http://www.extremetech.com/wp-content/uploads/2013/04/ncomms2747-f3.jpg |
It all sounds just a bit too good to be true, but I am sure this was no April Fool's joke.
Simple QRP projects, 10m, 8m, 6m, 4m, FT8, 160m, WSPR, LF/MF, sub-9kHz, nanowaves and other random stuff, some not related to amateur radio.
http://www.extremetech.com/wp-content/uploads/2013/04/ncomms2747-f3.jpg |
One of my birthday presents was this dual band, 5W, portable. At well below £20 delivered by airmail it is hard to go wrong . I am aware th...
1 comment:
The new batteries are the colored dots on the graph. Without knowning that, the graphic is meaningless. None of the new batteries have energy densities larger than current Li-ion technology. What this "advancement" looks like to me is a gap=filling battery technology that provides higher power density for a given energy density. But that's all it is; a gap-filler. The technology will benefit certain niche applications like batteries to power the electronics systems on airplanes or rockets; but it is no panacea. "The thousands of times better" claim seems dubious and may be rooted in the fact that power is proportional to the square of delivered current.
Experimental physical surface area multiplication technologies in battery design have appeared before - even at the nano-scale. However all have suffered from longevity problems as the build up of reaction by-products clogs the "pores". There's no mention of what will be done to mitigate this issue in this "new" technology. Couple the porosity vs. longevity problem with higher manufacturing costs, and you end up with a very specialized product. Again, no panacea.
Post a Comment