This is a nice, simple solution to an age-old problem:

Paper, Carbon, Salt and Water = Nano Battery

Yeah, electrical energy storage made that simple, that clean, that cheap will change the way we do lots of things, including transportation. My primary criticism of hybrid autos is the expensive and polluting battery now in use. Shoot, with this kind of battery, we could go all-electric and just stop at the recharge station and plop in a new one ever so often, like we do with flashlights but on a somewhat larger scale. I'm seeing Jeeps that carry not a couple of spare Jerry cans, but a couple of batteries of maybe a similar size.

If such a battery actually works, how will this impact industry?

See any new industries coming out of this development?

How could this development bolster alternative energy?

What resistance to this new technology might crop up?

We know little here except that it is thin and uses carbon ‘nanotubes” which by the way are now quite expensive and could be a dangerous pollutant.

http://www.earthsky.org/radioshows/51009/s...y-pollute-water


So we know nothing about storage capacity, recharge time and all the other specs that could qualify this for cars.

And beyond that is the whole issue of where we would get the electricity to charge the batteries. Right now most electricity is produced in dirty, pollution and C02 belching, coal fired power plants. The idiots in Congress have yet to approve a single new nuke plant and we have a capacity shortage in any case. And then there is the cost – still far above gasoline.

Bottom line here is – don’t hold you breath.

If such a battery actually works, how will this impact industry?


Yes, there does seem to be some concern about this. Right now, it appears to be more fear-based than actual data-based argumentation.


I don't think this technology is being considered for cars. There are many small things (small as in nano) that need power.


Heh. Good 'ol Ted. Always the same lines. Congress, of course, doesn't approve nuke facilities; it's the NRC (who was created by an act of Congress). What about this recent approval?

BTW, better batteries means increased efficiency in energy storage. This means we have more energy available than we otherwise would, i.e. a net increase in available energy.

How could this development bolster alternative energy?

It increases efficiency which means a net increase in available energy; thus, it helps decrease our overall energy demand. I'm not sure how it bolsters alternative energy.

What resistance to this new technology might crop up?

There may be environmental effects that should be considered if it becomes a ubiquitous technology. Otherwise, the only issues, I can think of, are more economic in nature.

The link simply says that any potential of the nanotubes for causing pollution is being studied. It's an environmental impact study, and that's a wise thing to do with any new technology. However, nothing has been determined as yet, only that in the presence of organic material, the nanotubes disperse in water. We're talking structures that are only a few atoms in size, as opposed to gigantic molecules. Also, carbon is a pretty stable element when combined as with bucky balls and nanotubes.

I suppose any new technology is expensive at first. Remember what DVD burners went for when they first came out? CD burners? The PC? Then there's a knee in the curve where price plummets due to supplies reaching the level of demand, and there it is, a commodity market. Simple economics.

The qualities of a specific product cannot be known until that product is developed. The article I linked to described the nano battery as operating like any other battery, so I imagine the technology can be configured in similar ways. But notice this: no heavy metals are used in its manufacturing. Cellulose, carbon, salt and water. That's it.

I'm doubtful that nukes are the answer to our massive use of coal. Both methods involve heating water to make high-energy steam that drives turbines. The Earth gets pretty dang hot when you drill down toward the magma, so use laser drill technology, send water down there and get back high-energy clean steam to drive the turbines. Don't have to buy uranium or coal to run such a generation plant, and no new technology needs to be developed other than the laser drill. The Colorado School of Mines is on that one. Another big plus of putting nukes out of the energy business is the reduction of nuclear arms proliferation. Seems we're all supposed to worried about Iran for exactly this reason.

Here's what's been happening for the past sixty or so years. The time from concept to product has shortened tremendously due to computerized automation of the process. So yeah, I could probably hold my breath despite the warning against it, but there's no point. We'll likely see this technology on the shelves in a year or two. Besides the auto industry wanting something like this, you've got the microelectronics industry, medical industry and the solar energy industry interested in better batteries. I am sure there are more.

Hey I had not heard of this one. At last we get moving. But there are lots of hoops to jump through to get approval and not just the NRC. Money is also a big issue.

I saw a Congressman on the Energy Commission waving around a handful of nuclear power plant applications 8 months ago “ready to sign” and today we have one plant approver. Frankly it should have been 10 or more.


http://www.nmcco.com/education/facts/safet...rgency_prep.htm


http://www.mercurynews.com/politics/ci_6505652




No argument there but what consumers really need is more efficient solar collectors so we can get collect some of our own power from the sun rather than give it to the power companies.

If such a battery actually works, how will this impact industry?
It will wreak havok on the battery recycling industry, and seriously dent the heavy metals mining industry.

See any new industries coming out of this development?
Not new industries, just perhaps some new companies to make the tooling for producing the batteries.

How could this development bolster alternative energy?
Minimally. Improvements in battery technology (if this turns out to be an improvement) don't significantly affect the production side of the energy equation, which is what "alternative energy" encompasses. However, there would likely be a push to use the fibrous waste product from ethanol plants as the cellulose raw stock. A few more bucks in the pockets of ADM and Cargill.

What resistance to this new technology might crop up?
Zero-risk luddites, possibly labor unions (unemployed miners), economic startup costs. I can't really see any significant rallying 'round the Save Our Lead-acid Batteries Campaign.