http://citylabs.net/ Looks like betas whacking solar cells. Makes no sense to me. A primary lithium battery will deliver power for over 20 years at a cost per joule probably a million times better than this. Not to mention getting a more sensible terminal voltage. How do they expect to charge a battery with 0.7 volts? That all goes for most of the "energy harvesting" things you read a lot about. -- John Larkin Highland Technology Inc www.highlandtechnology.com jlarkin at highlandtechnology dot com Precision electronic instrumentation Picosecond-resolution Digital Delay and Pulse generators Custom timing and laser controllers Photonics and fiberoptic TTL data links VME analog, thermocouple, LVDT, synchro, tachometer Multichannel arbitrary waveform generators
another atomic battery
Started by ●July 24, 2012
Reply by ●July 24, 20122012-07-24
On 24/07/2012 17:22, John Larkin wrote:> > http://citylabs.net/ > > Looks like betas whacking solar cells. > > Makes no sense to me. A primary lithium battery will deliver power for > over 20 years at a cost per joule probably a million times better than > this. Not to mention getting a more sensible terminal voltage. How do > they expect to charge a battery with 0.7 volts? > > That all goes for most of the "energy harvesting" things you read a > lot about.A lithium cell won't last long when hot - Arrhenius and all that. These produce electrons from radioactive decay, so shouldn't really be affected by temperature. Must be pretty niche, though. Cheers -- Syd
Reply by ●July 24, 20122012-07-24
On 24/07/2012 17:22, John Larkin wrote:> > http://citylabs.net/ > > Looks like betas whacking solar cells. > > Makes no sense to me. A primary lithium battery will deliver power for > over 20 years at a cost per joule probably a million times better than > this. Not to mention getting a more sensible terminal voltage. How do > they expect to charge a battery with 0.7 volts?It could make sense in hostile environments where battery chemistry might not behave itself. ISTR Their second generation is 3v. I rather like Zamboni piles which at least have a proven track record: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Zamboni_pile probably powering the Oxford electric bell since 1840 http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Oxford_Electric_Bell> > That all goes for most of the "energy harvesting" things you read a > lot about.This one sounds more like shareholder IPO harvesting to me. -- Regards, Martin Brown
Reply by ●July 24, 20122012-07-24
John Larkin wrote:> http://citylabs.net/ > > Looks like betas whacking solar cells. > > Makes no sense to me. A primary lithium battery will deliver power for > over 20 years at a cost per joule probably a million times better than > this. Not to mention getting a more sensible terminal voltage. How do > they expect to charge a battery with 0.7 volts? > > That all goes for most of the "energy harvesting" things you read a > lot about. >It isn't such a big deal. We had a bet going in a European NG some years ago. One guy said that you can't get any decent conversion performance either way with a single 600mV fuel cell. Me and some other dudes said that you can even get above 90% efficiency. So, one guy rolled up his sleeves and actually built it, with the help of all the other Aye-sayers. It worked. Of course, for the bet it had to be self-starting, and it was. -- Regards, Joerg http://www.analogconsultants.com/
Reply by ●July 24, 20122012-07-24
On 24/07/2012 18:10, Martin Brown wrote:> On 24/07/2012 17:22, John Larkin wrote: >> >> http://citylabs.net/ >> >> Looks like betas whacking solar cells. >> >> Makes no sense to me. A primary lithium battery will deliver power for >> over 20 years at a cost per joule probably a million times better than >> this. Not to mention getting a more sensible terminal voltage. How do >> they expect to charge a battery with 0.7 volts? > > It could make sense in hostile environments where battery chemistry > might not behave itself. ISTR Their second generation is 3v. > > I rather like Zamboni piles which at least have a proven track record: > > http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Zamboni_pile > > probably powering the Oxford electric bell since 1840 > > http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Oxford_Electric_Bell >> >> That all goes for most of the "energy harvesting" things you read a >> lot about. > > This one sounds more like shareholder IPO harvesting to me. >The original Batmobile used atomic batteries... Batman: "To the Batmobile! Let's go!" Robin: "Atomic batteries to power. Turbines to speed." Batman: "Ready to move out." Cheers -- Syd
