Production Fuel Cells in 2nd Half of 2006? [Archive]

MacRumors

Mar 3, 2006, 12:48 AM

http://www.macrumors.com/images/macrumorsthreadlogo.gif (http://www.macrumors.com)

ExtremeTech reports (http://news.yahoo.com/s/zd/20060302/tc_zd/172637) that Antig Technology and AVC Corp. will be demoing production-ready fuel cell battery technology for laptops at CeBIT next week.

The fuel cells appear to be methanol-based and provide 45 watts of power, weigh 3.7 pounds and reportedly can power a laptop for eight hours with a single cartridge. The fuel cell is the size of a CD-Rom drive and is designed to fit into the media bay of a laptop PC. These fuel cells are reportedly going into production for late 2006. No details on cost or fuel refill information is yet available. A photo is shown here (http://www.fuelcellsworks.com/Supppage4600.html).

This is not the first time fuel cell technology has been promised. NEC was reportedly expecting them (http://www.macrumors.com/pages/2003/06/20030630154612.shtml) in to be production in 2004.

Back in 2003, Apple was rumored (http://www.macrumors.com/pages/2003/06/20030626013405.shtml) to be actively pursuing fuel cell technology for the PowerBook line. Fuel Cells promise long battery life but significant technical hurdles have limited their development.

revjay

Mar 3, 2006, 12:56 AM

There you go iGary...you no longer need to carry an extra battery...all you need is a 3.7 lb fuel cell half the size of a MacBook.

I suppose, once this type of tech. goes into production, size will possibly dwindle and efficiency climb?

bluedevil14

Mar 3, 2006, 12:58 AM

3.7 lbs!!!!!!???? Who wants to carry that around? I think carrying around three normal batteries would definitely be lighter

EricNau

Mar 3, 2006, 01:01 AM

45 watts of power and 3.7 lbs... The current MacBook Pro battery is 60 watts, and I'm sure it weighs less than that.

Superdrive

Mar 3, 2006, 01:02 AM

3.7 lbs!!!!!!???? Who wants to carry that around? I think carrying around three normal batteries would definitely be lighter
And less expensive too!

Glad to see technology coming along. I'd still bet it is at least five years before we see any of this in a mainstream product.

Chundles

Mar 3, 2006, 01:04 AM

I hope it's one of those ones that gets the Hydrogen from alcohol - study time would be great. One for me, one for you, two for me, one for you. Glug glug glug.....

yoda13

Mar 3, 2006, 01:08 AM

Time to hit the gym again so I can carry my laptop power supply around....:p

n8236

Mar 3, 2006, 01:08 AM

i dunno how i feel about anything methanol near me when i'm on a flight altitude of 39,000 ft lol

EricNau

Mar 3, 2006, 01:11 AM

i dunno how i feel about anything methanol near me when i'm on a flight altitude of 39,000 ft lol
It's perfectly safe... until you drop it! :eek: :p

pdpfilms

Mar 3, 2006, 01:12 AM

Hahahaha.

I just have to laugh. I'm sure they'll refine this enough to be usable one day, but i just think it's funny right now...

what if you dropped your laptop?

revjay

Mar 3, 2006, 01:15 AM

It's perfectly safe... until your drop it! :eek: :p
Kaboom!
http://www.hiroshima-is.ac.jp/Hiroshima/Images/Survivors/A-bomb_scene2.jpg

darwen

Mar 3, 2006, 01:18 AM

what if you dropped your laptop?

If it fell on you? It would hurt. Lets hope that guy who did the Mag Safe test does not get ahold of one of these.

lord patton

Mar 3, 2006, 01:28 AM

I suppose, once this type of tech. goes into production, size will possibly dwindle and efficiency climb?

no, that's not the least bit likely:rolleyes:

tjwett

Mar 3, 2006, 01:49 AM

uh, "in the media bay..."? yeah, reeeal futurey. :rolleyes:

macnews

Mar 3, 2006, 01:53 AM

I just can't see this working long term and seriously doubt Apple would deploy it. It needs to be lighter, thinner (yes, it say CD rom size but that is misleading given the picture on the site), and ideally use a better fuel source such as hydrogen fuel.

kenzbud

Mar 3, 2006, 01:56 AM

Blah.... Big and bulky.
Do you recharge it like a normal battery or does it have to be filled up with hydrogen?

