<article>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#article09_06_26_1746258</id>
	<title>New Lithium-Air Battery Delivers 10 Times the Energy Density</title>
	<author>ScuttleMonkey</author>
	<datestamp>1246045020000</datestamp>
	<htmltext><a href="http://www.technologyreview.com/" rel="nofollow">Al</a> writes <i>"A company called PolyPlus has <a href="http://www.technologyreview.com/energy/22926/">developed lithium metal-air batteries</a> that have 10 times the energy density of regular lithium-ion batteries. The anode is made up entirely of lithium metal, and the surrounding air acts as the cathode, making the batteries incredibly energy dense. Previous efforts to make lithium metal batteries have been stymied by the sensitivity of lithium to water in the air. The new batteries use a sophisticated membrane to protect the lithium anode and PolyPlus has even created a version that works underwater, by drawing oxygen through the membrane. Lithium metal-air batteries could be light-weight power sources for demand for plug-in hybrid vehicles and consumer electronics; IBM also recently announced that it would develop lithium metal-air batteries <a href="http://www.technologyreview.com/energy/22780/">for the energy grid and for transportation</a>."</i></htmltext>
<tokenext>Al writes " A company called PolyPlus has developed lithium metal-air batteries that have 10 times the energy density of regular lithium-ion batteries .
The anode is made up entirely of lithium metal , and the surrounding air acts as the cathode , making the batteries incredibly energy dense .
Previous efforts to make lithium metal batteries have been stymied by the sensitivity of lithium to water in the air .
The new batteries use a sophisticated membrane to protect the lithium anode and PolyPlus has even created a version that works underwater , by drawing oxygen through the membrane .
Lithium metal-air batteries could be light-weight power sources for demand for plug-in hybrid vehicles and consumer electronics ; IBM also recently announced that it would develop lithium metal-air batteries for the energy grid and for transportation .
"</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Al writes "A company called PolyPlus has developed lithium metal-air batteries that have 10 times the energy density of regular lithium-ion batteries.
The anode is made up entirely of lithium metal, and the surrounding air acts as the cathode, making the batteries incredibly energy dense.
Previous efforts to make lithium metal batteries have been stymied by the sensitivity of lithium to water in the air.
The new batteries use a sophisticated membrane to protect the lithium anode and PolyPlus has even created a version that works underwater, by drawing oxygen through the membrane.
Lithium metal-air batteries could be light-weight power sources for demand for plug-in hybrid vehicles and consumer electronics; IBM also recently announced that it would develop lithium metal-air batteries for the energy grid and for transportation.
"</sentencetext>
</article>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_26_1746258.28487311</id>
	<title>A few years?</title>
	<author>gubers33</author>
	<datestamp>1246049700000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>A few years for this product on the market is too long, I know through reading through some patents that they are currently working on different types of polymer batteries which are actually lighter than lithium polymer batteries. If one of these polymers hits the market before or at the same time as these batteries then it will be no competition on which will dominate the market. If they want to make money they need to get these on the market faster than a few years.</htmltext>
<tokenext>A few years for this product on the market is too long , I know through reading through some patents that they are currently working on different types of polymer batteries which are actually lighter than lithium polymer batteries .
If one of these polymers hits the market before or at the same time as these batteries then it will be no competition on which will dominate the market .
If they want to make money they need to get these on the market faster than a few years .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>A few years for this product on the market is too long, I know through reading through some patents that they are currently working on different types of polymer batteries which are actually lighter than lithium polymer batteries.
If one of these polymers hits the market before or at the same time as these batteries then it will be no competition on which will dominate the market.
If they want to make money they need to get these on the market faster than a few years.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_26_1746258.28490313</id>
	<title>Re:Explosions</title>
	<author>timeOday</author>
	<datestamp>1246025100000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><blockquote><div><p>At ten times the energy output, it may be 10x more dangerous.</p></div></blockquote><p>

Who cares?  All this fear is based on practically nothing.  An increase in battery density of 10x, if true, is an incredible step forward, and could really open the door for electricity to displace oil.  That is huge.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>At ten times the energy output , it may be 10x more dangerous .
Who cares ?
All this fear is based on practically nothing .
An increase in battery density of 10x , if true , is an incredible step forward , and could really open the door for electricity to displace oil .
That is huge .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>At ten times the energy output, it may be 10x more dangerous.
Who cares?
All this fear is based on practically nothing.
An increase in battery density of 10x, if true, is an incredible step forward, and could really open the door for electricity to displace oil.
That is huge.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_26_1746258.28487183</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_26_1746258.28488815</id>
	<title>Re:Explosions</title>
	<author>Rei</author>
	<datestamp>1246013400000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Not explosive -- just flammable.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Not explosive -- just flammable .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Not explosive -- just flammable.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_26_1746258.28487257</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_26_1746258.28487465</id>
	<title>Lithium, a limited natural resource?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1246007040000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext>It seems like this is the holy grail for electric vehicles, and we can finally stop burning dinosaur juice in our little bitty engines and realize the economies of scale of burning dinosaur farts in really big and efficient prime movers.  This is all well and good, but how plentiful is lithium, and can it be recycled easily (I suspect yes)?

-Michael</htmltext>
<tokenext>It seems like this is the holy grail for electric vehicles , and we can finally stop burning dinosaur juice in our little bitty engines and realize the economies of scale of burning dinosaur farts in really big and efficient prime movers .
This is all well and good , but how plentiful is lithium , and can it be recycled easily ( I suspect yes ) ?
-Michael</tokentext>
<sentencetext>It seems like this is the holy grail for electric vehicles, and we can finally stop burning dinosaur juice in our little bitty engines and realize the economies of scale of burning dinosaur farts in really big and efficient prime movers.
This is all well and good, but how plentiful is lithium, and can it be recycled easily (I suspect yes)?
-Michael</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_26_1746258.28488231</id>
	<title>Disposable batteries for heating pools</title>
	<author>cryfreedomlove</author>
	<datestamp>1246010400000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>If these are cheap to make and then I'd like to be able to pick one up on the way home from work and plug it in to my pool heater when I get home.  Imagine heating your pool to 85F for the weekend for about $5.</htmltext>
<tokenext>If these are cheap to make and then I 'd like to be able to pick one up on the way home from work and plug it in to my pool heater when I get home .
Imagine heating your pool to 85F for the weekend for about $ 5 .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>If these are cheap to make and then I'd like to be able to pick one up on the way home from work and plug it in to my pool heater when I get home.
Imagine heating your pool to 85F for the weekend for about $5.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_26_1746258.28487343</id>
	<title>Scalability plus environmental concerns</title>
	<author>javacowboy</author>
	<datestamp>1246049820000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I have a couple of questions about Lithium Ion, as a raw material:</p><p>1) What rate of extraction is sustainable?  Is it enough to supply all the transportation of electronic devices of the world if petroleum-powered vehicles are replaced, or will production fall short of those needs?<br>2) What is the environmental impact of extraction, production and disposal?</p><p>Until these questions and resolved satisfactorily, I have my doubts.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I have a couple of questions about Lithium Ion , as a raw material : 1 ) What rate of extraction is sustainable ?
Is it enough to supply all the transportation of electronic devices of the world if petroleum-powered vehicles are replaced , or will production fall short of those needs ? 2 ) What is the environmental impact of extraction , production and disposal ? Until these questions and resolved satisfactorily , I have my doubts .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I have a couple of questions about Lithium Ion, as a raw material:1) What rate of extraction is sustainable?
Is it enough to supply all the transportation of electronic devices of the world if petroleum-powered vehicles are replaced, or will production fall short of those needs?2) What is the environmental impact of extraction, production and disposal?Until these questions and resolved satisfactorily, I have my doubts.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_26_1746258.28487267</id>
	<title>Re:Explosions</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1246049580000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><blockquote><div><p>Previous efforts to make lithium metal batteries have been stymied by the sensitivity of lithium to water in the air.</p></div></blockquote><p>

I believe the summary is the first time I've ever seen "sensitivity" used as a synonym for "tendency to explode violently."<br> <br>

Based on some spectacular chemistry class demonstrations of lithium/water interaction, I'm going with significantly less safe than Li-ion.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>Previous efforts to make lithium metal batteries have been stymied by the sensitivity of lithium to water in the air .
I believe the summary is the first time I 've ever seen " sensitivity " used as a synonym for " tendency to explode violently .
" Based on some spectacular chemistry class demonstrations of lithium/water interaction , I 'm going with significantly less safe than Li-ion .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Previous efforts to make lithium metal batteries have been stymied by the sensitivity of lithium to water in the air.
I believe the summary is the first time I've ever seen "sensitivity" used as a synonym for "tendency to explode violently.
" 

Based on some spectacular chemistry class demonstrations of lithium/water interaction, I'm going with significantly less safe than Li-ion.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_26_1746258.28487021</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_26_1746258.28493115</id>
	<title>Re:Lithium Oxide?</title>
	<author>Jack Malmostoso</author>
	<datestamp>1246097700000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>No. In many metal-air batteries, the reaction occurs by transporting oxygen to the metal (Zn-air), but in Li-air it is the lithium ion that is transported towards the oxygen rich electrode.
The lithium anode is never directly in contact with oxygen, or air.</htmltext>
<tokenext>No .
In many metal-air batteries , the reaction occurs by transporting oxygen to the metal ( Zn-air ) , but in Li-air it is the lithium ion that is transported towards the oxygen rich electrode .
The lithium anode is never directly in contact with oxygen , or air .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>No.
In many metal-air batteries, the reaction occurs by transporting oxygen to the metal (Zn-air), but in Li-air it is the lithium ion that is transported towards the oxygen rich electrode.
The lithium anode is never directly in contact with oxygen, or air.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_26_1746258.28487189</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_26_1746258.28487279</id>
	<title>Exploding Laptops? Anyone?</title>
	<author>atramentum</author>
	<datestamp>1246049640000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext>I wonder if load could cause them to explode?  If you short circuit this thing, will the heat eventually rupture the membrane?</htmltext>
<tokenext>I wonder if load could cause them to explode ?
If you short circuit this thing , will the heat eventually rupture the membrane ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I wonder if load could cause them to explode?
If you short circuit this thing, will the heat eventually rupture the membrane?</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_26_1746258.28487511</id>
	<title>Let me guess...</title>
	<author>santax</author>
	<datestamp>1246007280000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Blocked by the panasonic firmware?</htmltext>
<tokenext>Blocked by the panasonic firmware ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Blocked by the panasonic firmware?</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_26_1746258.28488069</id>
	<title>I'll Believe It...</title>
	<author>rally2xs</author>
	<datestamp>1246009800000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext>When I can buy one.

