Slashdot Mirror


Motorola Makes Gasoline Powered Cell Phones

Wister285 writes "Well, now that PDAs are integrated with cell phones, you'll need some extra juice to power that thing. Motorola seems to think that the next generation of cell phones needs to be powered by gas (fuel cells). Supposedly these cell phones can last for a whole month without needing to be recharged. Batteries are not being eliminated since the "power plant" of the phone is located on the user's belt. Seems interesting. Gives a whole new meaning to "Fill 'er up!""

242 comments

  1. I'm still waiting for the cell-phone by poemofatic · · Score: 2, Funny

    ..which is powered by my own hot-air.

    --

    When in doubt, have a man come through a door with a gun in his hand.

    1. Re:I'm still waiting for the cell-phone by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Funny

      You would have to fart in it to make long distance calls.

  2. Gas, Not Gasoline by bellings · · Score: 5, Informative

    The first paragraph of the article (which is all I bothered to read, but that's still more than CmdrTaco) clearly says "methane gas-powered", not "gasoline powered".

    --
    Slashdot is jumping the shark. I'm just driving the boat.
    1. Re:Gas, Not Gasoline by Rackemup · · Score: 2

      That's what I thought too, you beat me to it... I couldn't remember any news stories showing off a new cell-phone with a big-old gasoline engine strapped to it.

    2. Re:Gas, Not Gasoline by ozbird · · Score: 5, Funny

      The first paragraph of the article ... clearly says "methane gas-powered", not "gasoline powered".

      Which also explains why the fuel cell is attached to the user's belt. ;-)

    3. Re:Gas, Not Gasoline by Domini · · Score: 2

      Gas is not fuel (petrol).

      Gas is a state of matter.

    4. Re:Gas, Not Gasoline by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
      Domini is not a Slashdot user.

      Domini is a pedantic asshole.

      -- AC @ Slashdot

    5. Re:Gas, Not Gasoline by Sam+Jooky · · Score: 1, Insightful

      Seeing as how slashdot is "very busy person"-powered, I think we should cut them some slack.

    6. Re:Gas, Not Gasoline by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Woa, you just ripped the metaphorical rug out from under my intellectual background!

      You mean there *are* countries that still refer to fuel as gas?

      There are worse things to be... and so kind of you to demonstrate.

      --
      Domini @ Slashdot

    7. Re:Gas, Not Gasoline by Wiggin · · Score: 1

      um, if you look at the story all of it is the submitter's comments (note the italics). none of it is actually cmdrtaco's comments.

      --

      "I don't need a compass to tell me which way the wind shines." - Mr. Furious, Mystery Men
    8. Re:Gas, Not Gasoline by llauren · · Score: 2, Funny
      Gas. Methane. To charge your phone battery, just fart.
      • ~llaurén
    9. Re:Gas, Not Gasoline by MarkusQ · · Score: 2
      Gas is not fuel (petrol).

      Gas is a state of matter.

      In this case, it is both. Methane, a gas, is being used as a fuel.

      -- MarkusQ

    10. Re:Gas, Not Gasoline by ackthpt · · Score: 1

      The way I've been ripping them lately I could talk for hours. Geez.

      --

      A feeling of having made the same mistake before: Deja Foobar
    11. Re:Gas, Not Gasoline by nion · · Score: 1
      (which is all I bothered to read, but that's still more than CmdrTaco)

      I fail to see why you're bashing CmdrTaco, he didn't add any comments to the submission. If anyone, you should be giving the sumitter some $#!^. Nobody's perfect, but you people can only see the bad things.

      --
      der dee der.
    12. Re:Gas, Not Gasoline by armb · · Score: 1

      The submitter's story in italics says "gas", which is right.

      The title says "gasoline", which is wrong.

      --
      rant
    13. Re:Gas, Not Gasoline by huckda · · Score: 1

      Thats great! For $0.59(price of 1 bean burrito) I can recharge my cell-phone!! I bet Taco Bell sees a direct co-related increase in burrito sales!

      --
      "Just Smile and Nod." --Huck
    14. Re:Gas, Not Gasoline by FaRuvius · · Score: 1

      yes, but the the TITLE of the news post CLEARLY reads "GASOLINE".

      --
      Need to get away?
      Adirondack Vacations
    15. Re:Gas, Not Gasoline by Fencepost · · Score: 2
      The first paragraph of the article [...] clearly says "methane gas-powered", not "gasoline powered".

      While this is true, it's not really all that important - the key item is that it's a fuel cell. Odds are that it could run pretty well on gasoline, natural gas, propane, or a variety of other volatiles with a lot of hydrogen with fairly minor modifications.

      --
      fencepost
      just a little off
    16. Re:Gas, Not Gasoline by MindStalker · · Score: 1

      Yes, infact most of the U.S. referes to it as gas. Not because we don't know any better, but simply because to the American tounge, petrol sounds so stupid.

    17. Re:Gas, Not Gasoline by Zaknafein500 · · Score: 2

      In this case, it is both. Methane, a gas, is being used as a fuel.

      Actually, from a technical standpoint, the methane being used in this application is not a gas. It has been compressed into liquid form.

      --

      "The guide is definitive, reality is frequently inaccurate."
    18. Re:Gas, Not Gasoline by KurdtX · · Score: 1

      Taco would be almost as correct to say "it uses an advanced form of fusion"

      --

      Kurdt
      I'm not anti-social. Just pro-technology.
    19. Re:Gas, Not Gasoline by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Petrol is simply short for petroleum which need not necesarily be fuel. The American useage of gas is short for gasoline a more specific form of petroleum fuel. They are both non-specific localisms.

    20. Re:Gas, Not Gasoline by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Petrol is unambiguous, however.

    21. Re:Gas, Not Gasoline by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      While this is true, it's not really all that important - the key item is that it's a fuel cell.

      I beg to differ. The difference between gasoline and methane is an important one, primarily because gasoline is a non-renewable resource. It makes very little sense to build more devices that are dependent on fossil fuels. Methane is abundantly renewable. This is an important distinction.

    22. Re:Gas, Not Gasoline by cyclist1200 · · Score: 1

      "Gas is a state of matter."

      Not to be confused with a state of mind.

