I’ve stated several times in this forum…I know of at least 4 new battery startups here in the Boston area. They are either associated with MIT or Harvard. Billions of private money is being invested into battery R&D. The company(s) that come out on top could make all the investors extremely wealthy (or wealthier then the already are).
Ready in 2016? Was story in pop science is 1972?
Here’s the article’s date: NOVEMBER 24, 2014
Seven years ago, and still no sign of this miracle battery? Unfortunately, this is common with these kinds of announcements. My BS meter starting going off when it talked about nano-whatever.
Is this from the company that came up with gas mileage pills you put in the tank, or fuel ionizers, or all of the other products that are called “Wonder” or “Miracle”? Or should we believe it’s a technology being suppressed by a conspiracy of greedy capitalists?
Anything and everything that we don’t like has to be the result of some sort of conspiracy.
It’s called drumming up investor money. This isn’t new with many startups. Many times investors will invest on an idea in the hopes it pans out. This is why investor capitalists look for 30% return on their money in 2-5 years. Many times it doesn’t pan out and they loose their investment. But when they hit a good one it can make them a lot of money.
I have to apologize to everyone. A friend forwarded it to me, under the guise of “news”.
I didn’t check the date, and I think that instead of being “news”, it actually falls into the category of “olds”.
I’m sorry for the confusion that ensued.
That’s OK, @VDCdriver. It was news to me, even if it’s yesterday’s tomatoes. Surely it takes longer to miniaturize and bring it to market. It could take maybe 5 years to produce the right size battery, then it takes another 5 to build the pilot plant and work the bugs out. Add another 5 to bring it to market at sufficient volume to be included it a line of smartphones. We are still several years away from market release, and my guess at timing might be optimistic.
Nano-technology is a real thing.
I work for a university that has a lab doing research on it.
The A123 company makes LiFePO4 batteries that incorporate nano-technology.
It does increase charge and discharge rates, but does not perform miracles.
Of course it is. It is also the favorite jargon to get tossed out by folks trying to sell something. The complete quote is “Using nano-technology to synthesize artificial molecules”. That ‘sythesize artificial molecules’ is another batch of jargon that says nothing. Hence my comment.
Also, their claim to ‘charge an EV in 5 minutes’ would require a HUGE amount of current, more than my whole house service could deliver, more than any currently-existing charger could deliver.
Throwing out a current buzzword in order to hawk one’s merchandise doesn’t necessarily mean that the word really applies to one’s product.
Thinking back to my childhood, Chlorophyll was the new “miracle” ingredient in toothpastes, mouthwashes, and a few other personal care/hygiene-related products.
I still recall a Macy’s ad–circa 1955–hawking their new Chlorophyll-infused neckties. Talk about taking advantage of the public with malarkey!
Silly, but benign.
How about copper infused knee and back braces. I saw an ad the other day for copper infused face masks. I’m sure someone will buy because of this.
If a sports star hawks them, they’ll sell.