Tesla Could Use Up All The World's Laptop Batteries (18650's)

haha that is great. though my ecig runs off stacked lifepo4 rcr123a's. not much demand for those lol

the flashlight scene will be pushed to using 26650s. everyone will sell off their 18650 lights for cheap once cells start to deteriorate. I will buy them up for cheap. once a few teslas have a 7k li-Ion thermal runaways, 18650s are back on the streets and I get rich selling back btu shockers and fire foxes

No self respecting BLFer will be sitting at home on the dark!

We'll all be basking in the warm glow of our AA lights while counting our returns from our investment in Eneloop stocks. A 4 pack of 6th generation eneloop AAs is now selling on ebay for as low as $50!

Good jokes, guys :D!

I wonder the same, how this will tranform battery industry?! Will it bring some of those promised fast-charge, super-capacity battery technology to the market or will it drive up the price due to lack of supply and growing demand?

Anyway, it looks like my D40A and EA8 and recently bought 18650 are worthy investments in that regard :D!

wrong and wrong

assuming an average of 0.725kg/l for gasoline density (wikiepdia says 0.71–0.77 kg/l) makes 165L of fuel to travel 473km equals 34.88l/100km or 6.74mpg, i don’t think so

electricity has no weight, i bet the 1 gram is testing error if it were ever actually tested

Greater demand will lead to greater production meaning the market will balance itself out and prices won’t rise appreciably if at all, and if competitors start making batteries then this should lead to lower prices for all of us. Assuming no shortage of material resources and no market failures

In the long run it leads to better technology, but in the short term there may be fluctuations due to demand not anticipated by suppliers.
E=mc*2 is the most famous equation in the world. c is 3 10*8 meters per second. Without working it out in detail, the factor of about 10*17 shows that the 1 g is an error, unless the volume change displaces that weight of air.
I read that the subsidies for electric cars are not justified, because of the impacts of generating electrical power and of mining and processing the materials for the electrical components. I am not against cars, just big cars carrying one person. I like the Tesla roadster, except that I am not rich, but the S is really just another big car. If any of you are in places like Iraq, don’t be mislead by this electric nonsense and keep the oil underground until it really becomes valuable.

That ‘magic’ is safety. When interviewed about the problems with the Boeing 787 battery, Musk specifically said that the reason why he went with small cells in his cars was safety. Because the 787 uses a larger form factor cell, this means that, if there is a problem, the consequences are going to be more dire. Larger battery = more electride material and electrolyte = bigger bang if the battery vents with flames. Also, having a large number of individual smaller cells mean that bad cells can be more isolated from the rest of the cells, both physically and electrically.

Admittedly, using larger prismatic cells would allow the battery pack to have a higher capacity for a given pack size. But from a safety standpoint, this isn’t a good idea unless a safer chemistry can be found which will still allow a similar energy density (like if, say, a way was found to increase the energy density of LiFePO4 threefold).

your not converting energy into matter when you charge the battery, your increasing electric potential by converting a lower energy chemical to a higher energy one (that goes back to the lower energy chemical as it discharges)

Yes, you are converting energy to matter! Chemical reactions are no different, than nuclear. Mass conservation si only simplification, becouse mass change in chemical reactions is very small :wink:

Surely they will increase production and the cells will become cheaper? Note also that laptop sales are falling fast.

so your telling me there are nuclear reactions happening in a battery?
So the chinese preoccupation with lead ending up in food and other products is just for our safety?

This is all irrelevant, as I hoped was clear when I posted it, but. It’s like you said, electricity has no weight, except energy always has some weight as given by the famous equation. If no matter moves but chemical and electric energy changes, only the relativistic mass of the energy changes. That is less than a gram but not exactly zero. Part of why the equation is famous is that in nuclear reactions, so much energy can be given off or absorbed that the difference in mass is measurable, even though the number of protons, neutrons and electrons does not change.

energy has no mass, energy and matter can be converted but a battery is not a nuclear reactor it stores energy chemically not by changing matter into energy, converting matter to energy requires fusion (like the sun) or fission

e=mc2 means if you had a chunk of matter and you could convert it all to energy you would get the number of joules specified by the equation.
And if you convert energy into matter, you would get the amount of matter indicated by rearranging the equation to solve for m

No :~
E=m*c^2 is for both, chemical and nuclear reactions.

Nuclear=bonding energy in nucleous
Chemical=bonding energy of electrons

Example:
H2+O2 mixture has a higher energy state than H2O when the bonds are reconfigured to the lower energy state of H2O this energy is released and hence mass.
But weight loss is only 0.294ng per gram of water produced-you can simplify, that there is no mass change :stuck_out_tongue:

so why does my nimh batteries deliver less output then my li ion? the lithium weighs less as well

premium Ultrafires.

Fusion and fission are the most common forms of matter to energy conversion. Neither, however, are REQUIRED. Radioactive decay is a perfect example. The interior of the earth is primarily heated by the decay heat of radioactive isotopes. Neither fission or fusion contribute to this conversion. The three damaged reactors in Fukushima, Japan as well as the spent fuel pools must also be continually cooled because of the Matter to Energy conversion of radioactive decay. No Fusion or Fission is taking place (well, at least that's what Japan tells us - I have other beliefs, but that's for another discussion)..

PPtk

radioactive decay=fission
In nuclear physics and nuclear chemistry, nuclear fission is either a nuclear reaction or a radioactive decay process in which the nucleus of an atom splits into smaller parts…

Good news ! The technology in energy and batteries are so archaic it desperately need huge scientific research, the thing that is blocking the evolution is the oil based economic system.

Thanks for quoting wikipedia. Bill Nye the Science Guy, for the record, is equally frowned upon for quotes when talking about things more interesting and complicated than why solid water generally floats on liquid water.

fission is defined as the splitting of an atom into two smaller atoms. Uranium 235, for instance, after being struck by a free neutron commonly fissions into xenon and strontium. It can fission into many different things, but xenon and strontium are some of the most common.

Decay, on the other hand, does not create two atoms. A single atom releases a Beta or Alpha particle, and sometimes one or more gamma photons. It remains a single atom, but changes to a different isotope or a completely different element. Iodine-131, for instance, typically decays by emitting a Beta particle and a gamma photon to become Xenon-131.

PPtk