I agree however the methanol required may ony be a small eye dropper like packet or a really small juice box mylar containger with straw. You could then just add the methanol. The technology is still immature but it is the right size right now. Economies of scale may make the item cheaper too.
From what I heard, methanol is very toxic and it can do terrible things if even a small amount gets in your eye. There are specially designed nozzles at gas pumps to prevent such accidents. It is unlikely that there will be refilling kits at home. I'd think that you have to take your batteries to a specialized dealer with a specially designed refilling machine.
Probably the easiest way is to have fully sealed fuel cell batteries which are not refillable. When empty, you dispose of it and buy another one. But that still leaves the safety problem of storing large amounts of menthanol batteries at home and the environmental problem of recycling of empty fuel cell batteries.
From what I heard, methanol is very toxic and it can do terrible things if even a small amount gets in your eye. There are specially designed nozzles at gas pumps to prevent such accidents. It is unlikely that there will be refilling kits at home. I'd think that you have to take your batteries to a specialized dealer with a specially designed refilling machine.
Probably the easiest way is to have fully sealed fuel cell batteries which are not refillable. When empty, you dispose of it and buy another one. But that still leaves the safety problem of storing large amounts of menthanol batteries at home and the environmental problem of recycling of empty fuel cell batteries.
It is toxic however, with swift treatment it can be overcome. So, we should just buy the devices and discard them.
for a good place to start this discussion look to:
You'll find virtually all batteries are toxic if opened. The amount of toxic stuff we have around the home in general is quite staggering so I doubt that will be an issue when it comes down to whether or not fuel cells get used.
On an aside if I followed political lines I'd support Australia's failure to ratify Kyoto. My dislike of politics and Australia's involvement springs from what I saw during my involvement on various projects.
You'll find virtually all batteries are toxic if opened. The amount of toxic stuff we have around the home in general is quite staggering so I doubt that will be an issue when it comes down to whether or not fuel cells get used.
These guys are working with gilette on the fuel cell cartrage. Gilette has experience in regulatory approval.
It may be around the corner.
Look at how ubiquitous and explosive the bic lighter is and they let it on airplanes.
It's nice to see that Gillette is using their expertise to try to change the regulations. But from my experience, law/rulemakers will still work as slow as molasses. I still think it will be a few years. But those few years will be well spent in setting up extra safety precautions and a widespread distribution network.
Remember that Apple is a global company. Unless they are planning to sell their next Powerbook/iBook/iPod exclusively in America, they need to have the fuel cell distribution network and regulations set up globally. I simply don't think it will happen that fast. If you think American policymakers are slow, you should see how some other countries work. For example, Japan is known to block new technologies until the Japanese manufacturers get a strong foothold in that field.
It is possible that Apple may make their products to be able to accept both traditional and fuel cell batteries so that they can have a gradual transition. But I'm not sure how much cost that might add. I assume that the fuel cell batteries and li-ion batteries would need to have a different shape to ensure that no-one accidently plugs the fuel cell into a recharger. It must be disastrous if some user accidently tries to charge a fuel cell battery with a battery charger. Or would be harmless? Anybody have any ideas? Also, no-one wants to accidently dispose a li-ion battery thinking that it's a fuel cell. Different shapes would be natural even from a marketing point of view.
Which means the Powerbook/iBook/iPod would need to have special adaptors for both types of batteries (=more bulky and expensive than necessary). If I was in a country that can't use fuel cells, I won't want to buy a bulky and expensive devices with a short (traditional) battery life just so that Americans can enjoy the benefits of fuel cells. Apple would lose sales in other countries.
I saw a similar article on the same subject which included the information that a single charge provided about 2 W-Hrs of energy. This seems to be less than that of a Li battery. The advantage is that you don't need to spend several hours recharging the battery. You just plug in a new methanol pack.
By way of comparison, PB batteries run from 45 to about 60 W-Hrs of capacity.
As to the dangers, Li batteries also have their problems. There was just an item on the news about some sort of cell phone batteries exploding and catching fire.
