You might want to hold off on the unless you’re already experiencing problems like some new MBP users are. My latest not-so-scientific numbers show its a risky bet.

Check out my older post on the topic…

The graph is basically the number of positive to negative comments made on MacRumors.com.

10.5.6 Update

Top Gear is by far the best television show about cars ever aired. They can be quite opinionated and occasionally wrong, but they do their best from their perspective. Today’s episode 12×07 unfortunately, in my opinion, they got it wrong. While they loved the performance and looks of the Tesla roadster they made it clear they believe fuel cell powered electric vehicles (FCEV) are superior to battery electric vehicles (BEV).

My Gripes…

1. They implied the fuel for recharging battery electric vehicles is from “dirty” power generation and that the alternative is a small wind powered recharger that would take 600hours to charge it.

They neglected to mention that any hydrogen produced would be powered by the same “dirty” power generation that any electric vehicle would be recharged by. They also neglected to mention that in doing so would require more power and would be less efficient. Meaning more pollution with hydrogen than battery electric.

2. They also implied that owners would be charging their vehicles with a “normal 13 amp” outlet which would take 16 hours (or 600 with the silly windmill).

They neglected to mention the Tesla is designed to be recharged with a much higher output connection included with the vehicle that charges it in 3.5 hours. That’s a massive difference and likely a dealbreaker for many people if they didn’t know the truth. Also, battery technology is improving at an incredible rate at the moment. There are already batteries from several manufacturers that will be able to be recharged in under 15 minutes.

3. They also complained about the price and went on to explain how hydrogen fuel cell powered vehicles would NOT cost more than a “normal car” and “possibly less”.

Now with the US exchange rate as it is, the Tesla is overpriced, but the overall implication is that hydrogen fuel cell vehicles will be cheaper than battery electric vehicles. As far as I know there is no evidence that shows this will happen. Hydrogen fuel cells are still a pipe dream and battery electric vehicles while expensive now are at least available now and very likely could be cheaper than hydrogen fuel cells when they first arrive 5-10 years from now.

4. The most minor gripe was with the range. They mentioned they only got 55 miles on their track vs. the 200mile rated range.

That’s an unrealistic expectation. The Bugatti Veyron holds 26.4 US Gallons and at its rated 14MPG it will go 371 miles. But at top speed it will run out in 12 minutes or 50 miles. But is this fair to say it only goes 50 miles? Obviously, I chose an extreme example but I also believe driving around the Top Gear test track is also an extreme example.

So why do I like BEV more than FCEV? It’s the EFFICIENCY stupid!

Power generation -> Liquid Hydrogen -> Electric Motor = 17%*
Power generation -> Gas Hydrogen -> Electric Motor = 22%*
Power generation -> Battery -> Electric Motor = 66%*
Power generation -> Capacitor -> Electric Motor =79%**

*From a report FROM the European Fuel Cell Forum.
** Assuming 20% better for not losing anything in the batteries.

Even assuming those numbers are a little biased towards BEVs, no matter how you look at it BEVs are at least twice as efficient at a minimum. They both require a power source so you can’t argue about the source of power. But BEVs requires half the power! So that’s twice as good in my opinion.

Tesla Motors

I also don’t like to argue about distribution because both of them require infrastructure upgrades, but in my personal opinion it’s much easier to add high-powered (<15mins) charging stations at existing refilling stations and medium powered (several hours) outlets at homes. Remember you won't often need a full charge at refilling station. Most of the time if you run low in electric vehicle you probably only need a quick under five-minute charge to get you where you need to go. Normal charging will happen at home. In the rare circumstance of long range driving, you'll probably actually appreciate a 15 minute recharge every few hundred miles just to stretch your legs out.

The other thing which is great about a 5-15 minute recharge is the economic benefits to the stations. Remember most refilling stations don't make substantial profits from selling fuel. They make their profits from selling ancillary items such as cigarettes and snacks. If you're there 5-15 minutes you're going to buy more on average.

The two points they legitimately make are that
1. Batteries are too expensive at the moment.
2. The batteries in the Tesla make it weigh too much.

I believe both of these problems will be solved with evolutionary (not revolutionary) improvements in battery chemistry. I can only hope someone from Top Gear actually reads this and might be swayed in the right direction…

Updates:
Wired chimes in…
Jalopnik Comments…
Tree Hugger weighs in…

P.S. Before anyone thinks I don’t get Top Gear, I do. It really is one of my favorite programs. They are hardly fair to ANYONE and for an Electric & American *gasp* car they really did give it a positive (for Top Gear) review. But, for some reason or another, I just wish they would have added in a few counter points and then when they oversold the Hydrogen thing…well…that was the final straw!

The Volkswagen Key Disassembly continues to be one of the more trafficked pages on my site so I figured I would commit one more selfless act of community service and bring you the all-new Mazda Key Disassembly page. This particular key is from a 2006 MX-5 (aka. 3rd Gen. Miata, or Miata NC), bit will probably work just the same as many similar keys. I’m not even sure if what Mazda might charge for this, but I’m sure its more than the $1-2 cost to replace the battery and 5 minutes of your time. It could also be useful to replace the keychain link or clean the contacts.

Enjoy…

There are at least three basic parts to powering a motor vehicle.

1. An energy source
2. An energy carrier
3. A motivation system

Energy Source
A natural resource that we can exploit in order to generate work. Without trying to get too cosmic, all energy sources in the universe that we are aware of are finite and will eventually run out. It is important that we choose our energy sources carefully in order to not pollute the environment (heat, carbon, radiation, etc…) and to not run out.
Examples: solar power, geothermal power, fossil fuels, wind, hydroelectric, nuclear fission, nuclear fusion, etc.

Energy Carrier
A method that allows stored energy to be moved from its energy source to its destination where work needs to be done.
Examples: electrochemical conversion (batteries and fuel cells), fossil fuels, flywheel, polonium, the electric grid, etc.

Motivation system
A device that turns energy into kinetic work.
Examples: electric motor, internal combustion engine, pneumatic pump, turbine engine, rocket engine, etc.