Same sort of "good news" 2 years ago from Stanford when the "nanowire battery" was announced to be capable of 10X a regular lithium cell due to the nanowire construction of the anode.  No mention that they also needed a cathode breakthru to achieve the 10X.  Without a cathode breakthru, you get 3X.  Big whoop.  Good, but no cigar.  An electric car needs the whole 10X.  But guess what - where is that battery now?  It's being "developed" by the researchers in question not at Stanford but at a university in Saudi Arabia.  Does Saudi Arabia have an interest in bringing to market a device that would preclude the need for their chief export?  Not hardly.  I wouldn't be either of those guys for all the tea in China.  They're likely as not to have a beheading "accident" before this research is done, with the very least that could happen being a sabotaging of the product.  We'll see how this new battery goes - or if it goes to Saudi Arabia too.</htmltext>
<tokenext>When I can buy one .
Same sort of " good news " 2 years ago from Stanford when the " nanowire battery " was announced to be capable of 10X a regular lithium cell due to the nanowire construction of the anode .
No mention that they also needed a cathode breakthru to achieve the 10X .
Without a cathode breakthru , you get 3X .
Big whoop .
Good , but no cigar .
An electric car needs the whole 10X .
But guess what - where is that battery now ?
It 's being " developed " by the researchers in question not at Stanford but at a university in Saudi Arabia .
Does Saudi Arabia have an interest in bringing to market a device that would preclude the need for their chief export ?
Not hardly .
I would n't be either of those guys for all the tea in China .
They 're likely as not to have a beheading " accident " before this research is done , with the very least that could happen being a sabotaging of the product .
We 'll see how this new battery goes - or if it goes to Saudi Arabia too .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>When I can buy one.
Same sort of "good news" 2 years ago from Stanford when the "nanowire battery" was announced to be capable of 10X a regular lithium cell due to the nanowire construction of the anode.
No mention that they also needed a cathode breakthru to achieve the 10X.
Without a cathode breakthru, you get 3X.
Big whoop.
Good, but no cigar.
An electric car needs the whole 10X.
But guess what - where is that battery now?
It's being "developed" by the researchers in question not at Stanford but at a university in Saudi Arabia.
Does Saudi Arabia have an interest in bringing to market a device that would preclude the need for their chief export?
Not hardly.
I wouldn't be either of those guys for all the tea in China.
They're likely as not to have a beheading "accident" before this research is done, with the very least that could happen being a sabotaging of the product.
We'll see how this new battery goes - or if it goes to Saudi Arabia too.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_26_1746258.28487129</id>
	<title>Pudding...</title>
	<author>GenP</author>
	<datestamp>1246049160000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>I'll believe it when I can use my laptop for 30 hours instead of 3.</htmltext>
<tokenext>I 'll believe it when I can use my laptop for 30 hours instead of 3 .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I'll believe it when I can use my laptop for 30 hours instead of 3.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_26_1746258.28487939</id>
	<title>5000 watt hours per KILO?</title>
	<author>sgt scrub</author>
	<datestamp>1246009080000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Am I reading this wrong.  If not, something tells me there is a lot more energy going into harvesting and purifying the Lithium than it is worth.  If there is a need for an alternative I'd start here.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Am I reading this wrong .
If not , something tells me there is a lot more energy going into harvesting and purifying the Lithium than it is worth .
If there is a need for an alternative I 'd start here .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Am I reading this wrong.
If not, something tells me there is a lot more energy going into harvesting and purifying the Lithium than it is worth.
If there is a need for an alternative I'd start here.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_26_1746258.28489141</id>
	<title>Re:I'm so happy 'cause today I found my friends</title>
	<author>geekoid</author>
	<datestamp>1246015260000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>That's a myth. Look into it.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>That 's a myth .
Look into it .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>That's a myth.
Look into it.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_26_1746258.28487387</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_26_1746258.28487915</id>
	<title>What about LiS?</title>
	<author>TheRaven64</author>
	<datestamp>1246009020000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Ten times the energy density of LiIon would be great, but LiS currently (as in, in products that actually exist) gives four times the energy density of LiIon.  My laptop's battery lasts 3-4 hours now.  Four times that is enough for me to use it all day on battery and just charge it in the evening.  The problem is that they currently only last for about 30 discharge cycles, while LiIon is typically rated at 300.  This seems like more promising technology for the next few years.  LiS is mainly used in military applications at the moment (if you're paying a few hundred thousand dollars for a UAV that may be shot down any time you fly it, replacing the battery after 30 successful flights isn't such a problem), so it's not a technology short on R&amp;D money.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Ten times the energy density of LiIon would be great , but LiS currently ( as in , in products that actually exist ) gives four times the energy density of LiIon .
My laptop 's battery lasts 3-4 hours now .
Four times that is enough for me to use it all day on battery and just charge it in the evening .
The problem is that they currently only last for about 30 discharge cycles , while LiIon is typically rated at 300 .
This seems like more promising technology for the next few years .
LiS is mainly used in military applications at the moment ( if you 're paying a few hundred thousand dollars for a UAV that may be shot down any time you fly it , replacing the battery after 30 successful flights is n't such a problem ) , so it 's not a technology short on R&amp;D money .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Ten times the energy density of LiIon would be great, but LiS currently (as in, in products that actually exist) gives four times the energy density of LiIon.
My laptop's battery lasts 3-4 hours now.
Four times that is enough for me to use it all day on battery and just charge it in the evening.
The problem is that they currently only last for about 30 discharge cycles, while LiIon is typically rated at 300.
This seems like more promising technology for the next few years.
LiS is mainly used in military applications at the moment (if you're paying a few hundred thousand dollars for a UAV that may be shot down any time you fly it, replacing the battery after 30 successful flights isn't such a problem), so it's not a technology short on R&amp;D money.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_26_1746258.28498641</id>
	<title>Re:Almost 1/2 the energy density of gas</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1246104120000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>It is time someone started factoring in the efficiency of the electricity grid into these claims. Unless you really want to go to a power plant to fill up your batteries each time... Yes, it would be nice to have solar and wind and other renewables do the charging locally, but the reality is, it is most likely that the power will be generated centrally, elsewhere.</p><p>Oh, and energy-wise, I once read that a candle has more energy than a comparable stick of TNT, only the candle releases its energy (when burning) more slowly. It would be a great model for modern batteries<nobr> <wbr></nobr>:)</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>It is time someone started factoring in the efficiency of the electricity grid into these claims .
Unless you really want to go to a power plant to fill up your batteries each time... Yes , it would be nice to have solar and wind and other renewables do the charging locally , but the reality is , it is most likely that the power will be generated centrally , elsewhere.Oh , and energy-wise , I once read that a candle has more energy than a comparable stick of TNT , only the candle releases its energy ( when burning ) more slowly .
It would be a great model for modern batteries : )</tokentext>
<sentencetext>It is time someone started factoring in the efficiency of the electricity grid into these claims.
Unless you really want to go to a power plant to fill up your batteries each time... Yes, it would be nice to have solar and wind and other renewables do the charging locally, but the reality is, it is most likely that the power will be generated centrally, elsewhere.Oh, and energy-wise, I once read that a candle has more energy than a comparable stick of TNT, only the candle releases its energy (when burning) more slowly.
It would be a great model for modern batteries :)</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_26_1746258.28488053</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_26_1746258.28488133</id>
	<title>Re:Explosions</title>
	<author>zygotic mitosis</author>
	<datestamp>1246010100000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Informativ</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext>Lithium does not tend to explode violently in the air. Not even sodium will explode just sitting in the air. Both will, however, oxidize rapidly, being sensitive to moisture as the summary correctly states.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Lithium does not tend to explode violently in the air .
Not even sodium will explode just sitting in the air .
Both will , however , oxidize rapidly , being sensitive to moisture as the summary correctly states .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Lithium does not tend to explode violently in the air.
Not even sodium will explode just sitting in the air.
Both will, however, oxidize rapidly, being sensitive to moisture as the summary correctly states.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_26_1746258.28487267</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_26_1746258.28487761</id>
	<title>Re:Lithium Oxide?</title>
	<author>Jeng</author>
	<datestamp>1246008300000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>This was listed as a concern in the link regarding IBM's efforts.  So yep, they've taken it into consideration.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>This was listed as a concern in the link regarding IBM 's efforts .
So yep , they 've taken it into consideration .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>This was listed as a concern in the link regarding IBM's efforts.
So yep, they've taken it into consideration.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_26_1746258.28487189</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_26_1746258.28487021</id>
	<title>Explosions</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1246048800000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Funny</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>I'm no battery scientist, but I wonder if these batteries will be more or less safe compared to the lithium-ion batteries.  I guess I <i>could</i> go read the article but...</htmltext>
<tokenext>I 'm no battery scientist , but I wonder if these batteries will be more or less safe compared to the lithium-ion batteries .
I guess I could go read the article but.. .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I'm no battery scientist, but I wonder if these batteries will be more or less safe compared to the lithium-ion batteries.
I guess I could go read the article but...</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_26_1746258.28489237</id>
	<title>Re:Explosions</title>
	<author>w0mprat</author>
	<datestamp>1246015920000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>Let me say this, idiots that don't take care of the new lithium batteries will spur the need for more idiot proof batteries.

The article mentions that you should not introduce any amount of water near these types of batteries. Since water is very common, do not put both an idiot and this battery near each other.

