Are there any alternatives for batteries?

[Shadow-Shocker]

Does anyone know if there are any substances that can be used/made into a substitute for a battery?

 

[DaveC426913]

There are lots of ways to store energy. Loosely speaking, they can all be considered batteries, inasmuch as they store energy. An internal combustion engine stores potential energy in the form of chemistry, which can be liberated to produce useful mechanical or electrical energy.

I think what you're asking is are there any alternatives to (dry cell batteries, wet cells or ... metal) for storing electricity.

The problem you're going to run into is energy density. Our current batteries are so popular because they are at the pinnacle of energy density, especially considering their size. You may produce an alternate way of storing electricity, but if you find one that can store as much electricity as our current cells, you'll be a rich man.

 

[David Lewis]

Large value capacitors are sometimes substituted for voltaic cells, e.g. where weight is critical.

 

[DocWonder]

recent developments into supercapacitors have proven as much as 26kw per kg which is getting closer to where many would like them to be. I believe this example was nitrogen doped graphene. The benefits of capacitors are there rapid discharge and recharge rate, however their down fall is voltage regulation and discharge efficiency. In other words yes there are many substances that can replace a battery but none are as good. technically a lemon, onion, or potato could be used to replace a battery and aluminum foil and paper could be used to replace a capacitor, but now we are just getting into semantics.

 

[CWatters]

Shadow-Shocker...What's the problem with using a battery?

 

[sophiecentaur]

Shadow-Shocker...What's the problem with using a battery?

That's my gut reaction, too but the thing that makes me react against Capacitor storage is the drooping voltage and that could be a worry of the past with switch mode becoming cheap and powerful.

 

[CWatters]

Ultra capacitors used to power buses (2009)...

 

[Shadow-Shocker]

Large value capacitors are sometimes substituted for voltaic cells, e.g. where weight is critical.

Shadow-Shocker...What's the problem with using a battery?

The problem with batteries is that they eventually die out due to conventional current. I want to find an alternative form of energy that lasts longer, since the project I am doing will always be turned on, and I am looking for a much higher dense form of energy that will last for years. The battery that will fit within my project, structure wise, is a 9V battery. I was looking at graphene/carbon nanotube substances, since they are capable of being put on a piece of paper and have a crap ton of conductivity. However, those substances cannot be used as a power supply only as a capacitor. The question is, are there any forms of highly condense energy that are tangible/mobile?

 

[sophiecentaur]

are there any forms of highly condense energy that are tangible/mobile?

Old fashioned fuels do a pretty good job and the engines are cheap. Still a good solution for some applications; you need to do the precise sums for a proper evaluation. If you want a result, it's not always best to get too fond of a particular solution.

 

[Shadow-Shocker]

Old fashioned fuels do a pretty good job and the engines are cheap. Still a good solution for some applications; you need to do the precise sums for a proper evaluation. If you want a result, it's not always best to get too fond of a particular solution.

What about clean alternative solutions?

 

[sophiecentaur]

What about clean alternative solutions?

That's a valid question but you could consider how much real impact a simple 'dirty' solution could be, compared with an expensive, hi tech solution that may have had all sorts of impact on the environment before you bought it. There's a lot of snake oil associated with some of the 'clean' uses of energy and it's important to do a lot of sums before concluding the absolute level of cleanliness of a solution.

 

[CWatters]

Reduce the consumption of the device? Some smoke alarm batteries last 10 years due to their low power consumption.

 

[Shadow-Shocker]

Reduce the consumption of the device? Some smoke alarm batteries last 10 years due to their low power consumption.

What about alternating current solutions, they reduce significant amounts of energy compared to direct current? How can we apply that for a battery?

 

[CWatters]

As I recall the standard 9V consumer battery has a low energy density compared to other cells because it contains six 1.5V cells each with its own case. Better to design for a single Lithium cell?

 

[CWatters]

Perhaps worth pointing out that it takes quite a lot of time and effort to get a factor of two improvement in battery energy density. If you want better than current Lithium cells you may have to wait 5-10 years for them to become commercially available.

 

[Shadow-Shocker]

Perhaps worth pointing out that it takes quite a lot of time and effort to get a factor of two improvement in battery energy density. If you want better than current Lithium cells you may have to wait 5-10 years for them to become commercially available.

Or hell, we can start making better ones instead of waiting.

 

[DaveC426913]

Or hell, we can start making better ones instead of waiting.

This doesn't make sense.
You can bet that a better battery has the attention of a LOT of tech companies. Do you think they're just sitting on their laurels and reaping dividends?
5-10 years is how long it will take the best in the world to make them.

 

[Shadow-Shocker]

This doesn't make sense.
You can bet that a better battery has the attention of a LOT of tech companies. Do you think they're just sitting on their laurels and reaping dividends?
5-10 years is how long it will take the best in the world to make them.

Just making an funny/encouraging statement.

 

[DaveC426913]

Oh.

