Structured materials technology is making leaps and bounds like that all the time. I read an article a month or so ago about scientists having made a specially structured material that causes an object placed at it's center to be invisible to microwave radiation, it's not a special property of the material used but of the structure of the material. Negative Index of refraction. Nifty stuff.

Since the impedance is so low compared to a battery wouldn't that make the device prone to explosion or at least electrical fire if it were damaged severely such as in an accident? That's one of the hardest things to deal with hydrogen fuel cells as well, storing the hydrogen safely and efficiently but still having it able to react well. I would be curious to see what products they're actually rolling out, but the article is definitely over hyped.

The article is questionable to say the least.

If it's possible to store such huge amounts of energy in capacitors then there are many other applications for this, lasers, radar, electric armour, partical accelerators.

I wouldn't recommend building a car with capacitors like this because the technology could easilly be misused for neuclear weapons.

Originally Posted by Hero999

I wouldn't recommend building a car with capacitors like this because the technology could easilly be misused for neuclear weapons.

So what has capacitor storage got to do with nuclear weapons?.

And why is the same amount of energy stored in a capacitor/battery any more dangerous than it stored in a tank of petrol?.

Originally Posted by Nigel Goodwin

So what has capacitor storage got to do with nuclear weapons?.

Huge capacitors are often used in particle accelerators which are a component of all nuclear weapons.

Originally Posted by Hero999

particle accelerators which are a component of all nuclear weapons.

So they had particle accelerators during the second world war?.

I think you are confused with something else?.

Originally Posted by Nigel Goodwin

So they had particle accelerators during the second world war?.

Yes.

One of the early particle accelerators used for development of the atomic bomb at the Science Museum, London. It is a voltage multiplier circuit, known as a Cockcroft-Walton generator, built in 1937 by Philips, Eindhoven.

1234567890

partical accel were/are needed to get an understanding of how atomic/sub particals behave. One of their uses was in determining the best materials/shape for neutron concentrators (needed in A/H-bombs)

as it stands there is plenty of well documented material on how to make a nuke bomb (with the right stuff) and as such no HV (be it in a CW gen or capacitors [NOTE super caps have VERY low breakdown voltages,measure in one's of volts]) is needed in the construction

plus anyway... when was the last time a nuke was used? how many ppl have died due to conventional weapons as opose to atomics?

what is the greater threat?

Used to make a nuclear bomb? That's the kind of paranoid thinking books like Fahrenheit 451 were about. Books gave people ideas and hence power so they burned them. Even thinking about suggesting it's not a good idea to further technology in an area that could conceivably be used in a nefarious manner at some point in time erodes free thinking and societies advancement. Otherwise you gotta start burning people like Einstein at the stake.

Originally Posted by Hero999

The article is questionable to say the least.

If it's possible to store such huge amounts of energy in capacitors then there are many other applications for this, lasers, radar, electric armour, partical accelerators.

I wouldn't recommend building a car with capacitors like this because the technology could easilly be misused for neuclear weapons.

Well, by the specs such a capacitor could easily be used to create a "quarter shinker". This method creates a magnetic field so intense that it will instantly crush a quarter down smaller than a dime. Right now the type of capacitors requires are nearly impossible to come by! In fact the EEStor cap is much larger still and I have no idea what all it may be capable of.

It could possibly be used to make an EMP bomb with a practical range. Might be simple too, who knows? That is scary indeed if any Timothy McVey could park at an airport and instantly wipe out the terminals, tower, security, and nearby planes. Fry everything down to handheld devices, inventory scanners and such. It could literally take months to return an airport to operational service after that. Could knock out Wall Street too. EMPs easily leave devices so thoroughly damaged that replacement is the only option.

Nearly impossible to come by? Check e-bay... High voltage capacitors in the ufarrad range are available for relativly inexpesive prices. They can be used to make surge generators.

EMP bombs aren't really practical when built out of capcitors, they're too large. I think the current EMP's being worked on are basically modified grenades that cause a massive compression in some kind of foil package to create their discharge.

Originally Posted by Sceadwian

Nearly impossible to come by? Check e-bay... High voltage capacitors in the ufarrad range are available for relativly inexpesive prices. They can be used to make surge generators.

EMP bombs aren't really practical when built out of capcitors, they're too large. I think the current EMP's being worked on are basically modified grenades that cause a massive compression in some kind of foil package to create their discharge.

Simply being HV and having some capacitance won't do it. They have to be very low ESR, low inductance, and rated for terrific surge potential. Bert Hickman did the quarter shrinker and found only a certain type of Maxwell cap can do it, and a lot of them. Like enough to fill up the bed of a pickup.

Originally Posted by zevon8

last October 2006 in North Korea, nuclear sillyness was demonstrated.

I know people that I wouldn't turn my back on if they had a pack of matches, nevermind " conventional weapons." I get and concede your point re regular arms, and second the point about the tree huggers praising technology that simply moves the "dirty" technology out of sight, as in coal generating plants providing power for electric/hybrid cars.

One thing I have a bit of trouble swallowing is the whole energy density comparison. To pack the same power, availble at the same rate, would require a bit more than carbon nano tubes to deliver without completely evaporating itself in a puff of plasma.

That's not what I ment and you know it