At ten times the energy output, it may be 10x more dangerous.</p></div><p>
Build something idiot proof and someone will find a better idiot.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>Let me say this , idiots that do n't take care of the new lithium batteries will spur the need for more idiot proof batteries .
The article mentions that you should not introduce any amount of water near these types of batteries .
Since water is very common , do not put both an idiot and this battery near each other .
At ten times the energy output , it may be 10x more dangerous .
Build something idiot proof and someone will find a better idiot .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Let me say this, idiots that don't take care of the new lithium batteries will spur the need for more idiot proof batteries.
The article mentions that you should not introduce any amount of water near these types of batteries.
Since water is very common, do not put both an idiot and this battery near each other.
At ten times the energy output, it may be 10x more dangerous.
Build something idiot proof and someone will find a better idiot.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_26_1746258.28487183</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_26_1746258.28487753</id>
	<title>tub61rl</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1246008240000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Troll</modclass>
	<modscore>-1</modscore>
	<htmltext><A HREF="http://goat.cx/" title="goat.cx" rel="nofollow">Won't b3 standing co8munity. The</a> [goat.cx]</htmltext>
<tokenext>Wo n't b3 standing co8munity .
The [ goat.cx ]</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Won't b3 standing co8munity.
The [goat.cx]</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_26_1746258.28487387</id>
	<title>I'm so happy 'cause today I found my friends</title>
	<author>CopaceticOpus</author>
	<datestamp>1246049940000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>If these batteries really can store 10 times the energy of current batteries, they could be revolutionary. They could make the electric car more practical than using gasoline.</p><p>However, the big catch is that we can't really <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lithium#Production\_and\_world\_supply" title="wikipedia.org" rel="nofollow">produce enough Lithium</a> [wikipedia.org] to make all those batteries. There is a plentiful supply in the water: "Seawater contains an estimated 230 billion tons of lithium, though at a low concentration of 0.1 to 0.2 ppm." But there's probably no practical way to extract it.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>If these batteries really can store 10 times the energy of current batteries , they could be revolutionary .
They could make the electric car more practical than using gasoline.However , the big catch is that we ca n't really produce enough Lithium [ wikipedia.org ] to make all those batteries .
There is a plentiful supply in the water : " Seawater contains an estimated 230 billion tons of lithium , though at a low concentration of 0.1 to 0.2 ppm .
" But there 's probably no practical way to extract it .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>If these batteries really can store 10 times the energy of current batteries, they could be revolutionary.
They could make the electric car more practical than using gasoline.However, the big catch is that we can't really produce enough Lithium [wikipedia.org] to make all those batteries.
There is a plentiful supply in the water: "Seawater contains an estimated 230 billion tons of lithium, though at a low concentration of 0.1 to 0.2 ppm.
" But there's probably no practical way to extract it.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_26_1746258.28487851</id>
	<title>Re:Lithium, a limited natural resource?</title>
	<author>trybywrench</author>
	<datestamp>1246008720000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Informativ</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext>It's Bolivia that has all the Lithium. They are already freaking out about corporations raping their country for profit. IIRC Bolivia has started working on putting policy in place to keep from getting screwed over by large mining firms.<br> <br>
"Like many other producers of crude oil, Bolivia finds itself in a frustrating situation regarding its processing and the refining of its raw materials. It finds company in the history of the incumbent automobile fuel source, petroleum. There is a great deal that the Bolivians could learn from the Saudis regarding what they should do with its lithium reserves and how to extract them. To achieve this, Bolivia will want to strive to find the answer to a number of questions with which the Saudis have dealt over the years, and continues to deal with, such as how wealth will be distributed if the commodity is nationalized, how to maintain a balance between maximum production and environmental stability, and what will stabilize the economy once the commodity is exhausted."
<br> <br>http://www.coha.org/2009/02/lucky-bolivia-and-the-future-of-lithium-in-the-world-economy/</htmltext>
<tokenext>It 's Bolivia that has all the Lithium .
They are already freaking out about corporations raping their country for profit .
IIRC Bolivia has started working on putting policy in place to keep from getting screwed over by large mining firms .
" Like many other producers of crude oil , Bolivia finds itself in a frustrating situation regarding its processing and the refining of its raw materials .
It finds company in the history of the incumbent automobile fuel source , petroleum .
There is a great deal that the Bolivians could learn from the Saudis regarding what they should do with its lithium reserves and how to extract them .
To achieve this , Bolivia will want to strive to find the answer to a number of questions with which the Saudis have dealt over the years , and continues to deal with , such as how wealth will be distributed if the commodity is nationalized , how to maintain a balance between maximum production and environmental stability , and what will stabilize the economy once the commodity is exhausted .
" http : //www.coha.org/2009/02/lucky-bolivia-and-the-future-of-lithium-in-the-world-economy/</tokentext>
<sentencetext>It's Bolivia that has all the Lithium.
They are already freaking out about corporations raping their country for profit.
IIRC Bolivia has started working on putting policy in place to keep from getting screwed over by large mining firms.
"Like many other producers of crude oil, Bolivia finds itself in a frustrating situation regarding its processing and the refining of its raw materials.
It finds company in the history of the incumbent automobile fuel source, petroleum.
There is a great deal that the Bolivians could learn from the Saudis regarding what they should do with its lithium reserves and how to extract them.
To achieve this, Bolivia will want to strive to find the answer to a number of questions with which the Saudis have dealt over the years, and continues to deal with, such as how wealth will be distributed if the commodity is nationalized, how to maintain a balance between maximum production and environmental stability, and what will stabilize the economy once the commodity is exhausted.
"
 http://www.coha.org/2009/02/lucky-bolivia-and-the-future-of-lithium-in-the-world-economy/</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_26_1746258.28487465</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_26_1746258.28489723</id>
	<title>TEN times?</title>
	<author>jcr</author>
	<datestamp>1246019400000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Ok, that makes electric cars a whole lot more interesting.   It might even make manned electric aircraft feasible.</p><p>-jcr</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Ok , that makes electric cars a whole lot more interesting .
It might even make manned electric aircraft feasible.-jcr</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Ok, that makes electric cars a whole lot more interesting.
It might even make manned electric aircraft feasible.-jcr</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_26_1746258.28487133</id>
	<title>Don't crash your car in the rain</title>
	<author>random coward</author>
	<datestamp>1246049160000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Would be bad to have a crash penetrate the membrane in a rainstorm. Would make quite a vigorous reaction to be sure.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Would be bad to have a crash penetrate the membrane in a rainstorm .
Would make quite a vigorous reaction to be sure .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Would be bad to have a crash penetrate the membrane in a rainstorm.
Would make quite a vigorous reaction to be sure.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_26_1746258.28487021</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_26_1746258.28489995</id>
	<title>Re:I'm so happy 'cause today I found my friends</title>
	<author>JohnnyBGod</author>
	<datestamp>1246021560000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Thanks. The song is stuck in my head, now.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Thanks .
The song is stuck in my head , now .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Thanks.
The song is stuck in my head, now.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_26_1746258.28487387</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_26_1746258.28489233</id>
	<title>Don't use these Batteries in Space!!!!</title>
	<author>jameskojiro</author>
	<datestamp>1246015860000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Funny</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I needed some batteries for the life support systems on my spacesuit, so i went and bought some of these new fangled Lithium-Air Batteries and they don't work worth a crap.  They worked fine in the airlock but as soon as I stepped out on my space walk I was gasping for air as my life support system inexplicably shutdown.<br>.<br>These Batteries are Horrible, just Horrible!!!!   I have to trust my life to batteries for supplying me with Oxygen and keeping my temperature constant.<br>.<br>Two space gloved thumbs down!<br>.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I needed some batteries for the life support systems on my spacesuit , so i went and bought some of these new fangled Lithium-Air Batteries and they do n't work worth a crap .
They worked fine in the airlock but as soon as I stepped out on my space walk I was gasping for air as my life support system inexplicably shutdown..These Batteries are Horrible , just Horrible ! ! ! !
I have to trust my life to batteries for supplying me with Oxygen and keeping my temperature constant..Two space gloved thumbs down ! .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I needed some batteries for the life support systems on my spacesuit, so i went and bought some of these new fangled Lithium-Air Batteries and they don't work worth a crap.
They worked fine in the airlock but as soon as I stepped out on my space walk I was gasping for air as my life support system inexplicably shutdown..These Batteries are Horrible, just Horrible!!!!
I have to trust my life to batteries for supplying me with Oxygen and keeping my temperature constant..Two space gloved thumbs down!.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_26_1746258.28487189</id>
	<title>Lithium Oxide?</title>
	<author>reginaldo</author>
	<datestamp>1246049340000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>I have a question for the makers of this techL

When lithium metal reacts with oxygen, it creates lithium oxide as a byproduct, which is inert to oxygen.  If this battery is using solid metal that is covered by a membrane, wouldn't the lithium oxide block oxygen from getting to the lithium after a fairly short while?  I would think this is a problem with using lithium metal in general.</htmltext>
<tokenext>I have a question for the makers of this techL When lithium metal reacts with oxygen , it creates lithium oxide as a byproduct , which is inert to oxygen .
If this battery is using solid metal that is covered by a membrane , would n't the lithium oxide block oxygen from getting to the lithium after a fairly short while ?
I would think this is a problem with using lithium metal in general .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I have a question for the makers of this techL

