the decay to stability (Sr-> Y -> Zr, all betas) releases about 2.8 MeV of energy (.546 MeV for Sr, and 2.28 MeV for Y), and that the total power you could get (assuming 100% efficiency) is about 2.3 W per gram.

 

The rest of the explanation in the link is perpetual motion/quantum snake oil mumbo-jumo.

 

This link explains how Brown's company had been sued for fraud. Nobody could come up with a working device.

 

I'm shocked, shocked to find gambling going on in this establishment.

[JohnB]

Swansont, I'll have to accept your professional opinion. (I'm not inclined to doubt you and even if I did, I'm really not knowledgable enough in the area to debate you. )

 

I heard about nucell back in the 80s and never really kept up with it. The idea behind the two devices does seem similar to me though.

 

I must admit though, I wasn't that impressed by the other link. It sounded more like an opinion piece than anything else. The writer quotes the same figures you do, but aside from that it's full of "I think...", "It seems...." and "I believe....". By itself, not a particularly convincing piece.

 

Unfortunately for many I'm not the usual type of sceptic, I expect both sides to prove their arguments, that piece fails to do so.

[spamonkey8]

There is also the fact that most high-technology devices are manufactured with a projected lifespan around 18 months (IE you don't need the battery in your cell phone or laptop to last decades if you're going to be buying a new one in a year or two).

 

Don't forget that it's half life is 12 years. I don't know exactly how much the average LiIon battery's voltage can drop before it won't power the laptop, but I'd guess half voltage would cause problems. What that boils down to is that a 12 year half-life may only translate into a measly 4 year battery. Wait... Energizer's about to go out of business!

[YT2095]

the bit I find totaly astonishing is the AC current claim, I`de go so far as to say it`s Impossible without moving parts or support electronics. No Seriously, I`de say Impossible!

[mmalluck]

Don't forget that it's half life is 12 years. I don't know exactly how much the average LiIon battery's voltage can drop before it won't power the laptop, but I'd guess half voltage would cause problems. What that boils down to is that a 12 year half-life may only translate into a measly 4 year battery. Wait... Energizer's about to go out of business!

 

The voltage the nuclear battery can output will remain at the same level as long as there's material breaking down. Electrons released by the breakdown of tritium have an average energy content of 6.5KeV. If one atom or a million atoms of tritum break down at the same time, we'll still see 6.5kv across the output of the battery. The maxium current the battery can substain will fall as the battery ages (Fewer atoms of tritum decaying ->less electrons moving -> less current).

 

Now considering the average energy of electrons given off by tritium is 6.5KeV, there will be some kind of transformer built into the battery or the device to drop this voltage down to a level used in today's electronics.

 

I like the idea of a little battery that can shock the bejesus out of you.

[Severian]

These Beta particals, how dangerous are they. I know they can be blocked by thick clothing, or glass, usually, but what can it do to human tissue? It doesn't seem like it would be too dangerous, what about cancer concerns??

 

A layer of tin foil is enough to block beta particles (which are themselves electrons), so they are no more danergous than normal batteries.

[Severian]

Don't forget that it's half life is 12 years. I don't know exactly how much the average LiIon battery's voltage can drop before it won't power the laptop, but I'd guess half voltage would cause problems. What that boils down to is that a 12 year half-life may only translate into a measly 4 year battery. Wait... Energizer's about to go out of business!

 

If the voltage is proportional to the decay rate, then it will drop exponentially!