backtop

Print 41 comment(s) - last by mindless1.. on Dec 13 at 3:34 AM

An early model of Boston-Power's new battery pack, which will be available on HP machines next year; the battery is expected to deliver approximately twice the battery life of current models, and recharge in only 30 minutes. It also will run "like new" for three years.  (Source: News.com)
The world's largest computer maker enters major deal with green startup

Batteries are one of the most troublesome parts of laptop computers.  Some batteries have been known to overheat, catch fire, and even explode.  However, the worst thing about them is that they are frequently short-lived, with many losing much of their maximum capacity after two years or less.

Green battery maker Boston-Power Inc.  hopes to change that.  Founded in 2005 by a battery technology researcher, Christina Lampe-Önnerud, the company's goal is to deliver lithium ion batteries that will behave "like new" for three years.  These designs will help the environment by reducing battery waste and help save consumers the headache of battery replacements. 

The company is drawing a great deal of interest in the laptop, consumer electronics and hybrid and electric vehicle markets.  It has pulled in $68M USD of investment capital in the last three years to support its research and has expanded to over 500 employees.

Now it has scored its first big contract and is finally seeing the light at the end of the research cycle tunnel.  HP, the world's largest manufacturer of computers, has announced that Boston-Power's Sonata line of batteries will be offered as an upgrade option for some of its notebook models, starting in 2009.

The Sonata-sporting notebooks will be part of HP's Enviro Series program.  They will get a nice boost to a three-year warranty, thanks to the green battery design, which Boston-Power pledges will behave "like new" for three years.  The batteries, according to leaked details will charge in only 30 minutes and will deliver longer running times, offering 4.4 amp hours of power versus the 2.6 amp hours of power of a standard notebook battery.  HP has gone as far as to say its EliteBook notebook model will be able to run for up to 24 hours on an optional ultra-capacity battery.

Preexisting HP computers will also have access to the new batteries as a replacement option.  No systems upgrades are necessary, as they will be compatible with the preexisting battery slots.

The project is the culmination of three years of collaboration, according to jointly released statements.  While financial information on the deal is not lucrative, it is almost certainly a lucrative one for Boston-Power.

Even customers who aren't looking to "shop green" are anticipated to pick the Sonata batteries as an upgrade or replacement, thanks to the improved battery life, faster charge times, reliability, and durability.

Comments     Threshold


This article is over a month old, voting and posting comments is disabled
more efficient != Green
By omnicronx on 12/10/2008 12:40:42 PM , Rating: 1
What isnt green these days? While it is a step in the right direction, I hardly call a battery that gets thrown out in 3 years instead of 2 as green. Capacity also has nothing to do with a 'green' product.




RE: more efficient != Green
By Souka on 12/10/2008 12:45:30 PM , Rating: 4
maybe it's "green" from the green radioactive sludge it uses?

But yeah... "green" this..."green" that... *sigh*


RE: more efficient != Green
By TSS on 12/10/2008 5:53:00 PM , Rating: 3
there's nothing in this article, nothing in the source article, not even a link to the own company's website (why not use *that* as a source?)

here's the site where the criteria for rechargeble batterys are to recieve "the swan", the nordic enviromental friendly label sort of speak.

http://www.svanen.nu/Default.aspx?tabName=Criteria...

under "Kriteriedokument" hit "engelska". don't ask me anything else about the site, i don't know any nordic languages :P

basicly it's fewer heavy metals and that stuff, but all the press is only focussed on the batteries lasting longer, thus less batterys are needed over a period of time and as such, it's more enviromentally sound because less have to be produced for the same result.

also, jason, i am shocked that a enviromentallist as yourself left out these bits of information:

"Boston-Power is the first US-based company ever to receive the Nordic Ecolabel."
"Boston-Power is pleased to be the first lithium-ion battery manufacturer to receive the Chinese Ecolabel certification. "

http://www.boston-power.com sustainability -> ecolabels.

you could've devoted atleast a whole paragraph to that which would've made the news a whole lot more believable. and less confusing.