When lithium metal reacts with oxygen, it creates lithium oxide as a byproduct, which is inert to oxygen.
If this battery is using solid metal that is covered by a membrane, wouldn't the lithium oxide block oxygen from getting to the lithium after a fairly short while?
I would think this is a problem with using lithium metal in general.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_26_1746258.28487815</id>
	<title>Energy Density Fears</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1246008540000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Informativ</modclass>
	<modscore>5</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>A lot of people are raising concerns about the risk associated with increasing the energy density of the battery.</p><p>I would like to point out that it's difficult to directly compare the risks of two fuel sources without knowing how quickly the energy can be released, and under what conditions it can happen.</p><p>For instance, I enjoy working with motorcycles, which typically carry 2 major energy sources: A battery, which supplies starting and auxiliary power, and gasoline, which supplies primary power (including the power required to charge the battery.)</p><p>The gasoline in the tank has a far greater energy density and far higher energy potential than the battery, but of the two, the battery poses the greatest risk of injury and explosion.</p><p>The gasoline can certainly burn, but will only explode under very specific conditions. The conditions required to set it burning are also very easily removed. In fact, I'm far more concerned about the chemical damaged caused by exposing fuel to skin than I am about the risk of fire or explosion.</p><p>On the other hand, I work around the battery with wrenches that are typically grounded against the frame while in use. Even with a disconnected battery, I've had cases (while working on a car) where the wrench contacts the positive terminal of the disconnected battery, creating very heavy gauge short circuit between the terminals. The resulting release of energy will cut through metal and cause severe burns. Likewise, if overdrawn, the battery can release hydrogen which can either vent and ignite, or build internal pressure causing the battery to explode.</p><p>An interesting example of a substance that is explosive, has a high energy density, and is safe is C4, which can actually be used to cook food if burned, but will not explode without a blasting cap.</p><p>So... Are these batteries a risk? Perhaps. We should look into that. But it's best not to cry about the sky falling without first investigating the matter.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>A lot of people are raising concerns about the risk associated with increasing the energy density of the battery.I would like to point out that it 's difficult to directly compare the risks of two fuel sources without knowing how quickly the energy can be released , and under what conditions it can happen.For instance , I enjoy working with motorcycles , which typically carry 2 major energy sources : A battery , which supplies starting and auxiliary power , and gasoline , which supplies primary power ( including the power required to charge the battery .
) The gasoline in the tank has a far greater energy density and far higher energy potential than the battery , but of the two , the battery poses the greatest risk of injury and explosion.The gasoline can certainly burn , but will only explode under very specific conditions .
The conditions required to set it burning are also very easily removed .
In fact , I 'm far more concerned about the chemical damaged caused by exposing fuel to skin than I am about the risk of fire or explosion.On the other hand , I work around the battery with wrenches that are typically grounded against the frame while in use .
Even with a disconnected battery , I 've had cases ( while working on a car ) where the wrench contacts the positive terminal of the disconnected battery , creating very heavy gauge short circuit between the terminals .
The resulting release of energy will cut through metal and cause severe burns .
Likewise , if overdrawn , the battery can release hydrogen which can either vent and ignite , or build internal pressure causing the battery to explode.An interesting example of a substance that is explosive , has a high energy density , and is safe is C4 , which can actually be used to cook food if burned , but will not explode without a blasting cap.So... Are these batteries a risk ?
Perhaps. We should look into that .
But it 's best not to cry about the sky falling without first investigating the matter .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>A lot of people are raising concerns about the risk associated with increasing the energy density of the battery.I would like to point out that it's difficult to directly compare the risks of two fuel sources without knowing how quickly the energy can be released, and under what conditions it can happen.For instance, I enjoy working with motorcycles, which typically carry 2 major energy sources: A battery, which supplies starting and auxiliary power, and gasoline, which supplies primary power (including the power required to charge the battery.
)The gasoline in the tank has a far greater energy density and far higher energy potential than the battery, but of the two, the battery poses the greatest risk of injury and explosion.The gasoline can certainly burn, but will only explode under very specific conditions.
The conditions required to set it burning are also very easily removed.
In fact, I'm far more concerned about the chemical damaged caused by exposing fuel to skin than I am about the risk of fire or explosion.On the other hand, I work around the battery with wrenches that are typically grounded against the frame while in use.
Even with a disconnected battery, I've had cases (while working on a car) where the wrench contacts the positive terminal of the disconnected battery, creating very heavy gauge short circuit between the terminals.
The resulting release of energy will cut through metal and cause severe burns.
Likewise, if overdrawn, the battery can release hydrogen which can either vent and ignite, or build internal pressure causing the battery to explode.An interesting example of a substance that is explosive, has a high energy density, and is safe is C4, which can actually be used to cook food if burned, but will not explode without a blasting cap.So... Are these batteries a risk?
Perhaps. We should look into that.
But it's best not to cry about the sky falling without first investigating the matter.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_26_1746258.28488929</id>
	<title>Don't let limits cloud your thinking...</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1246014000000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>Batteries suck. There have been many times when batteries would be "10 times" more better than some previous generation. But they never are. Batteries would only be good if cellular phone could run at least a MONTH on them.</p></div><p>Seriously? A month? How about a solar cell that makes you not have to plug in your cell phone ever, or a motion generator that uses your movement to charge the phone?</p><p>Part of the battery life problem isn't the battery - it's the efficiency of the device being powered. If we can reduce the current/power consumption of phones by a factor of 3, and improve the capacity of the battery by a factor of 3 then we have a 9 times better story. That's realistic to expect by 2020.</p><p>Devices like the Amazon Kindle have huge power savings compared to laptops because the screen device isn't active. Once we get write ability (like a magnetic pen or maybe capacative touch) added to that kind of device, we will be well on the way to achieving "paper" computers. The prices on these new technologies will drop as they mature and economies of scale kick in. You can bet that the competition in the market place for cheaper and lower powered devices will bear fruit.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>Batteries suck .
There have been many times when batteries would be " 10 times " more better than some previous generation .
But they never are .
Batteries would only be good if cellular phone could run at least a MONTH on them.Seriously ?
A month ?
How about a solar cell that makes you not have to plug in your cell phone ever , or a motion generator that uses your movement to charge the phone ? Part of the battery life problem is n't the battery - it 's the efficiency of the device being powered .
If we can reduce the current/power consumption of phones by a factor of 3 , and improve the capacity of the battery by a factor of 3 then we have a 9 times better story .
That 's realistic to expect by 2020.Devices like the Amazon Kindle have huge power savings compared to laptops because the screen device is n't active .
Once we get write ability ( like a magnetic pen or maybe capacative touch ) added to that kind of device , we will be well on the way to achieving " paper " computers .
The prices on these new technologies will drop as they mature and economies of scale kick in .
You can bet that the competition in the market place for cheaper and lower powered devices will bear fruit .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Batteries suck.
There have been many times when batteries would be "10 times" more better than some previous generation.
But they never are.
Batteries would only be good if cellular phone could run at least a MONTH on them.Seriously?
A month?
How about a solar cell that makes you not have to plug in your cell phone ever, or a motion generator that uses your movement to charge the phone?Part of the battery life problem isn't the battery - it's the efficiency of the device being powered.
If we can reduce the current/power consumption of phones by a factor of 3, and improve the capacity of the battery by a factor of 3 then we have a 9 times better story.
That's realistic to expect by 2020.Devices like the Amazon Kindle have huge power savings compared to laptops because the screen device isn't active.
Once we get write ability (like a magnetic pen or maybe capacative touch) added to that kind of device, we will be well on the way to achieving "paper" computers.
The prices on these new technologies will drop as they mature and economies of scale kick in.
You can bet that the competition in the market place for cheaper and lower powered devices will bear fruit.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_26_1746258.28487291</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_26_1746258.28493565</id>
	<title>Re:YEAH RIGHT</title>
	<author>mikechant</author>
	<datestamp>1246104000000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><i>Batteries suck. There have been many times when batteries would be "10 times" more better than some previous generation. But they never are.</i></p><p>My eeePC 1000 (SSD model) gets about 5hrs battery life and is much more powerful in nearly every respect** than my work-provided 5 year old laptop, which gets about 1hr battery life (and probably got less than 2hrs when it was new). Seems like pretty reasonable progress to me (although I realize this is only partly due to battery improvements).</p><p>** Twice as much RAM and disc space, about 3x faster, weighs about 1/3rd as much but smaller screen</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Batteries suck .
There have been many times when batteries would be " 10 times " more better than some previous generation .
But they never are.My eeePC 1000 ( SSD model ) gets about 5hrs battery life and is much more powerful in nearly every respect * * than my work-provided 5 year old laptop , which gets about 1hr battery life ( and probably got less than 2hrs when it was new ) .
Seems like pretty reasonable progress to me ( although I realize this is only partly due to battery improvements ) .
* * Twice as much RAM and disc space , about 3x faster , weighs about 1/3rd as much but smaller screen</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Batteries suck.
There have been many times when batteries would be "10 times" more better than some previous generation.
But they never are.My eeePC 1000 (SSD model) gets about 5hrs battery life and is much more powerful in nearly every respect** than my work-provided 5 year old laptop, which gets about 1hr battery life (and probably got less than 2hrs when it was new).
Seems like pretty reasonable progress to me (although I realize this is only partly due to battery improvements).
** Twice as much RAM and disc space, about 3x faster, weighs about 1/3rd as much but smaller screen</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_26_1746258.28487291</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_26_1746258.28489091</id>
	<title>It's just the beginning ...</title>
	<author>electricprof</author>
	<datestamp>1246014840000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>I'm currently developing a methane-air battery.  Unfortunately, it only works when I sit on it after eating a couple of bowls of chili<nobr> <wbr></nobr>...</htmltext>
<tokenext>I 'm currently developing a methane-air battery .
Unfortunately , it only works when I sit on it after eating a couple of bowls of chili .. .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I'm currently developing a methane-air battery.
Unfortunately, it only works when I sit on it after eating a couple of bowls of chili ...</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_26_1746258.28487841</id>
	<title>Re:Explosions</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1246008660000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Funny</modclass>
	<modscore>5</modscore>
	<htmltext><blockquote><div><p>I believe the summary is the first time I've ever seen "sensitivity" used as a synonym for "tendency to explode violently."</p></div>
</blockquote><p>
My former girlfriend was a very sensitive person.</p><p>
It never occurred to me before, but now that you mention it, I think this is <i>exactly</i> what she meant by the term.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>I believe the summary is the first time I 've ever seen " sensitivity " used as a synonym for " tendency to explode violently .
" My former girlfriend was a very sensitive person .
It never occurred to me before , but now that you mention it , I think this is exactly what she meant by the term .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I believe the summary is the first time I've ever seen "sensitivity" used as a synonym for "tendency to explode violently.
"

My former girlfriend was a very sensitive person.
It never occurred to me before, but now that you mention it, I think this is exactly what she meant by the term.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_26_1746258.28487267</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_26_1746258.28487131</id>
	<title>Re:Explosions</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1246049160000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Informativ</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><i>lithium metal material reacts rapidly and violently with water</i>
<br>(From the TFA)<br> <br>The safety concern is the main problem here.</htmltext>
<tokenext>lithium metal material reacts rapidly and violently with water ( From the TFA ) The safety concern is the main problem here .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>lithium metal material reacts rapidly and violently with water
(From the TFA) The safety concern is the main problem here.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_26_1746258.28487021</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_26_1746258.28511335</id>
	<title>Re:Rechargeables in "early development"</title>
	<author>olman</author>
	<datestamp>1246269060000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>As a heavy user of zinc-air batteries, I can spoil the party for all of you. Zinc-air and likely Lithium-Air batteries are great for energy storage where you need high size/energy ratio.</p><p>What they absolutely suck on is self-discharging. Your average zinc-air hearing air battery will discharge in about a week exposed to oxygen. So these lithium-air batteries would probably come with a tape sealing the terminal and as soon as you remove it, it will start discharging.</p><p>This would pretty much sabotage applications where you would prefer regular batteries over rechargeable ones right now. Namely clocks, remotes and so on, which are supposed to run on a single set of batteries for more than a year.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>As a heavy user of zinc-air batteries , I can spoil the party for all of you .
Zinc-air and likely Lithium-Air batteries are great for energy storage where you need high size/energy ratio.What they absolutely suck on is self-discharging .
Your average zinc-air hearing air battery will discharge in about a week exposed to oxygen .
So these lithium-air batteries would probably come with a tape sealing the terminal and as soon as you remove it , it will start discharging.This would pretty much sabotage applications where you would prefer regular batteries over rechargeable ones right now .
Namely clocks , remotes and so on , which are supposed to run on a single set of batteries for more than a year .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>As a heavy user of zinc-air batteries, I can spoil the party for all of you.
Zinc-air and likely Lithium-Air batteries are great for energy storage where you need high size/energy ratio.What they absolutely suck on is self-discharging.
Your average zinc-air hearing air battery will discharge in about a week exposed to oxygen.
So these lithium-air batteries would probably come with a tape sealing the terminal and as soon as you remove it, it will start discharging.This would pretty much sabotage applications where you would prefer regular batteries over rechargeable ones right now.
Namely clocks, remotes and so on, which are supposed to run on a single set of batteries for more than a year.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_26_1746258.28487293</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_26_1746258.28487337</id>
	<title>Steorn regoices!</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1246049820000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Finally they have something to efficiently store all of that free Orbo energy!</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Finally they have something to efficiently store all of that free Orbo energy !</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Finally they have something to efficiently store all of that free Orbo energy!</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_26_1746258.28487595</id>
	<title>I love all these green techs</title>
	<author>xutopia</author>
	<datestamp>1246007580000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Offtopic</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext>Unless they are in the store at an affordable price it doesn't matter to me.

Seriously if a battery that is lighter than air and can go on for 12 months straight without recharge but cost 1 billion dollar do you think you will have one in your ipod tomorrow?