      What is mind? No matter.
      What is matter? Never mind.

    23. Re:Gas, Not Gasoline by operagost · · Score: 1

      Well, we chose to abbreviate "gasoline" to "gas" rather than "petroleum" to "petrol". Seems logical to me. After all, calling that substance petrol(eum) is simply too vague. You could be talking about motor oil or plastics. They're made from petroleum too.

      --

      Gamingmuseum.com: Give your 3D accelerator a rest.
    24. Re:Gas, Not Gasoline by KC7GR · · Score: 1

      Boy... Cow farmers won't EVER run out of power! Talk about 24/7/365... ;-)

      --

      Bruce Lane, KC7GR,

      Blue Feather Technologies

    25. Re:Gas, Not Gasoline by J.Random+Hacker · · Score: 3, Informative

      I'm not sure how minor the variations would be. Last I knew, all fuel cells were based on the 2H+O->H2O, where the -> also produces a current. There was research on other types of fuel cells that could "burn" (e.g. oxidize to produce a current) methane (say) in this same manner, but i don't recall any success. What has worked is a process where a hydrocarbon (like methane or gasoline) is cracked to produce H2 and a residue, usually CO2, but sometimes with a quanity of CO as well.

      That said, the thing that has to change to burn another fuel is the cracking catalyst. I suspect that the methane catalyst is the easiest to handle, since the operating temperature is reasonably close to room temperature, as opposed to gasoline cracking catalysts, which operate at much higher temperatures, last I knew (which was 15 years ago -- much may have changed since I was a Chemical Engineer professionally).

      Does anyone out there have more recent info on fuel cell technology?

    26. Re:Gas, Not Gasoline by ka9dgx · · Score: 2
      Then the RIAA will sue Taco Bell because the methane could be used to power something playing an MP3 file.

      --Mike--

    27. Re:Gas, Not Gasoline by SnugBoy · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Actually, to have a fuel cell run off anything other than pure hydrogen requires a reformate process which takes a lot of power and space. The use of methane is only possible becuase the there are Proton Exchange Membranes avaialable that can extract hydrogen directly from methane using different catalyist loadings on the anode. While it is possible to run a cell from methane the effeciency is much lower than that of a hydrogen fuel cell, and the chances of the PEM fouling are much higher.
      It is so disturbing to see people commenting on stories with so much authority, when it is quite obvious that they have no idea what they are talking about (not particularly you FencePost, its just that I have seen many Fuel Cell realated stories posted here, and people make comments on them like they are experts). I am a Mechanical Engineer deeply involved in fuel cell research, and I would never assume to open my mouth in a forum about Networking protocols and such. Please have the same repsect and do not pretent to be an authority when you are not (again, not directed on you FencePost, your comment was fairly tame, it just so happenes I am responding to this post when feeling this way)

    28. Re:Gas, Not Gasoline by Z4rd0Z · · Score: 1

      No joke. I once worked on a dairy farm where all the cow shit from the barn was scraped down into a big tank underneath where there was plenty of methane a-brewin'. That methane could have easily powered all or a good portion of the entire farm. I've read books on how to set up a system like that. Sorry, I don't remember any titles.

      --
      You had me at "dicks fuck assholes".
    29. Re:Gas, Not Gasoline by khalua · · Score: 1

      Can't they just put a tube in your ass and you can fart your way through cell conversations?

      --


      "There are more pleasant things to do than beat up people." --Muhammad Ali
    30. Re:Gas, Not Gasoline by feed_me_cereal · · Score: 1

      So when I say I have a gas powered furnace, I'm actually not speaking correctly? Go take a linguistics class.

      --
      "Question with boldness even the existence of a god." - Thomas Jefferson
    31. Re:Gas, Not Gasoline by Fencepost · · Score: 2
      Heck, the best way to get good information is to post something just a little bit questionable and wait for the corrections to flow....

      In any case, my assumption was that the cell itself was pretty much running on straight hydrogen - I just hadn't realized that it was that much easier to split the hydrogen out of methane with reasonable conditions (temperature, materials cost, etc.).

      I think it's safe to assume that even pen-refill-sized cartridges of compressed hydrogen aren't going to be considered a widely acceptable option since they'd probably hold as much hydrogen as a balloon. Reportedly a hydrogen-filled balloon will explode nicely if flame is applied.

      --
      fencepost
      just a little off
    32. Re:Gas, Not Gasoline by twitter · · Score: 2

      Cool, I've got plenty of gas close to my belt! Co -workers have always complained, but now I can tell them it's for the company. Gassoline powered stuff kinda scarged me.

      --

      Friends don't help friends install M$ junk.

    33. Re:Gas, Not Gasoline by Cougar1 · · Score: 2, Informative

      I hate to break it to you and mess up all of these posts about gas, gasoline, etc..., but the ZDNet article is screwed up. The Motorola Fuel Cell uses Methanol, not methane!

      See: http://www.cellular.co.za/battery_technology.htm

      and http://www.enn.com/news/wire-stories/2000/09/09272 000/upi_fuelcell_31950.asp

    34. Re:Gas, Not Gasoline by Domini · · Score: 2

      There's a difference between linguistics and context. Lexically your sentence does make sense, and for some people that is enough.

      However, how can your furnace run on helium?
      (It's a gas, isn't it?)

      You cannot even achieve exothermic fusion with it!
      ;)

      'Gas' heaters are scarce in my country (as are wooden buildings). Since my climate is so bloody pleasant, I guess heating issues are not so pronounced.

      Many a war was forged on simple misunderstandings.

    35. Re:Gas, Not Gasoline by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You're forgetting that most of the /. trolls are ambiguous, so naturally, they prefer to use ambiguous terms.

    36. Re:Gas, Not Gasoline by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Yup I think you're right...

      ...I wish they'd just wake up and smell the gas.

      Silly american types.

  3. Beans, the fuel for an everlasting cellphone by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I'm sure most humans would be capable of providing their own fuel for a methane powered cell phone.

  4. sw33t by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    now my phone will smell as bad as my car!

  5. Accuracy: Story Vs. Title by Calcbert · · Score: 1

    Leaping to the conclusion of 'gasoline powered' was certainly a leap.