I saw a similar article on the same subject which included the information that a single charge provided about 2 W-Hrs of energy. This seems to be less than that of a Li battery. The advantage is that you don't need to spend several hours recharging the battery. You just plug in a new methanol pack.
By way of comparison, PB batteries run from 45 to about 60 W-Hrs of capacity.
As to the dangers, Li batteries also have their problems. There was just an item on the news about some sort of cell phone batteries exploding and catching fire.
Current fuel cell technology gives 3-4x the power of a li ion battery. As for the regulation the UL is pursuing the united nations approval for the technology and if my guess is complete then Japan will adopt it if toshiba is ready to market the beast. The methanol is diluted to 25% in aqueous solution to prevent fire and explosion hazards.
The technology is just around the corner. at least by 2005
Another thing to think about: If Fuel cell batteries are going to be of the disposable type, some sort of industry standard needs to be made. I can't picture your local supermarket to stock 30-40 different types of fuel cell batteries to match every major model of laptop/mp3 player.
Traditional batteries have been standardized by certain specs (e.g. AA, AAA, 2CR5 etc.) Is there some kind of organization out there with a standard set in place or are they only starting now?
Another thing to think about: If Fuel cell batteries are going to be of the disposable type, some sort of industry standard needs to be made. I can't picture your local supermarket to stock 30-40 different types of fuel cell batteries to match every major model of laptop/mp3 player.
Traditional batteries have been standardized by certain specs (e.g. AA, AAA, 2CR5 etc.) Is there some kind of organization out there with a standard set in place or are they only starting now?
True, but they can be of different sizes for different needs. they don't have to be round and cylindrical.
look at the dates of the articles. This is right about here. perhaps not for WWDC (unless prototype device), but within the next year.
Remember, You can refill a lighter with butane by pressing a cylinder into the ligher. Imagine a refill solution like that where the methanol is sold in a universal cylinder giving you anywhere from 1-20 fills depending upon your fuel cell. All of the agents are in the refill bottle. The cylinder does not have to go on the plane. just the fuel cell(s) Make the device hold enough and you could power the laptop or device for 36hours. Long enough to find another fill. If you travel to exotic locals then traditional batteries might suit you for the time being until the distribution has gained wide spread acceptance. Look at the ink jet market. Staples, Comp USA, etc have racks of the stuff. Why not fuel cells? People would buy them by the case at first then as needed when supermarkets carry them.
Perhaps even a hybrid battery/fuel cell solution initially. If the fuel cell runs out then the battery backup (liIon) could power the device by recharging via a firewire like port exactly like the ipod's recharging.
All of your thoughts are good and you provide many possible answers to the many problems that fuel cells are facing. But my point is simple: Are all of these problems resolved NOW? If the groundwork is not completed within the next few months, I really doubt that we will see fuel cells next year. Trying to get all of those details worked out takes more time than you are probably imagining.
Let me add another potential problem: Every answer that you gave included a different company. Are you really sure that all of those companies are collaborating together? If each company is doing their own thing, it's going to be another DVD format war. Sony/Phillips had debated with Matsushita/Others for years before a DVD standard was agreed upon.
True, but they can be of different sizes for different needs. they don't have to be round and cylindrical.
As I mentioned in a previous post, 2CR5 is a battery standard. That's not cylindrical. The shape isn't important. But it still needs to be standardized if you want mass market acceptance.
Quote:
Originally posted by TednDi
Remember, You can refill a lighter with butane by pressing a cylinder into the ligher.
As I mentioned in a previous post, it's TOXIC. The problem with methanol is not only that its flammable. It can be absorbed through your skin and cause health problems. Any refilling solution has to absolutely leak-free and idiot-proof. I don't think the current butane method is good enough.
Quote:
Originally posted by TednDi
Imagine a refill solution like that where the methanol is sold in a universal cylinder giving you anywhere from 1-20 fills depending upon your fuel cell. All of the agents are in the refill bottle. The cylinder does not have to go on the plane.
