PesWiki.com

Menu

Directory:MIT Nanotube Super Capacitor

Lasted edited by Andrew Munsey, updated on June 14, 2016 at 9:12 pm.

  • 2 errors has been found on this page. Administrator will correct this soon.
  • This page has been imported from the old peswiki website. This message will be removed once updated.

&lt&lt A Congress:Top 100 Technologies -- RD Energy Technology &gt&gt

There was an error working with the wiki: Code[1]

There was an error working with the wiki: Code[2]

[[Image:MIT Nanotube filaments on-battery electrodes full.jpg|right|frame|Nanotube filaments on the battery's electrodes

image: MIT/Riccardo Signorelli]]

MIT researchers are developing a battery based on capacitors that utilize nanotubes for high surface area, enabling near instantaneous charging and no degradation. Estimating ~5 years to commercialization.

About

Official Website

No official company yet. Still in research and development at MIT.

http://lees.mit.edu/lees/schindall_j.htm

Carbon Nanotube Enhanced Double Layer Capacitor (pdf)

How it Works

Rechargable and disposable batteries use a chemical reaction to produce energy. The problem is that after many charges and discharges the battery loses capacity to the point where the user has to discard it.

However, capacitors contain energy as an electric field of charged particles created by two metal electrodes. Capacitors charge faster and last longer than normal batteries.

The problem is that storage capacity is proportional to the surface area of the battery's electrodes, so even today's most powerful capacitors hold 25 times less energy than similarly sized standard chemical batteries.

MIT researchers have solved this by covering the electrodes with millions of nanotubes, which are essentially tiny filaments. The nanotube filaments increase the surface area of the electrodes and allow the capacitor to store more energy.

The MIT capacitor thus combines the strength of today's batteries with the longevity and speed of capacitors.

Source

Applications

This technology has broad practical possibilities, affecting any device that requires a battery.

Small devices such as hearing aids that could be more quickly recharged where the batteries wouldn't wear out.

In automobiles you could regeneratively re-use the energy of motion and therefore improve the energy efficiency and fuel economy.

hybrid cars would be a particularly popular application for these batteries, both for the speed of recharge, capacity for charge, and because current hybrid batteries are expensive to replace.

Source

Environmental Advantage

Capacitors have very long life cycles (though they most certainly do wear out). Potentially, environmental waste from discarded batteries could be greatly reduced, but not eliminated.

Stage of Development

Prototype expected to be finished in the next few months.

Commercialization could be less than five years away.

Inventor: Joel Schindall

Image:Joel Schindall MIT 95x95.jpg

http://lees.mit.edu/lees/schindall_j.htm

Double Layer Capacitors: Automotive Applications and Modeling - powerpoint presentation

Phone: (617) 253-3934 Fax: (617) 258-6774

E-Mail: joels (at) mit (dot) edu

Self-Evaluation

On June 16, 2006, Joel Schindall provided the following self-assessment, according to the Congress:Technology Criteria set forth by the New Energy Congress.

Preface

As you are aware, the capacitor battery technology does not serve as an

energy source it is an energy "recycler," so in some ways it does not

directly fit your criteria. I've provided some comments to your criteria

below...

I. Renewable

As a device, its manufacture is probably "5" (manufacturing process

consumes energy), but since it lasts so much longer than a battery (over

600,000 charge-discharge cycles versus 1000 or so for a battery), its

lifetime is very long compared to its manufacturing energy-cost and it

should probably be at least an "8" or "9" As an energy source, it varies

from a "5" (allowing time-averaging of energy from a fossil source) to a

"10" (recovering braking energy that would otherwise be wasted).

II. Environmental Impact

Requires fossil fuel to manufacture, but lifetime is very long. At

disposal, consists of aluminum, carbon, and an electrolyte hydrocarbon

called acetonitrile which has some toxicity, but I don't think it is very

great.

III. Cost (cents / kw-h)

Once manufactured, it doesn't "cost" anything to use it. Lifetime should

be >10 years. Today's ultracapacitors cost about 10X that of

equivalent-sized batteries. The main reason for the difference is that

they are manufactured in smaller quantities. At equivalent quantities,

they should cost the same or even be cheaper. I would expect the same for

the nanotube-enhanced devices, but it's too soon to really tell.

IV. Credibility of Evidence

Encouraging, but we still have a ways to go. We are extrapolating from

measured performance of existing ultracapacitors (using activated carbon

electrodes). We have electron microscope pictures of the nanotube-enhanced

electrode structure and we have used a technique called Rhaman Spectroscopy

to establish that the nanotubes have the desired structure, but we estimate

another 3-6 months before we can verify that our extrapolation is accurate

by measuring the actual electrical performance of a sample device.

V. Stability / Reliability

Existing ultracapacitors are extremely stable and reliable, there is no

reason why this device should not be the same.

VI. Implementation

Prototype quantities are probably a couple of years away, small-scale

manufacturing in about 5 years, larger scale manufacturing about 10 years,

primarily because initial devices will be lower volume and therefore higher

cost. This could be shortened if independent investment $$ were provided.

VII. Safety/Danger to Persons

Aluminum and carbon electrode materials are very safe. Acetonitrile

produces cyanide gas if incinerated -- devices would need to be in sealed

packages. There is an alternate electrolyte called PC which is harmless

but has only about half the energy storage capability per unit volume.

VIII. Politics of science

Hmmm, I think everyone has their own opinions on this. However, it's not

terribly threatening to existing players (it could be manufactured by

"battery" companies), so hopefully it would not be too contentious.

IX. Open-Source conducive

MIT would want royalties, and other people's patents might be involved in

the manufacturing process. MIT takes the position that it wants to make

royalties, but its primary goal is to disseminate IP, not to restrict it.

X. Stage of Device Development

We have manufactured samples of the electrode material, but we have not yet

demonstrated the operation of a prototype device (3-6 months). We believe

that it can be mass produced at competitive prices, but this has not yet

been established.

In the News

Google News > Capacitor Battery Schindall

Image:Carbon nanotubes 95x95.gif

Nanotube Superbatteries - Researchers at MIT have made pure, dense, thin films of carbon nanotubes that show promise as electrodes for higher-capacity batteries and supercapacitors. (MIT Technology Review Jan. 9, 2009)

Super Battery - Researchers at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology are developing a battery that could charge your cellphone or laptop in a few seconds rather than hours, and also might never need to be replaced. (ScienCentral News June 8, 2006)

Capacitors to Replace Batteries? - (Slashdot June 9, 2006)

Lowly battery technology due for a recharge (Ars Technica, Mass. June 9, 2006)

Super battery developed (The Inquirer 09 June 2006)

A Better Energizer - An ultracapacitor is what really keeps going and going ... (Discover Vol. 27 No. 05 | May 2006)

Comments

See Talk:Directory:MIT Nanotube Super Capacitor

Sponsor

For building established websites, effective search engine marketing and domain names are importatant. However they become useless without credit card processing when you cant accept the money.

See also

Directory:Batteries

Directory:Capacitors

- Directory

Latest

Directory:A

Directory:J

Directory:S

Directory:Tree

News

There was an error working with the wiki: Code[1]

There was an error working with the wiki: Code[2]

Comments