  6. Motorola Makes First Post by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Bioootch

  7. What about engine noise? by Lethyos · · Score: 1

    Will it interfere with my conversations? (I lay this karma upon the alter for sacrifice...)

    --
    Why bother.
  8. more risks by stilwebm · · Score: 4, Funny

    Great. As if it wasn't bad enough to share the road with people trying to hold on to a cigarette and a cell phone more than they are hanging on to their 3+ ton SUV. Now they are going to be catching on fire too.

    1. Re:more risks by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      "Great. As if it wasn't bad enough to share the road with people trying to hold on to a cigarette and a cell phone more than they are hanging on to their 3+ ton SUV. Now they are going to be catching on fire too."

      As long as they're not swerving their Canyonero into my lane, this is a bad thing because... ?

    2. Re:more risks by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Because now you're going to be waiting in traffic all morning while the highways crawl past the one open lane at the scene of destruction.

    3. Re:more risks by Mr.+Slippery · · Score: 2, Funny
      Now they are going to be catching on fire too.
      Think of it as evolution in action.
      --
      Tom Swiss | the infamous tms | my blog
      You cannot wash away blood with blood
    4. Re:more risks by HBD · · Score: 0

      i am totally for un-natural evolution since we have weeded out the real thing, we need to start irradiating the people with low IQs, and tell the mediocore ppl to walk into the oceans just incase anyone was guessing through the test..lol..seriously though

      --
      -- Note to self - 'Don't push that button'.
  9. Does it come with a pull cord? by CyberGarp · · Score: 1

    Great I can't keep my lawnmower working more than half a season. I hate small gasoline motors. It's also wonderful how you can't get the smell off your hands when you spill some.

    --

    I used to wonder what was so holy about a silent night, now I have a child.
    1. Re:Does it come with a pull cord? by c4thy · · Score: 0

      maybe you should read the article its not gasoline powered cell fones, but gas powered cell fones.

      dont you just love it when ppl dont actually read the article

      --

      i am convinced that "/.ers" are homosexuals and imma make that my "sig"
    2. Re:Does it come with a pull cord? by HBD · · Score: 0

      if u read the arcticale you might be able to say the word phone..huh?
      lol

      --
      -- Note to self - 'Don't push that button'.
    3. Re:Does it come with a pull cord? by c4thy · · Score: 0

      i am able to say the word fone (did you actually hear it?). In Spanish its telefono, so i abbreviate it fone, not phone.

      --

      i am convinced that "/.ers" are homosexuals and imma make that my "sig"
    4. Re:Does it come with a pull cord? by HBD · · Score: 0

      lol..just wasting time making usless comments, don't take it personelly

      --
      -- Note to self - 'Don't push that button'.
    5. Re:Does it come with a pull cord? by c4thy · · Score: 0

      heh, np dewd, but while we are wasting time maybe you should check out these links here and here or invest in a spell checker or a GED or something.

      --

      i am convinced that "/.ers" are homosexuals and imma make that my "sig"
  10. Fuel Cells by alnapp · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Could this be the "Killer App" for fuel cells?
    They won't get cheaper untill there's a mass market, cell phones could be the answer.

    1. Re:Fuel Cells by dolanh · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Cell phones are pretty efficient already, IMHO. My Nokia 6185 battery lasts plenty long for me.

      Where this tech will find it's "killer app" is in the gas-guzzlers of the portable market -- the PDA/Cell-phones (as the article states), the color PDAs, and probably laptops eventually.

      I just hope this doesn't create another disposable tech. The article said nothing about any environmental side effects.

    2. Re:Fuel Cells by ShelbyCobra · · Score: 1

      While I agree with PDA being a "gas guzzler," don't discoutn the power usage of the antenna on your cell.

      I have noticed a considerable decline in the size of cell phone batteries lately, and an increase in standby time. In fact, I can leave my new phone on for about a week, if I don't talk at all. I think that this is due to newer chip tech being implemented.

      The downside of having the smaller batteries is the decrease in talk time due to the power consumed by the antenna. Newer cell phones seem to have shorter talk times than older phones, mine being around 2.5 hrs.

      Having a sronger power plant on the phone will allow users to actually be able to talk for extended times without worry of running out of juice.

      --

      -ShelbyCobra

      Living life in the right side of the s-plane

    3. Re:Fuel Cells by matrix29 · · Score: 1

      Should be refillable with butane disposable lighter refill bottles.

      Or for a bigger job a small propane container could do. It's not like methane isn't easy to find, just few people have thought to capture, contain, and resell it in small containers (which should be easy to recycle or refill).

      A battery with "INSTANT RECHARGE" would be a godsend to all aspects of personal electronics and amusements.

      I've been waiting for a better battery than the slow-to-recharge radio-controlled car batteries. Now if the parents groups will wake up and recognize that children can be smart and a few Darwin-award suicide cases shouldn't cripple the entire powered toy industry we could get onto making better amusements with more processor power than what a lousy 1.5V to 6V toy could provide.

      --
      "Face it, a nation that maintains a 72% approval rating on George W. Bush is a nation with a very loose grip on reality.
    4. Re:Fuel Cells by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
      Right, but this is only logical. To emit something like 1 Watt of RF, you need to suck more than 1 watt out of the battery (actually at least 1.5 times as much last time I looked and being extremely optimstic).

      Reception circuitry power consumption has on the other hand been reduced significantly over the last few years: more efficient, lower voltage devices (means less battery elements hence smaller battery even if current reduction is not that large), mixers which work with less local oscillator power, oscillators with lower power requirements etc...

      10 yeasr ago , it would ahve been impossible to build a cell phone without at least a 12V power supply. Now all components are available which run on about 3V, except perhaps for the VCO control voltage, but the current is minimal and a very small DC/DC converter (charge pump) will give you plenty (after all it's only one op-amp, basically wired as an integrator).

    5. Re:Fuel Cells by HBD · · Score: 0

      just a question..y do ppl need 2 keep using those annoying buzzwords the yuppies use like killer app????

      --
      -- Note to self - 'Don't push that button'.
  11. Why bother with renewable energy, by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    such as solar, or kinetic, when you can just use cheaper, greenhouse causing sources?

    Carbon monoxide & radiation...how would you like to die today?