 

[russ_watters]

The problem with batteries is that they eventually die out due to conventional current. I want to find an alternative form of energy that lasts longer, since the project I am doing will always be turned on, and I am looking for a much higher dense form of energy that will last for years. The battery that will fit within my project, structure wise, is a 9V battery.

Exactly how much energy does it need?

What about alternating current solutions, they reduce significant amounts of energy compared to direct current?

No, they don't.

 

[Shadow-Shocker]

Exactly how much energy does it need?

Enough to keep a 6V motor moving forever, or for a really long time.

 

[Shadow-Shocker]

No, they don't.

Just thinking of ideas

 

[russ_watters]

Enough to keep a 6V motor moving forever, or for a really long time.

Well, "forever" would be an infinite amount of energy and since a volt is not a unit of energy and "a really long time" is undefined, I'll say you need 47 and suggest powering it with purple.

Just thinking of ideas

Well, no offense, but this is a serious forum and if you intend for this to be a serious idea and want real help, you need to take it more seriously.

 

[Shadow-Shocker]

Well, no offense, but this is a serious forum and if you intend for this to be a serious idea and want real help, you need to take it more seriously.

Im sorry, but on this forum I have come in contact with a bit of a problem. This field of electrical engineering is relatively new to me, and I have taken a bit offense to your assumption, although it wasn't your intention to as stated. Now, correct me if I may be wrong, but we can both agree that we want a serious forum that encourages people with different viewpoints to think freely and to share their ideas on this forum to build upon discussion not discouragement. As Staff member on this forum, from your experience, you can understand that we as people continue to grow and learn from one another and to help each other grow we must not discourage people from knowing the truth. I am taking this forum seriously, one can see I am continuing to ask questions to encourage discussion, but in the future, would it be alright if you can make sure no discouraging comments come on this forum so people can elaborate more in discussions?

 

[Thewindyfan]

There's no point to tell you that you had a 'great idea' if that idea doesn't get you anywhere. We're here to help you with challenges, not to make you feel like you can already do them if you truly can't.

Don't take offense to this please, and get back to the main subject. I'm very interested into how this discussion will further progress, though I currently do not have the adequate knowledge required to even assist you with this challenge.

By all means though if you believe that great idea pertains to your challenge but others don't see it that way, try looking into that idea yourself before asking others what they think about said idea. :)

 

[DocWonder]

OK, so battery companies have already produced amazing results in metamaterials and synthetics especially with graphene doping and lithium ion tech, however many are too expensive for mass production. If you are looking to have a major source of reliable energy with minimal depletion and highly condensed it is already available but not cheap... Nuclear

 

[DocWonder]

Oh and on a separate note, to solve the problem you are working on, first you must set parameters, like a finite amount of time and an amperage. If you have a low draw of current solar or kinetic generators could direct drive the motor while in use the charge the battery while not in use.

 

[NascentOxygen]

Does anyone know if there are any substances that can be used/made into a substitute for a battery?

Minature fuel cells powered by a few drops of methanol hold promise, but turning research devices into cheap mass-market products is staying tantalizingly just out of reach. http://www.techradar.com/au/news/world-of-tech/whatever-happened-to-mobile-fuel-cells-718317

 

[russ_watters]

Im sorry, but...

C'mon, you're really in need of tough love and we can be extraordinarily helpful if you help us help you. Nowhere in there did you address the problem I highlighted. So do you want false encouragement or do you want real help?

 

[CWatters]

As I understand it one of the big challenges with new battery tech is the fragility or the electrodes. To improve capacity they typically need to maximise surface area, perhaps by making them porous, but expansion and contraction during charge cycles cause damage to fine structures. So when you read about any new battery tech look to see if they have also solved the problems of fast charging and life/number of charge cycles.

 

[Shadow-Shocker]

C'mon, you're really in need of tough love and we can be extraordinarily helpful if you help us help you. Nowhere in there did you address the problem I highlighted. So do you want false encouragement or do you want real help?

I am accepting criticism, and I am letting a lot of people help on this discussion. If you don't want to participate on this discussion and go to another one, that is up to you.

 

[russ_watters]

I am accepting criticism, and I am letting a lot of people help on this discussion. If you don't want to participate on this discussion and go to another one, that is up to you.

I was helping/participating: I did ask you a specific question that would be a big help, but you haven't answered it.

 

[CWatters]

I'm with Russ. The question is badly specified. Many wrist watches have "motors" that run for a long time.

 

[DocWonder]

Following the idea of large surface area does anyone know if they have tried graphene aerogel? Or zeolite? It seems to me that the conductance and porosity of graphene aerogel would be a ringer for this.

 

[CWatters]

I believe they have been looking at graphene for some years. If I understand correctly the energy density isn't high enough unless the graphene is compressed and there are problems with just compressing it? I might be wrong/out of date.

