Air-fuelled STAIR battery could last ten times longer than traditional cells

It's funny, really. We've figured out how to put men an women on the moon and repair an orbiting telescope, but we can't concoct an AA battery that lasts more than four days inside a Teddy Ruxpin. Thanks to a revolutionary new design from the labs at the University of St Andrews, all that could be well on the way to changin'. Researchers at said institution have teamed up with partners at Strathclyde and Newcastle in order to design an air-fuelled STAIR (St Andrews Air) cell that could theoretically last up to ten times longer than current batteries. Put as simply as possible, this design utilizes oxygen in the air as a re-agent instead of heavy, costly chemicals; the result is a lighter, cheaper battery with loads more capacity. Needless to say, gurus within the project are already dreaming of a prototype to fit in small gizmos such as cellphones or MP3 players, though we wouldn't expect one anytime soon -- after all, there's still two years of research left to complete.

[Thanks, Khattab]

[Templarian @ May 23rd 2009 11:50AM]

It's a start. Hopefully we see it come to fruition. Really the main thing holding back most technology it always seems like.

[murmermer @ May 23rd 2009 12:22PM]

I don't mean to be a Debby Downer or anything but won't burning oxygen in batteries cause a huge ruckus like"global warming" or "CFC's and the Ozone layer"? I don't believe in either of these things but I could see a huge debacle from uneducated nimrods saying how we are all going to suffocate and our children are going to look like they were born on Mars (see Total Recall)

[jay jay @ May 23rd 2009 12:32PM]

@ murmermer

this is quoted from the original report:
"Rechargeable lithium batteries are currently comprised of a graphite negative electrode, an organic electrolyte and lithium cobalt oxide as the positive electrode. Lithium is removed from the layered intercalation compound (lithium cobalt oxide) on charging and re-inserted on discharge.Energy storage is limited by the lithium cobalt oxide electrode (0.5 Li/Co, 130 mAhg-1). The University of St Andrews design replaces the lithium cobalt oxide electrode with a porous carbon electrode and allows Li+ and e- in the cell to react with oxygen from the air."

it seems the by product of this reaction is going to be lithium oxide which is made through the following chemical reaction 4Li+O2 → 2Li2O. the new battery isn't going to do anymore damage to the environment than current lithium batteries probably less since colbalt is removed from the equation. no need to worry about ozone depletion or global warming :)

[Josh Warner @ May 23rd 2009 8:26PM]

Biggest possible problem I see with widespread adoption would be that not all devices could even use these. In particular, weather hardened gear and anything designed to resist water have sealed the battery compartments. Among non-hardened devices, almost everything has an enclosed compartment and depending on the O2 flow required the battery cover itself could reduce it enough to be problematic.

I could see these EASILY outperforming standard Li-ion packs in most applications... where they can get the required O2 without a problem. But their use may be relegated to new devices that are specifically designed with their use in mind. I don't think there is any way they could be designed to work properly with weather-hardened devices.

That second having been said, O2 does dissolve in water at fairly reasonable partial pressures. They might well be able to make another version of these that acquire their O2 exclusively from water; that would have really interesting uses for diving / aquatic equipment.

[Johnny K @ May 23rd 2009 11:50AM]

It looks like a condom...

[drunksaru @ May 23rd 2009 12:08PM]

ha! thats the first thing I thought too.

[Agent .25i @ May 23rd 2009 12:12PM]

Yup. Is that a condom in your pocket, or are you charging something?

[Josh @ May 23rd 2009 2:44PM]

A new hook for the Duracell bunny then?

[Cronick @ May 23rd 2009 5:27PM]

The rubber is for insulation.

[Loonie @ May 23rd 2009 9:49PM]

It completely does, doesn't it.

First thing I thought. "Why has someone clamped a couple of crocodile clips on that condom?"

[webon @ May 24th 2009 1:43AM]

shocker condom...

kinkeeee!

[Mr. Ford @ May 24th 2009 4:37PM]

Makes you wonder what they are really planning on putting inside Teddy Ruxpin.

[Fr0 @ May 23rd 2009 11:50AM]

Well... they had those Zinc air batteries, and they didn't end up being any better than an alkaline... I wonder what makes this one so much better.

[basroil @ May 23rd 2009 11:52AM]

Yea, sounds exactly like a zinc air battery

[n00b @ May 23rd 2009 11:53AM]

@Templarian indeed!