Fossil fuels and radioactive materials such as uranium are somewhat unique in that they are both an energy source and an energy carrier. The disadvantage of using these sorts of resources are obvious. They will run out sooner than later (10’s or 100’s of years vs. millions’s of years for other resources), they often cause pollution and they often cause political turmoil because of their geospatial location.

Hydrogen falls into the second category, it is an energy carrier. Many people who are used to dealing with fossil fuels often mistakenly believe Hydrogen is an energy source. Also unfortunately, since fuel cells operate most efficiently with pure hydrogen and because there are virtually no environmental byproducts when using Hydrogen it has been identified and championed as the future energy carrier. But, it’s a really terrible energy carrier. It requires an energy source to produce, energy for transportation to move it locally, and energy and expensive containers to store it.

Hydrogen is the LEAST dense element on the periodic table. There are no other elements with a lower density, why would we choose this as the ultimate way to store energy?

Regardless of which energy source we use, what we need is a technology that can store energy with very little loss, in a compact package, repeatedly, and with low or no environmental impact.

Energy Carrier Candidates

• Kinetic energy - flywheels, springs, etc.
• Burning liquid fuels - fossil fuels
• Burning gaseous fuels - fossil fuels, hydrogen
Electro-chemical conversion:
• Batteries - NiCd, NiMh, LiFePO4, Limn2o4, Licoo2, Lipf6, etc…
• Fuel cells - hydrogen
• Radioactive decay - uranium, polonium, etc…
• Pure electricity - capacitors

Best Long Term Solution
If we are to pick a technology with the most promise and the most long-term benefits personally I think capacitors are the way to go. Little or no losses, extremely high power (how much energy you can use per unit of time), quick charging (<5mins with the right hookup), virtually unlimited cycles (long lasting), and density on par with 2x modern lithium ion (think 450+ mile range). EEStor claims to have ultra capacitors with the density equivalent to twice lithium-ion batteries. If this is true it is truly game changing.

Best Short Term Solution
If we want to pick a solution for the interim to improve over fossil fuels I’d have to choose batteries. Fuel cells are merely batteries that instead of recharging (storing chemical energy) they re-fuel the cells with additional liquid chemical fuel and the cell is merely a catalyst (hence fuel-cell). Unfortunately, they are not ready for commercial production and sales yet. So it has to be standard chemical batteries for the time being. In the past 5-10 years there have been huge technological improvements in lithium-based batteries. There are at least half a dozen commercially viable lithium-based battery chemistries available today that can charge quickly, last much longer, are much safer, and are cheaper than traditional lithium cobalt.

Additional Considerations
It is more than likely that there will be a mix of technologies used for various modes of transportation for the foreseeable future (hybrids, biodiesel, CNG, ethanol, pure EV’s, etc). Hydrogen is often touted as some sort of panacea energy solution when in fact it’s expensive to produce, difficult to store, and difficult to use. Existing oil companies and automobile manufacturers who have vested interests in the status quo like hydrogen because of these reasons. It favors the usage of fossil fuels for the time being and it also favors the same large companies who will build the large infrastructures needed to support the hydrogen economy.

Energy storage technologies are improving. There is no denying that. Whether it’s batteries, ultra-capacitors, or kinetic energy systems (flywheels) improvements are being made across the board. With that, every few weeks or so someone says “my energy storage will allow electric vehicles to be charged in under X minutes” (Typically 5-10). This is usually followed up with something about how the electrical grid will never be able to handle that and how you could never do that at home.

I also periodically run into someone who starts talking about swapping batteries out of the cars for freshly charged ones. This is obviously being pursued most famously by Shai Agassi’s Better Place. As intriguing as this may sound for some people it is totally unrealistic for the consumer marketplace. Besides all of the obvious possible ways to try and cheat the system for profit, the practical limitations are also overwhelming. Imagine how many batteries a refueling station would need as technology improves with multiple chemistries and vehicles of various sizes need different capacities and voltages. Packaging alone will not allow quick replacement for all vehicles. Thus this technology will ultimately be limited to fleet vehicles.

Does anyone really believe people are all going to want to drive the same vehicle or even the same line of vehicles or even vehicles that can only have batteries exchanged from the same company?

The reality is this, batteries will charge faster, the power for these batteries will come from the grid. Most homes will not be equipped to do fast charging. So where will it come from?

Let’s see, who has the existing real estate, the resources for the necessary equipment, and the economic incentive? Duh… Refilling stations.

We already know the majority of income from existing refilling stations comes from ancillary products (cigarettes, snacks, etc.). Stations will slowly allocate additional space for charging electric vehicles using existing parking areas and other under-utilized space. The local electricity providers will work with them on meeting requirements of both maximum draw and potentially energy returned to the system at peak needs. This could potentially also help offset costs of on-site storage of electric energy. Whether they use Kinetic, Capacitor or Batteries, refilling stations will have the ability to store this energy on site and dispense it to vehicles as needed. They could even have electric signs that say things like “Full charge* in 7 Minutes for $5!” (*and tiny print for 30kw maximum [insert additional legal disclaimers here]) that changes based on their current available energy.

Electric vehicles will not appear all at once out of thin air. Most arguments for electrical grid issues make the assumption that all vehicles will need to charge off the existing grid all at once and today. the reality is, it will take years for the vehicles to get on the roads, years of standards committees working out the system ( charging rates, voltages, connectors, etc.) and years for the filling stations to upgrade. No, they will probably not charge in under five minutes day one, no it won’t be free, and yes you will still be able to charge slower at home.

Electric vehicles are coming, fast charging stations are not going to be free and they will be available at refilling stations. It’s so obvious that no one seems to say it…

Update: A prime example, at least one intelligent commenter pointed out if you charge at home you actually SAVE time because you don’t have to spend time at the gas station.

Update 10/2: According to this study by the US Department of Energy If 84% of the cars, pickup trucks, and SUVs in the US were Plug-in Hybrids they could be supported using the EXISTING generating, transmission, and distribution capacity (if vehicles are charged during the least used hours at night). This would also result in a 27% reduction overall of the total greenhouse gasses in the US.

