There is a long road from theory to practice (aka., nuclear fusion power plants, nuclear energy) so one needs to take such announcements with a bit of skepticism. Still, this is interesting: Green Car Congress: MIT Researchers Find That Elastic Energy Storage Systems Built With Carbon Nanotubes Could Match Li-ion Battery Energy Densities Nanotubes have amazing properties ... something like "unobtanium" ... but they are devilishly difficult to make in useful forms. Still, it is an interesting material even if still more microscopic than usable for real world structures. Bob Wilson
Actually, and more interestingly, I just read about using specially-modified bacteria and nanotubes to create highly efficient batteries that don't use toxic ingredients. The spring idea seems like it's a LONG ways off. Sort of like someone saying in ancient Rome, "Hey, we can make swords out of metal, so with just a little more research, it shouldn't be a big deal to make boats and enormous buildings out of metal, too."
I'm imagining a PSD and smart spring at the base of a windmill. Cool If society does not implode in the next couple of centuries, I think this age of burning fossil fuels for energy, and using massive amounts of metals for mechanical applications will be known as the 'age of waste'.
I fully support the research for any new technologies. I'm open minded. If this works, excellent! I just hope that unlike traditional rubber that dries up and cracks after several years, these carbon nanotubes last the life of the vehicle, and do not have to be replaced regularly; creating an environmental waste impact.
It'll happen when carbon nanotubes and buckyballs are used to build the tethers for a space elevator. The astronauts can be the early adopters. Until then, I'll just use wind-up rubberbands like I've always done. Whatever happened to flywheel energy storage?
IIRC, everyone ended up using battery KERS systems. And only a few cars used them because of the limitations they put on the system.
When I firs saw this, two things jumped into my mind. 1) stored energy/weight is high, but that is largely because the weight of carbon is so low, not necessarily that the stored energy is so high. This thing has to take you 200 miles and up hills, or we going to stop and wind it up with a hand crank every 10 miles </grins>... sorry.... 2) what about stored energy/volume? If there is a lot of wasted space in this gizmo, a car for two people will look like an 18-wheeler. </more grins> And of course, you actually have to make a big version work. Well, it sounds like a lot of fun in the lab anyway. The race is on between carbon nanotubes, flywheels, compressed air, zap caps, cold fusion.... and... I almost forgot... batteries.
So then I was thinking, "nanotube cords in tires." If they are efficient at returning energy with low loss, perhaps a nanotube cord and nanotube rubber complex might reduce tire flex losses ... but there in lies the path to madness (aka., nuclear power advocates hanging out in airports.) So I'm sitting at a bar typing the note and wondering how great would be a nanotube cocktail straw? ... Basic research, always and the more the merrier. But there is such a long, long lead time from the lab to practical products ... unless it can be used in a weapon. Bob Wilson
In F1 racing, drivers accelerate within a second after braking; however, on the street people may drive miles between starting and stopping ... errr, uh, stopping and starting Okay, you win. But like Glider said...flywheels are HEAVY! Rubber bands weigh much less (maybe; it depends on the size and weight of the belt that would drive a CAR) ....But then again, flywheels may weigh less than batteries. Very true.