 

[DocWonder]

I am not sure but I have seen where they have doped graphene with other atoms like nitrogen or lithium to improve the power storage. As far as compressing graphene (anyone feel free to correct me on this) but you should not be able to compress it at all theoretically, because it is only one atom thick in one direction and in the other direction (of the tube or sheet surface) it can only configure in the natural hexagonal format, which is due to it's electron configuration. This is now bridging into a materials engineering topic, which brings me back to saying nuclear is the way to go! No I am not talking about a nuclear reactor plant or an industrial sized RTG system. A small scale thermopyle encompassing a decent amount of Americium (radioactive material commonly found in household smoke detectors) should be able to supply at least 5watts for 10 years or so. (I am in no way condoning the unauthorized or uneducation handling of radioactive material).

 

[CWatters]

I didn't mean compress it at the atomic level.

 

[That Neuron]

Lately, I've done a lot of research on this and m currently building a portable methanol micro reactor targeting portable electronics.

If you're willing to use a hydrocarbon fuel (2-3.something Wh per ml depending on the efficiency) then Direct Methanol/Ethanol or Direct Borohydride Fuel Cells are the way to go.

The reason that they haven't hit the "big-time" yet is because there are currently problems with their power density (how much energy they can release in the form of electricity per time). When you're trying to fit one in a small electronic device this SUCKS, but if you're not constrained by weight or volume, I recommend it.

Also, in response to the other comments on the lithium batteries, I see the most promising change being the adoption and use of silicon electrodes, with them you can basically make the silicon bind to many more li ions than graphite, and thus store more energy. But there are issues with the Li Metal build up on the actual silicon. Some people are using graphene to cage silicon electrode nanoparticles and are having some success, but I'm not sure how far down the track this is.

I have no idea about radioactive batteries, but I assume they'd work like a super efficient geiger counter??

I'd recommend the DMFC, but it's up to you for your specific application.

 

[Jeff Rosenbury]

Here is the Wikipedia page on energy density. Notice that hydrocarbon solutions are about the best chemical solution for storing energy. These take advantage of "free" oxygen from air. Thus fuel cells are probably the future of consumer electronics (remembering graphene is a hydrocarbon of sorts). They are currently hobbled with technical problems. Until then we have diesel generators.

Beyond that, nuclear cells are a few million times as efficient, but have some serious drawbacks. Still, tritium (³H) gas is relatively safe (relatively, not completely) and has a nice 14 year half-life. A 0.8V, 20 year battery seems to cost about $1,000. At 50 nA, it won't run a large motor (or a small one really).

Another potential source is ¹⁸⁰Tantalum (metastable Tantalum). Tantalum should decay in about 8 hours, but it doesn't because its high nuclear spin keeps it in a metastable state. It has energy density between fission and chemical processes so might be safe if anyone could figure out how to destablize it easily. (About 1% of Tantalum is ¹⁸⁰Tantalum).

 

[zawy]

Metal-air batteries (lithium is one type) can do pretty good, not quite as good as reacting oils with oxygen. The metals release a lot of energy when combined with oxygen, sort of trying to return to their original "ore" state. I think aluminum and zinc are the best candidates. Energy storage technology has had an amazing lack of improvement on a cost/Joule basis. The first self-start cars used lead acid and on a Joule per constant dollar basis a lead acid battery cost the same in the 1930's from the Sears mail order catalog as it does today from Walmart. All the technological advances in mining, world trade, and Walmart efficient distribution were not able to offset the increased cost of energy needed to mine, fabricate, and transport and pollution control regulations. Alkaline AA batteries appear to cost the same today on a constant dollar basis as they did in the 1980s, if not more, and we still normally use them instead of lithium or NiMH.

Supercapacitors can't compete with batteries. There were several companies 10 years ago jumping onto that bandwagon to get funding by making unproven and unphysical claims. EEStor was the one with the most success, sucking $40 M out of equity markets, even from KPCB investors. They had the biggest success because they were the most successful fraud. The fundamental problem with capacitors is that the internal chemical bonds do not change except by being stretched (unless it is a pseudo-capacitor like electrolytics or a graphene-type). A high dielectric constant is the result of the dipoles affecting each other: you apply a voltage and they begin to separate, but by their separation the 2 neighboring dipoles above and below have their opposite attracting charges get closer to the charges of the dipole in the middle, helping pull each other apart. So there is a feedback between the dipoles that is not storing a lot of energy. You can't raise the voltage much because the bonds break. The best (energy storage) capacitors will have a low dielectric constant, nearly as low as air (k=1).

Batteries on the other hand have electrons that cross the plates and go inside the "dielectric", changing the physical bonds. This is why they can't be cycled "forever" like a true capacitor, and why electrolytics are half battery and don't last forever. Graphene type pseudo-capacitors (half battery by my definition of battery) can only do a little bit better on an energy/weight basis than lead-acid and compressed air. The graphene type is a mixture of polarizing the material and letting electrons get inside the "dieletric" to change the bonds right there at the surface (not really entering too far, but not following the ideal capacitor equation exactly either).

 

[anorlunda]

if you want a better battery, there are multiple ways to define better.

kWh/kg
kW/kg
kWh/l
kW/l
kWh/$
kW/$
Charge acceptance rate and efficiency
Lifetime
Operating temperature
Voltage versus charge
Short circuit withstand
Safety and toxicity
Recycleability
Reliability
...blah blah