These promises of great technologies are nice and all... but it's just R&amp;D until it's feasible in the market.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Unless they are in the store at an affordable price it does n't matter to me .
Seriously if a battery that is lighter than air and can go on for 12 months straight without recharge but cost 1 billion dollar do you think you will have one in your ipod tomorrow ?
These promises of great technologies are nice and all... but it 's just R&amp;D until it 's feasible in the market .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Unless they are in the store at an affordable price it doesn't matter to me.
Seriously if a battery that is lighter than air and can go on for 12 months straight without recharge but cost 1 billion dollar do you think you will have one in your ipod tomorrow?
These promises of great technologies are nice and all... but it's just R&amp;D until it's feasible in the market.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_26_1746258.28487827</id>
	<title>Why would you bother with Lithium?</title>
	<author>Colin Smith</author>
	<datestamp>1246008600000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Use Sodium instead. There's even more of it in seawater. Sure it's a bit heavier, a bit bigger but a tiny fraction of the cost, and cost is a huge problem with batteries.</p><p>
&nbsp;</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Use Sodium instead .
There 's even more of it in seawater .
Sure it 's a bit heavier , a bit bigger but a tiny fraction of the cost , and cost is a huge problem with batteries .
 </tokentext>
<sentencetext>Use Sodium instead.
There's even more of it in seawater.
Sure it's a bit heavier, a bit bigger but a tiny fraction of the cost, and cost is a huge problem with batteries.
 </sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_26_1746258.28487387</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_26_1746258.28490573</id>
	<title>Re:Explosions</title>
	<author>ScrewMaster</author>
	<datestamp>1246027380000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>At ten times the energy output, it may be 10x more dangerous.</p></div><p>It's not ten times the energy output, it's ten times the <i>energy density</i> (e.g. watt hours per pound), and that means you can have a device powered by a battery that's of similar capacity to current designs but <i>ten times smaller</i>. That's what this is all about, when it comes to microelectronics. Dick Tracy video watch, anyone?
<br> <br>
Hell, if we had a lithium ion battery that's ten times more energy dense, it means my laptop would run for ten hours (yeah yeah, time for a new battery pack.)</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>At ten times the energy output , it may be 10x more dangerous.It 's not ten times the energy output , it 's ten times the energy density ( e.g .
watt hours per pound ) , and that means you can have a device powered by a battery that 's of similar capacity to current designs but ten times smaller .
That 's what this is all about , when it comes to microelectronics .
Dick Tracy video watch , anyone ?
Hell , if we had a lithium ion battery that 's ten times more energy dense , it means my laptop would run for ten hours ( yeah yeah , time for a new battery pack .
)</tokentext>
<sentencetext>At ten times the energy output, it may be 10x more dangerous.It's not ten times the energy output, it's ten times the energy density (e.g.
watt hours per pound), and that means you can have a device powered by a battery that's of similar capacity to current designs but ten times smaller.
That's what this is all about, when it comes to microelectronics.
Dick Tracy video watch, anyone?
Hell, if we had a lithium ion battery that's ten times more energy dense, it means my laptop would run for ten hours (yeah yeah, time for a new battery pack.
)
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_26_1746258.28487183</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_26_1746258.28489535</id>
	<title>Lithium</title>
	<author>Lennie</author>
	<datestamp>1246017780000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Is it just me, is isn't this such a good idea ?:</p><p>There are widespread hopes of using lithium ion batteries in electric vehicles, but one study concluded that "realistically achievable lithium carbonate production will be sufficient for only a small fraction of future PHEV and EV global market requirements", that "demand from the portable electronics sector will absorb much of the planned production increases in the next decade", and that "mass production of lithium carbonate is not environmentally sound, it will cause irreparable ecological damage to ecosystems that should be protected and that LiIon propulsion is incompatible with the notion of the 'Green Car'".</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Is it just me , is is n't this such a good idea ?
: There are widespread hopes of using lithium ion batteries in electric vehicles , but one study concluded that " realistically achievable lithium carbonate production will be sufficient for only a small fraction of future PHEV and EV global market requirements " , that " demand from the portable electronics sector will absorb much of the planned production increases in the next decade " , and that " mass production of lithium carbonate is not environmentally sound , it will cause irreparable ecological damage to ecosystems that should be protected and that LiIon propulsion is incompatible with the notion of the 'Green Car ' " .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Is it just me, is isn't this such a good idea ?
:There are widespread hopes of using lithium ion batteries in electric vehicles, but one study concluded that "realistically achievable lithium carbonate production will be sufficient for only a small fraction of future PHEV and EV global market requirements", that "demand from the portable electronics sector will absorb much of the planned production increases in the next decade", and that "mass production of lithium carbonate is not environmentally sound, it will cause irreparable ecological damage to ecosystems that should be protected and that LiIon propulsion is incompatible with the notion of the 'Green Car'".</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_26_1746258.28488175</id>
	<title>Re:I'm so happy 'cause today I found my friends</title>
	<author>Rei</author>
	<datestamp>1246010220000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Informativ</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><i>However, the big catch is that we can't really produce enough Lithium to make all those batteries. </i></p><p>God, that myth <a href="http://gas2.org/2008/10/13/lithium-counterpoint-no-shortage-for-electric-cars/" title="gas2.org">just won't die</a> [gas2.org], will it?</p><p><i>But there's probably no practical way to extract it.</i></p><p>Of course there is.  There are dozens of ways.  <a href="http://www.osti.gov/energycitations/product.biblio.jsp?osti\_id=7351225" title="osti.gov">Here's one</a> [osti.gov] -- $22-$32/kg.  Given that 1kWh of automotive li-ion batteries takes 1-2kg of lithium carbonate and costs about $500, that's a pretty minor cost.  More expensive than the surface-mined stuff, mind you (which runs $5-8/kg), but eminently affordable.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>However , the big catch is that we ca n't really produce enough Lithium to make all those batteries .
God , that myth just wo n't die [ gas2.org ] , will it ? But there 's probably no practical way to extract it.Of course there is .
There are dozens of ways .
Here 's one [ osti.gov ] -- $ 22- $ 32/kg .
Given that 1kWh of automotive li-ion batteries takes 1-2kg of lithium carbonate and costs about $ 500 , that 's a pretty minor cost .
More expensive than the surface-mined stuff , mind you ( which runs $ 5-8/kg ) , but eminently affordable .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>However, the big catch is that we can't really produce enough Lithium to make all those batteries.
God, that myth just won't die [gas2.org], will it?But there's probably no practical way to extract it.Of course there is.
There are dozens of ways.
Here's one [osti.gov] -- $22-$32/kg.
Given that 1kWh of automotive li-ion batteries takes 1-2kg of lithium carbonate and costs about $500, that's a pretty minor cost.
More expensive than the surface-mined stuff, mind you (which runs $5-8/kg), but eminently affordable.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_26_1746258.28487387</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_26_1746258.28487745</id>
	<title>Vaporware we can believe in!</title>
	<author>Alt\_Cognito</author>
	<datestamp>1246008240000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Funny</modclass>
	<modscore>3</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>*groan* (yknow, being made of air and whatnot)</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>* groan * ( yknow , being made of air and whatnot )</tokentext>
<sentencetext>*groan* (yknow, being made of air and whatnot)</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_26_1746258.28488053</id>
	<title>Almost 1/2 the energy density of gas</title>
	<author>flipmac</author>
	<datestamp>1246009740000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext>This thing 'theoretically' has more than 5kW-hr/kg, which is a big deal considering gasoline has an energy density of 46.9Mj/kg or 12.9kW-hr/kg.

Coupling this new battery, when it exists, to a decent brushless DC motors, which are upto 90\% efficient, then you'll have a purely electric car that can rival a gasoline powered cars in terms of power and range since IC engines are only 40\% efficient (minus more energy that is absorbed in the transmission, etc).

And I have a hunch that lithium is more abundant than crude oil.