As I mentioned in a previous post, methanol is not allowed on the plane. It doesn't matter if it's in a cylinder or laptop.
Quote:
Originally posted by TednDi
Look at the ink jet market. Staples, Comp USA, etc have racks of the stuff. Why not fuel cells? People would buy them by the case at first then as needed when supermarkets carry them.
As I mentioned in a previous post, stores do not want to carry 40-50 different types of batteries. Some sort of standard shape/spec needs to be set to be accepted by retailers.
Quote:
Originally posted by TednDi
Perhaps even a hybrid battery/fuel cell solution initially. If the fuel cell runs out then the battery backup (liIon) could power the device by recharging via a firewire like port exactly like the ipod's recharging.
As I mentioned in a previous post, manufacturers have to deal with many idiots out there. If you make the rechargeable battery and fuel cell battery the same shape, chances are, someone will try to recharge a fuel cell or dispose perfectly useable LiIon batteries. To prevent consumer confusion, the two types of batteries would need to be different shapes with different connectors. But making a device that can handle both types of batteries will increase size, cost, and complexity (All the things that a consumer hates in a portable device). I doubt manufacturers will purposely do something that will make their device look bad in the eyes of the consumer.
In conclusion, fuel cells will happen and it may happen much the same way that you predict but I doubt that it will happen in the time frame that you want. When those articles say that fuel cells will be sold next year, they are referring to certain specialized markets. Not mass-consumer. Remember that Apple computers and iPods are consumer devices.
It seems that I've already mentioned everything that I need to say and I'm starting to have to repeat myself so I'm moving on to another topic.
For those of you not up to speed on the mechanics, every battery can be described as having two things inside it: a fuel cell, and a fuel reservoir. Most over the counter batteries have the cell & the reservoir tightly coiled and use corrosives as the fuel -> requiring good sealing. The advantage of the 'new' fuel cells is that they are _separate_ from the reservoir.
Example of a AA battery:
Retail price: $1.00.
Retail cost of the same amount of electricity from a wall outlet: $0.02 or so.
The expense of a battery is in manufacturing the fuel cell - making alternating layers of materials, coiling them, and sealing them up. Not in storing the energy.
So a 'new' fuel cell replacement for the AA might cost near the $1.00 price, but you can swap out the fuel reservoirs. And the fuel _reservoirs_ can be dirt cheap. Say $1.00 for a pack of 20, where _each_ of those 20 has the same energy as one AA battery. For methanol, one form could be small sealed packets, probably cylindrical, with no opening. The fuel cell could have a 'sharp' strawlike inlet that pierces the packet when inserted. They may or may not have a hard outer shell protecting the bulk of the packet.
Regardless, methanol just isn't _that_ dangerous. You've probably exposed yourself to more dangerous things cleaning out your 'fridge, and you definitely have if you've every cleaned your bathroom. Use google to search for 'MSDS Ethanol Aldrich', note 'Can not be made nonpoisonous' and 'may cause blindness' yada yada. This is ordinary alcohol - read 'beer'.
As far as plane regulations are concerned - they're currently inconsistent, and it doesn't look like they'll ever _be_ consistent. "No explosives, no fuels" etc etc. So we won't allow passengers - they have methane in them. And we can't allow laptops - lithium isn't the world's safest chemical. No battery is safe really - they're methods of _storing_energy_. Also disallow wires and water, its a bomb precursor... whatever.
According to a report in the Nihon Keizai Shimbun, KDDI is pushing ahead with the commercialisation of fuel cell powered mobile phones using separte agreements with both Hitachi Ltd. and Toshiba Corp.
KDDI plans to have such handsets on the market by 2007. Nihon Keizai Shimbun reported that the fuel cells should be able to double the operating times of conventional lithium-ion batteries.
The planned fuel cell would extract hydrogen ions from methanol to generate power, meaning that no time would be required for recharging because simply replenishing its methanol supply would allow the battery to operate continuously, the report said.
