http://www.engadget.com/2010/03/14/stanford-develops-safer-lithium-sulfur-batteries-with-four-times/ Engadget Comments for Stanford develops safer lithium-sulfur batteries with four times the charge of lithium-ion cells http://www.engadget.com/media/feedlogo.gif http://www.engadget.com en-us Copyright 2012 Weblogs, Inc. The contents of this feed are available for non-commercial use only. Blogsmith http://www.blogsmith.com/http://www.engadget.com/2010/03/14/stanford-develops-safer-lithium-sulfur-batteries-with-four-times/http://www.engadget.com/2010/03/14/stanford-develops-safer-lithium-sulfur-batteries-with-four-times/Mar 14th 2010 7:43AMhttp://www.engadget.com/2010/03/14/stanford-develops-safer-lithium-sulfur-batteries-with-four-times/http://www.engadget.com/2010/03/14/stanford-develops-safer-lithium-sulfur-batteries-with-four-times/
Yes, but I say congratulations to them. They have invented an entire new solution that doesn't work.]]>Mar 14th 2010 2:18PMhttp://www.engadget.com/2010/03/14/stanford-develops-safer-lithium-sulfur-batteries-with-four-times/http://www.engadget.com/2010/03/14/stanford-develops-safer-lithium-sulfur-batteries-with-four-times/
People don't usually think about battery life when they buy a phone, mostly the looks and how high megapixel the camera is.]]>Mar 14th 2010 2:54PMhttp://www.engadget.com/2010/03/14/stanford-develops-safer-lithium-sulfur-batteries-with-four-times/http://www.engadget.com/2010/03/14/stanford-develops-safer-lithium-sulfur-batteries-with-four-times/Mar 14th 2010 2:54PMhttp://www.engadget.com/2010/03/14/stanford-develops-safer-lithium-sulfur-batteries-with-four-times/http://www.engadget.com/2010/03/14/stanford-develops-safer-lithium-sulfur-batteries-with-four-times/Mar 14th 2010 7:46AMhttp://www.engadget.com/2010/03/14/stanford-develops-safer-lithium-sulfur-batteries-with-four-times/http://www.engadget.com/2010/03/14/stanford-develops-safer-lithium-sulfur-batteries-with-four-times/
they're not MIT ;)]]>Mar 14th 2010 8:37AMhttp://www.engadget.com/2010/03/14/stanford-develops-safer-lithium-sulfur-batteries-with-four-times/http://www.engadget.com/2010/03/14/stanford-develops-safer-lithium-sulfur-batteries-with-four-times/
I actually agree, and its pretty obvious to why that is, MIT is an Institute of Technology, so its more focused on technology than Stanford, but ofcourse we also can't deny Stanford's brilliance in technology (as well as any other field).]]>Mar 14th 2010 8:49AMhttp://www.engadget.com/2010/03/14/stanford-develops-safer-lithium-sulfur-batteries-with-four-times/http://www.engadget.com/2010/03/14/stanford-develops-safer-lithium-sulfur-batteries-with-four-times/
Actually, Stanford is just playing catch up, MIT is leading the pack.