Some totally useless statistics…

Apple released the 10.5.5 update the other day and while debating whether or not to run the update I threw together this graph. It’s basically the number of positive/negative comments on MacRumors for each point release of OS X from 10.4 and 10.5 to-date.

Anyway, while not the best reception for a release, 10.5.5 is tracking to be pretty average (46% being average and 10.5.5 at 50% as of today). I’m still at 10.5.2 as I skipped 10.5.3 because of the complaints and then just forgot to update since everything has been running so smoothly. It’s interesting to note the bad run from 10.4.6-10.4.9. I wonder if there were internal issues at Apple at the time or something to correlate it with.

Note: the 10.4.8 story was combined with the 10.3.9 release for whatever thats worth.

So, I finally decided to clean up this site and upgrade WordPress. Unfortunately, that took lot more effort than I ever anticipated. Apparently, 2.5 was a major restructuring of how things work. That would be fine for the average user but I’ve made many customizations and optimizations over the years and it took quite a bit of recoding to make it work in the new system.

The good news is that the new system has a much better layout for customizing pages that I can see will make upgrading in the future much easier. Everything seems isolated in the themes folder under your specific theme. I still have a few things that I should probably clean up in the main directory but, I’m already 20 hours or more in and I don’t feel like coding anymore. At least comments, rss, etc… are all working again. Although, there will probably be a few missing layouts…

So I thought it might be a bright idea to illustrate what has to be one of the more over complicated HTPC (Home Theatre PC aka. PVR, Tivo thing, etc…) setups ever, mine… Ok, probably not, I’m sure plenty of people have crazier setups. But, it does surprise me how reliable it has been, even with so many computers involved. So how does it work? Magic! Ok, maybe not but something like this…

SageTV controls most of it. But, after trying numerous 1394 (a.k.a. FireWire) cards I never managed to get Windows XP, the Scientific-Atlanta SA-3250HD STB, and Charter Cable’s crappy signal to get along. Magically (Apple did create the standard for 1394) it just works without anything special on a Mac. So, FireWire is plugged in to the Mac, Sage TV controls it, all HD and digital channels go through the Mac and get recorded to the main media server/raid as raw MPEG-2 TS (transport streams). SD signals get recorded directly to the RAID through a Hauppauge PVR150 in the Windows box. All channels SD and HD are controlled through the 1394 (no infrared blaster silliness).

The great thing about this set is you get pure digital recording and playback all the way to the display. Digital cable -> Firewire digital files -> HDMI TV. The only other systems that work like this are DirectTV TiVo, some dedicated cable/sat. company PVR’s and Cable Card based systems. Unfortunately, after many years of unencrypted goodness, earlier this year Charter turned on 5C encryption on all HD pay channels. Note 5C is the digital encryption for the HDMI not the encryption that protects which channels you get which I believe is DigiCipher 2.

So what does the future hold? FIOS TV and the Hauppauge HD PVR Model 1212 likely. Unfortunately, this may mean losing pure digital recording/playback. But, I would regain recording of all HD channels.

The future is more likely the Internet and Bit Torrent. It’s really too bad for the studios that downloading bit torrent TV shows are often higher quality, more convenient and let you build collections as compared to the ‘legitimate’ offerings (Hulu, NBC online etc… and even recording SD/HD TV from cable/sat). But, this is a rant for another time…

Update: For completeness I added my parents Mac Mini to the full diagram (click the image), it runs Front Row Apple’s not so good PVR software, its slow over the Internet, but I believe that might be something about Samba. She can watch movies via the remote mount to my RAID and I put aliases in her Movies folder in her home directory.

Tag	Warning!
Connected	Disconnected

So it took not 1, not 2, not 3, but 4 or more of these strong magnets before it came apart easily. Anyway, much easier and safer than trying to Dremel it apart and much more immediate gratification than having to wait for the store to open, driving back and having them remove it.

Oh and be good, this is not for you bad guys out there!

So being the lucky guy I am, both my parents and I both have FIOS 20Mbit Bi-directional internet connections (actually they may have a slightly lower tier). So after the 50th time I had the conversation “You should really see this movie, tv show, etc…”, I got to thinking it might be cool to connect our networks in order to allow them to share my media library/HTPC.

Unfortunately, getting my father to reconfigure his home network firewall is pretty much a non-starter. So I had to find a more creative solution.

So here it is, a quick how to get Samba connected over a reverse ssh Tunnel on OS X.

SSH Tunnel
sudo ssh -N -p 222 -c 3des user@domain.com -L 222/127.0.0.1/139>

-N detaches terminal for ssh tunnels
-p is the port - you probably don’t want to use 22 since you already use that
-c encryption type - 3des is the default blowfish is faster if CPU time is an issue
remote user/domain

(direct from the man page)

-L [bind_address:]port:host:hostport
Specifies that the given port on the local (client) host is to be
forwarded to the given host and port on the remote side. This
works by allocating a socket to listen to port on the local side,
optionally bound to the specified bind_address. Whenever a con-
nection is made to this port, the connection is forwarded over
the secure channel, and a connection is made to host port
hostport from the remote machine.

Ok, now you have a tunnel, the next step is mounting the remote drive.

Mount command
mount -t smbfs //user:password@127.0.0.1:222/remoteshare /mountpoint


To make this run at login, put it in a text file, chmod it executable and then put it in your login items.

Great! Final step, how to make the connection persistant. Enter launchd.

`launchd` is a unified, open source service management framework for starting, stopping and managing daemons, programs and scripts. It was introduced with Mac OS X v10.4/Darwin v8.0, and is licensed under the Apache License.

Unfortunately, you need to make a launchd plist and launchd is a bit of a bitch, so its much easier to just go get Lingon by Peter Borg it’s free, it works and you won’t have to learn launchd.

Now you have a great persistent remotely mounted Samba title over SSH.