The report also said that the partners in both projects seek to develop prototype cell phones powered by a fuel cell by the end of fiscal 2005.
Comments
Probably the easiest way is to have fully sealed fuel cell batteries which are not refillable. When empty, you dispose of it and buy another one. But that still leaves the safety problem of storing large amounts of menthanol batteries at home and the environmental problem of recycling of empty fuel cell batteries.
Originally posted by BeigeUser
From what I heard, methanol is very toxic and it can do terrible things if even a small amount gets in your eye. There are specially designed nozzles at gas pumps to prevent such accidents. It is unlikely that there will be refilling kits at home. I'd think that you have to take your batteries to a specialized dealer with a specially designed refilling machine.
Probably the easiest way is to have fully sealed fuel cell batteries which are not refillable. When empty, you dispose of it and buy another one. But that still leaves the safety problem of storing large amounts of menthanol batteries at home and the environmental problem of recycling of empty fuel cell batteries.
It is toxic however, with swift treatment it can be overcome. So, we should just buy the devices and discard them.
for a good place to start this discussion look to:
http://www.methanol.org/
On an aside if I followed political lines I'd support Australia's failure to ratify Kyoto. My dislike of politics and Australia's involvement springs from what I saw during my involvement on various projects.
Originally posted by Telomar
You'll find virtually all batteries are toxic if opened. The amount of toxic stuff we have around the home in general is quite staggering so I doubt that will be an issue when it comes down to whether or not fuel cells get used.
These guys are working with gilette on the fuel cell cartrage. Gilette has experience in regulatory approval.
It may be around the corner.
Look at how ubiquitous and explosive the bic lighter is and they let it on airplanes.
http://www.eweek.com/article2/0,1759,1615865,00.asp
Originally posted by TednDi
These guys are working with gilette on the fuel cell cartrage. Gilette has experience in regulatory approval.
It may be around the corner.
Look at how ubiquitous and explosive the bic lighter is and they let it on airplanes.
http://www.eweek.com/article2/0,1759,1615865,00.asp
It's nice to see that Gillette is using their expertise to try to change the regulations. But from my experience, law/rulemakers will still work as slow as molasses. I still think it will be a few years. But those few years will be well spent in setting up extra safety precautions and a widespread distribution network.
The underwriters labratories is working on regulation of disposable fuel cells and predicts adoption in 2004.
http://www.ul.com/dge/fuelcells/03Me...rt_Summary.pdf
Originally posted by TednDi
A large company like gilette which owns duracell can employ a great deal of lobbing efforts in washington.
The underwriters labratories is working on regulation of disposable fuel cells and predicts adoption in 2004.
http://www.ul.com/dge/fuelcells/03Me...rt_Summary.pdf
Remember that Apple is a global company. Unless they are planning to sell their next Powerbook/iBook/iPod exclusively in America, they need to have the fuel cell distribution network and regulations set up globally. I simply don't think it will happen that fast. If you think American policymakers are slow, you should see how some other countries work. For example, Japan is known to block new technologies until the Japanese manufacturers get a strong foothold in that field.
It is possible that Apple may make their products to be able to accept both traditional and fuel cell batteries so that they can have a gradual transition. But I'm not sure how much cost that might add. I assume that the fuel cell batteries and li-ion batteries would need to have a different shape to ensure that no-one accidently plugs the fuel cell into a recharger. It must be disastrous if some user accidently tries to charge a fuel cell battery with a battery charger. Or would be harmless? Anybody have any ideas? Also, no-one wants to accidently dispose a li-ion battery thinking that it's a fuel cell. Different shapes would be natural even from a marketing point of view.
Which means the Powerbook/iBook/iPod would need to have special adaptors for both types of batteries (=more bulky and expensive than necessary). If I was in a country that can't use fuel cells, I won't want to buy a bulky and expensive devices with a short (traditional) battery life just so that Americans can enjoy the benefits of fuel cells. Apple would lose sales in other countries.
