Personal boycot of Lithium Ion batteries

On 3 Nov 2005 09:48:34 -0800, Bill Tuthill wrote:

Bucky wrote:

Sounds like your real issue is with all rechargeable batteries.
NiMH and NiCad only last about 2 years as well. Li-ion batts are more

Bull-oney.

We have some AA NiMH batteries at home that have been in use
for over 8 years. They are GP brand. I'm not certain how long,
(wish I had marked the year of purchase on these batteries) but
I'm sure our kids have had book lights for 8 years.

You're both right (or wrong). One manufacturer claimed that
properly cared for batteries should be considered to have reached
their end-of-life when their capacities have diminished to about 3/4
of their original capacity. My own tolerance is greater, and I only
start considering that batteries need replacing when they can only
be charged to about 60% of their original capacity when used in most
devices. But for devices requiring very low currents, batteries
that have lost far more of their original capacity can remain
useful. As a result, I still use some NiMH batteries that are
probably more than 5 years old.


Some NiMH batteries we bought didn't last that long, especially
Ray-o-vac it seems. I'm not sure whether milliamp-hour capacity
is inversely related to life expectancy; could be.

Battery life is affected most by the equipment it is used in and
how the batteries are used or abused. If a digital device shuts
down due to low voltage well before any individual cell has been
flatlined or reverse charged, the batteries should have a long life
of many years. This is most likely to be the case when the devices
use a small number of cells, such as 1 or 2. When 4 or more are
used, you've got to be very careful with some equipment. I assume
that most cameras are fairly well behaved, but many radios using 4
AA cells can easily damage batteries without you being aware of it,
so that instead of the batteries lasting several years, they might
have to be replaced within several months.

The only problems I've had with RayOVac batteries were with their
rechargeable alkalines. Their NiMH batteries have performed well
for me. I'm still using several older ones that originally had 1300
mah and 1600 mah capacities. But I don't use them in cameras.

On Wed, 2 Nov 2005 13:43:05 -0500, "SimonLW" wrote:

The Lio-ion in my Dell notebook (only 2 years old) now only runs it for
10-15 minutes. About $200 to get a new one. The Sony Cybershot camera at
work, the Info lithium battery I get low battery warning after recharging
$50 to replace. My Fuji 6800, the Lithium was no good after three years.
I've tried some off brands for less $$, but they don't seem hold the charge
as the OEM. The $35 I bought as a spare form my 6800 never was that great
and it quit running the camera after 1 year.

They are expensive and have a short life span. From this point on, I'm going
with cameras that will take AA, or have the AA option in the vertical hand
grip (DSLRs). With AA's I can carry a couple spares without the cost of the
second lithium. And in a pinch, I can go buy Alkalines just about anywhere.
I can get 150 shots from alkalines PS camera or 300+ with Ni-Mh.

Well that's my rant. Perhaps Lithium longevity will improve. Don't the
hybrid cars use lithium batteries? Can't imagine the cost of replacing that
thing in three years!
-S



$200 for a laptop battery? That is ridiculous. No, excuse me, it's
absurd. Talk about a sucker game. Is this typical? If so, I can put
off buying a laptop for another few years.

There is no rational reason a battery like that should cost that much.
it does not contain gold nor have to be manufactured in outer space.
But I'm sure some will defend the ripoff; they always do.

Spudnik

ASAAR wrote:

We have some AA NiMH batteries at home that have been in use
for over 8 years. They are GP brand.

You're both right (or wrong). One manufacturer claimed that
properly cared for batteries should be considered to have reached
their end-of-life when their capacities have diminished to about 3/4
of their original capacity. My own tolerance is greater, and I only
start considering that batteries need replacing when they can only
be charged to about 60% of their original capacity when used in most
devices. But for devices requiring very low currents, batteries
that have lost far more of their original capacity can remain
useful. As a result, I still use some NiMH batteries that are
probably more than 5 years old.

That explains a lot. I'm sure that these GP 850(?) mAh NiMH batteries
have taken more than 1000 charge/discharge cycles, but perhaps they are
way below 75% of capacity.

Battery life is affected most by the equipment it is used in and
how the batteries are used or abused. If a digital device shuts
down due to low voltage well before any individual cell has been
flatlined or reverse charged, the batteries should have a long life
of many years.

