2009/5/20, mix...@bigpond.com <mix...@bigpond.com>: > In reply to Michel Jullian's message of Tue, 19 May 2009 15:31:41 +0200: > Hi, > [snip] >>The Nature Materials abstract is here (full text is subscription only): >> >>http://www.nature.com/nmat/journal/vaop/ncurrent/abs/nmat2460.html >> >><<Reversible capacities up to 1,320 mA h g-1 are attained>> >> >>The Li-S battery voltage being 2.0V, this would amount to 1320*2.0 = >>2640 mWh/g = 2640 Wh/kg, which is HUGE, the current best specific >>energy density for rechargeable batteries being Li polymer with 200 >>Wh/kg according to: >> >>http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rechargeable_battery#Table_of_rechargeable_battery_technologies >> >>So this would be a most impressive 13x improvement, I wonder why Nazar >>claims only 3x in her comment below.? >> >>Michel > > Note the "up to", which implies that they are getting variable results, of > which > this was the best. Furthermore, I think the number of charge cycles may as > yet > be rather limited, as was previously intimated. > IOW there is still some work to do before this becomes a commercially > feasible > product.
Still, the figure is amazing. A 52 kWh battery would only weigh 52000/2600= 20 kg, ~10 times less than Eestor's EESU of the same capacity is supposed to weigh :) Michel