RE: more efficient != Green
By Souka on 12/10/2008 7:06:17 PM , Rating: 4
oh...forgot another Green product.... Soylent Green

google it if you dont' know what it means...


RE: more efficient != Green
By Solandri on 12/10/2008 7:20:54 PM , Rating: 2
Something to think about regarding the "greenness" of batteries:

Say your laptop battery is 6600 mAh at 10.8V and costs you $100. This seems about typical.

6600 mAh at 10.8V works out to 256,600 joules. That's 0.07128 kWh.

If electricity costs you 11 cents a kWh, your $100 battery holds 0.78 cents worth of electricity.

If the battery lasts 300 charge/discharge cycles, it will have carried $2.35 worth of electricity in its lifetime. All for the low, low price of $100.

Is it really ever "green" to use an energy storage medium which costs 40x more in materials than the energy it will store in its lifetime? Just admit that you use it for its convenience and be done with it.


RE: more efficient != Green
By Gzus666 on 12/10/2008 12:52:23 PM , Rating: 5
Technically you shouldn't be "throwing out" batteries, as all the materials can be recycled to use in new batteries.


RE: more efficient != Green
By omnicronx on 12/10/2008 1:18:28 PM , Rating: 2
When a lithium battery is recycled, only the reusable parts are salvaged, and the remaining parts are discarded, so you are still throwing them out.

Also I can't remember where i read it, but only something like 25% of lithium batteries are currently recycled (out of the 2 billion per year that are discarded). The salvage value of these batteries is just too little to make it worthwhile, i think its something like 100$ per ton of materials. Also hardly any of these recycling plants actually extract the metals (such as cobalt).


RE: more efficient != Green
By dirx13 on 12/10/2008 1:03:47 PM , Rating: 2
Okay. Here's a quote from EarthTimes relating to the "Green-ness" of the batteries:

"Boston-Power is the first and only provider of rechargeable Li-ion battery cells to earn the prestigious Nordic Ecolabel certification for the cell. Created in 1989 and part of the Global Ecolabel Network, Nordic Ecolabel acknowledges companies like Boston-Power that are conscientious regarding the environmental impact of the production, usage and disposal of their products, providing guidance and alternatives to consumers who prefer products designed with the environment in mind. Additionally, Boston-Power has earned a similar world’s-first certification for their battery cells from the Chinese Environmental Protection Agency following rigorous testing and reviews. "


RE: more efficient != Green
By rcc on 12/10/2008 2:36:44 PM , Rating: 3
quote:
Additionally, Boston-Power has earned a similar world’s-first certification for their battery cells from the Chinese Environmental Protection Agency following rigorous testing and reviews. "


ar, ar. does this mean it won't turn your kids blue on contact?

Seriously tho, what other products have earned this coveted certification?


RE: more efficient != Green
By djc208 on 12/10/2008 2:53:48 PM , Rating: 1
While I'm glad they've put some thought into it, I'm always reluctant over these types of claims.

quote:
Boston-Power is the first and only provider of rechargeable Li-ion battery cells to earn the prestigious Nordic Ecolabel certification for the cell.


So, they got some certifcation from some company who aparently makes it's money by judging others on their "green-ness" (probably for a fee). For $1000 I can write a flowery press release on how you've earned the coveted DJC friend-to-the-Earth award.

quote:
Additionally, Boston-Power has earned a similar world’s-first certification for their battery cells from the Chinese Environmental Protection Agency following rigorous testing and reviews.


Isn't that like saying Hitler agrees with our non-discrimination policy? Isn't China the one with giant mounds of e-waste being smelted in peoples kitchens? They're probably hoping when people throw out the whole device in two years they'll be able to continue using the batteries for another two after they dig them out of the landfill. Probably in the next laptop you purchase to replace the one you just threw out.