I have wireless mouse and keyboard set and it is driving me crazy that I need to change the batteries quite often!

[nu_D @ May 23rd 2009 11:55AM]

We've never sent a woman to the moon...

SCORE for men!

[mian @ May 23rd 2009 12:28PM]

Why? Because the more astronaut studs we tuck away in orbit, the better the average guy's odds at getting a date?

[The Dude @ May 23rd 2009 12:36PM]

@mian:

http://www.nasa.gov/images/content/271319main_image_1165_946-710.jpg
Yeah, lots of studs there brah'.

[mian @ May 23rd 2009 4:46PM]

Well sure, out of uniform they don't look so great.

Hide some of those faces behind a tinted domed helmet, and throw on a couple of stellar arm patches, and they wouldn't be able to beat the ladies off with a stick.

[Osiris @ May 23rd 2009 5:14PM]

Does your common sense really let you believe USA actually managed to send anyone too the moon? The technology they had in those day was ridiculous; a calculator the size of a filing cabinet..

My common sense says elaborate hoax

[schmitty338 @ May 23rd 2009 5:30PM]

@Osiris

SIGH

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lunar_laser_ranging

You can go to many different observatories around the world (there is one at the university I attend) where they shoot a laser at the moon, and it is reflected off a reflector that was placed there by the Apollo missions, and this is used to measure the distance of the moon from Earth.

For this, and MANY MANY other reasons, is why there is NO FUCKING HOAX YOU STUPID FUCKING MORON. THEY WENT TO THE MOON, PERIOD.

*Ahem*

[Benson @ May 24th 2009 12:18AM]

schmitty, either you just got trolled, or my estimate of the intelligence required to make an engadget post with decent spelling and punctuation is an order of magnitude off...

[Bluecold @ May 23rd 2009 12:08PM]

Another day, another revolutionary battery technology that we'll never hear from again.

[Pontro! @ May 23rd 2009 12:15PM]

My heart just stop!

HELP!

[TreDay74 @ May 23rd 2009 12:28PM]

I haven't (and don't want to) got a chance to use this HP or any PEECEE for that matter but it looks kinda slick but also kinda cheezy with those graphics. Everyone needs to just bite the bullet and buy a mac! I used to be a hater but I bought my fist mac about 10 years ago and have never looked back. MAC'S RULE!

[Penguin @ May 23rd 2009 12:30PM]

What does that have to do with this article? Nothing!

[The Dude @ May 23rd 2009 12:31PM]

Cocaine is a hell of a drug.

[Kizorblade @ May 23rd 2009 12:54PM]

I banish you! Banish you!

[zaryzen @ May 23rd 2009 5:11PM]

1) wow, that has nothing to do with the article
2)PEECEE's are just a tiny bit older than modern computers, and i think you might mean EEEPC
3)i hate closed-minded attitudes, namely you

[Fraggle.Rock @ May 23rd 2009 12:29PM]

Woohoo, go St. Ands! :)

It's always nice to see your alma mater in the news, especially on Engadget. I still find it amazing that the university is coming up on 600 years old... just thought I'd throw that little tidbit out there.

Fraggle

[TreDay74 @ May 23rd 2009 12:30PM]

Oops wrong post. My bad, sorry first post ever to Engadget and I do it wrong. Too Funny. Thank the dear lord it seems battery life is finally going to get addressed!

[Greg @ May 27th 2009 11:07AM]

You, sir, are a credit to your (Mac) community.

[zaryzen @ May 23rd 2009 5:12PM]

Greg, i love you, man.

[Gi @ May 23rd 2009 12:40PM]

I'm sure men an women alike can't wait for this!

[darkmax @ May 23rd 2009 12:47PM]

"man an women"?

[Matt @ May 23rd 2009 12:59PM]

I'm confused, would this be rechargeable or not?

[noname @ May 23rd 2009 1:05PM]

you know - two times, four times or ten times longer duration batteries i'm hearing every year since 1990'. And they are, but also the consumpution of the devices is two, four or ten times higher, and devices are getting smaller. So the cell phone duration today is about the same as cell phone duration 12 years ago. Similar for laptops - the normal laptop duration is about 2 hours as 5 years ago. Funny is, that Apple laptops duration is 5-6 hours, and even funnier is that if you put Vista on them, the duration is again only 2 hours.
So it is great to develop quality batteries, but please try to also thing about the device power consumption.

