The fact that non-rechargeable would last twice as long is irrelevant because my rechargeables never run out.
Where do you get NiMH cells with infinite life?
(picture of leaking batteries with very clear "made in China" markings removed)
Duracell do also make batteries in China, but I am not aware I have removed any marking.
Some?
"Duracell guarantees its batteries against defects in materials and workmanship. Should any device be damaged due to a battery defect, we will repair or replace it at our option."
"Energizer will repair or replace, at our option, any device damaged by leakage from Energizer® MAX® AA/AAA Alkaline batteries"
You mean the brands I've been mentioning in this thread?
Yes, they do have that guarantee in some countries.
Ummmm... how hard can it be to think of 'costs' when you're buying things? (Hint: The clue is in the verb).
Duracell/Energizer AA - easily under $1 (under 50 cents if you buy boxes of them)
Duracell/Eneloop rechargeable AA - $3 each
Decent battery charger: $10-$20 ??
So they cost 4-5 times less, they last twice as long in 'standby' devices, eg. remote controls, and you don't have any start-up costs (charger).
So how much is a free recharge really worth?
I payed 2€ per Eneloop AA,
and 0,34€ per Duracell AA,
the charger was already available (and that's why I don't calculate these costs, the question should be "what do _I_ have to pay extra in _my_ setup")
So yes, you could argue that (charging no cost for the charger) I could use 6 duracells instead of one Eneloop.
But that would also imply 6 times more waste for the same level of comfort, and in this case, I prefer to pay some € more for the environment's sake.
But that would also imply 6 times more waste for the same level of comfort, and in this case, I prefer to pay some € more for the environment's sake.
Sure, but the argument was:
Using rechargeable batteries in remote control units isn't usually cost-effective
"the cost of recharging them is practically zero"
But that would also imply 6 times more waste for the same level of comfort, and in this case, I prefer to pay some € more for the environment's sake.
Sure, but the argument was:
Using rechargeable batteries in remote control units isn't usually cost-effective
"the cost of recharging them is practically zero"
Which is still true, if you already have a charger.
Or, if you want, I think I payed about 30€ for mine, and use it for at least 5 years now. With about 50 charges per year, that's 12ct per charging, reducing with every charge. I'd call that "practically zero."
"the cost of recharging them is practically zero"
Which is still true, if you already have a charger.
And if you already have the batteries.
If you don't, then.... it
isn't true! Tada!
Math. It works, bitches!
And if you already have the batteries.
If you don't, then.... it isn't true! Tada!
Math. It works, bitches!
It's still true, only the break even point moves slower. I'm sure you can do the calculations with 2€+n*0,14€ against n*0,34€, where n is the number of charges, for yourself.
Say you buy 10 Eneloop that you recharge.
Then it probably should be 30€+10*2€+n*0,14€ vs n*0,34€.
So: 50 + n*0.14 = n*0.34 => 50 = n*(0.34-0.14) => n = 50/0.2 or 250 charge cycles to break even.
Less if you purchase less Eneloops.
Even without taking into account the cost of recycling those 250 batteries which should be included in the price of the batteries to begin with.
It's still true, only the break even point moves slower. I'm sure you can do the calculations with 2€+n*0,14€ against n*0,34€, where n is the number of charges, for yourself.
Sure, let's see...
I calculate that I'll be dead
long before before I break even with a remote control.
And you buy a new charger for every rechargable batteryi your calculation. You're always seeing that use case isolated.
2€+n*0,14€ against n*0,34€ => n=10 in my scenario with all the other batteries also using the charger (as I said, about 50 charges per year), summing up to 34ct per charge including the charger.
That's still 20 years for the RC batteries, but I hope you won't die that quick.
That's still 20 years for the RC batteries, but I hope you won't die that quick.
My RC batteries last a lot longer than 2 years.
Words fail me at the pointlessness of this video
This is supposed to be their big comeback to me using a power supply to test battery cutoff in a product!
OMG, how cluelesss are these people?
They should have added their product to those empty batteries that run instantaneously below the 0.9V when activated in the test and then....... oh no the monkey still does not operate even with their magic smoke product FAIL
OMG, how cluelesss are these people?
I don't think they are clueless.
I think they do this on purpose to rescue their product.
If they are good enough to build a boost circuit that small, thei knew what they are doing.
They only want to sell their product at high price to people which are not that good at electronic.
This is the new way of selling "snakeoil".
By the way.
Does the scinentist guy knew what they are doing with his statement about batteries?
OMG, how cluelesss are these people?
I don't think they are clueless.
I think they do this on purpose to rescue their product.
If they are good enough to build a boost circuit that small, thei knew what they are doing.
They only want to sell their product at high price to people which are not that good at electronic.
Yep, agreed, it must be that.
By the way.
Does the scinentist guy knew what they are doing with his statement about batteries?
Probably yes:
The whole bench looks like a movie setup: The scope is running with the probe connected to the probe adjust test signal output. And the remaining space is filled with random tools and other stuff.
I don't think they are clueless.
Well, you never know. Look at the equipment. Never underestimate human stupidity.
Is this guy in the ugly shirt supposed to be one of the developers? If so, I could really imagine that he didn't quite get the problem with this open load voltage comparison.
Besides, the statement from the 1st vid is like "batteries are different - just believe us". The one one from the 2nd video is like "batteries are different - and there are very complex technical reasons for this (that we just googled without understanding the real issue)".
In a typical convince-confuse-con theorem, now they reach confuse stage
Adding the "risk" when using alkaline battery which I think worth considering, especially in an expensive T&M instruments.
This photo was taken at Oct 2013, watch the expiry date at the cell. They were the standard batteries came with Fluke 287, and was installed in the meter (Fluke distributor's showroom) when I bought it for cheaper price as its a show unit. The meter was showing full bar at the battery indicator when they're installed, and also I did a brief "loaded" test and they were still fresh.
Just a reminder as well, remember to check your T&M instruments periodically if you are still using alkaline cells. Currently I'm a fanatic Eneloop user, and there are no alkaline cells allowed in my house, period.
The damages at the meter's battery contacts
I'm aware of Energizer warranty claim, its just not worth it for such expensive instruments, besides in my place, the damage claim could ended up for months in their bureaucracy , and there is no guarantee that they will replace or fix the device damaged by their battery.
I dont quite understand who the target audience is in regards to the toy monkey clips.
I dont quite understand who the target audience is in regards to the toy monkey clips.
It's something they can post on their Facebook page to all the plebs to make them sound like they know what they are talking about when somebody links in my video.
Obviously it's a direct response to my video, and of course they can't answer any of the criticism, so they have to invoke this deception (which is technically correct without any context) that batteries and and power supplies aren't the same thing, therefore my entire video, blog post, and all my evidence is wrong
OMG, how cluelesss are these people?
I love their expert's "workbench". Totally clean and littered with tools what are obviously fresh out of the packet and unused.
And that soldering iron? Obviously for EE work...
and then they followed up with this:
I wanna know why they didn't put the batterizer in the monkey and show us how well it works!
Must have just been an innocent omission on their part, right?
I love their experts's "workbench". Totally clean and littered with tools what are obviously fresh out of the packet and unused.
Anyone who can identify the "professor" in the video wins the Internet!