I'm sure Apple will be right behind HP here, except their marketing will say how it's good for 10 years since no reasonable person is expected to beleive an Apple commercial.


RE: more efficient != Green
By Heir on 12/10/2008 1:50:03 PM , Rating: 3
While it's a step in the right direction, I too am getting tired of everything being "green" nowadays. A company stamps "green" in front of their products and suddenly they're environmentally friendly (and are more attractive to the average consumer...wow what do you coincidence?).


RE: more efficient != Green
By Heir on 12/10/2008 1:50:29 PM , Rating: 2
And forgive my grammar. Proof-reading ftw.


RE: more efficient != Green
By quiksilvr on 12/10/2008 6:21:37 PM , Rating: 2
Its mainly for PR, but in this case it's actually much greener than the average battery. For Lithium Ion batteries, its ideal to keep its charge between 40-80%. If it goes below 40% the voltage goes down and you lose the amount of time a charged battery can provide power. If it goes beyond 80% the heat from the charge degrades the battery and cuts down on the number of cycles it can run. That's the main reason why its so simple to charge from 0% to 80% in 30 minutes; it doesn't eat away the battery. This battery seems to be much more resilient to this degradation process and on top of that has 2x the density, which I believe earns to be called green.


RE: more efficient != Green
By Klober on 12/10/2008 3:29:52 PM , Rating: 2
That's not quite what I got out of the article. Below are the 2 quotes that made the difference in my interpretation:
quote:
lithium ion batteries that will behave "like new" for three years
quote:
However, the worst thing about them (current Li-ion technology) is that they are frequently short-lived, with many losing much of their maximum capacity after two years or less .
To me this says that current tech Li-ion batteries aren't good much past 2 years, which through my experience doing tech support for Dell I can attest to and is why they currently only carry a 1 year warranty (much past a year and most current laptop batteries are nearly worthless). The new tech Li-ion batteries from Boston-Power, however, perform like new for the first 3 years and then begin to have a more severe drop-off in capacity. To me this shows more like a 200+% increase in battery lifetime and is a significant increase over what we currently have available.


RE: more efficient != Green
By Solandri on 12/10/2008 7:13:01 PM , Rating: 3
This came up with the use of lithium batteries in hybrid vehicles. The problem (going from memory here) is that the lithium bonds with some of the surrounding material through use, resulting in diminished capacity (typically about 300 cycles to half initial capacity). A company claimed to have solved it by encapsulating the lithium, thus preventing the bond from happening. Maybe these new batteries are the result of that?


RE: more efficient != Green
By Spectator on 12/11/2008 3:45:48 AM , Rating: 2
Yes I read something along those lines also.

The compounds inside lump together forming crystals which reduces the efficiency (Charging and not using is particularly bad idea).

I also read that supply'ing the battery with 2-3x its rated voltage in rapid bursts can shatter the crystals making it more efficient again. (obviously caution is required)

Perhaps some bright person may think about developing a sonic method to break the crystals down one day.(especially when its $10k for batteries for your car :P)


How much?
By FITCamaro on 12/10/2008 12:21:36 PM , Rating: 2
Price is always king.




RE: How much?
By Shig on 12/10/2008 12:32:28 PM , Rating: 2
I'm just glad we are finally putting necessary money into battery technology. It's been pretty poor for a very long time.

I remember by sega gamegear took 6 AA batteries and only lasted a couple hours =D


RE: How much?
By conflictxinside on 12/10/2008 1:19:18 PM , Rating: 2
Outdone only by the Sega Nomad... :)


RE: How much?
By FITCamaro on 12/10/2008 1:58:55 PM , Rating: 2
Nintendo Virtual Boy FTW!

God that thing sucked @$$. I remember seeing the commercials as a kid and being like "I WANT IT!".

My cousin got one and I played it and it was terrible.