Downside is obviously with the higher energy density, the potential for fire/explosion is bigger. I don't know about you guys, but watching a shorted lithium polymer battery pack is very entertaining and dangerous.</htmltext>
<tokenext>This thing 'theoretically ' has more than 5kW-hr/kg , which is a big deal considering gasoline has an energy density of 46.9Mj/kg or 12.9kW-hr/kg .
Coupling this new battery , when it exists , to a decent brushless DC motors , which are upto 90 \ % efficient , then you 'll have a purely electric car that can rival a gasoline powered cars in terms of power and range since IC engines are only 40 \ % efficient ( minus more energy that is absorbed in the transmission , etc ) .
And I have a hunch that lithium is more abundant than crude oil .
Downside is obviously with the higher energy density , the potential for fire/explosion is bigger .
I do n't know about you guys , but watching a shorted lithium polymer battery pack is very entertaining and dangerous .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>This thing 'theoretically' has more than 5kW-hr/kg, which is a big deal considering gasoline has an energy density of 46.9Mj/kg or 12.9kW-hr/kg.
Coupling this new battery, when it exists, to a decent brushless DC motors, which are upto 90\% efficient, then you'll have a purely electric car that can rival a gasoline powered cars in terms of power and range since IC engines are only 40\% efficient (minus more energy that is absorbed in the transmission, etc).
And I have a hunch that lithium is more abundant than crude oil.
Downside is obviously with the higher energy density, the potential for fire/explosion is bigger.
I don't know about you guys, but watching a shorted lithium polymer battery pack is very entertaining and dangerous.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_26_1746258.28488099</id>
	<title>Re:YEAH RIGHT</title>
	<author>Rei</author>
	<datestamp>1246009920000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Informativ</modclass>
	<modscore>3</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>The only people who make this argument are those who haven't paid attention to battery energy density over time.  If you don't know what I'm talking about, compare your cell phone with one from the early 90s, or your laptop battery.  Battery energy density has increased 4.5x in the past 20 years, and power density 10x.  And it only seems to be speeding up.</p><p>Yes, there was a long time (the first 2/3rds to 3/4s of this century) where battery technology was mostly stagnated.  Then the consumer electronics industry came into its own, and people actually started putting serious money into battery research.  And our modern understanding of chemistry and nanoscale structures certainly doesn't hurt.</p><p><i>Or a halogen flashlight could SHINE for that long. But no, they're always still the same sucky thing as in the 1800s</i></p><p>Um, do you realize where the term "flashlight" comes from?  Flashlights in the 1800s (actually, the very end of the 1800s) were these big, massive things with huge, heavy batteries -- and despite this, they had so little energy density that you couldn't leave them on all the time.  You had to "flash" them when you wanted to see something.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>The only people who make this argument are those who have n't paid attention to battery energy density over time .
If you do n't know what I 'm talking about , compare your cell phone with one from the early 90s , or your laptop battery .
Battery energy density has increased 4.5x in the past 20 years , and power density 10x .
And it only seems to be speeding up.Yes , there was a long time ( the first 2/3rds to 3/4s of this century ) where battery technology was mostly stagnated .
Then the consumer electronics industry came into its own , and people actually started putting serious money into battery research .
And our modern understanding of chemistry and nanoscale structures certainly does n't hurt.Or a halogen flashlight could SHINE for that long .
But no , they 're always still the same sucky thing as in the 1800sUm , do you realize where the term " flashlight " comes from ?
Flashlights in the 1800s ( actually , the very end of the 1800s ) were these big , massive things with huge , heavy batteries -- and despite this , they had so little energy density that you could n't leave them on all the time .
You had to " flash " them when you wanted to see something .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>The only people who make this argument are those who haven't paid attention to battery energy density over time.
If you don't know what I'm talking about, compare your cell phone with one from the early 90s, or your laptop battery.
Battery energy density has increased 4.5x in the past 20 years, and power density 10x.
And it only seems to be speeding up.Yes, there was a long time (the first 2/3rds to 3/4s of this century) where battery technology was mostly stagnated.
Then the consumer electronics industry came into its own, and people actually started putting serious money into battery research.
And our modern understanding of chemistry and nanoscale structures certainly doesn't hurt.Or a halogen flashlight could SHINE for that long.
But no, they're always still the same sucky thing as in the 1800sUm, do you realize where the term "flashlight" comes from?
Flashlights in the 1800s (actually, the very end of the 1800s) were these big, massive things with huge, heavy batteries -- and despite this, they had so little energy density that you couldn't leave them on all the time.
You had to "flash" them when you wanted to see something.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_26_1746258.28487291</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_26_1746258.28487293</id>
	<title>Rechargeables in "early development"</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1246049640000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext>Both articles pointed to by the original post note that rechargeable lithium-air batteries are in "early development".  It may be worth noting that zinc-air batteries (fuel cells, more accurately, as these lithium devices are currently) have been available for some years now.  The problem is the recharging step, ie, making it a battery instead of a fuel cell.  Splitting zinc oxide to get relatively pure zinc back, all within the original container, remains an unsolved problem, in practice.  These lithium devices will face the same problem: how do you use electricity to <i>efficiently</i> split lithium oxides to get lithium and oxygen again?  If they have indeed solved that problem, and can apply it to other metals, zinc may be a better solution overall, even with somewhat lower energy density.  The global mineral reserves are much larger and the problem with water goes away.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Both articles pointed to by the original post note that rechargeable lithium-air batteries are in " early development " .
It may be worth noting that zinc-air batteries ( fuel cells , more accurately , as these lithium devices are currently ) have been available for some years now .
The problem is the recharging step , ie , making it a battery instead of a fuel cell .
Splitting zinc oxide to get relatively pure zinc back , all within the original container , remains an unsolved problem , in practice .
These lithium devices will face the same problem : how do you use electricity to efficiently split lithium oxides to get lithium and oxygen again ?
If they have indeed solved that problem , and can apply it to other metals , zinc may be a better solution overall , even with somewhat lower energy density .
The global mineral reserves are much larger and the problem with water goes away .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Both articles pointed to by the original post note that rechargeable lithium-air batteries are in "early development".
It may be worth noting that zinc-air batteries (fuel cells, more accurately, as these lithium devices are currently) have been available for some years now.
The problem is the recharging step, ie, making it a battery instead of a fuel cell.
Splitting zinc oxide to get relatively pure zinc back, all within the original container, remains an unsolved problem, in practice.
These lithium devices will face the same problem: how do you use electricity to efficiently split lithium oxides to get lithium and oxygen again?
If they have indeed solved that problem, and can apply it to other metals, zinc may be a better solution overall, even with somewhat lower energy density.
The global mineral reserves are much larger and the problem with water goes away.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_26_1746258.28487161</id>
	<title>Got a hammer?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1246049280000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Funny</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext><blockquote><div><p>I'm no battery scientist, but I wonder if these batteries will be more or less safe compared to the lithium-ion batteries. I guess I could go read the article but...</p></div>
</blockquote><p>
Anything that breaks the membrane and allows moisture to come into contact with the anode will start a nice fire. Or you can microwave them. Or blend them.
</p><p>
First they came for boxcutters, but I wasn't a terr'rist, so I didn't say anything.
<br>
Then they came for hammers, but I wasn't a terr'rist, so I didn't say anything.
<br>
Then they came for screwdrivers, but  I wasn't a terr'rist, so I didn't say anything.
<br>
Then they came for microwaves, but I wasn't a terr'rist, so I didn't say anything.
<br>
Then they came for blenders, but I wasn't a terr'rist, so I didn't say anything.
<br>
Then they came for can-openers, but  I wasn't a terr'rist, so I didn't say anything.
<br>So here I sit starving, unable to open this frigging can of food, and even if I could, I'd have to eat it cold because I can't nuke it and without tools I can't fix the furnace. Now if only I could find a rock and a lithium battery, I'd be able to cook it!</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>I 'm no battery scientist , but I wonder if these batteries will be more or less safe compared to the lithium-ion batteries .
I guess I could go read the article but.. . Anything that breaks the membrane and allows moisture to come into contact with the anode will start a nice fire .
Or you can microwave them .
Or blend them .
First they came for boxcutters , but I was n't a terr'rist , so I did n't say anything .
Then they came for hammers , but I was n't a terr'rist , so I did n't say anything .
Then they came for screwdrivers , but I was n't a terr'rist , so I did n't say anything .
Then they came for microwaves , but I was n't a terr'rist , so I did n't say anything .
Then they came for blenders , but I was n't a terr'rist , so I did n't say anything .
Then they came for can-openers , but I was n't a terr'rist , so I did n't say anything .
So here I sit starving , unable to open this frigging can of food , and even if I could , I 'd have to eat it cold because I ca n't nuke it and without tools I ca n't fix the furnace .
Now if only I could find a rock and a lithium battery , I 'd be able to cook it !</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I'm no battery scientist, but I wonder if these batteries will be more or less safe compared to the lithium-ion batteries.
I guess I could go read the article but...

Anything that breaks the membrane and allows moisture to come into contact with the anode will start a nice fire.
Or you can microwave them.
Or blend them.
First they came for boxcutters, but I wasn't a terr'rist, so I didn't say anything.
Then they came for hammers, but I wasn't a terr'rist, so I didn't say anything.
Then they came for screwdrivers, but  I wasn't a terr'rist, so I didn't say anything.
Then they came for microwaves, but I wasn't a terr'rist, so I didn't say anything.
Then they came for blenders, but I wasn't a terr'rist, so I didn't say anything.
Then they came for can-openers, but  I wasn't a terr'rist, so I didn't say anything.
So here I sit starving, unable to open this frigging can of food, and even if I could, I'd have to eat it cold because I can't nuke it and without tools I can't fix the furnace.
Now if only I could find a rock and a lithium battery, I'd be able to cook it!
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_26_1746258.28487021</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_26_1746258.28488925</id>
	<title>Re:Explosions</title>
	<author>severoon</author>
	<datestamp>1246014000000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I'm no battery scientist either, but I did pay attention in chemistry class. Many of you will remember the demonstration your chem teacher no doubt did where a chunk of pure sodium was dropped into water, whereupon it burst into flame and sputtered around, eventually giving little pops and starts as it exploded.
</p><p>Take a look at the <a href="http://www.elementsdatabase.com/Images/periodic\_table.gif" title="elementsdatabase.com">periodic table</a> [elementsdatabase.com] and note where Na and Li reside in relation to one another. All the same valence electrons with many times the energy. Much bigger boom.
</p><p>Or something like that...I didn't say I paid <em>close</em> attention.<nobr> <wbr></nobr>:-p
</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I 'm no battery scientist either , but I did pay attention in chemistry class .
Many of you will remember the demonstration your chem teacher no doubt did where a chunk of pure sodium was dropped into water , whereupon it burst into flame and sputtered around , eventually giving little pops and starts as it exploded .
Take a look at the periodic table [ elementsdatabase.com ] and note where Na and Li reside in relation to one another .
All the same valence electrons with many times the energy .
Much bigger boom .
Or something like that...I did n't say I paid close attention .
: -p</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I'm no battery scientist either, but I did pay attention in chemistry class.
Many of you will remember the demonstration your chem teacher no doubt did where a chunk of pure sodium was dropped into water, whereupon it burst into flame and sputtered around, eventually giving little pops and starts as it exploded.
Take a look at the periodic table [elementsdatabase.com] and note where Na and Li reside in relation to one another.
All the same valence electrons with many times the energy.
Much bigger boom.
Or something like that...I didn't say I paid close attention.
:-p
</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_26_1746258.28487131</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_26_1746258.28487501</id>
	<title>Actually, 1800's batteries were Better!</title>
	<author>StCredZero</author>
	<datestamp>1246007220000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Informativ</modclass>
	<modscore>3</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Actually, from the very edge of the 1800's.  Development didn't complete until 1901.</p><p><a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nickel-iron\_battery" title="wikipedia.org">http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nickel-iron\_battery</a> [wikipedia.org]</p><p>Nickel-Iron (NiFe) batteries don't appreciably degrade from discharge.  There is some wear, but they can last for 50 years if you change the electrolyte.  Power and current densities are low, but they are ideal for photovoltaic installations.  Battery wear from deep discharge is one of the biggest economic factors of solar power cost.</p><p>You can buy them, but currently only from manufacturers in India and China.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Actually , from the very edge of the 1800 's .
Development did n't complete until 1901.http : //en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nickel-iron \ _battery [ wikipedia.org ] Nickel-Iron ( NiFe ) batteries do n't appreciably degrade from discharge .
There is some wear , but they can last for 50 years if you change the electrolyte .
Power and current densities are low , but they are ideal for photovoltaic installations .
Battery wear from deep discharge is one of the biggest economic factors of solar power cost.You can buy them , but currently only from manufacturers in India and China .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Actually, from the very edge of the 1800's.
Development didn't complete until 1901.http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nickel-iron\_battery [wikipedia.org]Nickel-Iron (NiFe) batteries don't appreciably degrade from discharge.
There is some wear, but they can last for 50 years if you change the electrolyte.
Power and current densities are low, but they are ideal for photovoltaic installations.
Battery wear from deep discharge is one of the biggest economic factors of solar power cost.You can buy them, but currently only from manufacturers in India and China.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_26_1746258.28487291</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_26_1746258.28487965</id>
	<title>Re:I love all these green techs</title>
	<author>TheRaven64</author>
	<datestamp>1246009260000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>3</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p> Unless they are in the store at an affordable price it doesn't matter to me</p></div><p>In that case, I suggest you read Consumer Weekly, instead of a technology news site.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>Unless they are in the store at an affordable price it does n't matter to meIn that case , I suggest you read Consumer Weekly , instead of a technology news site .</tokentext>
<sentencetext> Unless they are in the store at an affordable price it doesn't matter to meIn that case, I suggest you read Consumer Weekly, instead of a technology news site.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_26_1746258.28487595</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_26_1746258.28487169</id>
	<title>Deja Vu</title>
	<author>evilviper</author>
	<datestamp>1246049280000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Informativ</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Completely unlike the Lithium Air battery on<nobr> <wbr></nobr>/. a month ago:  <a href="http://hardware.slashdot.org/article.pl?sid=09/05/21/1237231" title="slashdot.org">http://hardware.slashdot.org/article.pl?sid=09/05/21/1237231</a> [slashdot.org]</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Completely unlike the Lithium Air battery on / .
a month ago : http : //hardware.slashdot.org/article.pl ? sid = 09/05/21/1237231 [ slashdot.org ]</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Completely unlike the Lithium Air battery on /.
a month ago:  http://hardware.slashdot.org/article.pl?sid=09/05/21/1237231 [slashdot.org]</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_26_1746258.28490141</id>
	<title>Re:Almost 1/2 the energy density of gas</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1246023300000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><i>And I have a hunch that lithium is more abundant than crude oil</i></p><p>That is quite a suspect claim... as proven reserves of lithium are something like 50 million tonnes?  Reserves of oil is still measured in Gigabarrels, right?  I suppose lithium lasts a bit longer than oil.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>And I have a hunch that lithium is more abundant than crude oilThat is quite a suspect claim... as proven reserves of lithium are something like 50 million tonnes ?
Reserves of oil is still measured in Gigabarrels , right ?
I suppose lithium lasts a bit longer than oil .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>And I have a hunch that lithium is more abundant than crude oilThat is quite a suspect claim... as proven reserves of lithium are something like 50 million tonnes?
Reserves of oil is still measured in Gigabarrels, right?
I suppose lithium lasts a bit longer than oil.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_26_1746258.28488053</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_26_1746258.28488281</id>
	<title>Re:Lithium Oxide?</title>
	<author>Rei</author>
	<datestamp>1246010580000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>In a traditional li-air secondary cell, the reaction is actually 2 Li + O2 -&gt; Li2O2 and Li2O2 -&gt; 2Li + O2.  That is, the intermediary is lithium peroxide, not lithium oxide.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>In a traditional li-air secondary cell , the reaction is actually 2 Li + O2 - &gt; Li2O2 and Li2O2 - &gt; 2Li + O2 .
That is , the intermediary is lithium peroxide , not lithium oxide .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>In a traditional li-air secondary cell, the reaction is actually 2 Li + O2 -&gt; Li2O2 and Li2O2 -&gt; 2Li + O2.
That is, the intermediary is lithium peroxide, not lithium oxide.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_26_1746258.28487189</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_26_1746258.28488431</id>
	<title>Re:Lithium, a limited natural resource?</title>
	<author>MagicMerlin</author>
	<datestamp>1246011180000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>no.  There are tons of lithium everywhere (lithium is the 11th most common element in the ocean) in recoverable amounts (including the u.s.).  As the price goes up, more and more supplies come on line.  Not only that, lithium is not the primary cost of li-x batteries.<br> <br>read: <a href="http://gas2.org/2008/10/13/lithium-counterpoint-no-shortage-for-electric-cars/" title="gas2.org">http://gas2.org/2008/10/13/lithium-counterpoint-no-shortage-for-electric-cars/</a> [gas2.org]</htmltext>
<tokenext>no .
There are tons of lithium everywhere ( lithium is the 11th most common element in the ocean ) in recoverable amounts ( including the u.s. ) .
As the price goes up , more and more supplies come on line .
Not only that , lithium is not the primary cost of li-x batteries .
read : http : //gas2.org/2008/10/13/lithium-counterpoint-no-shortage-for-electric-cars/ [ gas2.org ]</tokentext>
<sentencetext>no.
There are tons of lithium everywhere (lithium is the 11th most common element in the ocean) in recoverable amounts (including the u.s.).
As the price goes up, more and more supplies come on line.
Not only that, lithium is not the primary cost of li-x batteries.
read: http://gas2.org/2008/10/13/lithium-counterpoint-no-shortage-for-electric-cars/ [gas2.org]</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_26_1746258.28487465</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_26_1746258.28490631</id>
	<title>Air does not conduct electricity, so???</title>
	<author>cvtan</author>
	<datestamp>1246028280000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>So how does this work if one of the terminals (cathode) does not conduct electricity?  Inquiring minds want to know how air can be a cathode.</htmltext>
<tokenext>So how does this work if one of the terminals ( cathode ) does not conduct electricity ?
Inquiring minds want to know how air can be a cathode .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>So how does this work if one of the terminals (cathode) does not conduct electricity?
Inquiring minds want to know how air can be a cathode.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_26_1746258.28487199</id>
	<title>They have a design for a battery...so what?</title>
	<author>dtolman</author>
	<datestamp>1246049340000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext>There's no here here. They don't have any real batteries in production. Its still in real-world testing.