Notes:
1. The mount command is a simple terminal script, but you may need to put a delay in the script if the connection isn’t up before the login runs the mount script. There is probably a way to get launchd to handle this but I haven’t spent the time to figure it out. So if the session disconnects it will automatically reconnect but not remount the drive.

2. The 1.83 GHz Mac mini doesn’t seem to have enough CPU to playback and receive HD content over the SSH tunnel (works fine if you download, then play). I may try to use blowfish to see if it improves playback. Normal SD divx/h.264 seems to be just fine.

I’m interested to know if anyone has any suggestions to improve this setup.

So if you ever wondered what happens if you screenshare in a loop, here is a nice fun picture =)

People will argue until the end of time whether or not widescreen is better than traditional 4:3 monitors. Personally, I believe most webpages and most documents are much taller vertically than they are wide. So you want the most vertical space possible. I’ve heard the argument that with widescreen you can have two vertical documents simultaneously. But, nothing prevents you from having to vertical documents with even more vertical space on non-widescreen monitor. 1600 wide is really no different than 1680 wide when viewing two documents at once.

So at the end of the day, what really matters is how many pixels get on screen and for any user who’s been around since the days of CRTs, for the most part widescreen has been a big downgrade not an upgrade. If you are buying a monitor for the first time in today’s market I can see how widescreen would not seem like a downgrade. But since most CRT users came from using either 1280×1024 or 1600×1200 the equivalent widescreen models have been downgrades.

I would argue that most users who had CRTs at 1280×1024 looking to upgrade to a LCD would have preferred 1600×1200 rather than 1680×1050. Unfortunately, widescreen monitors were much cheaper in comparison. Only recently in the last couple years have 1980×1200 become available at consumer prices. So I would argue that for the most part widescreen monitors have been downgrades rather than upgrades for anyone who has had a high-resolution CRT.

More recently 1920×1200 models have come out and they are still pretty pricey, some examples of very high rez monitors…

For me, when it comes down to it, maximum pixels on the screen means more to me than anything else. So 1.92MP is better than 1.76MP any day of the week, so i’ll be sticking with 1600×1200 until I decide to upgrade to a 1920×1200 model.

Gratuitous RX-7 pic I took

So i’ve thought about putting in a light weight battery for awhile now and earlier this year my old battery finally gave up the ghost, so I decided to try a light weight sealed AGM racing battery. I was a bit worried about whether or not he would become problematic, so I went not with the smallest possible battery but with something just ever so slightly larger. I’ve heard of people often using the Deka EXT14 (I’ve read these are the exact battery the more pricy racing brand Braille uses) which is a 200CCA 12lbs battery. I’ve also heard that if you don’t start on the first or second try it may not work. I’ve also heard that if you let your car sit for a too long it can be a problem. So I went for the EXT18L which is a 300CCA 18lbs battery. 33% bigger and more weight seemed totally reasonable to me. After removing the original battery tray and battery I saved 22lbs! Nice savings for a mere ~$80 battery which I picked up at Battery Power Inc. (818) 896-6455 (sylmar/burbank area of LA). Installation was 3 very large heavy duty zip ties.

So 6 months later? NO PROBLEMS at all… I’ve allowed my car to sit for seven days and it had no problem starting up and I’ve also had no problems turning it over multiple times. Actually, compared to my old battery which was way past due to be replaced its been a large improvement in the available power.

The only downside in going with a battery this size is that you don’t want to leave your car keyed on with the engine off for long periods of time. Also, note you’ll need some screw on battery posts. Here is a link with some pictures, links and discussion.

So, I recently ran into this article called “New Report Card Grades for the 12 Leading Lithium-ion Battery and Ultracapacitor Development Companies in the World”. Yes, I know, ridiculously long title… anyway this particular article was doing something I’ve been meaning to do for a long time which is consolidate all the battery technology advances I’ve been keeping track of in one easy to read blog post. Well, maybe not so easy to read but at least consolidated in one place. This particular article was written purely from a investment standpoint, which isn’t exactly what I had in mind. There are certainly benefits of looking at these companies from a financial perspective but I’m more interested in the technology.

Standard lithium chemistry batteries have some obvious issues. In the past battery technology (lead acid, nickel metal hydride, nickel cadmium, etc.) was too heavy and/or too bulky to be appropriate for modern vehicles. These days the current lithium chemistry that is used in a variety of consumer products is well within the range of powering a wide variety of vehicles. The problem is there are a few drawbacks with the current chemistry:

• Limited charge speed
• Limited current capacity
• Safety
• Cost

The good news is that these problems are being handled by advanced new lithium chemistries.

Section 1: Advanced Lithium Chemistries

Valence technologies
http://www.valence.com/
Technology: Lithium Phosphate
Claims: “Safe, rugged and reliable technology with a cycle life 3-4 times that of lithium cobalt” they claim after 1400 cycles at 115f (its maximum operating temperature) it will retain 80% (90% at 73F) of its capacity. They also claim a full charge in roughly 2 hours. This sounds like a solid technology for the average commuter car. Safe, long lasting, and reasonable recharge rate.

7/10

Boston power
http://www.boston-power.com
Technology: Lithium Manganese and softshell aluminum cases
claims: ”

• Longer life - up to three years of everyday charging
• Faster charging - up to 40% capacity in just 10 minutes, 80% in 30 minutes
• Safer to use - multiple, redundant safety features mean better protection for the user
• Better for the planet - awarded Nordic Ecolabel for environmental sustainability”

Unfortunately, there are no obvious data sheets on their products on the webpage. So, there is really no way to make a real comparison against the other products are. Again though, they seem to be squarely targeting EV’s. while these potentially have much better recharge time, the lack of real product information makes them lose a point.

6/10

A123 Systems
http://www.a123systems.com/
Technology: Lithium Nanophosphate
Claims: “At A123Systems we have developed breakthrough, patented Nanophosphate(TM) lithium ion battery technology that provides engineers and application developers significantly higher power, an inherently safer chemistry, and an order of magnitude longer life.”

