... a power density of 520 watts per cubic centimeter. The performance exceeds that of conventional electrolytic capacitors and thin-film lithium ion batteries, though it doesn't match the lithium ion battery formats commonly used in electronic devices and vehicles.
Yet.....................
To: ShadowAce
Capacitor Tech Ping!......................
2 posted on
08/03/2015 11:09:19 AM PDT by
Red Badger
(Man builds a ship in a bottle. God builds a universe in the palm of His hand.............)
To: Red Badger
To: Red Badger
Only problem with capacitors is that the discharge voltage drops in direct proportion to discharge amount.
Batteries are more constant voltage over their discharge cycle.
4 posted on
08/03/2015 11:13:27 AM PDT by
Yo-Yo
(Is the /sarc tag really necessary?)
To: Red Badger
Fatty acid? Moochelle’s butt must be a powerhouse.
To: Red Badger
This would be an important technology if it comes true.
7 posted on
08/03/2015 11:21:17 AM PDT by
DaxtonBrown
(http://www.futurnamics.com/reid.php)
To: Red Badger
Capacitors have a MUCH faster discharge rate than batteries. A capacitor can dump its energy in microseconds.
8 posted on
08/03/2015 11:26:33 AM PDT by
from occupied ga
(Your government is your most dangerous enemy)
To: Red Badger
High energy storage requires some combination of high dielectric constant and narrow spacing between the plates. It better be accompanies by adequate breakdown resistance of the dielectric and enough mechanical stability of the electrodes that the energy stays stored, and doesn’t release at unexpected times. Here’s hoping.
To: Red Badger
High energy storage requires some combination of high dielectric constant and narrow spacing between the plates. It better be accompanies by adequate breakdown resistance of the dielectric and enough mechanical stability of the electrodes that the energy stays stored, and doesn’t release at unexpected times. Here’s hoping.
To: Red Badger
Never fly in the US. Too many parties have a vested interest in the status quo as far as IC engines are concerned. Just like fuel cells and advanced batteries, this is a “rest of the world” technology, and not allowed to take hold in the US.
If you push the idea, it WILL be outlawed. If you don’t believe me, ask why LA no longer has a subway/streetcar system.
Do not challenge the established order, only multinationals who can profit from game changing technologies are allowed to do that.
14 posted on
08/03/2015 11:40:15 AM PDT by
factoryrat
(We are the producers, the creators. Grow it, mine it, build it.)
To: Red Badger
18 posted on
08/03/2015 11:49:49 AM PDT by
JJ_Folderol
(Cancelled due to lack of interest.)
To: rdb3; Calvinist_Dark_Lord; JosephW; Only1choice____Freedom; amigatec; Ernest_at_the_Beach; ...
21 posted on
08/03/2015 12:01:41 PM PDT by
ShadowAce
(Linux - The Ultimate Windows Service Pack)
To: Red Badger
The new material is composed of a silica sol-gel thin film containing polar groups linked to the silicon atoms and a nanoscale self-assembled monolayer of an octylphosphonic acid, which provides insulating properties. Now...why didn't I think of that?
23 posted on
08/03/2015 12:18:07 PM PDT by
Bloody Sam Roberts
(Democracy is not freedom. Democracy is simply majoritarianism. It is incompatible with real freedom.)
To: Red Badger
32 posted on
08/04/2015 6:51:24 PM PDT by
Sawdring
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson
