Shape-Shifting Battery Smooshes To Fit Sizes AA-D

[Resurrection]

Shape-Shifting Battery Smooshes To Fit Sizes AA-D : TreeHugger

----------

Rechargeable batteries are a solution for keeping batteries out of the landfill, but you still have to have the right size for your device, which means buying more batteries. What if you could buy just a small handful of batteries that fit all of your devices? That's the solution presented by The A to D Battery, a single nickel hydroxide battery core wrapped in memory foam that you can simply squish right into that remote control.


The battery is a AA size core with a memory foam wrap that expands to fit larger slots, up to size D.

Gadjitz writes, "Given the small capacity of the battery, it's hard to imagine that it would provide much life for any gizmo. But when you really need something to work right now, being able to grab a one-size-fits-all battery would be the very definition of convenience."


We fully agree - some devices call for D batteries because it needs that much juice to run. Plus, we aren't sure how your devices would react to having memory foam jammed into them. Heat is one issue, and foam that wants to expand (and therefore bust out of the battery slot) is another. Perhaps a solution is a memory foam wrap that can be removed when using smaller sizes, and added on when needing the core to fit into larger battery slots. But the concept itself is appealing.


Designing more sustainable batteries is not an easy task, and most designers bomb on the idea. However, there are a few designs that have stood out as having potential, like batteries wrapped in a solar cell for recharging, or batteries you could shake to recharge. It's a tough job, but we're glad designers are taking a crack at dreaming up solutions that can help us cut down on grid energy consumption as well as materials consumption. And, waxing optimistic, if designers keep up the innovation, perhaps we won't need batteries at all one day.

[slikrapid]

but you still have to have the right size for your device, which means buying more batteries.

you'll have to buy them anyway, or would you rather prefer constantly replacing/exchanging/moving them around from one device to another - as for the different sizes try blaming industrial standards for that one

a single nickel hydroxide battery core wrapped in memory foam that you can simply squish right into that remote control.

and then squish a little more until you hopefully get it to fit in the device, later on you can waste some more time with trying to return it to its original size - it may be fun for a while but it'll get annoying soon enough

Given the small capacity of the battery, it's hard to imagine that it would provide much life for any gizmo

a marketing 101 error?

Designing more sustainable batteries is not an easy task

they wouldn't want too sustainable/enduring items, now, would they, for it would hurt sales & reduce rampant consumerism, which naturally directly contradicts the following:

help us cut down on grid energy consumption as well as materials consumption.

furthermore, batteries themselves have an insignificant impact on lowering the grid energy consumption (which is rising regardless of the minor improvements by new design & co. much more than what can or could reasonably be reduced, not to mention that this increase itself is a direct effect of improved living standards, meaning its an inevitable/logical outcome), whereas the materials factor is likely quite similar as well, which hints at these arguments being empty phrases serving purely for vested industrial interests and/or political agendas

[desodorante]

This is a very idiotic concept. Not only it is worthless, you end using an AAA battery in a D compartment, and get 600mah instead of 2100 or whatever a D has.
Slikrapid, I disagree that using more materials and energy means an improvement of quality in life. Not only because more is not better, but because technology is at the very least evolutionary (and sometimes revolutionary), which means doing more for the same amount of energy/materials.
Using rechargeable batteries is way better than using disposable ones, because it does reduce the amount of waste they produce (don't know the difference about the manufacturing process), and combined with renewable energy sources such as solar light, this will sure mean a recess in the energy and material consumption worldwide.

[slikrapid]

I disagree that using more materials and energy means an improvement of quality in life.

which one is a sign of improved quality of life:
- having a pair of shoes for the whole year/season or many pairs (using more materials/energy)
- rarely or often discarding somewhat worn shoes or shoes that don't last long or shoes dictated by the fashion industry (using more materials/energy)
- having a low end computer or a gaming rig & perhaps a laptop for convenience (using more materials/energy)
- having a medium sound system or a bombastic hi-fi beast (using more materials/energy)
- having a used car with bad fuel efficiency or a brand new super efficient fully equipped one or a fancy sports car or two cars for each adult family member (using more materials/energy)
- how about 1 older cellphone vs. 2-3 brand new ones with flashy games & animations
- having an average medium house in the suburbs or a costly energy efficient apartment near the city center
- how about a low bandwidth monthly limited internet line vs. a big pipe with larger transfers/storage devices, perhaps a seedbox & co.
- how about all kinds of other useless consumerist gadgets & trinkets, items & collectibles, status symbols, whathaveyou, all in need of more materials to be produced/replaced from/with and additional energy to be powered with, reduced by the few percent of saved energy per item
- how about new applications, areas of human activity, research facilities, companies, increasing population, various products, product range and so on and so forth

combined with renewable energy sources such as solar light, this will sure mean a recess in the energy and material consumption worldwide.

not taking into consideration that no energy source has yet been proven to be non-renewable, even less to be anywhere near depletion (just labeled as diminishing to pump up the prices & pave the way for new technology to be consumed via scare tactics & environmental 'concern') - new technology, whether it be solar or wind or anything else, requires a complete re-construction & deployment of existing energy grid elements (from the source extraction point to the application point), all the usual technological cycles required to R&D it from its 'infancy' towards 'maturity' (where it hopefully will be able to surpass the existing mature technology), meaning its mere implementation is going to be a gigantic financial/material/energy consuming effort, likely to take at least a decade or few (thats their so-called 'green revolution')

in the meantime the above mentioned standards & consumption & population will continue to rise adding more and more demand for energy/materials that most certainly cannot be matched in intensity/proportions by technological evolution, whereas the energy revolution may prove to be a costly experiment, naturally for the citizens/consumers to bear, as originally intended by the political & industrial complex behind it