By way of comparison, PB batteries run from 45 to about 60 W-Hrs of capacity.
As to the dangers, Li batteries also have their problems. There was just an item on the news about some sort of cell phone batteries exploding and catching fire.
Originally posted by neutrino23
I saw a similar article on the same subject which included the information that a single charge provided about 2 W-Hrs of energy. This seems to be less than that of a Li battery. The advantage is that you don't need to spend several hours recharging the battery. You just plug in a new methanol pack.
By way of comparison, PB batteries run from 45 to about 60 W-Hrs of capacity.
As to the dangers, Li batteries also have their problems. There was just an item on the news about some sort of cell phone batteries exploding and catching fire.
Current fuel cell technology gives 3-4x the power of a li ion battery. As for the regulation the UL is pursuing the united nations approval for the technology and if my guess is complete then Japan will adopt it if toshiba is ready to market the beast. The methanol is diluted to 25% in aqueous solution to prevent fire and explosion hazards.
The technology is just around the corner. at least by 2005
Traditional batteries have been standardized by certain specs (e.g. AA, AAA, 2CR5 etc.) Is there some kind of organization out there with a standard set in place or are they only starting now?
Originally posted by BeigeUser
Another thing to think about: If Fuel cell batteries are going to be of the disposable type, some sort of industry standard needs to be made. I can't picture your local supermarket to stock 30-40 different types of fuel cell batteries to match every major model of laptop/mp3 player.
Traditional batteries have been standardized by certain specs (e.g. AA, AAA, 2CR5 etc.) Is there some kind of organization out there with a standard set in place or are they only starting now?
True, but they can be of different sizes for different needs. they don't have to be round and cylindrical.
look at the dates of the articles. This is right about here. perhaps not for WWDC (unless prototype device), but within the next year.
http://news.com.com/Fuel+cell+firm's+neat+solution+for+batteries/2100-1005_3-5242559.html
http://news.com.com/Membrane+could+r...28.html?tag=nl
Remember, You can refill a lighter with butane by pressing a cylinder into the ligher. Imagine a refill solution like that where the methanol is sold in a universal cylinder giving you anywhere from 1-20 fills depending upon your fuel cell. All of the agents are in the refill bottle. The cylinder does not have to go on the plane. just the fuel cell(s) Make the device hold enough and you could power the laptop or device for 36hours. Long enough to find another fill. If you travel to exotic locals then traditional batteries might suit you for the time being until the distribution has gained wide spread acceptance. Look at the ink jet market. Staples, Comp USA, etc have racks of the stuff. Why not fuel cells? People would buy them by the case at first then as needed when supermarkets carry them.
Perhaps even a hybrid battery/fuel cell solution initially. If the fuel cell runs out then the battery backup (liIon) could power the device by recharging via a firewire like port exactly like the ipod's recharging.
All of your thoughts are good and you provide many possible answers to the many problems that fuel cells are facing. But my point is simple: Are all of these problems resolved NOW? If the groundwork is not completed within the next few months, I really doubt that we will see fuel cells next year. Trying to get all of those details worked out takes more time than you are probably imagining.
Let me add another potential problem: Every answer that you gave included a different company. Are you really sure that all of those companies are collaborating together? If each company is doing their own thing, it's going to be another DVD format war. Sony/Phillips had debated with Matsushita/Others for years before a DVD standard was agreed upon.
Originally posted by TednDi
True, but they can be of different sizes for different needs. they don't have to be round and cylindrical.
As I mentioned in a previous post, 2CR5 is a battery standard. That's not cylindrical. The shape isn't important. But it still needs to be standardized if you want mass market acceptance.
Originally posted by TednDi
Remember, You can refill a lighter with butane by pressing a cylinder into the ligher.
As I mentioned in a previous post, it's TOXIC. The problem with methanol is not only that its flammable. It can be absorbed through your skin and cause health problems. Any refilling solution has to absolutely leak-free and idiot-proof. I don't think the current butane method is good enough.