From their data sheets, they claim 80% capacity at 800 cycles at 140f and 95% at 77F! The great news about these guys if they are shipping actual real products today! Both Black & Decker and DeWalt have lines of power tools that use A123 batteries. The world’s fastest” EV powered motorcycle the “kilacycle” is powered by their batteries. The current major downside is cost and lack of large cell availability. They advertise a small kit with 6 26650 cells for $110 each, but this is hardly a scalable solution. On a side note, its apparently cheaper to harvest them from power tool battery backs 3rd parties sell to the public.

7/10

Altair NanoTechnology
: “Nanosafe batteries”
http://www.altairnano.com/”
Technology: Nano-structured lithium titanate spinel oxide (LTO)

Claims:

• No operational safety issues
• Three times the power of existing batteries
• A one-minute recharge
• High cycle life–10,000 to 15,000 charges vs. 750 for existing batteries
• The capability to operate in extreme temperatures: -22* to 480*F
• Low life-cycle costs

While Altair batteries have a specific energy (~95wh/kg) higher than NiMH and similar to that of LiFePO4 batteries (in other words better than NiCad or lead acid but not as good as state of the art lithium-ion), they’ve made significant breakthroughs in specific power (available current). They make some bold claims that if they can deliver on would be fairly disruptive, including 10-100x watts/kg, the fastest recharge time, the most cycle life, the widest range of temperatures, and with total safety. They are closer to ultra capacitors in specifications in any other battery in this group. Pricing? Unclear…

8/10

Toshiba
“Supercharge SCiB”
Toshiba Press Release
Technology: unknown
Claims:

• Excellent safety
• Current performance equivalent to an electric double layer capacitor
• 5 minute recharge (to 90%)
• 3,000 to 5,000 cycles
• Low temperature use -30*C

Sounds very familiar doesn’t it? While not exactly as extreme as Altair is claiming, Toshiba is claiming much of the same advances. Which makes me highly suspicious they are either 1. using similar technology or 2. Sourcing technology from Altair.

“According to a report in the Nikkei, Toshiba will begin producing 150,000 batteries a month at a Saku, Nagano Prefecture, factory. It will shift to mass production by 2010 with plans to make 600,000 cells for hybrid and electric vehicles and 400,000 batteries for forklifts and other industrial equipment.”
— green car Congress
Green Car Congress

“Toshiba…19,440 kWh a year…”

“For comparison A123 is likely producing 40,000 in the eye in 2007. Altair is likely doing less than 3,500 kWh in 2007.”

9/10

ElectroVaya
http://www.electrovaya.com
Technology: “Lithium Ion SuperPolymer” (Lithiated Manganese Oxide)
Claims:

• 40-60 percent higher energy density compared to LiFePO4
• Comparable safety characteristics to LiFePO4

This Canadian company was founded in 2000 and makes a variety of lithium-based chemistry batteries. They seem to be going down the lithium manganese path as opposed to the lithium phosphate path. I don’t know a lot about them but I will start keeping my eye on them.
?/10

Generic Chinese LiFePO4
Claims:

• Safe
• Reasonable density 100wh/kg typical
• Decent temperature ranges
• Typically claim 1000-4000 cycles
• 1C-10C of available current

There are at least a dozen chinese companies building and selling LiFePO4 batteries. While most of them are still fairly pricey, a few of them are bringing costs down to the point where real EV’s are possible. I believe this is the most likely way consumers will see electric vehicles in the short-term. Major auto manufacturers will probably drag their feet and ignore these companies until the market pressure forces them to play their hand.

8/10

Section 2: The holy Grail… Ultra capacitors

While batteries store chemical energy and make it available as electricity. The disadvantage of this is that the chemical reactions necessary for rechargeable batteries are limited in the speed at which they can happen, in the number of times the reaction can be repeated and reversed, and in the shelf life of the chemicals. In contrast a capacitor stores its energy by putting electrons between a pair of conductors, there is no chemical reaction. This means they could potentially last forever and they can charge and discharge at very high rates. in the past, the problem with capacitors in general was capacity. Even the last generation of super capacitors were only capable of 1000th the capacity of the lithium-ion battery.

EESTOR
Ultracapacitors
EEStor Wiki
Technology: barium titanate coated with aluminum oxide and glass capacitors
Claims:

• Nontoxic and non-hazardous
• Non-explosive
• For a 52 kWh unit, an initial production price of $3,200, falling to $2,100 with mass production is projected.[6] This is half the price per stored watt-hour as lead-acid batteries, and potentially cheap enough to use to store grid power at off-peak times for on-peak use, and to buffer the output from intermittent power sources such as wind farms.
• No degradation from charge/discharge cycles
• 4-6 minute charge time for a 336 pound (152 kg), 2005 cubic inch (33 L), 52 kilowatt hour (187 MJ), 31 farad, 3500 volt unit, assuming sufficient cooling of the cables.
• A self-discharge rate of 0.1% per month

Queue up EESTOR!
Claims to have Capacitors with storage density of 280 wh/kg. typical LiION is 100-200 wh/kg and in 10 times typical lead acid. In real-world terms this means you could build a vehicle that would get 4-500 miles per charge and recharge in roughly 5 minutes.

Secrecy and “adjusted schedules” has caused some concern of vaporware. On the other hand, defense contractor Lockheed-Martin has recently signed and exclusive deal for defense applications. I wouldn’t be surprised if we don’t see consumer applications for awhile simply so that the US Military can get a good multi-year jump on building new technology around such game changing energy systems.

1 point off for my gut telling me its not going to be this cheap, 2 points off for lack of any real products.

7/10

Conclusion:

Pb (lead) - 30wh/kg, 300-500 cycles, can’t be discharged to 0%
NiCd - The past
NiMh - Memory issues, medium density, medium power
LiFePO4 - 100kw/kg, great cycle life, lots of power and reasonable price today, also doesnt have a huge environmental cost compared to NiMh.
LiMn2O4 - Reasonably safe, potential for higher density, wear quickly at high temperature and not as available.
LiCoO2 (”typical” Lithium ION) - NOT safe, best power/weight and very expensive.
Ultracapacitors - Ideal technology but not available yet.