RE: How much?
By omnicronx on 12/10/2008 2:14:22 PM , Rating: 3
Oh man, VB used to make me so nauseous, I remember throwing up all over my friends house when I was young. And whoever thought of having red on black is a moron. In fact just looking at a screen shot now makes me want to throw up.

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/8/89/Mari...


Cost?
By PogoThePrez on 12/10/2008 12:48:51 PM , Rating: 2
The article doesn't state anything about how these batteries are made or how they work, so how are we to believe they are really "green" huh?




RE: Cost?
By RU482 on 12/10/2008 1:03:05 PM , Rating: 2
If you go to their website ( http://www.boston-power.com/order-form.html), they are offering a box of 12 cells for $250.

That's just raw cells, not a battery pack. 12 cells is enough to make two of the HP packs, so $125 each. Plus the electronics, packaging, and handling costs.

that's a little salty


RE: Cost?
By omnicronx on 12/10/2008 1:20:05 PM , Rating: 2
HP is not going to be paying 125$ each when buying in bulk. It would be interesting to know how much a 6 cell lithium battery costs them now.


RE: Cost?
By Screwballl on 12/10/2008 1:32:37 PM , Rating: 2
Regardless of what it costs them now, even if these batteries are cheaper, you know the HP business model will have them adding $100-200 per battery "upgrade".


RE: Cost?
By mindless1 on 12/12/2008 1:27:01 AM , Rating: 2
I read that if all else were equal, the cost of the upgraded pack would be about $30 more than the regular. I'd be more interested in a double-cell pack though if we can finally get over 18 months of use out of them. By double I mean 12 cells versus the most common 6 cell config.

HP doesnt' charge THAT much for many battery upgrades. They're doing so well selling laptops because of competitive pricing.


a bunch of marketing crap
By gr33nv3g3tables on 12/10/2008 1:12:08 PM , Rating: 2
quote:
These designs will help the environment by reducing battery waste ...


Reducing waste by stretching it over a longer period of time? The new batteries are still lithium batteries, however you market it, it's still bad for the environment.




RE: a bunch of marketing crap
By nowayout99 on 12/10/2008 1:31:10 PM , Rating: 2
Having a 50% longer rechargeable life doesn't reduce waste?


RE: a bunch of marketing crap
By mindless1 on 12/12/2008 1:32:22 AM , Rating: 3
You are asking tree hungers to use logic. Shame on you.


RE: a bunch of marketing crap
By mindless1 on 12/12/2008 1:33:00 AM , Rating: 2
hungers. LOL


This Suggestion is Greener ?!
By Chipper Smoltz DT on 12/10/2008 10:58:53 PM , Rating: 2
Making things more green for those laptops doesn't have to be just increasing the lifespan of the battery or decreasing the recharge time of the battery but should also try to find renewable alternative sources of energy for those notebooks.

Try integrating customized solar panel strips (the most efficient ones) so that the notebook could function
and store some of those excess energy in the batteries....
Just some crazy idea that might work...

And while you're at it - try to add a "small" wind turbine as well for those outdoor windy conditions - hahaha.... seems like a lousy idea....


And being greener doesn't mean indulging most of the time in green jokes or better yet being greener means using your pc less for porn . ...that would hopefully bring down the cost of powering up your laptops... =))

Anyways, 'Gratz HP, some positive step towards something better.




RE: This Suggestion is Greener ?!
By mindless1 on 12/12/2008 1:43:38 AM , Rating: 2
In good conditions (relatively, there will be few good conditions using a notebook mostly inside) the area and light present might yield 100mA or about 2% of power. Not worth the bother and extra expense. Instead of trying to position the laptop for best sun exposure, use those seconds to get the work done 2% sooner.


RE: This Suggestion is Greener ?!
By Chipper Smoltz DT on 12/12/2008 4:02:22 AM , Rating: 2
Yup, for indoors, maybe if the laptop is positioned in front of the window in such a way that the back of the screen or the monitor faces the window (where the solar panels or strips will be located - assuming they're really efficient at collecting and storing the light energy or photons)

There was an article some time ago about solar panels making use of a nano-particle coating that is more efficient at collecting light from the different spectrums, maybe even artificial light...

