Technology
This is the official technology community of Lemmy.ml for all news related to creation and use of technology, and to facilitate civil, meaningful discussion around it.
Ask in DM before posting product reviews or ads. All such posts otherwise are subject to removal.
Rules:
1: All Lemmy rules apply
2: Do not post low effort posts
3: NEVER post naziped*gore stuff
4: Always post article URLs or their archived version URLs as sources, NOT screenshots. Help the blind users.
5: personal rants of Big Tech CEOs like Elon Musk are unwelcome (does not include posts about their companies affecting wide range of people)
6: no advertisement posts unless verified as legitimate and non-exploitative/non-consumerist
7: crypto related posts, unless essential, are disallowed
view the rest of the comments
I didn't see it in the article, but do they have a comparison in terms of energy density vs alternatives? What niche are they trying to fill?
Environmentally friendly batteries are exciting, just trying to gauge how excited I should be.
I wonder how big it is to physically deliver (only) 1.25 V at a capacity of 110 mAh. This won’t be powering much of anything in the near term. Also I’d be curious, as they claim it being water and organic matter based, if we could just “drain” the existing battery quickly and load in new pre-charged fluid to quickly recharge (I.e. recharge an EV as quickly as a gasoline based vehicle).
110 mAh/g * 1.25 V * 1000 g/kg = 137 Wh/kg.
Lithium ion is around 250 Wh/kg, so this battery is around twice as heavy.
Seems like a decent option for stationary energy storage then.