So the winner is LiFePO4. As LiMn2O4 become more available they may have a chance and ultimately if and when EESTOR comes through on its claims, ultra-capacitors will win the long war.

Nice Lithium comparison chart

Misc…

Recent rage of adding some capacitors and batteries together to increase battery life and increase instantaneous current/power.
Technology Review: A Cheaper Battery for Hybrid Cars

Research

Stanford University - 10x lithium with nanowires
High-performance lithium battery anodes using silicon nanowires

MIT Ultra capacitors
MIT Builds Efficient Nanowire Storage to Replace Car Batteries

]]> http://riskinit.com/2008/07/08/mega-battery-technology-wrap-up/feed/ http://riskinit.com/2008/04/24/window-explosion-distraction/ http://riskinit.com/2008/04/24/window-explosion-distraction/#comments Fri, 25 Apr 2008 07:08:30 +0000 jriskin http://riskinit.com/2008/04/24/window-explosion-distraction/
glass under pressure…

So, I was going to write a big post about battery technology. But, it is going to have to wait until tomorrow as a huge window in my house has just exploded… Thank the inventor of safety glass! I suppose this is one of the downsides of living in a house that was built in the 20’s. Well that and the fact that my office is tilted just enough that my chair always wants to roll away from my desk…okay and maybe lack of central air =P

It’s still crackling and splintering in a disturbing way…maybe I’ll take another picture in the morning.

]]> http://riskinit.com/2008/04/24/window-explosion-distraction/feed/ http://riskinit.com/2008/02/02/restore-itunes-warning-about-deleting-playlists/ http://riskinit.com/2008/02/02/restore-itunes-warning-about-deleting-playlists/#comments Sat, 02 Feb 2008 21:52:04 +0000 jriskin http://riskinit.com/2008/02/02/restore-itunes-warning-about-deleting-playlists/
iTunes

I wrote a long thing on what to do, then my wireless went down and when i went to post it, it lost it. gee I love technology….any so now you get the short end of the stick =)

This worked for iTunes 7.6 Build 29 (no guarantees…)

Backup
~/Library/Preferences/cmp com.apple.iTunes.plist

Use a Hex editor and change byte 0×13FF from 01 to 00

Launch iTunes…presto bingo, the warning should be back.

]]> http://riskinit.com/2008/02/02/restore-itunes-warning-about-deleting-playlists/feed/ http://riskinit.com/2007/10/23/topanga-and-malibu-fire-maps-and-information/ http://riskinit.com/2007/10/23/topanga-and-malibu-fire-maps-and-information/#comments Tue, 23 Oct 2007 22:27:43 +0000 jriskin http://riskinit.com/2007/10/23/topanga-and-malibu-fire-maps-and-information/
Topanga Canyon Fire Map as of 10/23/07 6am

So I’ve been showing my maps to a few people and decided they should to be posted. You’ll have to excuse the list of names, I’m sure you’re mom and mine aren’t in the same location!

Topanga Canyon Fire Map as of 10/22/07

Topanga Canyon Fire Map as of 10/23/07 6am

T-Cep (Topanga Collation for Emergency Preparedness) Fire Zone Map

T-Cep Information Updated Live information

NOAA (National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration)

Air direction and speed map Red numbers are air-speed, black are temperature. Direction is the line heading away from the + symbols.
Regional visible satellite images 1KM Loop (daytime only and requires Java)

City of Malibu page (source of original fire maps)

Update: 10/24/07 9am The Fire Department reports that the fire is estimated to be 4500 acres and is now 75% contained. Full containment is expected by Friday, October 26. All major highways are now open in both directions. Press Release

Update: 10/24/07 9am Charter expects that customers will have service restored between 6:30 and 8:30 pm this evening. Charter Press release

Southern California Fire Map google mashup (doesn’t seem to be frequently updated in many locations)

]]> http://riskinit.com/2007/10/23/topanga-and-malibu-fire-maps-and-information/feed/ http://riskinit.com/2007/10/10/deca-tv/ http://riskinit.com/2007/10/10/deca-tv/#comments Thu, 11 Oct 2007 05:50:54 +0000 jriskin http://riskinit.com/2007/10/10/deca-tv/
Deca.tv

Long time no post…

So I’m working at a new company. First job since some where in the early 90’s. No really…ok first time I’ve worked for someone else since then. We are a digital studio…the official marketing blurb…

“DECA is committed to creating unique, high-quality digital entertainment properties that combine premium video, social media applications and community. Our goal is to consistently provide new and exciting digital brands to consumers, marketers, distributors and creative talent.”

Reality:

Dog and Pony Show: cheeky interviews with business innovators.
BoingBoingTV: Boingboing…but video

So wish us luck and check out the content and let us know what you think!

]]> http://riskinit.com/2007/10/10/deca-tv/feed/ http://riskinit.com/2007/03/26/somewhere-inbetween-the-moon/ http://riskinit.com/2007/03/26/somewhere-inbetween-the-moon/#comments Tue, 27 Mar 2007 03:13:06 +0000 jriskin http://riskinit.com/?p=46
The Moon (warning its a biggie)

So back in November I did this set of photos of the moon. Recently I borrowed this 8″ Celestron telescope and got a shot of Saturn. I was both impressed (that you could see it at all) and mildly disappointed I couldn’t capture what you could see with the human eye. Hence I aimed my scope at something a little closer to see if I could improve on my past attempts without a real long lens. The results are not too shabby.

So until next time I can think of something else to take a picture of…signing off…

Update: Ok, so I managed to find some mostly free image stacking software, did a quick 10 stack and substantially improved the resolution, enough so that I’m willing to show the 100% version. Warning this is 3872×2592 but its quite impressive what you can do to remove the atmospheric distortion with multiple photos.