Just to have a good alternative other than being hooked on to the socket to recharge, it could just soak up some energy when it's turned off then store it in the batteries somehow... although this would bring radical changes to the way the laptop is designed but might be worth it ... somehow in some way...

Or for situations wherein the laptop will be used outdoors ...this would be something nice to have just to make the laptop charge its batteries even by a small amount thus extending its "power-on" time... or to soak up the light energy as well when closed or not in use. Good for nice sunny days outside, somehow...


RE: This Suggestion is Greener ?!
By mindless1 on 12/13/2008 3:34:07 AM , Rating: 2
Nope, it's just a silly idea. The minima area available and limited good light exposure make it not worth the time or expense.

if you want solar power buy a far larger panel array, a regulator to output the right voltage, and be done.

Tacking solar panels on things is almost never a good idea. Calculators and other very low drain devices are the exception.


High capacity?
By RU482 on 12/10/2008 12:58:45 PM , Rating: 2
2 18650 LiIon cells in parallel are the same size, and slightly higher capacity (4800mAh), and the same voltage. meh




RE: High capacity?
By RU482 on 12/10/2008 1:00:07 PM , Rating: 2
BUT...if they actually do live well for 3 yrs, and charge as fast as they say, then they are on to something


RE: High capacity?
By Jurgman on 12/10/2008 2:21:07 PM , Rating: 1
It took them $65,000,000 dollars and THREE years to 'make' a battery that's no better.
This is another example of a FAT scam by a (being sarcastic) 'research' company.
Several of my Lith cells have lasted over 3 years. They are still going and use 'older' tech.
30 min NOT for a FULL charge, maybe 80%.
Wow they put a alloy case around a pack to make it safer, average thinking there...
They just went to a chinese battery factory and got them to pack a few cells. Then made stupid claims and took the money.
HP your getting ripped off, cut the middle scam artists and go directly to the guys that make these batteries...


RE: High capacity?
By mindless1 on 12/12/2008 1:31:29 AM , Rating: 2
No current Li-Ion battery pack lasts 3 years of regular use before having greatly diminished capacity.

I'd love to get 3 years out of one and recharge it (even) to 80% in 30 minutes. Today's typical notebooks are a joke in how short a period they run on battery power once they're over a year old. Sure there are especially efficient designs, designs which trail majority sales.


By the goat on 12/10/2008 12:52:23 PM , Rating: 3
quote:
These designs will help the environment by reducing battery waste


That is the same logic that made Dr Richard Jordan Gatling think the Gatling gun would save lives. -- http://www.mymultiplesclerosis.co.uk/greatest-ever...

I'm all for better batteries. But calling these environmentally friendly is a joke. They are simply marketing the technology as green because that is what sells nowadays.




By bushputz on 12/10/2008 1:06:50 PM , Rating: 2
These new batteries definitely seem to be much more efficient, but before they are called 'green', we need to find out how the environment is affected.
How are they made? What waste products are created in the manufacturing process?
What happens to the worn-out batteries? Are they recycled, or do they join their old-school brethren in the landfills?




All the stuff Jason left out
By Doormat on 12/10/2008 10:46:45 PM , Rating: 2
1. Doesn't use heavy metals or PVC (vs normal Li-Ion batteries that do), is more recyclable than the standard Li-Ion batteries.

2. Between 800-1000 cycles to 80% (at 1 per day thats between 2-3 years), typical batteries are 150-300 cycles.

3. Price premium over regular battery is only supposed to be $30.

C'mon!




"If you mod me down, I will become more insightful than you can possibly imagine." -- Slashdot











botimage
Copyright 2012 DailyTech LLC. - RSS Feed | Advertise | About Us | Ethics | FAQ | Terms, Conditions & Privacy Information | Kristopher Kubicki