CanadaRAM

Mar 3, 2006, 02:18 AM

Blah.... Big and bulky.
Do you recharge it like a normal battery or does it have to be filled up with hydrogen?
Seriously -- did you read any of this before posting? A fuel cell generates electricity from catalyzing a hydrogen-rich, usually liquid fuel source like... the methanol mentioned in this thread, The cell is refuelled by putting in more methanol -- although practically we can expect self-contained fuel cartridges like disposable butane lighters.

Using methanol is less efficient than using pure hydrogen, but containment and recharging with pure hydrogen has some major logistical problems. The other challenge whatever the fuel is what to do with the waste heat from the process.

The point of a fuel cell is not high power, it is moderate power over a long period of time, and recharging with a chemical fuel source so you can be off the grid for days or weeks. It is not a battery replacement for desk to desk or even airline travel (and I'd like to see them answer the question of taking tiny 'jet engines' with methanol 'bombs' onto an aircraft...).

avus

Mar 3, 2006, 02:23 AM

Kaboom!

Yet another insensitive person who still thinks nuclear weapons are just big bombs:

www.eurekalert.org/pub_releases/2006-02/jaaj-abs022306.php

:rolleyes:

Stridder44

Mar 3, 2006, 03:34 AM

what if you dropped your laptop?

http://www.nikhef.nl/~h73/kn1c/ELSTAT/Explosion.jpg

Staffroomer

Mar 3, 2006, 03:52 AM

This sounds way better than the 4 hours on my current iBook :D

SeaFox

Mar 3, 2006, 03:53 AM

Blah.... Big and bulky.
Do you recharge it like a normal battery or does it have to be filled up with hydrogen?

Well since it's not a "battery" I don't know how you would recharge it. :rolleyes:

Actually the joke of this (if you read the article) is that they haven't designed them to be refilled by the user. So it's even worse than carrying a spare battery (besides the dismal runtime).

ScottB

Mar 3, 2006, 05:11 AM

Fuel cell? That sound very cool, but from the look of the specs it seems like it's not very useful. I guess we won't be seeing these in any practical laptop for a long while.

bigandy

Mar 3, 2006, 05:27 AM

i can't see this working for another decade at least.

plus they really do need to be able to be refilled by the user, or they're going to make more money selling dead badgers to shove in your battery bay.

*develops business plan* :rolleyes:

Austin.xstone

Mar 3, 2006, 06:16 AM

As I see it, the battery is the one thing holding everything back, bigger brighter screens? 'Takes more battery'. The sooner that they create something that can replace a battery the better the world will be.

I’m sure that all humans are looking at holding power in little boxes to use later the wrong way – I’m sure that there must be a totally different system - Some one just needs to invent it... good luck on that one... :confused:

puuukeey

Mar 3, 2006, 06:21 AM

can't we just pee into it?

d_saum

Mar 3, 2006, 06:31 AM

What I really want to know is the pricing!!!! How much is it going to cost for only 8 hours of runtime??? It better be damn cheap or this will never get off the ground (unless you drop it and the explosion launches it into the air....but otherwise..). Also, If I cant refill it myself, forget it. Im not taking it in everytime its empty.

:rolleyes:

syklee26

Mar 3, 2006, 07:02 AM

actually 8 hours is very disappointing. i thought this thing allowed for almost 24 hour usage.

and somewhere in middle east, Bin Laden is saying "hmm.....have our comrades take that to plane and kaboom...."

plinkoman

Mar 3, 2006, 07:10 AM

i can see it now, gas stations for your laptop... :eek:

give me a solution were i can recharge it myself or you can take those extra 4 hours and shove it...

MacMosher

Mar 3, 2006, 07:17 AM

I suppose, once this type of tech. goes into production, size will possibly dwindle and efficiency climb?
Im should hope so

Play Ultimate

Mar 3, 2006, 07:36 AM

can't we just pee into it?

Depends on the size of last night's party and the condition of your liver. ;)

miketcool

Mar 3, 2006, 07:43 AM

Hey, look on the bright-side; you may be able to get a Mac with extra features that you're always complaining about. It's not just a battery in the Apple sense, it can do so much more!!
Want to make a quick escape like a magician? Drop it and poof, everyones gone.
Want to cook a savory meal on all those long flights? Bring some fish, wrapped in aluminum of course and place it above your media drive.
Windy corner office? Makes an excellent paper weight!
Getting weaker then all your PC toting counterparts? No prob, this battery brings your hefty machine to spec! (great exercise, no?)
Feeling lonely on the weekend? Try taking these on your nearest friendly flight, and you can meet the burly latex gloved man of your dream. Just show your fuel cell like a member card!