I thought NiMH batteries liked to be completely discharged, like
NiCd. Whereas I hear LiOn batteries do not like complete discharge.

On 3 Nov 2005 15:18:12 -0800, Bill Tuthill wrote:

Battery life is affected most by the equipment it is used in and
how the batteries are used or abused. If a digital device shuts
down due to low voltage well before any individual cell has been
flatlined or reverse charged, the batteries should have a long life
of many years.

I thought NiMH batteries liked to be completely discharged, like
NiCd. Whereas I hear LiOn batteries do not like complete discharge.

NiMH (and NiCad) batteries are considered to be completely
discharged when their voltage under normal loads drops to about 0.9
volts, at which point they contain virtually no more potential
energy. Alkaline cells on the other hand have plenty of energy
remaining at that point, and in a suitable device can continue
operating for many more hours. This is the main reason why NiMH
batteries last so much longer in cameras than alkalines, even though
they both have similar capacities. When the camera shuts down due
to low voltage, NiMH cells are almost completely exhausted, whereas
the alkalines are only about 1/2 used up.

If NiMH cells continue to be used after the voltage has dropped
to 0.9v damage starts occurring, first to one electrode and then to
the other. There probably are differences between the two types
since I've only seen NiMH cells displaying zero voltage, but I've
often seen NiCad cells showing negative voltages after abuse. Most
of this and much more is explained in Energizer's NiMH application
manual, available at:

http://data.energizer.com/PDFs/nicke...ide_appman.pdf

SimonLW wrote:
The Lio-ion in my Dell notebook (only 2 years old) now only runs it for
10-15 minutes. About $200 to get a new one. The Sony Cybershot camera at
work, the Info lithium battery I get low battery warning after recharging
$50 to replace. My Fuji 6800, the Lithium was no good after three years.
I've tried some off brands for less $$, but they don't seem hold the charge
as the OEM. The $35 I bought as a spare form my 6800 never was that great
and it quit running the camera after 1 year.

They are expensive and have a short life span. From this point on, I'm going
with cameras that will take AA, or have the AA option in the vertical hand
grip (DSLRs). With AA's I can carry a couple spares without the cost of the
second lithium. And in a pinch, I can go buy Alkalines just about anywhere.
I can get 150 shots from alkalines PS camera or 300+ with Ni-Mh.

Well that's my rant. Perhaps Lithium longevity will improve. Don't the
hybrid cars use lithium batteries? Can't imagine the cost of replacing that
thing in three years!
-S


Well, lithium ion batteries DO has a rather short (2-3 years) life, but
their energy density is great, and their weight is low. You have to
weigh the good against the bad.


--
Ron Hunter

In article , The Original
Spudnik wrote:

$200 for a laptop battery? That is ridiculous. No, excuse me, it's
absurd. Talk about a sucker game. Is this typical? If so, I can put
off buying a laptop for another few years.

That's a touch on the high side; most are in the $150 - $180 range.

Inside the plasic housing, most contain off-the-shelf solder tab cells,
plus a thermal sensor and a small circuit board to retain the identity
and usage history of the pack. (This latter is so the laptop can
predict the runtime of that particular battery)

A couple of years ago, I calculated the cost of the components in a
pack. Minus the tiny proprietary circuit board, the batteries in a $150
pack would cost ME about $35. I assume the laptop manufacturer could
buy better than I, in quantity...

On Fri, 04 Nov 2005 10:15:41 -0500, Scott Schuckert
wrote:

In article , The Original
Spudnik wrote:

$200 for a laptop battery? That is ridiculous. No, excuse me, it's
absurd. Talk about a sucker game. Is this typical? If so, I can put
off buying a laptop for another few years.

That's a touch on the high side; most are in the $150 - $180 range.

Inside the plasic housing, most contain off-the-shelf solder tab cells,
plus a thermal sensor and a small circuit board to retain the identity
and usage history of the pack. (This latter is so the laptop can
predict the runtime of that particular battery)

A couple of years ago, I calculated the cost of the components in a
pack. Minus the tiny proprietary circuit board, the batteries in a $150
pack would cost ME about $35. I assume the laptop manufacturer could
buy better than I, in quantity...

A good rule of thumb I once heard is that the manufacturing cost is
one-fifth of the selling price.

K.S.