Or to put it in more slashdot-centric way of thinking... they don't even have 2/4 steps for profit

1) Announce untested idea for new battery
2) ??????
3) ??????
4) Profit!</htmltext>
<tokenext>There 's no here here .
They do n't have any real batteries in production .
Its still in real-world testing .
Or to put it in more slashdot-centric way of thinking... they do n't even have 2/4 steps for profit 1 ) Announce untested idea for new battery 2 ) ? ? ? ? ? ?
3 ) ? ? ? ? ? ?
4 ) Profit !</tokentext>
<sentencetext>There's no here here.
They don't have any real batteries in production.
Its still in real-world testing.
Or to put it in more slashdot-centric way of thinking... they don't even have 2/4 steps for profit

1) Announce untested idea for new battery
2) ??????
3) ??????
4) Profit!</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_26_1746258.28488083</id>
	<title>Air pollution?</title>
	<author>w3woody</author>
	<datestamp>1246009860000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>3</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Any time chemicals interact with air, it strikes me there is the potential for air pollution.</p><p>Is that the case here? I mean, in theory the chemistry may not result in pollution, but in the real world it only takes a fraction of a percent of the chemistry to take an alternate reactive path to result in unexpected or unwanted impurities...</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Any time chemicals interact with air , it strikes me there is the potential for air pollution.Is that the case here ?
I mean , in theory the chemistry may not result in pollution , but in the real world it only takes a fraction of a percent of the chemistry to take an alternate reactive path to result in unexpected or unwanted impurities.. .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Any time chemicals interact with air, it strikes me there is the potential for air pollution.Is that the case here?
I mean, in theory the chemistry may not result in pollution, but in the real world it only takes a fraction of a percent of the chemistry to take an alternate reactive path to result in unexpected or unwanted impurities...</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_26_1746258.28488173</id>
	<title>Underwater use?</title>
	<author>Locke2005</author>
	<datestamp>1246010220000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>3</modscore>
	<htmltext>Is energy density really a top requirement for submarine use? It seems to me most submersibles contain thousands of pounds of ballast anyway -- might as well carry heavy batteries. Plus "reacts violently to any contact with water" doesn't really sound like a property I would want in my submersible battery. Unless these are significantly cheaper or more reliable than li-ion, they don't sound like a win underwater. In cell phones and laptops, however, weight and volume are king, and any technology that stores more energy in less weight or volume will be an economic success.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Is energy density really a top requirement for submarine use ?
It seems to me most submersibles contain thousands of pounds of ballast anyway -- might as well carry heavy batteries .
Plus " reacts violently to any contact with water " does n't really sound like a property I would want in my submersible battery .
Unless these are significantly cheaper or more reliable than li-ion , they do n't sound like a win underwater .
In cell phones and laptops , however , weight and volume are king , and any technology that stores more energy in less weight or volume will be an economic success .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Is energy density really a top requirement for submarine use?
It seems to me most submersibles contain thousands of pounds of ballast anyway -- might as well carry heavy batteries.
Plus "reacts violently to any contact with water" doesn't really sound like a property I would want in my submersible battery.
Unless these are significantly cheaper or more reliable than li-ion, they don't sound like a win underwater.
In cell phones and laptops, however, weight and volume are king, and any technology that stores more energy in less weight or volume will be an economic success.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_26_1746258.28487533</id>
	<title>Not even rechargable!</title>
	<author>burtosis</author>
	<datestamp>1246007340000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Troll</modclass>
	<modscore>-1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Lol, the batteries in the <i>article</i> are 'primary' batteries which are one use then throw away batteries.   Last time I checked the market for one use laptop batteries was quite small, but what do I know compared to the overwhelming editorial prowess that we all have come to cherish in slashdot summaries?

FWIW the polyplus website says they are interested in pursuing research on lithium air secondary batteries down the road.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Lol , the batteries in the article are 'primary ' batteries which are one use then throw away batteries .
Last time I checked the market for one use laptop batteries was quite small , but what do I know compared to the overwhelming editorial prowess that we all have come to cherish in slashdot summaries ?
FWIW the polyplus website says they are interested in pursuing research on lithium air secondary batteries down the road .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Lol, the batteries in the article are 'primary' batteries which are one use then throw away batteries.
Last time I checked the market for one use laptop batteries was quite small, but what do I know compared to the overwhelming editorial prowess that we all have come to cherish in slashdot summaries?
FWIW the polyplus website says they are interested in pursuing research on lithium air secondary batteries down the road.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_26_1746258.28489129</id>
	<title>Re:YEAH RIGHT</title>
	<author>geekoid</author>
	<datestamp>1246015140000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>"Batteries would only be good if cellular phone could run at least a MONTH on them"</p><p>The can, but the phone will; be the size of a brick.</p><p>People want smaller.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>" Batteries would only be good if cellular phone could run at least a MONTH on them " The can , but the phone will ; be the size of a brick.People want smaller .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>"Batteries would only be good if cellular phone could run at least a MONTH on them"The can, but the phone will; be the size of a brick.People want smaller.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_26_1746258.28487291</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_26_1746258.28487183</id>
	<title>Re:Explosions</title>
	<author>philpalm</author>
	<datestamp>1246049280000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Informativ</modclass>
	<modscore>3</modscore>
	<htmltext>Let me say this, idiots that don't take care of the new lithium batteries will spur the need for more idiot proof batteries.

The article mentions that you should not introduce any amount of water near these types of batteries. Since water is very common, do not put both an idiot and this battery near each other.