Come on guys! What did you think the BP in MBP meant?!

~Shard~

Mar 3, 2006, 07:51 AM

For me, this is going to be along the same lines as holographic storage. Sure, it's come a long way the past few years, and it's nearing "production-ready" status, but in terms of feasiblility, cost, etc., it's just not there yet. Not for another 5-6 years would be my guess. :cool:

adamfilip

Mar 3, 2006, 07:56 AM

3.7lbs aint very light for sure

and 45 w aint enough for a new Mac Book Pro
it needs more time..

im sure in 1-2 years it will be 1 lb and can go 75w for 12 hours..
and there will be a recharge station. that you have at home. that will refill this things. just like we charge batteries. only the refil will only take a few minutes

we are headed into the right direction.

rabatjoie

Mar 3, 2006, 08:09 AM

Does anybody know about emissions from Fuel Cells? My (very basic) chemistry knowledge tells me that the carbon atom in the methanol molecule has to go somewhere - so will we have exhausts on laptops?

Apart from that, I think what we will see is hybrid laptops - just like hybrid cars. As long as you are travelling in civilized areas, there is no reason to get rid of your battery - but if you are, say, going to take your laptop on a weeklong train ride on the transsiberian railway, you just grab a handful of methanol cartridges and you're good to go.

excalibur313

Mar 3, 2006, 08:16 AM

I can't figure out why someone doesn't just make a reversible fuel cell. For example you could have one for hydrogen which you reacted with oxygen using some heterogeneous catalyst but stored the water on board. You could then plug it in and use electrolosis to separate it back into hydrogen and oxygen and then just dispense the oxygen into the air. And before anyone mentions this provided that the cartridge doesn't get a leak there are no dangers of explosion, although I still wouldn't smoke around it. ;)

excalibur313

Mar 3, 2006, 08:18 AM

Twenty1

Mar 3, 2006, 08:31 AM

Windows + fuel source = really bad idea

Gives the "blue screen of death" new meaning... :)

miketcool

Mar 3, 2006, 08:33 AM

Windows + fuel source = really bad idea

Gives the "blue screen of death" new meaning... :)

Hey, why else did you think Gates wanted to have Windows installed in every car by 2010...

"Introducing the Ford Fission, powered by Windows Obliterate"

yippy

Mar 3, 2006, 10:06 AM

They actually do make reversible fuel cells. However they are just in their infant stages and currently are big, costly, inefficient and there running lifetime is ridiculously short.

Also, I wouldn't worry about dropping it. I would consider a propane tank equally dangerous (or more so since they are much bigger) and people drop those all the time and nothing happens. Methane and hydrogen are quite safe to deal with as long as you have the proper container.

Running a fuel cell off of anything other than pure hydrogen produces the same amount of CO2 as burning the fuel would. There is actually no environmental savings by using a fuel cell other than you can produce hydrogen from renewable sources (wind, solar, water) by electrolyzing water. Right now they are no more efficient in using fuels than existing power plants (and cars I think but I don't know their exact efficiencies).

Don't expect fuel cells to progress as fast as most technology has. They have actually been around for 100 years or so but are very hard to improve. Also, a very big hurtle to get over is that hydrogen is very hard to store because its density is so low.

That said, fuel cells are great for select uses, I just don't expect them to become the replacement for batteries or combustion engines any time soon.

Balli

Mar 3, 2006, 10:27 AM

3.7 pounds?!...

Did Microsoft design it or something? :D

Whiteapple

Mar 3, 2006, 10:43 AM

What's the milage of your laptop?
OK i leave the inernet ------->[]

I'm not sure this is the right thing to do, to use up some more gas, especially if its to do nothing with a computer. In fact, if it's to use up less electricity from the nuclear power plants, OK, but if not, why the hell would you do that? Oh yeah, to be able to use it in the jungle or on top of mt everest where there is no electricity?

nagromme

Mar 3, 2006, 10:47 AM

It's probably not anything good enough for a Mac laptop this year, but all signs of progress are welcome.