Reply by ●July 24, 20122012-07-24
On 24/07/2012 19:33, Syd Rumpo wrote:> On 24/07/2012 18:10, Martin Brown wrote: >> On 24/07/2012 17:22, John Larkin wrote: >>> >>> That all goes for most of the "energy harvesting" things you read a >>> lot about. >> >> This one sounds more like shareholder IPO harvesting to me. >> > The original Batmobile used atomic batteries... > > Batman: "To the Batmobile! Let's go!" > Robin: "Atomic batteries to power. Turbines to speed." > Batman: "Ready to move out."So why did flames come out of the back end then? Looked more like a fuel rich blowlamp as afterburner. I reckon it required divine intervention - Holy smoke Batman! -- Regards, Martin Brown
Reply by ●July 24, 20122012-07-24
On 24/07/2012 20:07, Martin Brown wrote:> On 24/07/2012 19:33, Syd Rumpo wrote: >> On 24/07/2012 18:10, Martin Brown wrote: >>> On 24/07/2012 17:22, John Larkin wrote: >>>> >>>> That all goes for most of the "energy harvesting" things you read a >>>> lot about. >>> >>> This one sounds more like shareholder IPO harvesting to me. >>> >> The original Batmobile used atomic batteries... >> >> Batman: "To the Batmobile! Let's go!" >> Robin: "Atomic batteries to power. Turbines to speed." >> Batman: "Ready to move out." > > So why did flames come out of the back end then? > Looked more like a fuel rich blowlamp as afterburner. > > I reckon it required divine intervention - Holy smoke Batman!I don't know if you're familiar with the Gerry Anderson genre, but I remember Fireball XL5 and the various Thunderbirds moving at incredible speeds while the exhaust smoke drifted up in a gentle arc. There are some things which are as yet beyond our feeble understanding. F A B Cheers -- Syd
Reply by ●July 24, 20122012-07-24
Martin Brown wrote:> > On 24/07/2012 19:33, Syd Rumpo wrote: > > On 24/07/2012 18:10, Martin Brown wrote: > >> On 24/07/2012 17:22, John Larkin wrote: > >>> > >>> That all goes for most of the "energy harvesting" things you read a > >>> lot about. > >> > >> This one sounds more like shareholder IPO harvesting to me. > >> > > The original Batmobile used atomic batteries... > > > > Batman: "To the Batmobile! Let's go!" > > Robin: "Atomic batteries to power. Turbines to speed." > > Batman: "Ready to move out." > > So why did flames come out of the back end then? > Looked more like a fuel rich blowlamp as afterburner. > > I reckon it required divine intervention - Holy smoke Batman!Because they are based on comic books created for grade school level boys. And loser like Dimbulb who shoot up theaters.
Reply by ●July 24, 20122012-07-24
On Tuesday, July 24, 2012 12:22:43 PM UTC-4, John Larkin wrote:> http://citylabs.net/ > > Looks like betas whacking solar cells. > > Makes no sense to me. A primary lithium battery will deliver power for > over 20 years at a cost per joule probably a million times better than > this. Not to mention getting a more sensible terminal voltage. How do > they expect to charge a battery with 0.7 volts? > > That all goes for most of the "energy harvesting" things you read a > lot about. > > > -- > > John Larkin Highland Technology Inc > www.highlandtechnology.com jlarkin at highlandtechnology dot com > > Precision electronic instrumentation > Picosecond-resolution Digital Delay and Pulse generators > Custom timing and laser controllers > Photonics and fiberoptic TTL data links > VME analog, thermocouple, LVDT, synchro, tachometer > Multichannel arbitrary waveform generatorsIt can make cheap memory non-volatile and power sensors and/or query-able (?) systems intermittently, sounds like it could be useful. Cost is no object to the intended clientele, in fact, the more exorbitant the better.
Reply by ●July 25, 20122012-07-25
John Larkin wrote:> > http://citylabs.net/ > > Looks like betas whacking solar cells. > > Makes no sense to me. A primary lithium battery will deliver power for > over 20 years at a cost per joule probably a million times better than > this. Not to mention getting a more sensible terminal voltage. How do > they expect to charge a battery with 0.7 volts? > > That all goes for most of the "energy harvesting" things you read a > lot about. > >You fail to understand, the people that started that company have connections and got government grants; they get rich while the company founders on "insufficient sales" or some such excuse. Then they can go back for more money, fill their pockets and let it fail more. FirstSolar.