At ten times the energy output, it may be 10x more dangerous.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Let me say this , idiots that do n't take care of the new lithium batteries will spur the need for more idiot proof batteries .
The article mentions that you should not introduce any amount of water near these types of batteries .
Since water is very common , do not put both an idiot and this battery near each other .
At ten times the energy output , it may be 10x more dangerous .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Let me say this, idiots that don't take care of the new lithium batteries will spur the need for more idiot proof batteries.
The article mentions that you should not introduce any amount of water near these types of batteries.
Since water is very common, do not put both an idiot and this battery near each other.
At ten times the energy output, it may be 10x more dangerous.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_26_1746258.28487021</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_26_1746258.28487291</id>
	<title>YEAH RIGHT</title>
	<author>Lord Lode</author>
	<datestamp>1246049640000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Batteries suck. There have been many times when batteries would be "10 times" more better than some previous generation. But they never are. Batteries would only be good if cellular phone could run at least a MONTH on them. Or a halogen flashlight could SHINE for that long. But no, they're always still the same sucky thing as in the 1800s, and not the 10 times more powerful than should be if all the times someone claimed they were "10 times better" would be true.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Batteries suck .
There have been many times when batteries would be " 10 times " more better than some previous generation .
But they never are .
Batteries would only be good if cellular phone could run at least a MONTH on them .
Or a halogen flashlight could SHINE for that long .
But no , they 're always still the same sucky thing as in the 1800s , and not the 10 times more powerful than should be if all the times someone claimed they were " 10 times better " would be true .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Batteries suck.
There have been many times when batteries would be "10 times" more better than some previous generation.
But they never are.
Batteries would only be good if cellular phone could run at least a MONTH on them.
Or a halogen flashlight could SHINE for that long.
But no, they're always still the same sucky thing as in the 1800s, and not the 10 times more powerful than should be if all the times someone claimed they were "10 times better" would be true.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_26_1746258.28495959</id>
	<title>Finally!  Demise of the Hydrogen crap?</title>
	<author>aqk</author>
	<datestamp>1246128180000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Will this finally be the stake that is driven through the heart of that ridiculous "Our future is in Hydrogen" talk?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Will this finally be the stake that is driven through the heart of that ridiculous " Our future is in Hydrogen " talk ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Will this finally be the stake that is driven through the heart of that ridiculous "Our future is in Hydrogen" talk?</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_26_1746258.28489669</id>
	<title>Re:Explosions</title>
	<author>realnrh</author>
	<datestamp>1246019040000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>3</modscore>
	<htmltext>Any time someone thinks they've idiot-proofed anything, the universe takes that as a challenge to design a bigger idiot.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Any time someone thinks they 've idiot-proofed anything , the universe takes that as a challenge to design a bigger idiot .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Any time someone thinks they've idiot-proofed anything, the universe takes that as a challenge to design a bigger idiot.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_26_1746258.28487183</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_26_1746258.28489823</id>
	<title>Re:Explosions</title>
	<author>init100</author>
	<datestamp>1246020240000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Yeah, I remember that. I also remember the teacher doing the same with lithium and potassium, with lithium giving a much weaker reaction and potassium giving a much stronger reaction.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Yeah , I remember that .
I also remember the teacher doing the same with lithium and potassium , with lithium giving a much weaker reaction and potassium giving a much stronger reaction .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Yeah, I remember that.
I also remember the teacher doing the same with lithium and potassium, with lithium giving a much weaker reaction and potassium giving a much stronger reaction.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_26_1746258.28488925</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_26_1746258.28487823</id>
	<title>Re:Lithium, a limited natural resource?</title>
	<author>javacowboy</author>
	<datestamp>1246008540000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Dinosaur juice!  Dinosaur farts!   Nice!<nobr> <wbr></nobr>:)</p><p>Glad to see that somebody who understands what fossil fuels are also has a sense of humour.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Dinosaur juice !
Dinosaur farts !
Nice ! : ) Glad to see that somebody who understands what fossil fuels are also has a sense of humour .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Dinosaur juice!
Dinosaur farts!
Nice! :)Glad to see that somebody who understands what fossil fuels are also has a sense of humour.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_26_1746258.28487465</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_26_1746258.28488799</id>
	<title>Re:Explosions</title>
	<author>Hurricane78</author>
	<datestamp>1246013340000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Yeah right. It's pretty much a given, that an the first week, someone will drop his coffee on it. And what about the air itself. There is humidity in it, you know. ^^</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Yeah right .
It 's pretty much a given , that an the first week , someone will drop his coffee on it .
And what about the air itself .
There is humidity in it , you know .
^ ^</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Yeah right.
It's pretty much a given, that an the first week, someone will drop his coffee on it.
And what about the air itself.
There is humidity in it, you know.
^^</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_26_1746258.28487183</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_26_1746258.28487257</id>
	<title>Re:Explosions</title>
	<author>physburn</author>
	<datestamp>1246049520000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Exposed to air, and protected by a thin membrane, I should think these would be a little
on the explosive side, if the membrane gets damaged and water gets to the lithium, a
vigorous reaction, as the chemists says. Still you should see the caesium air battery
I built, heavy as a brick and explodes first hint of damp weather.
<p>
---
</p><p>
<a href="http://www.feeddistiller.com/blogs/Batteries/feed.html" title="feeddistiller.com">Batteries</a> [feeddistiller.com] Feed @ <a href="http://www.feeddistiller.com/" title="feeddistiller.com">Feed Distiller</a> [feeddistiller.com]</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Exposed to air , and protected by a thin membrane , I should think these would be a little on the explosive side , if the membrane gets damaged and water gets to the lithium , a vigorous reaction , as the chemists says .
Still you should see the caesium air battery I built , heavy as a brick and explodes first hint of damp weather .
--- Batteries [ feeddistiller.com ] Feed @ Feed Distiller [ feeddistiller.com ]</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Exposed to air, and protected by a thin membrane, I should think these would be a little
on the explosive side, if the membrane gets damaged and water gets to the lithium, a
vigorous reaction, as the chemists says.
Still you should see the caesium air battery
I built, heavy as a brick and explodes first hint of damp weather.
---

Batteries [feeddistiller.com] Feed @ Feed Distiller [feeddistiller.com]</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_26_1746258.28487021</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_26_1746258.28509437</id>
	<title>Re:Almost 1/2 the energy density of gas</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1246206900000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>ICE's are not 40\% efficient. They're 30\% max, with 20\% in the real world.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>ICE 's are not 40 \ % efficient .
They 're 30 \ % max , with 20 \ % in the real world .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>ICE's are not 40\% efficient.
They're 30\% max, with 20\% in the real world.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_26_1746258.28488053</parent>
</comment>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_26_1746258_0</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_26_1746258.28487133
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_26_1746258.28487021
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_26_1746258_17</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_26_1746258.28487851
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_26_1746258.28487465
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_26_1746258_27</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_26_1746258.28490141
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_26_1746258.28488053
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_26_1746258_23</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_26_1746258.28488815
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_26_1746258.28487257
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_26_1746258.28487021
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_26_1746258_4</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_26_1746258.28493115
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_26_1746258.28487189
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_26_1746258_15</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_26_1746258.28493565
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_26_1746258.28487291
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_26_1746258_11</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_26_1746258.28511335
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_26_1746258.28487293
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_26_1746258_10</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_26_1746258.28487161
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_26_1746258.28487021
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_26_1746258_14</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_26_1746258.28509437
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_26_1746258.28488053
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_26_1746258_2</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_26_1746258.28490313
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_26_1746258.28487183
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_26_1746258.28487021
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_26_1746258_1</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_26_1746258.28487965
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_26_1746258.28487595
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_26_1746258_19</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_26_1746258.28487501
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_26_1746258.28487291
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_26_1746258_18</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_26_1746258.28488431
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_26_1746258.28487465
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_26_1746258_8</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_26_1746258.28487823
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_26_1746258.28487465
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_26_1746258_5</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_26_1746258.28487761
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_26_1746258.28487189
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_26_1746258_16</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_26_1746258.28490573
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_26_1746258.28487183
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_26_1746258.28487021
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_26_1746258_12</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_26_1746258.28488099
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_26_1746258.28487291
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_26_1746258_9</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_26_1746258.28488929
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_26_1746258.28487291
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_26_1746258_6</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_26_1746258.28488133
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_26_1746258.28487267
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_26_1746258.28487021
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_26_1746258_3</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_26_1746258.28489237
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_26_1746258.28487183
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_26_1746258.28487021
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_26_1746258_7</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_26_1746258.28488175
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_26_1746258.28487387
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_26_1746258_20</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_26_1746258.28488281
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_26_1746258.28487189
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_26_1746258_30</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_26_1746258.28487841
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_26_1746258.28487267
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_26_1746258.28487021
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_26_1746258_24</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_26_1746258.28489129
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_26_1746258.28487291
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_26_1746258_28</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_26_1746258.28498641
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_26_1746258.28488053
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_26_1746258_21</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_26_1746258.28489823
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_26_1746258.28488925
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_26_1746258.28487131
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_26_1746258.28487021
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_26_1746258_25</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_26_1746258.28489669
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_26_1746258.28487183
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_26_1746258.28487021
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_26_1746258_26</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_26_1746258.28487827
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_26_1746258.28487387
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_26_1746258_29</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_26_1746258.28489995
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_26_1746258.28487387
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_26_1746258_13</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_26_1746258.28489141
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_26_1746258.28487387
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_26_1746258_22</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_26_1746258.28488799
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_26_1746258.28487183
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_26_1746258.28487021
</commentlist>
</thread>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_06_26_1746258.5</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_26_1746258.28487815
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_06_26_1746258.10</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_26_1746258.28487279
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_06_26_1746258.13</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_26_1746258.28487291
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_26_1746258.28488099
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_26_1746258.28493565
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_26_1746258.28487501
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_26_1746258.28489129
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_26_1746258.28488929
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_06_26_1746258.11</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_26_1746258.28489233
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_06_26_1746258.14</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_26_1746258.28487533
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_06_26_1746258.12</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_26_1746258.28488083
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_06_26_1746258.4</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_26_1746258.28487343
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_06_26_1746258.2</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_26_1746258.28487129
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_06_26_1746258.8</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_26_1746258.28488173
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_06_26_1746258.6</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_26_1746258.28487293
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_26_1746258.28511335
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_06_26_1746258.9</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_26_1746258.28488053
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_26_1746258.28490141
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_26_1746258.28498641
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_26_1746258.28509437
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_06_26_1746258.17</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_26_1746258.28487595
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_26_1746258.28487965
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_06_26_1746258.3</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_26_1746258.28487189
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_26_1746258.28487761
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_26_1746258.28488281
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_26_1746258.28493115
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_06_26_1746258.7</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_26_1746258.28487021
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_26_1746258.28487131
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_26_1746258.28488925
---http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_26_1746258.28489823
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_26_1746258.28487161
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_26_1746258.28487267
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_26_1746258.28488133
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_26_1746258.28487841
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_26_1746258.28487133
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_26_1746258.28487183
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_26_1746258.28490313
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_26_1746258.28488799
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_26_1746258.28489669
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_26_1746258.28490573
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_26_1746258.28489237
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_26_1746258.28487257
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_26_1746258.28488815
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_06_26_1746258.15</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_26_1746258.28488231
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_06_26_1746258.1</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_26_1746258.28489535
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_06_26_1746258.0</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_26_1746258.28487387
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_26_1746258.28489141
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_26_1746258.28487827
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_26_1746258.28488175
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_26_1746258.28489995
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_06_26_1746258.16</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_26_1746258.28487465
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_26_1746258.28487851
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_26_1746258.28487823
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_26_1746258.28488431
</commentlist>
</conversation>