[Brendan H @ May 23rd 2009 1:56PM]

It's kind of the same thing with memory. We keep getting bigger, faster, cheaper types of memory, but the devices that use them require more and more.
Back to batteries, I remember seeing something on tv a few years back that some natural science related job had their people in the field using an old TI computer, which only had a tiny screen (I think it was only a text-based lcd, similar to a calculator). They used it because it ran forever on AA batteries, which could also be easly and cheaply replaced.

[CaptSaltyJack @ May 23rd 2009 2:29PM]

No no.. new caption for that photo. (it's a condom ad) *ahem* "Jump-start your sex life. Jolt condom: so pleasurable, it's shocking."

[Funke, Tobias Dr. @ May 23rd 2009 3:08PM]

If memory serves, Teddy Ruxpin took "C" batteries.

[murmermer @ May 23rd 2009 3:54PM]

@ JAY JAY

that hasn't stopped green peace from forcing mercury filled CFL light bulbs and inefficient electric cars down our throats. I'm sure the current titans of the battery industry are going to love this kind of competition.

[Robert Johnston @ May 23rd 2009 4:12PM]

You do know that Electric cars are MUCH more efficient than their gasoline-burning bretheren, don't you? Or are you drinking the oil lobby's kool-aid just a little too much?

[GingerFox @ May 23rd 2009 8:31PM]

You also realise that mucury is released from burning coal and such, and that beacuse of the power saved from energy saving bulbs the murcury levels are about the same. Plus you never need to worry about it unless u break one and providing u recyle them at the end of their lives.


Ps please correct me if i got any of that wrong, i carnt quite remember the facts, been a while since i read up on it.

[Benson @ May 24th 2009 12:21AM]

Well, you got the spelling and punctuation so wrong it was hard to track what you were saying...

[Robert Johnston @ May 23rd 2009 4:11PM]

Just a thought, but if this battery consumes oxygen as it discharge, does that mean it generates oxygen as it charges?

[BloodReaper @ May 23rd 2009 4:40PM]

Shame on you engadget, children read this blog

[Josh Kirklin @ May 23rd 2009 5:17PM]

So it can't power a device once you put it in your pocket?

[TreDay74 @ May 24th 2009 11:32AM]

You guys need a life, i commented on the wrong post, get over it!

[Josh Warner @ May 23rd 2009 8:26PM]

Biggest possible problem I see with widespread adoption would be that not all devices could even use these. In particular, weather hardened gear and anything designed to resist water have sealed the battery compartments. Among non-hardened devices, almost everything has an enclosed compartment and depending on the O2 flow required the battery cover itself could reduce it enough to be problematic.

I could see these EASILY outperforming standard Li-ion packs in most applications... where they can get the required O2 without a problem. But their use may be relegated to new devices that are specifically designed with their use in mind. I don't think there is any way they could be designed to work properly with weather-hardened devices.

That second having been said, O2 does dissolve in water at fairly reasonable partial pressures. They might well be able to make another version of these that acquire their O2 exclusively from water; that would have really interesting uses for diving / aquatic equipment.

[Eric Nueman @ May 24th 2009 1:03AM]

You all may have missed the news! A team of South Korean scientists have already
developed a lithium battery upgrade that exceeds all expecations of length of operation for all sorts of applications.
--eric

A team of South Korean researchers has found a way to make lithium batteries 90 percent more efficient than current batteries. A Tuesday report says an applied chemistry professor at Hanyang University, Cho Jae-phil, leads the team of researchers, and claims that the new technology will allow the batteries in notebook PCs and cellphones to last eight times longer than conventional batteries. The significant capacity boost was made possible thanks to using three-dimensional porous silicon particles made of silica and hydrogen fluoride instead of graphite in the negative electrode.

While scientists already knew about the benefits of the new material, they were faced with the challenge of silicon expanding when put into contact with lithium. The research team reports that it was able to overcome this problem by using porous particles.

The researchers have already applied for four basic technology patents in South Korea, the United States and the European Union. Cho says commercial production of the new, high-capacity batteries could begin as soon as four years. Currently, the team is working on incorporating the technology to work with solar panels.


http://www.electronista.com/articles/08/11/11/team.doubles.battery.life/