• oldfart@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      7
      arrow-down
      2
      ·
      edit-2
      2 months ago

      It’s not, if you charge any capacity with 1C, it will take an hour. Looks like they achieved stable charging at over 4C (charging current in amperes 4x larger than stated capacity in amp-hours).

      EDIT: C is not Coulomb in this case

          • AwesomeLowlander@sh.itjust.works
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            6
            arrow-down
            1
            ·
            2 months ago

            There are tons of technologies that are inherently unscalable. Or won’t be for another 50 years. Commercial unviability is one thing, but physic limitations are another matter.

            • john89@lemmy.ca
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              3
              arrow-down
              1
              ·
              edit-2
              2 months ago

              True, but that doesn’t mean this is one of them.

              That said, I think salt batteries will eclipse these.

      • AHemlocksLie@lemmy.zip
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        2 months ago

        A Coulomb is basically a number of electrons, so it still very much depends on capacity. The only way it could avoid capacity dependence is if the amperage varied depending on total available uncharged capacity. That in itself is unlikely because the wires that transmit the electricity can only handle so many amps before getting too hot and melting apart, so any charging system must necessarily be constructed with intended charging capacity and rate in mind from the beginning.

        • oldfart@lemm.ee
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          2
          ·
          2 months ago

          What solbear said. I edited my post to clarify i did not mean the SI unit.

    • JackFrostNCola@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      5
      ·
      2 months ago

      What the general public thinks: Car or phone battery.
      What the scientists mean: Button cell battery for hearing aids.
      Reality: never makes it past the article/news cycle to scalable manufacture.

  • P1nkman@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    27
    arrow-down
    4
    ·
    2 months ago

    I’ve read news about better battery technology for YEARS, and then nothing. Repeat the cycle.

    Let me know when it’s released to the public and actually usable.

    • Ghostalmedia@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      20
      ·
      2 months ago

      You need to look at battery lab research on a 10-20 year time before it gets commercialized at scale.

      Moreover, go look at your rechargeable batteries from 10 or 20 years ago. They’re heavier, less energy dense, have shorter lifespans, have much slower charge rates. A lot of those advancement started in a lab and look many years to make it to your laptop or car.

    • halcyoncmdr@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      7
      ·
      2 months ago

      Well, it only looks like nothing because our power demands have increased as well.

      Current Lithium Ion Polymer batteries are a far cry from the ones of a decade ago, despite being very similar tech.

      The main issue with most of these alternative battery approaches are either low capacity, or low charge cycles. Finding a chemistry that both packs enough power in a small enough package to run devices for long term, and that don’t wear out quickly is difficult.

    • GreyEyedGhost@lemmy.ca
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      6
      ·
      2 months ago

      In my lifetime, about the only rechargeable battery the average person had in their home was the one in their car. Now we’ve added 4 new major battery chemistries to the commercial space, some with multiple variants within them and all with improvements throughout their lifetimes. This is what science and technology looks like. The results you’re looking for would be magic or wishful thinking.

    • logos@sh.itjust.works
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      2 months ago

      Lots of small, incremental improvements. The news predictably is always promising a huge breakthrough

  • halcyoncmdr@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    6
    ·
    edit-2
    2 months ago

    Even under rapid charging conditions with a full charge time of just 12 minutes, the battery achieved a high capacity of 705 mAh g⁻¹, which is a 1.6-fold improvement over conventional batteries. Furthermore, nitrogen doping on the carbon surface effectively suppressed lithium polysulfide migration, allowing the battery to retain 82% capacity even after 1,000 charge–discharge cycles, demonstrating excellent stability.

    Assuming that this is scalable for production… Which is a big if for many of these “breakthroughs”, then this could replace current Lithium Ion batteries in most devices with a noticeable bump in capacity. Everything else is pretty par for the course though with current technologies.

    The full charge time is meaningless without knowing what capacity they were working with. And a quick skim didn’t seem to have that in the article.