Regarding that 9V (I assume a 'PM3') battery. "This would be indeed an efficient chemical battery, but given the right technology, it could be done, no?" Simple answer....no, not with ANY 'chemical' battery since there is an upper physical bound to the electrochemical phenomenon imposed by today's known physics. That bound is some 43 MJ/Kg or mega joules (an amount of energy) per kilogram. which is close to the amount of energy release which can be obtained chemically (by combustion in say, 'fuel cells') from an equivalent amount of gasoline. Practical limits for chemical batteries (metal/air) are around 15MJ/Kg. about a third of the physical bound. Uranium 235 exhibits a specific energy of some 83 million MJ/Kg, and because it is so heavy and dense, a energy density over 1 trillion mega joules per liter, So a tiny nuclear battery could (theoretically) run your house, there is just no known way to fabricate it, and there are probably physical bounds also imposed by known physics which limit the scaling down of nuclear reactions. On Wed, Oct 23, 2013 at 8:34 AM, RussellMc wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > ... We'd bin drinking for a spell and ..... > > > > > In the morning? :) > > Whereas I never "drink". > But, after observing me awhile, most people can't tell, morning or > otherwise. > > > R > -- > http://www.piclist.com/techref/piclist PIC/SX FAQ & list archive > View/change your membership options at > http://mailman.mit.edu/mailman/listinfo/piclist > --=20 Perry Curling-Hope Research and Development --=20 http://www.piclist.com/techref/piclist PIC/SX FAQ & list archive View/change your membership options at http://mailman.mit.edu/mailman/listinfo/piclist .