This explains the "ExplodeSafe" power connector seen in recent Apple patents.

cgmpowers

Mar 3, 2006, 11:06 AM

Anything's gotta be better than the 1 hour (maybe 1 hour 20 minutes) that I get out of my powerbook battery now...

What makes me wonder... I remember hearing sometime last year that they're working on some kind of battery that's charged by just laying on a mat that provides power (no cords). This device theorized that you'd sit your laptop on a mat a little larger than a mousepad (probably the same size as the laptop width and height) and it'd charge it through some kinetic type transference.

Where's that? That's the device I want. So anytime my laptop is at my desk its recharging (and or powered) and I have even less cables to screw with.

Speaking of wireless when the heck is Belkin releasing that wireless USB hub? Supposedly you can hook up your printers, scanners and whatnots up to it and have it wireless (so no more cables coming out of your machine)..

Christopher

nagromme

Mar 3, 2006, 11:56 AM

Some products already have that kind of "touch" charging without actual metal contact: electric toothbrushes have been that way for years, and I think a few other electronics have tried it.

The advantage is slightly easier to charge: set the machine down but no plug to attach. The disadvantage is your charger setup itself is much bigger and less portable. And the charging pad itself would still have a cord. Plus I assume it recharges more slowly, but that's an UNeducated guess.

Still, as an extra where you have your mobile charger AND your big desktop pad, feeding multiple devices, I do like the idea.

rabatjoie

Mar 3, 2006, 12:05 PM

Running a fuel cell off of anything other than pure hydrogen produces the same amount of CO2 as burning the fuel would. There is actually no environmental savings by using a fuel cell other than you can produce hydrogen from renewable sources (wind, solar, water) by electrolyzing water. Right now they are no more efficient in using fuels than existing power plants (and cars I think but I don't know their exact efficiencies).

That's correct, but one has to remember that the fuels that we use now, i.e. in cars etc., are made of much longer molecules than methane. this is important because of the carbon-to-hydrogen ratio in the molecule. Take, for example, octane: 8 carbon atoms and 18 hydrogen atoms, which results in a ratio of 4:9. with methane, on the contrary, the ratio is just 1:4. That means if you burn methane, a lot less "polluting" / "unwanted" CO and CO2 molecules are produced relative to the amount of energy that you generate. in so far it is reasonable to run fuel cells on methane, given the storage problems with pure hydrogen (which would be, of course, the ideal fuel).

however, just thinking about all the world's laptops running on these cells, makes me wonder how much pollution that would create... probably the number is negligible, but i'd like to see some numbers on that anyway.

steveh

Mar 3, 2006, 12:12 PM

...just thinking about all the world's laptops running on these cells, makes me wonder how much pollution that would create... probably the number is negligible, but i'd like to see some numbers on that anyway.

Don't forget to subtract from the amount of CO2 and H2O generated the amount of CO2 (etc.) *not* generated by the electric power generation equipment that would otherwise be required to make the current needed to recharge normal laptop batteries.

e-clipse

Mar 3, 2006, 12:18 PM

http://www.nikhef.nl/~h73/kn1c/ELSTAT/Explosion.jpg

Bwah ha ha! Very funny! lol :D

whocares

Mar 3, 2006, 12:19 PM

Come on guys! What did you think the BP in MBP meant?!

Mac Beyond Petroleum? ;) :p :p
If so, this clearly has nothing to do with fuel cells.

BP now stands for Beyond Petroleum. Ahhh, the joys of corparate marketing.

rjrufo

Mar 3, 2006, 12:59 PM

3.7 pounds?!...

Did Microsoft design it or something? :D

Microsucks doesn't need fuel cells, they have a better invention:

http://homepage.mac.com/rjrufo/images/techsupport.jpg

revjay

Mar 3, 2006, 01:45 PM

Yet another insensitive person who still thinks nuclear weapons are just big bombs:

www.eurekalert.org/pub_releases/2006-02/jaaj-abs022306.php

:rolleyes:
Wow, I had no idea that a nucular (said like G.W.Bush) blast has such devistation fallout...are you sure it's not a conspiracy?:rolleyes:

photomaniac

Mar 3, 2006, 01:52 PM

3.7 pounds?!...

Did Microsoft design it or something? :D

LOL...

