Re: Stanford reports 10x Li-Ion capacity incresee

On Fri, 25 Apr 2008 10:37:56 -0700, John Larkin
<jjlarkin@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:

On Fri, 25 Apr 2008 12:58:13 -0400, Fred Bloggs <nospam@xxxxxxxxxx>
wrote:



John Larkin wrote:
On Fri, 25 Apr 2008 14:57:43 GMT, Glen Walpert <nospam@xxxxxxxxx>
wrote:


http://news-service.stanford.edu/news/2008/january9/nanowire-010908.html
http://www.nature.com/nnano/journal/v3/n1/full/nnano.2007.411.html

Looks like this could be the solution to both capacity and
charge/discharge cycle limitations. Could be the beginning of the end
of the lead acid battery :-).


They inadvertently omitted the mandatory nanotube statements "five to
ten years from commercial products" and "may lead to a cure for cancer
and diabetes."

PR breakthroughs like this have happened approximately daily for the
last eight years or so. So far, I know of no successful nanotube based
products, except maybe selling nanotubes themselves.

John


Nanotubes or nanotechnology? The supercapacitors are enabled by
nanotechnology...

The very same VC parasites who gave us the dot.com/fiberoptics boom (I
could name names) tried hard to start a nanotech boom [1]. They had
nanotech conferences at $400-a-night Peninsula hotels, churned press
releases, started Small Times magazine, and started buying up
(stealing, actually) arguably-nanotech companies. They defined
"nanotech" as "anything small", which allowed them to take credit for
everything from soot to IC's, and somehow managed to get MEMS
included.

The academics cooperated and went crazy for buckyballs and nanotubes.

It didn't work for them, so the VCs have moved on to Web 2.0 or
something.

John

[1] well, I got sucked in, too. That puts me about negative one year
of work, one lawsuit with the Sand Hill vultures, and positive 100,000
shares of worthless stock. Parts were fun.

It can be hard to tell what new ideas will fly, and when. I remember
seeing reports of data storage by burning pits in tellurium thin films
deposited on glass platters back around the early 80's IIRC, and
thinking "no way is that going to evolve into an under $30 DVD/CD-RW
drive that will put an entire 4.5G digital movie on 10 cent media from
the local office supply store in 10 minutes" - or something like that.

Since this one makes enough sense to me that I think it will turn into
a real battery within 10 years enough to bet a beer on it, it probably
has some fundamental flaw yet to be revealed :-).
.

Relevant Pages

  • Re: Stanford reports 10x Li-Ion capacity incresee
    ... ten years from commercial products" and "may lead to a cure for cancer ... except maybe selling nanotubes themselves. ... The supercapacitors are enabled by nanotechnology... ... could name names) tried hard to start a nanotech boom. ...
    (sci.electronics.design)
  • Re: Stanford reports 10x Li-Ion capacity incresee
    ... ten years from commercial products" and "may lead to a cure for cancer ... except maybe selling nanotubes themselves. ... could name names) tried hard to start a nanotech boom. ...
    (sci.electronics.design)
  • Carbon Nanotubes: Overhyped?
    ... I don't understand the incredible hype surrounding carbon nanotubes. ... electronics industry would never have gotten off the ground had ... What's disturbing is that few "nanotech" researchers seem to care about ...
    (sci.physics)
  • Re: Stanford reports 10x Li-Ion capacity incresee
    ... ten years from commercial products" and "may lead to a cure for cancer ... I know of no successful nanotube based ... except maybe selling nanotubes themselves. ... The supercapacitors are enabled by nanotechnology... ...
    (sci.electronics.design)