Ask Lemmy
A Fediverse community for open-ended, thought provoking questions
Rules: (interactive)
1) Be nice and; have fun
Doxxing, trolling, sealioning, racism, and toxicity are not welcomed in AskLemmy. Remember what your mother said: if you can't say something nice, don't say anything at all. In addition, the site-wide Lemmy.world terms of service also apply here. Please familiarize yourself with them
2) All posts must end with a '?'
This is sort of like Jeopardy. Please phrase all post titles in the form of a proper question ending with ?
3) No spam
Please do not flood the community with nonsense. Actual suspected spammers will be banned on site. No astroturfing.
4) NSFW is okay, within reason
Just remember to tag posts with either a content warning or a [NSFW] tag. Overtly sexual posts are not allowed, please direct them to either !asklemmyafterdark@lemmy.world or !asklemmynsfw@lemmynsfw.com.
NSFW comments should be restricted to posts tagged [NSFW].
5) This is not a support community.
It is not a place for 'how do I?', type questions.
If you have any questions regarding the site itself or would like to report a community, please direct them to Lemmy.world Support or email info@lemmy.world. For other questions check our partnered communities list, or use the search function.
6) No US Politics.
Please don't post about current US Politics. If you need to do this, try !politicaldiscussion@lemmy.world or !askusa@discuss.online
Reminder: The terms of service apply here too.
Partnered Communities:
Logo design credit goes to: tubbadu
view the rest of the comments
No. Primary cells are easy and cheap to manufacture, and hold much more charge than rechargeable equivalents.
And so much of everyday tech is already built around the form factor and voltage. You cannot change one without also changing the other. While I'm sure some battery sizes will go away with time, as some already have (Type B, anyone?), I'm willing to bet AA batteries will still be around in some form 100 years from now. Internals might change a little, and capacity might increase, but we're still going to see 1.5V packed into those dimensions.
This is half-true at best. Consider these tests of an alkaline primary, lithium primary, and NiMH rechargeable AA battery.
The alkaline has more energy than the NiMH at 0.1A load, but not above that. It will last longer in something like a TV remote or wall clock, but not in something like a flashlight with even moderate output or anything with a motor. Low-self-discharge NiMH, which has better shelf life beats alkaline once the load reaches 0.5A, which represents a device that will drain the battery in 4 hours of continuous use. Lithium primaries win the benchmark here until reaching a very heavy 3A load, but they cost as much as NiMH and only work once.
Allow a different voltage range in the same form factor and lithium-ion rechargeable 14500 cells now equal or slightly exceed the 5Wh capacity of lithium primary AA.
You can't just mix and match battery chemistry and call one superior. If you could, they'd all be inferior to a nuclear reactor in the right packaging anyway. But since you absolutely have to be pedantic about it, I'll make this revision specially for you with emphasis in the right place:
And you can't just allow for different voltage ranges without all the electronics also being adjusted for that.
Superior is a value judgment I wasn't making there. You made a claim about cost and capacity between different chemistries (unless you meant something else by "rechargeable equivalents"), and I said it only holds up for cheap (alkaline) primaries under light loads.
I'm trying to share additional information, not win an argument on a technical point.
That's true. The broader topic of long-term obsolescence ought to include device design though. Someone designing a device today that could potentially use AA batteries should think about whether they're obsolete for the use case.