  12. methane gas-powered by wiredog · · Score: 1, Redundant
    So, if I eat lots of chili con carne, I can power the thing myself off of my own naturally occuring emissions.

    Methinks it stinks.

  13. quite versatile by esoterus · · Score: 2, Funny

    ...and should the user ever finds him or herself amidst rioting - viola! Molotov phone!

    --
    Not only does God definitely play dice, but He sometimes confuses us by throwing them where they can't be seen. -Hawking
  14. Re:Let me get this straight... by bellings · · Score: 1

    Is this an auto-poster program? Because if it is, it's suprisingly good at stripping the relevant material out of an article and post.

    Are you doing some sort of computer reading research at a graduate school somewhere?

    --
    Slashdot is jumping the shark. I'm just driving the boat.
  15. Powered by gasoline.... by Teancom · · Score: 1

    Hrrm. Does it use a pull-cord to start the phone? Does that mean I can wander around asking people to yank my cord to start me up? Heh. "Yank it, baby! Yank it! W000t!".

  16. Wrong Solution by Ghengis · · Score: 1

    Fuel cells are fine and dandy, but shouldn't we be coming up with things like better batteries or kinetic chargers to charge batteries while we move? They've just given us another way to expedite the depletion of our natural resources.

    --

    "The best laid plans of mice and men gang oft agley..." - ROBERT BURNS

    1. Re:Wrong Solution by Ghengis · · Score: 1

      Okay... nevermind... methane is plentiful, but i still like the kinetic charger idea... it works for watches, so some improvement should make it work for cell phones.

      --

      "The best laid plans of mice and men gang oft agley..." - ROBERT BURNS

    2. Re:Wrong Solution by c4thy · · Score: 0

      why dont you ppl read the articles? methane is a renewable resource, go grab an eighth grade earth science book.

      --

      i am convinced that "/.ers" are homosexuals and imma make that my "sig"
    3. Re:Wrong Solution by ergo98 · · Score: 3, Interesting

      Methane isn't just a natural resource and can easily be synthesized, hence you can view it purely as a very clean chemical battery: Expend some energy creating a CH4 molecule, and then extract the energy catalyzing with oxygen (or whatever).

    4. Re:Wrong Solution by 3waygeek · · Score: 1

      It's being done -- the Freeplay folks are working on a cellphone battery charger.

    5. Re:Wrong Solution by ErikZ · · Score: 1

      Move? Last I checked, I sit on my ass all day in front of the computer.

      --
      Democrats or Republicans. They are both taking us to the same place and they are not afraid of us anymore.
    6. Re:Wrong Solution by caesar-auf-nihil · · Score: 1

      Actually no, the fuel cells are much better than batteries which you can only recharge so many times.
      Now I'm not sure if what's mentioned in the Motorola article is the same type of fuel cell I'm about to mention, but I think it is.

      The Dept. of Energy (Sandia or Los Alamos labs) revealed in 2000 methanol-based fuel cells. The catalytic component in the fuel cell breaks down the methanol to give either methane and water or hydrogen and CO2, I can't remember which. Anyway, the fuel cell consumes the gas to generate electricity and eventually the methanol runs out. Then - you refill the fuel cell with more methanol and start the cycle again. The researchers who made these particular fuel cells found that you can refill hundreds of times before you need to either put in a new catalyst or just clean out the catalyst support in the fuel cell.

      By using methanol, you've got a wonderful renewable fuel source. Tree and wood matter (deadwood will work) is fermented to give methanol. Methanol is consumed, plant a new tree, or use more deadwood, and you've got a very nice renewable energy cycle that is indirectly powered by the sun. As long as plants grow and the sun shines, you're fine. I know my explination on the methanol production cycle is simplistic, but it ultimately works that way.

      --
      -When going for broke, go for Ithaca!
    7. Re:Wrong Solution by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      While it would be neat to have a motion powered phone for convenience, it would not have any less effect on our natural resources. This is simple physics, humans require energy to move too, we are not magic, our energy does not come for free. As a human you will have just as much an effect on the environment with the extra calories you burn to power your phone as any fairly efficient power source would, if not more.

    8. Re:Wrong Solution by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Kinetic energy would be a great idea! You could put a crank at one end of the cell phone, then rotate it at a rapid pace when talking on the phone.

    9. Re:Wrong Solution by Big+Brass+Balls · · Score: 0
      Methanol is consumed, plant a new tree, or use more deadwood, and you've got a very nice renewable energy cycle that is indirectly powered by the sun. As long as plants grow and the sun shines, you're fine.


      Yeah, tell me this in a few billion years, when the sun dies, then I'll believe it's a renewable resource. ;)

      --
      Do I play Hockey?
      What you say!!
    10. Re:Wrong Solution by snoopy75 · · Score: 1

      Well, some of us actually are moving around a lot of the time anyway, so a motion-powered phone would simply be taking advantage of something that we already do. And it's hardly logical to imply that we humans are wasting natural resources through the simple act of motion. Burning coal, yes... using CFC's, sure... walking to the john, I don't think so. :-)

  17. Gasoline is made of methane now I suppose by Headius · · Score: 1

    Although others have already mentioned it, I thought I'd rail on CT for making the mistake of calling gas powered phones "gasoline powered". Talk about confusing, until I read the article I was trying to figure out how you'd fit a gasoline pump nozzle into anything I'd want to attach to my belt. Maybe that whole "liberal education" thing isn't such a bad idea after all?

  18. I guess we're trying to "recycle" with this one... by Uttles · · Score: 2

    So the phone is powered by methane? That sure brings new use to going out for Mexican food during lunch. Now instead of rednecks cowtipping you'll have techies running around the pastures trying to capture some of that "natural" gas!

    (humor)

    --

    ~ now you know
  19. Methane Power == Hot Air? by Atomizer · · Score: 2, Interesting

    Maybe the next version can run off your "hot air". After all, it is methane powered, but I don't think I would like to get that intimate with my cell phone just to make a call. But maybe they could run them off pig farts like they cook meals on woks in some remote parts of China. (I saw it on the Discovery channel.)

  20. hiss ... crackly .... yoo still there? by Darth+Paul · · Score: 1

    "Sorry Dave, my phone's running low! But I've got some beans in my pocket ... I'll call you back in an hour!"

