Sidebar Sidebar
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.

Production Fuel Cells in 2nd Half of 2006?

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:
 
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...."
 
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...
 
Dinner?

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?!
 
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:
 
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.
 
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.
 
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. ;)
 
rabatjoie said:
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.
Click to expand...

Yes CO2 and H20.
 
bad idea...

Windows + fuel source = really bad idea

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

Twenty1 said:
Windows + fuel source = really bad idea

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

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"
 
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.
 
right...

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?
 
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.
 
random thoughts

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
 
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.
 
yippy said:
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).
Click to expand...

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.
 
rabatjoie said:
...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.
Click to expand...

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.
 
Stridder44 said:
Explosion.jpg
Click to expand...

Bwah ha ha! Very funny! lol :D
 
miketcool said:
Come on guys! What did you think the BP in MBP meant?!
Click to expand...

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.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Register on MacRumors! This sidebar will go away, and you'll see fewer ads.
Top Bottom
Back