Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Technology Stocks : Energy Conversion Devices -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: fred whitridge who wrote (3958)	8/23/1999 10:53:00 PM
From: Michael Latas	Respond to of 8393

Fred, let me coat-tail on your post. First, let me state that there is plenty of room for competition in all fields. No one technology has captured all markets. Each niche is up for grabs by the best companies with the best technologies. And, that is just the way things are. It is competition that drives all companies to strive to do better, which includes ECD. I had to get that out of the way so that no one could misconstrue the following comments I'm going to make as bashing. I enjoy the many fine contributions that are made on this thread and I would like to see it continue. We are very fortunate in that we have a relatively good balance of informed members in this discussion group. Each one brings something different to the table. Now Fred, I would like to add to your comments. Ray's post #3948 reinforces your safety issue question with the following quote: "Lithium-ion technology uses organic materials that can burn, and disquieting fire and smoke have been observed in some tests." Now, that statement happens to be a scientific fact and not an opinion. This is public knowledge, with fires and explosions that most of us have read about. That happens to be a very, very, major big time problem that has yet to be able to be solved due to the very nature of the raw materials used in their process. That too is also a fact. That is just one problem inherent in lithium-ion technology. Lithium-polymer is another issue. They are attempting to overcome the problems of lithium-ion and are having a difficult time of it. We can discuss the differences later if you wish. Now, let's look at yet another problem. I refer to the previous sentence to the above quote from post #3948, that states: "For lithium-ion batteries, energy and power goals appear to be attainable, but meeting cycle-life AND calendar life targets (those are two different problems to overcome and not just one) is questionable. The complete 125 page report may have even elaborated more fully on this subject. These are far from easy problems to overcome. A whole lot of time and money have been spent and continue to be thrown at these very important technical problems. And, while the various mfgr's continue to work on these problems let me assure you that ECD continues to improve its technology and has a great proven potential to continue doing so. Now,let's talk about cost comparisons to mfg'r a lithium- ion battery vs. the same size NiMH battery. According to Stan Ovshinsky himself, it cost three times as much to produce a lithium-ion battery due to its high degree of complexity, than our NiMH battery. This was as of last year. Someone may ask what does Stan know about the subject of lithium-ion? Anyone who has been a member of this thread for any length of time knows that when Stan and company decided to tackle the battery technology problem in the beginning he started in hot pursuit of solving the very problems inherent in the lithium-ion technology. I rest my case. Ray, if you have any specific facts to the contrary I'm sure we would all appreciate hearing from you. We're all in this together. We all need to stay informed of the facts from fiction commonly propagandized by so many different companies. I appreciate your posts. Regards.

To: fred whitridge who wrote (3958)	8/23/1999 11:14:00 PM
From: Ray	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 8393

<I WON'T defer to LiPoly however. Tried to buy insurance for a lithium plant lately? Read about the conflagrations at Sony (big one),Valence, Ultralife and others? Read about the airline safety crusades where COMPUTER MANUFACTURERS are saying please don'trecharge our lithium batteries in flight? Listened to the Ft. Lauderdale battery conference where our very own Mike Fetcenko said that ourNiMh has more volumetric density than Lithium?> I am aware of the objections to lithium batteries you repeat. However, Lithium POLYMER batteries do NOT, as nearly as I can tell, have the hazards you mention. Lithium Ion (LiIon) batteries do have significant hazard issues, apparently, but not LiPoly. The factory-level hazards that exist due to handling raw lithium during processing steps are another matter; but this has not prevented production from commencing at a substantial level. As for even late-model Ovonic NiMH batteries having more volumetric efficiency than LiPoly batteries, don't blindly count on this. I believed this for a while, but recent (last six months, say) VLNC LiPoly specs I have seen indicate that the two technologies are close in this respect -- with the more advanced LiPoly batteries quite possibly ahead. I know full well that "specsmanship" prevails strongly in the battery world, but I have allowed for this as best and honestly as I can -- and I think the VLNC LiPoly batteries are a realistic near-future threat to the present contemplated Ovonic battery dominance. I could be wrong, of course, but I am speaking from the best assessment I can make at this time. It is my opinion that the group is generally not following the LiPoly technology with sufficient diligence. I would appreciate more effort in this direction by the other members. Ray