"Rechargeable lights have no place in caving"

[Jeff Bartlett]

My question is, who would use it?

good question - it HAS to be a proof-of-concept piece. you can run a 1x 1W LED for 50 hours on a quad of AAs, using yesterday's technology...

[ek]

Then it seems to prove that highly-portable fuel cell technology is not competitive with more traditional power sources. More of a proof of anti-concept.

[Jeff Bartlett]

More of a proof of anti-concept.

"Hooray! We've proved this can be done... poorly."

[potholer]

good question - it HAS to be a proof-of-concept piece. you can run a 1x 1W LED for 50 hours on a quad of AAs, using yesterday's technology[/url]...

One thing I do find annoying about some lighting adverts is the way they combine the maximum power rating of an LED with a runtime which the batteries can't come close to sustaining at anything like that power.

[Jeff Bartlett]

One thing I do find annoying about some lighting adverts is the way they combine the maximum power rating of an LED with a runtime which the batteries can't come close to sustaining at anything like that power.

i find it annoying as well, but i'm presuming both advertisers here are guilty of it and as such will use the published runtimes for comparison's sake.

[barcelonacvr]

Thanks NZ for the kudos, but I'm not an engineer when it comes to light systems/batteries. 20 years of ham radio ...

I wonder how some of the older purists would react to this product

http://www.angstrompower.com/products_a2.html

A complex, expensive hydrogen fuel cell system - and all to run a mere 1 watt LED flashlight? Not to sound like an old purist or anything but for now I'll stick with my rechargeable AA lights thanks.

I was just thinking that if some people have issues with rechargeables,then imagine the consternation once products like this perhaps become mainstream.I embrace new technology once it has been around for awhile and proven itself.I think rechargeables have met that by far at least IMHO///and Yes it is a hardcore way to drive a 1 watt LOL

[Jeff Bartlett]

is this officially the most lopsided poll in the history of cavechat? 34:0 disagree as of this writing.

[fuzzy-hair-man]

is this officially the most lopsided poll in the history of cavechat? 34:0 disagree as of this writing.

I was thinking of it as a most miraculous occurrence, having this many people agree on a forum and it seems 2 pages of people agreeing with each other is the earth still turning?

[ek]

Darn it--I should have agreed that rechargeable lights have no place in caving, to make things more interesting!

Too late now...

[Jeff Bartlett]

well, it's okay, SOMEONE will come along and play devil's advocate. but even I underestimated how out-in-left-field that editorial from the News was!

[ron_miller]

Apparently, rechargeable batteries "have no place in" the current generation (pre July 2008?) of the entire Petzl Myo line of headlamps - see the Petzl issues safety warning for Myo headlamps thread.

[NZcaver]

I just received my January 2009 NSS News today. Mr Lipton has responded to the earlier rebuttal letters by Mark Minton and John Gookin. This time he's added a photo of what is presumably his helmet and light setup. It looks like an old style silver construction hard hat, with his trusty little Olight mounted high on the front pointing down. Mr Lipton is sticking to his guns. Short version:

He really loves his $50 Olight T-15 1xAA LED flashlight, especially now "since my last letter I have taken the Olight caving and it works quite well."

He continues to make the assertion that "one's backup light should be equal to the main light."

Regarding Stenlights - "just because one particular Sten battery and light have not failed yet, it doesn't mean that any given Sten (or any other) unit will not fail in the future."

And of course "the 'green' argument against throwing away disposables is bogus (because) compared with the overall pollution of going caving it is utterly inconsequential."

Mr Lipton still seems to miss a couple of important points entirely. His own state-of-the-art Olight (and many other LED lights) should work just as reliably and efficiently - if not more - using good rechargeable AA's instead of alkalines. Especially with the newer precharged hybrid NiMHs. And regardless of how good or bad various other environmental pollutants are, it's a proven fact that rechargeable batteries have a lower environmental impact than using disposable alkalines. They're generally cheaper over the long term as well.

I don't think this discussion is quite finished yet...

[potholer]

"one's backup light should be equal to the main light."

Why is that?
If one's expectation is that the backup light will be rarely, if ever, needed, why does it need to be anything more than adequately bright to let you complete any likely trip?
Surely reliability (so it will work if ever required) and sufficient runtime are the main requirements?

[Jeff Bartlett]

"the 'green' argument against throwing away disposables is bogus (because) compared with the overall pollution of going caving it is utterly inconsequential."

Ah yes, the "F__k it" approach to environmental responsibility: "This is just a drop in the bucket and doesn't make a difference, so f__k it!"

His various arguments are dreadfully misguided, but I just don't have the energy to debate it. Of one thing I am certain: Never in my 30 years have I successfully convinced an old, crotchety person that the way they do things is wrong. Why try?

[Scott McCrea]

He who does not embrace change should prepare for obsolescence.