IMHO I feel that it's a waste of energy (no pun intended) to demo a fuel cell that weighs 3.7 lbs just to show that it is possible... bring it to the demo market when it's actually practical!! ...it's also possible to power my laptop with my 10 lb Honda generator too.

emaja

Mar 3, 2006, 02:45 PM

Yet another insensitive person who still thinks nuclear weapons are just big bombs:

www.eurekalert.org/pub_releases/2006-02/jaaj-abs022306.php

:rolleyes:

Yet another person with their humor/sarcasm filter set too high.

I think you sell us short if you think that no one here knows about the other - and more long term damaging - effect of a nuclear weapon.

revjay

Mar 3, 2006, 03:26 PM

LOL...

IMHO I feel that it's a waste of energy (no pun intended) to demo a fuel cell that weighs 3.7 lbs just to show that it is possible... bring it to the demo market when it's actually practical!! ...it's also possible to power my laptop with my 10 lb Honda generator too.

:) ...that's why I refused to buy a computer until the G5 imac's came out:rolleyes: ...they were just too big before...

"nothing without effort, and blood, and sweat is of much value"

Let's all sell off our autos because they are not fuel efficient and George Jetson enough...and lets walk everywhere...

...who is going to inovate? ...if no one is buying their product...there will be precious little $$ for inovation and evolution...

~Shard~

Mar 3, 2006, 03:30 PM

Let's all sell off our autos because they are not fuel efficient and George Jetson enough...and lets walk everywhere...

Hmm, less pollution, a slower pace of lifestyle, and more people exercising and becoming healthier as a result. Yep, I like this idea, sign me up! :p :D :cool:

iEdd

Mar 3, 2006, 03:48 PM

A good way for fuel cells to work is just 2 parts hydrogen, one part oxygen. Enegy is given off as they combine into water. This will be given in the form of electrical energy. The good thing about that is that it works in reverse too, meaning you can split the water back up using a normal laptop charger.

If the methanol based fuel goes along, it may be as simple as buying metholated spirits from a hardware store :p (Although it's 95% ethanol, 5% methanol).

dongmin

Mar 3, 2006, 05:53 PM

Can any one of you science types tell me how this fuel cell would compare to let's say 6 D batteries?

xPismo

Mar 3, 2006, 07:47 PM

can't we just pee into it?

Only if you get drunk the night before. Honestly, I think this is the wave of the future and can't wait to see a productised version ready to go. Batteries are so 1890.

thopter

Mar 3, 2006, 08:52 PM

This is a solution in need of a problem. Battery technology is finally ready to catch up with our insatiable demand for long lasting portable power. For starters there's the new A123Systems Lithium-ion cells for sale NOW with Black & Decker power tools.

http://www.cleanedge.com/story.php?nID=3960

And in the near future carbon nanotubes will help to build what till now has been only a pipe dream; the ultracapacitor.

http://pesn.com/2006/02/09/9600232_MIT_Battery/

yadmonkey

Mar 3, 2006, 08:53 PM

i dunno how i feel about anything methanol near me when i'm on a flight altitude of 39,000 ft lol

Yes - my very first thought on reading the article was there's no way the FAA or Homeland Security would let that on a commercial flight!

ncbill

Mar 4, 2006, 07:41 AM

No kidding.

Even for bigger applications, the newest lithium-ion batteries will have a significant impact.

Like doubling the range of electric-only (not hybrid) vehicles, for example - 200 mile range for vehicles (in the latest Wired magazine)

Add in a plug-in (inductive, of course) charger, and even hybrids could operate mostly on electric power (especially in a commuter role)

This is a solution in need of a problem. Battery technology is finally ready to catch up with our insatiable demand for long lasting portable power. For starters there's the new A123Systems Lithium-ion cells for sale NOW with Black & Decker power tools.

willwoodgate

Mar 4, 2006, 08:44 AM

No battery will last forever. Eventually comes the day when you can’t use your portable computer in a portable environment.

I think Apple has a chance to pioneer micro-solar panels to power its products and then develop a range of cheap environmentally friendly batteries to retain power until you stand under a light again or in the daylight. That way you can screw all the talk about battery time and switch off the energy saving functions on hardware.