  21. Lighter phones? by Domini · · Score: 1, Troll

    If the power cells start containing gasses... then phones will become much lighter.

    The only problem is with public perception...
    ... images of exploding phones next to my head does not conjure up great feelings of trust.

    Plus they may not be allowed on airplanes.
    (There was this crash not so long ago... so there's a lot of FUD)

    Dom.

    1. Re:Lighter phones? by Darth+Paul · · Score: 1

      Probably not. Zippos have a lot more style.

    2. Re:Lighter phones? by cvanaver · · Score: 1

      I can't see this as being more dangerous than carrying around butane cigarette lighters, and they let those on planes. Especially since lighters will probably have more fuel in them than the battery rechargers, and are made out of cheap plastic for a dime a pop.

    3. Re:Lighter phones? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I don't know if you were trying to be funny, or missed the idea that he was getting at. Lighter, as in, not as heavy. Even though it would be more accurate to say bouyant than lighter, but that is just me.

    4. Re:Lighter phones? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Wow, I got a troll to reply!

      You MUST be new at this.

      Besides I was not even trying to be abusive - only helpful.

      I'm not even English.

  22. A conversation in the car pool.... by sdo1 · · Score: 2

    "OK, who just farted in here?"
    "Oh, that's just Joe using his methane powered cell phone."

    I can't wait to be riding in a car/bus/subway full of these things.

    -S

    --
    --- What parts of "shall make no law", "shall not be infringed", and "shall not be violated" don't you understand?
    1. Re:A conversation in the car pool.... by psych031337 · · Score: 1
      "OK, who just farted in here?"
      "Oh, that's just Joe using his methane powered cell phone."

      The reaction produces, oxygen (no stink), heat (no stink) and electricity (no stink).

      --
      +++ath0
  23. correction by psych031337 · · Score: 4, Informative
    From the link:

    Motorola researchers announced Tuesday that they have successfully demonstrated a methane gas-powered fuel cell, which can provide enough juice between chargings for a month of cell phone calls.

    The way i understand it, it works as follows:

    1. You buy the fuel cell powerplant which is slightly smaller than a standard battery
    2. You keep using you phone as usual - recharging the normal battery when it goes flat.
    3. If you are out in the fields with no electricity or in a hotel without your charger, you hook up the phone with the flat battery to the fuelcell to recharge the normal battery
    4. After charging the devices are disconnected from each other and you keep using your phone like you are used to...

    I kinda like the idea, but hope for flexibility in the fuelcell device. It sure would kick ass if i not only could "refuel" my cell but also my PDA, MP2 player or whatever gizmo is currently hungry.

    --
    +++ath0
    1. Re:correction by Ghengis · · Score: 2, Interesting

      One, maybe two problems. If you forget your charger enough to want this as a solution, you'll probably forget the fuel cell. Wouldn't it just be easier to buy a car charger and be done with it? I mean a charger is a charger is a charger...

      --

      "The best laid plans of mice and men gang oft agley..." - ROBERT BURNS

    2. Re:correction by psych031337 · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Well... maybe you don't own a car? Maybe you only go with cabs, which have ride times that don't allow full charge? Maybe you are taking part in the Rallye Paris-Dakar and your diesel-generator failed? Maybe you're CNN staff in a rural country where power outlets are rare... Or you travela alot and hate to fiddle with all these different standards for power outlets and voltages? Maybe you just want the UNIVERSAL charger for all your stuff...

      I can see some useful applications for this.

      --
      +++ath0
  24. as soon as i get one.. by dj28 · · Score: 1

    im going to put dual exhaust on that bad boy.

    1. Re:as soon as i get one.. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      > im going to put dual exhaust on that bad boy.

      Catback and twin tips should add another 30min. talk time! Put in one of those air filters for another hour! And you just know a sweet set of AR rims will get you some better signal clarity!

    2. Re:as soon as i get one.. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You should also put that super high wing on the back, and some covers for it's lights too.

      There could be a very lucrative market for "Rice Power-plants" for cell phones. That's just what we need to bring truth to the term "Rice Burner".

  25. It's METHANE GAS, not GASOLINE, DUMBASS! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    DUH... I don't think I'd enjoy lugging around anything that smelled like that noxious gasoline.

    1. Re:It's METHANE GAS, not GASOLINE, DUMBASS! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Ok, but METHANE is the primary ingredient of farts. So you would prefer to carry around farts than gasoline? To each, this own.

    2. Re:It's METHANE GAS, not GASOLINE, DUMBASS! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      And water is the primary ingrdient of urine, so I guess your going to stop drinking now. BTW methane gas is completely oderless unless they add sulfur to it for safety reasons. Try reading a book sometime, you just *might* actually learn something.

  26. Re:I guess we're trying to "recycle" with this one by Ghengis · · Score: 1

    Atlanta's "Varsity" restaurants will start having charging stations next to the bathrooms...

    --

    "The best laid plans of mice and men gang oft agley..." - ROBERT BURNS

  27. Stupid idea. by NineNine · · Score: 2

    I just want my phone to work if I drop it, or at least work under normal circumstances for at least a year. Is introducing MORE moving parts going to make phones more reliable? Charging isn't really a problem now. Most batteries can last for days at a time. At works, you go home every night and drop your phone in the charger. How tough is that? What's the point of adding incredible complexity and expense to phones? So that I can put my phone on my desk instead of in it's charger every night? This is absolutely ridiculous. Yeah, just what I need. A more complicated phone.

    1. Re:Stupid idea. by Anne_Nonymous · · Score: 2, Interesting

      I neither need, use, or want a cell phone, but most of the people I know who do have them could use more talk time and less size/weight. The "absent minded professor" type is pretty forgettful about getting the phone on the charger at night, and thus is prone to running out of power mid-conversation. Additionally, if you travel for business, a FC powered phone would also mean that you wouldn't have to carry a charger with you on trips. Lastly, FC's don't have moving parts (but I certainly agree that initially they would be more complicated than current technology).

    2. Re:Stupid idea. by Fiznarp · · Score: 1

      Fuel cells don't have moving parts. It's a chemical reaction. Why wouldn't you want your phone to last a month between chargings? Charging it every night seems more complicated to me then doing nothing.