Originally posted by TednDi
Imagine a refill solution like that where the methanol is sold in a universal cylinder giving you anywhere from 1-20 fills depending upon your fuel cell. All of the agents are in the refill bottle. The cylinder does not have to go on the plane.
As I mentioned in a previous post, methanol is not allowed on the plane. It doesn't matter if it's in a cylinder or laptop.
Originally posted by TednDi
Look at the ink jet market. Staples, Comp USA, etc have racks of the stuff. Why not fuel cells? People would buy them by the case at first then as needed when supermarkets carry them.
As I mentioned in a previous post, stores do not want to carry 40-50 different types of batteries. Some sort of standard shape/spec needs to be set to be accepted by retailers.
Originally posted by TednDi
Perhaps even a hybrid battery/fuel cell solution initially. If the fuel cell runs out then the battery backup (liIon) could power the device by recharging via a firewire like port exactly like the ipod's recharging.
As I mentioned in a previous post, manufacturers have to deal with many idiots out there. If you make the rechargeable battery and fuel cell battery the same shape, chances are, someone will try to recharge a fuel cell or dispose perfectly useable LiIon batteries. To prevent consumer confusion, the two types of batteries would need to be different shapes with different connectors. But making a device that can handle both types of batteries will increase size, cost, and complexity (All the things that a consumer hates in a portable device). I doubt manufacturers will purposely do something that will make their device look bad in the eyes of the consumer.
In conclusion, fuel cells will happen and it may happen much the same way that you predict but I doubt that it will happen in the time frame that you want. When those articles say that fuel cells will be sold next year, they are referring to certain specialized markets. Not mass-consumer. Remember that Apple computers and iPods are consumer devices.
It seems that I've already mentioned everything that I need to say and I'm starting to have to repeat myself so I'm moving on to another topic.
Example of a AA battery:
Retail price: $1.00.
Retail cost of the same amount of electricity from a wall outlet: $0.02 or so.
The expense of a battery is in manufacturing the fuel cell - making alternating layers of materials, coiling them, and sealing them up. Not in storing the energy.
So a 'new' fuel cell replacement for the AA might cost near the $1.00 price, but you can swap out the fuel reservoirs. And the fuel _reservoirs_ can be dirt cheap. Say $1.00 for a pack of 20, where _each_ of those 20 has the same energy as one AA battery. For methanol, one form could be small sealed packets, probably cylindrical, with no opening. The fuel cell could have a 'sharp' strawlike inlet that pierces the packet when inserted. They may or may not have a hard outer shell protecting the bulk of the packet.
Regardless, methanol just isn't _that_ dangerous. You've probably exposed yourself to more dangerous things cleaning out your 'fridge, and you definitely have if you've every cleaned your bathroom. Use google to search for 'MSDS Ethanol Aldrich', note 'Can not be made nonpoisonous' and 'may cause blindness' yada yada. This is ordinary alcohol - read 'beer'.
As far as plane regulations are concerned - they're currently inconsistent, and it doesn't look like they'll ever _be_ consistent. "No explosives, no fuels" etc etc. So we won't allow passengers - they have methane in them. And we can't allow laptops - lithium isn't the world's safest chemical. No battery is safe really - they're methods of _storing_energy_. Also disallow wires and water, its a bomb precursor... whatever.
Publication Date: 11-July-04
According to a report in the Nihon Keizai Shimbun, KDDI is pushing ahead with the commercialisation of fuel cell powered mobile phones using separte agreements with both Hitachi Ltd. and Toshiba Corp.
KDDI plans to have such handsets on the market by 2007. Nihon Keizai Shimbun reported that the fuel cells should be able to double the operating times of conventional lithium-ion batteries.
The planned fuel cell would extract hydrogen ions from methanol to generate power, meaning that no time would be required for recharging because simply replenishing its methanol supply would allow the battery to operate continuously, the report said.
The report also said that the partners in both projects seek to develop prototype cell phones powered by a fuel cell by the end of fiscal 2005.