]]> http://riskinit.com/2007/03/26/somewhere-inbetween-the-moon/feed/ http://riskinit.com/2007/03/13/things-close-upthings-far-away-saturn/ http://riskinit.com/2007/03/13/things-close-upthings-far-away-saturn/#comments Tue, 13 Mar 2007 08:42:34 +0000 jriskin http://riskinit.com/?p=45
Saturn

So instead getting an image of something really close up (which I often like doing), here is something far far away. It’s nothing spectacular or amazing like this. But, its the best I could do with equipment on hand and not being NASA. Maybe if I can get the tracking a little better I could improve it marginally, but really I bet better viewing conditions would have a much greater impact in quality.

It’s also really overkill but impressive on things much closer to home. Here is my best shot with a marginal quality 320mm lens. Same thing at 2032mm (no eye piece and reduced to 50%). Impressive!

I’ll get a much better moon shot once it rolls around, its not coming up until like 5am or something silly.

Celestron C8 Telescope (2032mm F10) 8mm eye piece (so like 254x magnification)
Pentax K10D 10MP Camera

]]> http://riskinit.com/2007/03/13/things-close-upthings-far-away-saturn/feed/ http://riskinit.com/2007/01/11/iphone-my-2-cents/ http://riskinit.com/2007/01/11/iphone-my-2-cents/#comments Fri, 12 Jan 2007 02:38:11 +0000 jriskin http://riskinit.com/?p=43
Everyones new talking point

So as a techie, my biggest complaints on the iPhone (besides the inevitable scratches that will drive everyone nuts to the point of class action lawsuits) are…

1. No 3G high speed network support. EDGE is 2.5G and barely acceptable for the type multimedia this phone is capable of.
2. No expansion. A simple SD card slot would make your 4G unlimited gig…
3. Battery not removable.

So I got to thinking about it and so far no one has said how long the ‘exclusive’ Cingular thing will be. It could be as short as 6 months maybe a year at the most.

The second thing I thought of was, hey this is standard apple operating procedure. Release a product that is amazing in every way but a few, then 6-12months later ‘blow everyone’s mind’ by adding all the missing features and forcing everyone to upgrade =)

So the lack of HSDPA/EVDO is because 6-12 months later they’ll announce ‘iPhone Pro’ with a removable battery and HDSPA and twice the memory or SD card slot or similar. It will also fix the crippling xyz bug that all the first gen owners are inevitably going to complain about (buzzing, hissing, or some other odd glitch that really drives 1% of the users mad).

Anyway, i’ll probably wait for the 2nd gen, cause my Treo700p on EVDO does 95% of the functionality with 1% of the stability and 5% of the fineness.

My 2 cents…

]]> http://riskinit.com/2007/01/11/iphone-my-2-cents/feed/ http://riskinit.com/2006/08/07/bump-key-video/ http://riskinit.com/2006/08/07/bump-key-video/#comments Mon, 07 Aug 2006 19:41:41 +0000 jriskin http://riskinit.com/?p=42
Click for video

So, I was just reading Engadget and I realized I don’t think I ever posted my bump key video.

For those of you out of the loop, locks don’t work. Even a total amateur can break in to some of the most sophisticated locks without any skill what-so-ever. In fact I’ve personally found it EASIER to break in to more expensive locks with this method, than cheaper old ones that are lose inside. Wiki on lockpicking.

I made this key in under 5 minutes with an old key I found in a drawer and a Dremal.

So without further ado…the bump…

]]> http://riskinit.com/2006/08/07/bump-key-video/feed/ http://riskinit.com/2006/07/08/frys-a-love-hate-relationship/ http://riskinit.com/2006/07/08/frys-a-love-hate-relationship/#comments Sun, 09 Jul 2006 05:08:17 +0000 jriskin http://riskinit.com/?p=41
$39.99 or $14.99

So I was in Fry’s Electronics today and I wanted a 16foot USB Repeater cable. Its basically a 16 foot USB cable (the maximum the spec. allows) and a little bus powered hub on the end. Anyway, after searching the “USB Stuff” isle for about a minute I realized it was on another isle. No problem, ah…the “USB Cable” isle, hmm product 1. $39.99, ah another one, crap $39.99. I was also looking for a plain extension. 10Ft $12.99…ouch…

So after about 5 minutes of digging, I give up and start wondering again. Out of the corner of my eye on a random isle, ah, mixed in with the Firewire cables, a few lone USB cables. Found the SAME 16foot extender $14.99 and the same one bundled with a 10foot and a 6foot cable for $19.99!

Aye…I feel sorry for all the poor saps who just pay full price…

Check out the picture, yellow is HALF the price of blue!

]]> http://riskinit.com/2006/07/08/frys-a-love-hate-relationship/feed/ http://riskinit.com/2006/07/03/snakes-on-a-pole/ http://riskinit.com/2006/07/03/snakes-on-a-pole/#comments Tue, 04 Jul 2006 07:05:12 +0000 jriskin http://riskinit.com/?p=40
Snake on a pole

Wow an update, crazy…been distracted with other things in my life, like
Turbo and other stuff. But I took some good pictures recently and thought I would share…

Snake

How the snake got there…

Back off buddy, my snake!

]]> http://riskinit.com/2006/07/03/snakes-on-a-pole/feed/ http://riskinit.com/2005/11/24/the-moon/ http://riskinit.com/2005/11/24/the-moon/#comments Fri, 25 Nov 2005 00:58:04 +0000 jriskin
Click the moon

Not much to say. I took some shots of the moon and the sky and I liked the results. Click the link, 4 shots and then it loops.

I recommend at least 1280×1024 to view them. I also have an identical but larger set for those of you at 1600×1200.

The first moon shot is done with a cheap 80-320 zoom (at 320mm x1.5 FOV crop 480mm 35mm equivalent), it came out fairly good for the lens I used. The others were taken with the kit lens 18-55mm (F5, 13 second exposure ISO400) that came with my *ist DS. For the fairly standard fare quality of the lenses I was happy with the results. I really need to try and get a hold of my dad’s 10″ mirror telescope, thats an equivalent 2000mm roughly at 35mm and 3000mm with my *ist DS.

So full screen your browsers and check them out. 1280 versions and 1600 versions.

