Researcher of new battery accepted my invitation for interview in this website.

[All Darc]

Would you produce a hamburger that make you pleased with one bite ?
Or you would prefer to keeping selling 2 or 3 hamburgers to obese people ?

I can post the text, but compirators could acuse me of made up the text. That' why we (me and Braga) prefered to set a system to record, and jsut when ready, tested, make a video chat and post on Youtube.

Originally Posted by redpoint5

Are you going to post the text of that chat?

Coming out with conspiracy theories of why a product wouldn't get produced because it's too good is ridiculous. Name 1 time that has happened.

[redpoint5]

I was hardly skeptical at the beginning of this thread, but now I don't believe any of it at all.

Researchers don't come up with conspiracy theories of why their research will amount to nothing, they simply share the results of their research.

The hamburger analogy is ridiculous. If people were willing to pay for that hamburger, I would produce it. Saying something is too good to be profitable is a load of bull.

As I said, name 1 time ever where something was too good and was not sold.

I think you've lead us on long enough.

[All Darc]

She didn't told the ressearch would do in nothing. She only said it was more difficult than one might imagine.

Industry wants money. If the big Li-on manufactures get high profite with batteries that last 2 years, why would they sell abattery for 50% of the price and lasts 60 years ?

That why we need smaller manufacturers that wants to cash by competing with the large ones. In the beggining the laws of offer and demand would works and not reduce profit so deeply, and would take the consumers from the big manufacturers.

Why would she and Goodenough lie ??? They don't get millions for this discovery, and a lie so big would destroy their reputation in the academy. They would only have disavantages if they lie.

If it was a start-up, private ressearch, with the main ressearcher as CEO, I would be very skeptical too.

I will turn skeptical only if after they got all patents time pass and they don't allow anyone else to test their batteries. But would still find werid a lie just to destroy a academic life of credibility çike have John B. Goodenough.

Originally Posted by redpoint5

I was hardly skeptical at the beginning of this thread, but now I don't believe any of it at all.

Researchers don't come up with conspiracy theories of why their research will amount to nothing, they simply share the results of their research.

The hamburger analogy is ridiculous. If people were willing to pay for that hamburger, I would produce it. Saying something is too good to be profitable is a load of bull.

As I said, name 1 time ever where something was too good and was not sold.

I think you've lead us on long enough.

[All Darc]

She told there was a bulb that last 100 years but no one wants to manufacture.

I know you got tired of since, since I failed to record a video (I hate computers in these hours). Chat, extra software, full of improvises.
Digital technology... always fails with me.

Originally Posted by redpoint5

As I said, name 1 time ever where something was too good and was not sold.
.

[oil pan 4]

We already have batteries that can last around 50 years.

[All Darc]

Really? But... is it economicly viable, practical and with hi energy density?

Maria Helena Braga told me, for example, that LED bulbs (for home) in USA last quite less than on Europe, since USA politic don't care about ecology, so they prefer to produce more and sell more a product to last less and, even than it polutes more the environment.
Here on Brazil we have both, the long lasting and the short lasting LED Bulbs brands, and the long lasting (not sure if last as long as europeens) it's way more expensible than the short lasting (mainly from China).

I believe in the this super battery project cause I can't imagine one single reson to John B. Goodenough create a hoax, remambering he do not profit with such discoveries like a private enterprise research would do, since he works for university. Why would a recognized brilliant mind, nominated for Nobel Prize more than once, suddenly decide to end his respectable carrier with a hoax at 96 years old age?

And why would Maria Helena Braga destroy his reputation in the relatively begining of her research life, in a projet she will not profit ?

Give me one reasonable motive for both (Braga and Goodenough) do that ?

She was offered a new lab for research on Portugal, with more equipment, after these battery projects, to expand the studies. I don't think a public university would spend such money if they didn't trust or hadn't reasonable proofs of her claims.

Originally Posted by oil pan 4

We already have batteries that can last around 50 years.

[oil pan 4]

Nickel iron batteries.
They have been around a while.

[All Darc]

Just a small correction, it was a incandecent (not LED) bulb that lasts 100 years, but had no interest from manufacturers.

[All Darc]

Is it price competitive?
Have it fine energy density?

One thing:
I would like to apologize for you Ecomodder members and adminstration, since my harware/software set up wasn't up to do the video chat. I will update my system and test, and when ready I will do the interview.

It's not polished to give segmented information, pices here and there. We need a fine interview in her own words.
But I need to make a correction : Despite be difficult in some cases, they are working with the industry. I never said the industry refused them.

Originally Posted by oil pan 4

Nickel iron batteries.
They have been around a while.

[redpoint5]

Originally Posted by All Darc

Just a small correction, it was a incandecent (not LED) bulb that lasts 100 years, but had no interest from manufacturers.

There's no interest because it isn't efficient. I can make a light bulb last 10,000 years. It would be like 2% efficient at putting out light and cost a fortune.

When something fails to come to market, it's because it isn't better. It's not enough to simply last longer than other bulbs.

You're always complaining about LCD and claim CRT is superior. There isn't a conspiracy to obsolete CRT; it isn't power efficient, isn't space efficient, and isn't as cheap to manufacture. Perhaps it has better dynamic range and less ghosting (or whatever the actual technical advantages are), but it simply isn't enough to overcome the advantages of LCD (from the typical consumer perspective).