Become a fan of Slashdot on Facebook

 



Forgot your password?
typodupeerror
Note: You can take 10% off all Slashdot Deals with coupon code "slashdot10off." ×

Comment Re:I hope this goes into production (Score 0) 2

It may still not be compeltely acceptable for long distance travelling. The battery takes 4 hours to charge. The 6 minute figure comes from the theoretical limit that hasn't actually been reached. Quoting Neil Blanchard from the linked article:

Yes, I agree the car is not super efficient, but the battery seems to be the revolutionary thing.
If this is real, then the end of the ICE age is here.
They are also saying the batter is 97% efficient, which a bit better than current batteries (which are ~94% as I understand it?).
They had ~18% charge left, and since we don't know what the DOD is, a wild ass guess is they used ~90kWh, and this works out to ~240Wh/mile. Which is very plausible, though not outstanding. At 660 pounds, this battery could be used in Dave Cloud's Dolphin and since it is 1,300 pounds lighter, it could get below 100Wh/mile -- and have a range of about 1,000 miles!
*That* would be a revolution!
Translated from this page: http://adacemobility.wordpress.com/2010/10/26/das-wunder-von-berlin/#more-744
"Technical Data Audi A2 DBM *
* Subject
Empty weight (including driver) 1260 kg
Perm. Total weight 1600 kg
Battery lithium-iron-polymer (260 Ah/380 V) cell voltage of 3.8 volts
Battery weight about 300 kg
Charging time about 4 hours due to mains phase current in the household (380)
battery requires 6 minutes (future solution)
Life time 2500 charge cycles (without loss of capacity)
= Service life target: 500,000 km
Top speed 160 km / h
5-speed sequential gearbox (race gear: shifting without the clutch)
E-motor 300 Nm torque"
So, the 6 minute charge is future/theoretical limits of the battery. The actual time is 4 hours; which is still very impressive.
Sincerely, Neil

Comment Re:Dual 960x1080 (Score 0) 1140

You're reffering to Linux right? or possibly OSX? Windows aero has that snap to left/right side of the monitor that works well with 16:9, or even two monitors. I'm not trying to troll, and i know it's possible to set up linux to do a similar thing (I used compiz, but that has its issues too). I dont have any experience OSX, so i can't comment on that. As far as i know, windows does widescreen best, at least by default. Personally i hate M$, and all their practices, but i'm not above saying what they actually do well.

Comment Re:Wow (Score 0) 363

Anon isn't one being, it's a collective of people. Some are nice, some aren't, and some do kill puppies and post that as an animated .gif. Though recently 4chan got a bunch of 'summerfags', who i imagine are diluting the truly 'evil' anons that there are. It really has been getting more immature and the years pass by.

Comment Re:I think its entirely reasonable to say... (Score 0) 439

I'm not 100% sure, but if 78% of electrons generate electricity, isn't there still wasted energy before it actually gets to the useful energy stage? i.e. energy in a single visible photon (~700nm if i recall) is significantly higher than the energy required to jump an electron up a state, and that difference in energy is turned into heat. this would have the effect of reducing the overall efficiency to 15% or something that is much lower. Is this true, or am i remembering bits and peices that are all wrong?

Statistics means never having to say you're certain.

Working...