    3. Re:Stupid idea. by Telek · · Score: 2

      "Stupid Idea"?? Did you bother to read the article?

      What happens when your new cellphone/PDA/wireless net/wristtop starts sucking back 20x the power that your cellphone does? You want to be recharging your device once every 30 minutes?

      Devices are getting a lot more integrated and needing to suck back far more juice. This is more of a proof of concept, soonafter laptops will start using this device as well, and then from there to even more complicated devices. Battery technology is what is holding us back from the really cool stuff that we've been waiting for. Technology is there, it's just that it can't be powered. This is a fantastic step in the right direction.

      --

      If God gave us curiosity
    4. Re:Stupid idea. by ryanwright · · Score: 2

      The "absent minded professor" type is pretty forgettful about getting the phone on the charger at night, and thus is prone to running out of power mid-conversation. Additionally, if you travel for business, a FC powered phone would also mean that you wouldn't have to carry a charger with you on trips.

      Point #1: Anyone who can't be bothered or can't remember to plug their cellphone into a charger at night doesn't deserve to own one. Mine is tossed in a cradle on my dresser every night and doubles as my alarm clock. I've never run out of power; even if I don't plug it in, the damn thing will go a week on standby.

      Point #2: This fuel cell isn't built into the cellphone. It's an extra device you have to carry around. Might as well carry a charger.

      --
      -Ryan, with the unoriginal sig
    5. Re:Stupid idea. by Anne_Nonymous · · Score: 1

      >> Anyone who can't be bothered or can't remember to plug their cellphone into a charger at night doesn't deserve to own one.

      Jeeze, what a hard-ass. Don't you know anybody with a 4 sigma IQ, who wouldn't remember to wear pants in the morning if their wife didn't remind them?

      >> This fuel cell isn't built into the cellphone. It's an extra device you have to carry around. Might as well carry a charger.

      Agreed. But the guys working of FCs for mobile apps are all looking to eventually replace the battery not the charger. Just because the first mobile phones were the size and weight of a cinder-block, doesn't mean that creating them wasn't a useful exercise.

    6. Re:Stupid idea. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      >Devices are getting a lot more integrated and needing to suck back far more juice.

      Tell that to the guy in the 1980's with the PC Convertible "laptop" that had to be plugged into a wall socket for juice...

  28. fuel cell, not engine. (nt) by delmoi · · Score: 1

    (nt)

    --

    ReadThe ReflectionEngine, a cyberpunk style n
  29. Its not the standby time its the talk time. by Foochar · · Score: 2

    I think we can all agree that the standby time on a modern digital cell phone has gotten to the point where most of us are more then satisfied with it. I can go for three or four days without charging my phone if I only use it a few minutes a day. And how many people go three or four days without being able to recharge their phone.

    Where this will really come into play is the power cell users. The people that for one reason or another spend most of the day on a cell phone. A college student for example that spends all day on campus but in the course of his day talks to his girlfriend for an hour between classes, his work for an hour, his buddies to figure out what bar to go to that night etc.

    One thing that article really didn't get into that I would want answered before I put one of thse on my belt is saftey. If I slip and fall and land on my cell phone I don't want it to erupt into flames. Other then that I can see these doing well even if they aren't needed, for no other reason then the "my cellphone is better then yours" discussion we all get into from time to time.

    --
    "You can't fight in here! This is the war room" --Dr. Stra
    1. Re:Its not the standby time its the talk time. by Telek · · Score: 2

      what the hell is it with everybody assuming that if you drop it or slip you'll explode?!!?

      Does anyone out there own a butane lighter? Woah. Bet you're scared of walking around with those things as well. and those are in plastic cases. I'll bet that you've screwed around with those, making flamethrowers and I'll bet that you've dropped them plenty of times, perhaps even whipped them at things. this isn't much different people.

      Have you ever dropped an actual BBQ propane tank? Go ahead. You're not going to do much damage. Those things are designed to be stable.

      And these things have a VERY SMALL AMOUNT of methane in a very thick tank (relatively speaking). You'd need to take a hammer and a nail to these things in order to pierce them. There is no danger from any sort of forseen rational usage. And EVEN IF you manage to break the tank, the gas will release VERY quickly. There's little to no risk of any sort of damage.

      --

      If God gave us curiosity
  30. methane gas by Lynx0 · · Score: 1

    If they would sell a simple add-on device for it, you could power your cell phone bye eating beans...

  31. just what I need... by Lxy · · Score: 2

    the radiation of my cell phone and a cell full of methane in the same piece of hardware. I'd start looking at yesterday's story on body powered batteries before I started walking around with methane on my belt. So what kind of emissions do these things put out?

    --

    There is no reasonable defense against an idiot with an agenda
    :wq
    1. Re:just what I need... by psych031337 · · Score: 2
      the radiation of my cell phone and a cell full of methane in the same piece of hardware. I'd start looking at yesterday's story on body powered batteries before I started walking around with methane on my belt. So what kind of emissions do these things put out?

      Oxygen, heat and electricity. Nothing really hazardous in terms of output...
      --
      +++ath0
    2. Re:just what I need... by Lxy · · Score: 1

      How much heat?

      --

      There is no reasonable defense against an idiot with an agenda
      :wq
  32. Fuel Cell Leak... by FortKnox · · Score: 2

    Imagine you are sitting in the board room of the chief shareholders of your company. You stand to make a presentation...

    Your methane fuel cell leaks.

    Now all the shareholders accuse you of nasty farts when they smell you, and you are fired.

    I'll stick to my normal cell batteries, thank you very much!!!

    Note to moderators: This was a vain attempt at some humor. Gimmie a break :-P

    --
    Good quote, too many chars. Seriously, the slashdot 120 char limit sucks!
    1. Re:Fuel Cell Leak... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
      Your methane fuel cell leaks.

      Now all the shareholders accuse you of nasty farts when they smell you.

      Not to get too pedantic, but methane doesn't smell.

      What give farts their "full-bodied" aroma is sulfur containing compounds - not the methane itself.

      That's why the Gas company has to put Ethyl Mercaptan in the Natural Gas supply to make it smell like a "gas leak." If it were just the natural gas (methane), you wouldn't smell it at all, and you wouldn't be able to vacate your house before it blew up.