http://www.a123systems.com/a123/technology]]>Mar 16th 2010 1:24AMhttp://www.engadget.com/2010/03/14/stanford-develops-safer-lithium-sulfur-batteries-with-four-times/http://www.engadget.com/2010/03/14/stanford-develops-safer-lithium-sulfur-batteries-with-four-times/Mar 14th 2010 8:02AMhttp://www.engadget.com/2010/03/14/stanford-develops-safer-lithium-sulfur-batteries-with-four-times/http://www.engadget.com/2010/03/14/stanford-develops-safer-lithium-sulfur-batteries-with-four-times/Mar 14th 2010 8:05AMhttp://www.engadget.com/2010/03/14/stanford-develops-safer-lithium-sulfur-batteries-with-four-times/http://www.engadget.com/2010/03/14/stanford-develops-safer-lithium-sulfur-batteries-with-four-times/Mar 14th 2010 9:00AMhttp://www.engadget.com/2010/03/14/stanford-develops-safer-lithium-sulfur-batteries-with-four-times/http://www.engadget.com/2010/03/14/stanford-develops-safer-lithium-sulfur-batteries-with-four-times/
But that's because of chip inovation, as stated above, not baterry tech improvements....]]>Mar 14th 2010 9:46AMhttp://www.engadget.com/2010/03/14/stanford-develops-safer-lithium-sulfur-batteries-with-four-times/http://www.engadget.com/2010/03/14/stanford-develops-safer-lithium-sulfur-batteries-with-four-times/Mar 14th 2010 8:07AMhttp://www.engadget.com/2010/03/14/stanford-develops-safer-lithium-sulfur-batteries-with-four-times/http://www.engadget.com/2010/03/14/stanford-develops-safer-lithium-sulfur-batteries-with-four-times/
Whenever you hear of something like this developed in academia, it could be up to a decade before it hits your average consumer. ]]>Mar 14th 2010 2:21PMhttp://www.engadget.com/2010/03/14/stanford-develops-safer-lithium-sulfur-batteries-with-four-times/http://www.engadget.com/2010/03/14/stanford-develops-safer-lithium-sulfur-batteries-with-four-times/Mar 14th 2010 8:12AMhttp://www.engadget.com/2010/03/14/stanford-develops-safer-lithium-sulfur-batteries-with-four-times/http://www.engadget.com/2010/03/14/stanford-develops-safer-lithium-sulfur-batteries-with-four-times/Thankfully, the earth-ending threats have so far been successfully postponed. Unfortunately, the annual technological breakthroughs are never delivered, presumably blamed on inadequate funding.]]>Mar 14th 2010 8:47AMhttp://www.engadget.com/2010/03/14/stanford-develops-safer-lithium-sulfur-batteries-with-four-times/http://www.engadget.com/2010/03/14/stanford-develops-safer-lithium-sulfur-batteries-with-four-times/

Sent from my li-ion 3g battery sucking phone...]]>Mar 14th 2010 9:50AMhttp://www.engadget.com/2010/03/14/stanford-develops-safer-lithium-sulfur-batteries-with-four-times/http://www.engadget.com/2010/03/14/stanford-develops-safer-lithium-sulfur-batteries-with-four-times/
Where would you get the hydrogen from in an energy-efficient way? No where, because hydrogen is a terrible vehicle for energy storage.]]>Mar 14th 2010 3:50PMhttp://www.engadget.com/2010/03/14/stanford-develops-safer-lithium-sulfur-batteries-with-four-times/http://www.engadget.com/2010/03/14/stanford-develops-safer-lithium-sulfur-batteries-with-four-times/Mar 14th 2010 11:01AMhttp://www.engadget.com/2010/03/14/stanford-develops-safer-lithium-sulfur-batteries-with-four-times/http://www.engadget.com/2010/03/14/stanford-develops-safer-lithium-sulfur-batteries-with-four-times/Mar 14th 2010 11:45AMhttp://www.engadget.com/2010/03/14/stanford-develops-safer-lithium-sulfur-batteries-with-four-times/http://www.engadget.com/2010/03/14/stanford-develops-safer-lithium-sulfur-batteries-with-four-times/The fact that this battery only does 40-50 recharge cycles is not a big problem; since each charge cycle holds 4x that of a LiPo battery, that equates to the same energy output as a normal battery with 160-200 cycles. Sure, this should be improved a bit, but it would only need a 25% improvement would make it competitive.]]>Mar 14th 2010 1:16PMhttp://www.engadget.com/2010/03/14/stanford-develops-safer-lithium-sulfur-batteries-with-four-times/http://www.engadget.com/2010/03/14/stanford-develops-safer-lithium-sulfur-batteries-with-four-times/
That may be true, but what if after half those charge cycles the charge capacity of the battery is halved (or worse).. You can see how there could still be alot of work to be done.]]>Mar 14th 2010 9:27PMhttp://www.engadget.com/2010/03/14/stanford-develops-safer-lithium-sulfur-batteries-with-four-times/http://www.engadget.com/2010/03/14/stanford-develops-safer-lithium-sulfur-batteries-with-four-times/
Ever watch "Who Killed the Electric Car?"