Macnoviz

Mar 4, 2006, 12:13 PM

can't we just pee into it?

or we could attach a wind-up crank
(actually not such a bad idea, although hideous and probably not powerful enough)

http://www.physorg.com/newman/gfx/news/laptop-crank.jpg

Macnoviz

Mar 4, 2006, 12:15 PM

jct101

Mar 5, 2006, 02:27 AM

So it looks like, with the current technology; these are just like those cell phone batteries that you keep in the sealed plastic until you want to use it one time. Open the packaging and expose it to air for your one shot deal. The point I see in these right now is emergency power. It's the thing you keep in your glove compartment or bring in your backpack just-in-case. Not something you plan on using. Got that REALLY important meeting...bring it along. Then you can probably recycle/get-burned it back for another one in exchange for some greenbacks.

Macnoviz

Mar 5, 2006, 06:42 AM

ModestPenguin

Mar 5, 2006, 02:17 PM

Obviously there is an enormous amout of potential for these fuel cells...hehehe...fuel cells it sounds so Sci-Fi...but right now they are almost ridiculous. Give them two years and we will laugh at the battery powered video iPods and Macbook Pros:cool:

avus

Mar 5, 2006, 07:11 PM

I think you sell us short if you think that no one here knows about the other - and more long term damaging - effect of a nuclear weapon.

I sincerely hope you are correct.

elysdir

Mar 6, 2006, 06:29 PM

The page with the photo (http://www.fuelcellsworks.com/Supppage4600.html) also contains an article, which says that there are two different products.

One is a fuel-cell "battery" you can slide into a notebook computer. Antig hasn't given stats for that, including amount of power or weight or running time.

The *other* product is "a 45W producing methanol fuelled portable power system." That's the one that runs for eight hours and weighs 3.7 pounds. It's a power unit that you plug into the power socket on your laptop.

I don't know whether there are really two products or just one, but thought it was worth mentioning.

Also, here's the Antig page about the Media Bay DMFC Prototype (http://www.antig.com/english/mediabay.html) (the "battery" unit).

uncle

Mar 6, 2006, 08:17 PM

or we could attach a wind-up crank
(actually not such a bad idea, although hideous and probably not powerful enough)

http://www.physorg.com/newman/gfx/news/laptop-crank.jpg

You know what I like the Idea. It's simple, total independence, no emissions & no possible mishaps at 39000 feet.

It could be sold with a treadmill. Dock your laptop or better a separate cassette do a 20 min run and have 8 hours of stored kinetic energy. Have a portable handel so you can top it up when really necessary. otherwise first thing am or pm for a days use. hummm..... :D :D :D

where dat pic come from spoof or what

Macnoviz

Mar 9, 2006, 09:34 AM

You know what I like the Idea. It's simple, total independence, no emissions & no possible mishaps at 39000 feet.

It could be sold with a treadmill. Dock your laptop or better a separate cassette do a 20 min run and have 8 hours of stored kinetic energy. Have a portable handel so you can top it up when really necessary. otherwise first thing am or pm for a days use. hummm..... :D :D :D

where dat pic come from spoof or what

No way, that's a real laptop, I'm actually surprised you hadn't seen it
It's the 100-dollar laptop developed at MIT and it's part of a UN project to give every child in the third world a laptop.
It's linux-based open source software, and has some handy features like the crank for power, an LCD screen that's clear even in straight sunlight, and 1GB of flash memory. It's comparable to a laptop of a few years ago, and has WiFi

EDIT: I just did some searches, and the power consumption of a macbook Pro is about 25W-47W, a powerbook around 30W
This laptop consumes 3W, so let's say 1/10 of a normal laptop
The crank provides 10 minutes of juice for 1 minute of cranking, although it's doesn't seam very heavy, and is aimed at children.
So, if you would use that power supply you would have to crank constantly. Suppose you build in a heavier restance, like 3-5 times heavier, you might have an emergency solution if you run out of batteries. Although you could construct a kinetic system that uses your legs...

yadmonkey

Mar 9, 2006, 01:08 PM

Macnoviz, thanks for providing that background story. It makes me smile!! :D

uncle

Mar 12, 2006, 07:04 PM

Had a little look and they have new designs that may or may not be the final production models; One light blue, one yellow, but sans the crank?? seems this may or may not be the final solution. I did read that they had found a way to improve battery life by making text reading activity reduce power consumption.

Impressive project

:o that I didn't know about it....