  33. I can see it now by s4ltyd0g · · Score: 1

    prrrt!
    hang on i gotta take this call...
    oops anyone got any paper?
    I think I'm revieving a FAX.

  34. Welcome to America by Fantastic+Lad · · Score: 0, Offtopic
    Life moves on, and the briefly awakened return to their slumbers.

    But don't get all riled up. This is as it should be. Lessons aren't worth squat if you don't give people the time and space to learn them properly.

    Conversely, those terrorist bombings while spectacular and emotionally shocking, were just blips in the big picture for anybody who didn't directly lose friends or family, (i.e., almost everybody). Job losses and changes of the economic picture happen all the time. Just because these ones stemmed from violence shouldn't serve to incapacitate you.

    Obsession is a force in the negative. You might want to watch that.


    -Fantastic Lad

  35. Refills? by Ksop · · Score: 1

    So when i run out of methane. Not that i personally will ever run out. But when my phone runs out, where do i go? I cant plug it into a car adapter or a wall outlet and recharge it. Are there refills at the grocery store, filling station, or radio shack? The article says they are about the size of a ballpoint pen ink cartrige so I gues could cary a few around. It just sounds crapy to me tho. Especially cuz my phone uptime is almost 6 months now and if i have to take the empty tank out and put a new one in ill have downtime.

    1. Re:Refills? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I would like to see a picture of the belt unit.
      I suspect that there mite be one of those clear flexible plastic hose's attached. And what mite that hose attach too? hummm.
      I got-it, it all come back to me now. In the movie "The Matrix", it said that we were nothing more than batteries. As I see it this is the first step to being a human Duracel Battery ;-)

    2. Re:Refills? by ers81239 · · Score: 1

      If you had read the article, you would have noted that the fuel cell is used to charge your cell phone's normal battery. The fuel cell is just an alternative (and portable) way to charge your phone.

      --
      there are 2 kinds of people. those who divide people into 2 kinds, and those who don't.
  36. Wow, the batteries can now outlast my wallet... by ScooterComputer · · Score: 5, Informative
    Ooooh, that's great. The thing can stay powered up longer, but I doubt I can afford to use it.

    I was at the Sprint PCS store the other day looking at the Kyocera and Samsung Palm phones. Pretty cool. I have a Palm VIIx with Palm net, but to have a PIM, a network appliance, AND a phone would just be cool. Anyhow, Palm.net charges not by TIME, but by BIT...and this makes sense, as the data services are low-bandwidth and bursty. Just as it should be for a handheld device. Well, just to prove that they JUST DON'T GET IT Sprint PCS charges by the minute. You check your email and there is none: 16 seconds, 110 bytes, $0.39. I can go a whole month on Palm.net for $12, checking my email several times per day. I figured I'd rack up close to $50 on Sprint--and that's not allowing for actually GETTING any mail. I checked in with AT&T, they charge the same.

    Apparently, the Kyocera and Samsung phones actually use a digital modem and connect to an ISP, rather than simply talking to the "network" like Palm.net. So you are physically setting up a PPP session with an ISP and running an IP stack. What a bunch of idiots. Wireless data network my ass.

    So does anyone know of any providers that actually have a cool phone/Palm/data network worth needing extra battery life--that don't charge by the minute?

    --
    Scott
    "Hokey religions and ancient weapons are no match for a good blaster at your side, kid."
    1. Re:Wow, the batteries can now outlast my wallet... by lythander · · Score: 1

      If I recall from reading about Voicestream's offering earlier this week on /., they charge by bandwidth used, not time.

    2. Re:Wow, the batteries can now outlast my wallet... by snafu · · Score: 3, Informative
      Well, just to prove that they JUST DON'T GET IT Sprint PCS charges by the minute. You check your email and there is none: 16 seconds, 110 bytes, $0.39.

      To be clear. Sprint PCS charges

      • $0.39/minute for "data" calls, plus it uses up minutes accoring to your plan.
        or
      • about $6/month for "Wireless Web" which gives you "data" calls and "WAP" (built-in phone.com browser) browsing which use up your minutes according to your plan (but no extra charges)
      It's not the best, it's not the worst.

      I checked in with AT&T, they charge the same.

      AT&T wireless has free "pocket net" service but you have to buy the worst phones they sell (Ericsson). Sadly the Nokia phones don't do it. AT&T's "pocket net" -- from my understanding -- uses the same BellSouth network that Palm VII (Palm.net?) uses; thus is uses a totally different frequency and stuff to access, it's not just a matter of making a "data call".

      You can pay more (2 other pay levels) to get a pop-box and some other stuff (not sure what).

      ....So you are physically setting up a PPP session with an ISP and running an IP stack. What a bunch of idiots. Wireless data network my ass.

      Yup. It's slow too. But it works. I use Sprint PCS for this data-stuff, and it's functional, but not amazing.

    3. Re:Wow, the batteries can now outlast my wallet... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Yeah, Mobitai, KG Telecom, and Chunghwa Telecom.
      They are in Taiwan (so am I so it works for me).

      They are using GPRS though so I still have to wait for someone to come out with a Palm OS PDA/phone that supports GPRS. Anyone know when that Visor phone is going to come out with a GPRS version? (They charge by time for plain vanilla WAP access. Too pricy to check your e-mail that way I think.)

    4. Re:Wow, the batteries can now outlast my wallet... by trcooper · · Score: 2

      If you buy the wireless web service from Sprint, you dip into your regular plan minutes, just like a voice call, which costs much less than $.39 a minute.

      The advantage to the IP based model is it is available in more locations. PCS exists in more places than Palm.net does. Palm.net is available only in major cities, PCS hits a lot of smaller cities, and covers most interstates.

      We're getting closer to unlimitted wireless plans. Two companies are offering local unlimitted usage for about 30$ a month where I am. We'll see more of this as time goes on, and paying by the bit is going to make less sense.

    5. Re:Wow, the batteries can now outlast my wallet... by nosilA · · Score: 2

      Most GSM phones can connect to a springboard slot (or pcmcia if you prefer) with a cable by Xircom [buy.com], some do IR, some bluetooth. With a GPRS phone you can just hook it up to your visor and voila. Alternatively you can use bluetooth (the only phone I know that this will work with is the Ericsson T39)

      I think this solution is superior to getting a "SmartPhone" because you don't have to talk with the visor up to your ear and it's cheaper.