Yeah...]]>Mar 14th 2010 1:51PMhttp://www.engadget.com/2010/03/14/stanford-develops-safer-lithium-sulfur-batteries-with-four-times/http://www.engadget.com/2010/03/14/stanford-develops-safer-lithium-sulfur-batteries-with-four-times/Mar 14th 2010 1:53PMhttp://www.engadget.com/2010/03/14/stanford-develops-safer-lithium-sulfur-batteries-with-four-times/http://www.engadget.com/2010/03/14/stanford-develops-safer-lithium-sulfur-batteries-with-four-times/Mar 14th 2010 1:59PMhttp://www.engadget.com/2010/03/14/stanford-develops-safer-lithium-sulfur-batteries-with-four-times/http://www.engadget.com/2010/03/14/stanford-develops-safer-lithium-sulfur-batteries-with-four-times/
Stinkin' Sulfur? d'Geez! Why dint I think of that BEFORE?

What's next? Boron?]]>Mar 14th 2010 2:36PMhttp://www.engadget.com/2010/03/14/stanford-develops-safer-lithium-sulfur-batteries-with-four-times/http://www.engadget.com/2010/03/14/stanford-develops-safer-lithium-sulfur-batteries-with-four-times/Rule of thumb, anytime you see new technology using "nanowires" and/or "carbon nanotubes", it won't be commercialized any time soon. You see that picture with yellow balls on the end of those Si NWs? Those are gold nanoparticles (about 30 nm in diameter) that have been cooking at high pressure and high temp (i.e., expensive). Presently, the end result is just a small batch of these nanowires. Of course, that doesn't stop Yi Cui et al. from researching potential applications since someone must have a breakthrough someday (just don't expect it anytime soon)!

Don't let the fact that it's posted on Engadget let you fool you that you'll see this in your laptop/cell phone battery anytime soon. To be fair, neither Engadget nor Yi Cui et. al (although they seem to get a lot of media attention) claim this. It's up to us, Engagdet readers, not to jump to conclusions (or get our hopes up).]]>Mar 14th 2010 6:45PMhttp://www.engadget.com/2010/03/14/stanford-develops-safer-lithium-sulfur-batteries-with-four-times/http://www.engadget.com/2010/03/14/stanford-develops-safer-lithium-sulfur-batteries-with-four-times/Mar 14th 2010 6:47PMhttp://www.engadget.com/2010/03/14/stanford-develops-safer-lithium-sulfur-batteries-with-four-times/http://www.engadget.com/2010/03/14/stanford-develops-safer-lithium-sulfur-batteries-with-four-times/isnt this new technology? or just a rehash of current tech? whichever way, it sounds better that whats being discussed here.]]>Mar 14th 2010 7:50PMhttp://www.engadget.com/2010/03/14/stanford-develops-safer-lithium-sulfur-batteries-with-four-times/http://www.engadget.com/2010/03/14/stanford-develops-safer-lithium-sulfur-batteries-with-four-times/Mar 14th 2010 7:51PMhttp://www.engadget.com/2010/03/14/stanford-develops-safer-lithium-sulfur-batteries-with-four-times/http://www.engadget.com/2010/03/14/stanford-develops-safer-lithium-sulfur-batteries-with-four-times/
If by invent you mean took credit for, then yes. Also Li-Poly batteries have the same energy density as Li-Ion, with the differences being that they're more expensive to manufacture, but safer in extreme environments. If you short a Li-Poly battery and then puncture it, it probably won't blow your arm off like a Li-Ion battery would.

Anyway the reason macbooks get such great battery life is because they choose energy efficiency over performance wherever possible, and they have huge-ass batteries. ]]>Mar 14th 2010 8:16PM