]]> http://riskinit.com/2005/11/24/the-moon/feed/ http://riskinit.com/2005/11/23/lcd-blown-up-round-2/ http://riskinit.com/2005/11/23/lcd-blown-up-round-2/#comments Thu, 24 Nov 2005 04:32:24 +0000 jriskin
2×2 section of white pixels

So I wasn’t totally satisfied with the magnification I got on my last round of LCD vs. RGB pics. This time instead of using a straight 100MM Macro lens, I used a 35mm normal lens attached to a bellows. Last time I got around 14x magnification, this time its more like 168x =)

]]> http://riskinit.com/2005/11/23/lcd-blown-up-round-2/feed/ http://riskinit.com/2005/08/04/rx-7-still-rediculously-fast/ http://riskinit.com/2005/08/04/rx-7-still-rediculously-fast/#comments Fri, 05 Aug 2005 06:57:36 +0000 jriskin
G-force Graph, click for full run data

While part of me feels like I’m getting old, I know I’m not quite over the hill yet. So I got my car back from the shop after 3 months of engine rebuild. Its not quite running right yet…but in the twisty’s not much is faster. Back in March I made this post about the G-Tech Pro. I never got around to posting any of my runs, so I’ll post this one.

Disclaimer: Pseudo-professional Driver on a Closed Course. (hey it works for the car ads)

While in theory on a closed course I have no fear of crossing the center divider and should have the same cornering room, lets just say I was trying to practice normal style driving, just faster =). Now notice how I’m a total wuss when corning left only getting about 1.0g’s while to the right I peak at 1.34g’s. I know there is more room to run out in case I get in trouble on the rights…

Anyway I just like posting graphs. Enjoy…

]]> http://riskinit.com/2005/08/04/rx-7-still-rediculously-fast/feed/ http://riskinit.com/2005/08/04/volkswagen-key-disassembly/ http://riskinit.com/2005/08/04/volkswagen-key-disassembly/#comments Thu, 04 Aug 2005 19:12:30 +0000 jriskin
VW Key

Volkswagon, Volkswagen, VW, Beetle, Jetta…ok that should feed the search engines enough variations =P

Ok, need to replace the battery on your VW Key fob? Or need to replace the metal keychain thingy on it? VW will charge you a fortune for either…I made a page a few years back on my personal web page thats pretty popular, so I decided time for some update pictures and add the fix for the broken keychain…

Enjoy the savings!

]]> http://riskinit.com/2005/08/04/volkswagen-key-disassembly/feed/ http://riskinit.com/2005/06/25/rx-8-sales-by-month/ http://riskinit.com/2005/06/25/rx-8-sales-by-month/#comments Sat, 25 Jun 2005 22:44:40 +0000 jriskin

RX-8 USA Sales. Click for bigger version!

I’ve always been a big RX-7 fan, but for some reason or another the RX-8 just doesn’t do it for me looks wise. Anyway, I did this for MY FRIEND ADAM and just remembered one of the reasons I started this site was so that my seemingly pointless efforts may be useful for someone other than just myself.

USA Sales by year
2003 - 12,346
2004 - 23,690
2005 - 6,992
Total - 43,028

P.S. I noticed I didn’t label the graph, so if it isn’t obvious its in cars sold per month.

]]> http://riskinit.com/2005/06/25/rx-8-sales-by-month/feed/ http://riskinit.com/2005/06/24/high-quality-photo-printers/ http://riskinit.com/2005/06/24/high-quality-photo-printers/#comments Sat, 25 Jun 2005 05:51:32 +0000 jriskin

Canon Pixma IP8500 and the Epson R800

This article is a tad old, but its still very relevant. I recently decided that my cheap ass Canon S520 (paid $50 refurb at Frys) is lacking compared to modern printers. I also recently started doing more photography and decided it might be nice to have a nice printer. Tom’s Hardware did a nice review of the 3 current $300-400 range printers from Canon, Epson and HP. Anyway, so sum up…

The Canon and the Epson were very close and better overall than the HP. The Canon IP8500 had the edge in Speed. The Epson R800 has its edge in better Quality and print Longevity (uses pigment based inks instead of dye based). The Epson also had a couple little features I think might be nice the canon doesn’t, roll paper, firewire, and better fine art paper selection. The Canon on the other hand has pictbridge (lets you print from memory cards), duplex printing (double sided) and a user replaceable printhead. The Epson print head is not user replaceable, so if its damaged or clogged and can’t be cleared using self-cleaning it needs to be sent in for repair. Although, I hear in the latest models this is less of a concern, I would use your printer occasionally to keep the heads clean and follow the directions when replacing ink. I’ve also heard one of the caveats of any of Epsons printers is that if you switch print qualities they tend to go crazy about head cleaning and in general they tend to be fussy if you don’t use them often.

I hear the Canon prints can have some color variation compared to the Epson’s when viewed in different lighting conditions, as well as they tend to be a bit exaggerated which can make printing portraits (which have subtle skin tones) a little challenging. On the other hand your average pictures will look brighter and more vibriant.

From pcworld’s review, they both seem to have almost identical photo print costs.

A. So if you need the extra speed and want to sacrifice a very small touch of quality for a nice boost in speed, the Canon is your man.

B. If you demand the highest quality and want fade free water resistant archival quality prints on a variety of papers and follow the directions to keep your heads unclogged the Epson is a winner.

After taking a look at some print samples from both printers, its very very close. I would need to have identical prints to really tell you which one is better, but it does look like the Epson has the edge. Its detail from its 1.5picoliter drop size just seems to edge out the 2picoliter drops on the Canon.

I think for most users the feature list will be the deciding factor since they are so close to each other in quality.

P.S. Ok, I take it back, after reading tons of additional reviews I think the less hassle of the Canon is winning over the archival inks of the Epson. They simply clog too often from user reports than I think is worth it to me. I don’t print every day and I don’t want to waste $10 in ink warming my printer up every couple of weeks.

]]> http://riskinit.com/2005/06/24/high-quality-photo-printers/feed/