In article ,
D.P.Round wrote:
Why no NiMH? No Cadmium and a higher energy density again. Currently
based on AA size (which may not be a useful comparison for a great many
reasons) the achievable energy density seems to be something like four
times that on NiCads. Again for small batteries Li poly do much better
than NiMH and far more than twice NiCads. This doesn't tally with your
data. Do you know why? Regardless it will not get close to petrol
anytime soon.

It's as well to note that none of the rechargeable cells approach the
capacity of an alkaline type like Duracell...

--
*If one synchronized swimmer drowns, do the rest have to drown too?

Dave Plowman London SW 12
RIP Acorn