    6. Re:Wow, the batteries can now outlast my wallet... by aozilla · · Score: 2

      So does anyone know of any providers that actually have a cool phone/Palm/data network worth needing extra battery life--that don't charge by the minute?

      Nextel has free incoming calls. I'd imagine it wouldn't be hard to hook up a system at home which calls your cell modem and establishes a connection. Alternatively, Verizon has 3000 night and weekend minutes, and mobile office is completely free (only uses up your minutes). I've been thinking about getting nextel after my current contract with verizon runs out. $70/month is a little high, though, and that's besides the cost of the phone line (I don't have one right now), and DSL/Cablemodem (which I do currently have).

      --
      ok then your [sic] infringing on my copyright! Could you as [sic] me next time before STEALING my comments for your own?
  37. Imagine this by c4thy · · Score: 0, Troll

    you are one of the 20 that have survived the fall of the towers. you are buried under the rubble. you have been trying to call out on you cell fone for days but it has been busy from other ppl using theirs. after a few days your batteries run out. HAD YOU HAD A METHANE POWERED CELL FONE BY MOTOROLA YOU COULDA TRIED FOR SEVERAL DAYS, BUT NOOOO YOU WERE TOO BUSY COMPLAINING AND WORRYING ABOUT OTHER PPLS PRIORITIES SO YOU DIDNT BUY ONE AND NOW YOU HAVE JUST HAVE TO GIVE IN TO FATHER TIME AND DEATH AS YOU RUN OUT OF OXYGEN IN YOUR POCKET OF AIR THAT IS LEFT.

    --

    i am convinced that "/.ers" are homosexuals and imma make that my "sig"
  38. Re:I guess we're trying to "recycle" with this one by Ronin+Developer · · Score: 2

    Not necessary to run around any fields. Every well equipped and resource techie will have the option to purchase a personal refueling system.

    They are going to package the thing with a retractable three foot hose equipped with a nozzle, regulator and check valve and a year's supply of discount coupons to Taco Bell.

    You can guess what you are expected to do with it.

  39. Mercaptan (Re:A conversation in the car pool....) by isdnip · · Score: 5, Informative

    Methane doesn't stink. It's basically odorless.

    Natural gas doesn't smell by itself. Distributors add methyl mercaptan to it in order to make it smell, so that leaks can be found. (Walk up and down the street in front of my house any day of the year and you'll smell it coming from the rather porous old Boston Gas/Keyspan pipes. They make repairs when their leak detector shows the concentration getting scary.) Mercaptan was chosen because it, well, has a strong and distinctive smell. Acetylene smell similar but is itself explosive.

    This practice began after a very unfortunate incident in the 1930s. The public school in London, Texas had been heated by gas that was being, uh, skimmed off of a pipeline passing from a nearby well. The connection wasn't exactly professional. A leak sprang, and gas accumulated in the basement, reaching serious concentrations without being noticed. It blew the school sky-high, killing about 200 people, including most of the children, largely wiping the town off the map. (The town, near Tyler, was renamed New London; it now has about 900 inhabitants.)

    People nowadays appreciate methane's properties a bit better. A little cartridge to power a fuel cell should not be a problem.

  40. I can't wait by mikey504 · · Score: 1

    The Scene:

    A busy interstate highway cluttered with burning wreckage.

    Local News Reporter:

    Oh the Humanity!

  41. Re:Let me get this straight... by poemofatic · · Score: 1

    uh..but why are you posting and surfing to slashdot? What did you expect to see here, in this thread? I can understand a person in mourning, but your emotion-fascism is offtopic and hypocritical.

    --

    When in doubt, have a man come through a door with a gun in his hand.

  42. Finally!! by smack_attack · · Score: 1

    Now I can have a battery to power ringzilla. Happy Happy Joy Joy.

  43. any reads around here? by f00zbll · · Score: 1

    Where does the article say the battery emits exhaust? For a fuel cell that size, excessive exhaust could be a huge problem and suggest it was burning pretty hot. A quick search on direct conversion of methane into electricity reveals the preferred technique uses chemical reactions to create free electrons, which suggest it doesn't require combustion of gas. Further, the by product would be water and hydrogen, which doesn't smell. Perhaps some one with more knowledge of fuel cel technology can post more details and clear up the air.

    1. Re:any reads around here? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      A fuel cell does more-or-less the same chemical reactions as combustion, but more efficiently, at low temperature, and with a much lower power-to-mass ratio.

      So, yeah, it would have an exhaust of water vapor at not much over room temperature. It would weigh more than an internal combustion engine with the same power, but less than a battery (or weight the same with a much longer life).

      Never mind cellphones - the killer app for this is laptops! Give me a full day on my Thinkpad and we've got something...

    2. Re:any reads around here? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Methane is CH4. So the H part plus the O2 in the air makes H20 - the C part still has to go somewhere. What becomes of the carbon?

  44. Motorola's new by glasslemur · · Score: 1

    9310 Fart Fone

  45. Hmm. by Spankophile · · Score: 1

    Will you be allowed to bring these on planes?

  46. Similar to what Ballard was trying by SplitzSocket · · Score: 1
    Ballard (the guy who started the Ballard Fuel Cell company) went off on a new direction, and started looking at fuel cells for laptops, and cell phones. It looks like this might be the results of that.

    Personally the sooner we get off the dependancy of heavy batteries, the happier I'll be. Even RC cars for my kids would be cool again. (and maybe last longer then 15 minutes).

    --
    R U paying too much Insurance? Compare here (no sales involved)
  47. Vegetarians... by justin_schoeman · · Score: 1

    Finally, a compelling reason to become a vegetarian - I will never have to charge my phone again...

    Yeah, it's lame, but hey.

  48. Not stupid. (was Re:Stupid idea.) by Fly · · Score: 3, Informative

    What are the added moving parts to which you are referring? Fuel cells do not use moving parts. Searching on Google took me about 15 seconds to find this page:
    http://216.51.18.233/whatis.html
    It shows a simple diagram of a fuel cell. It has the same number of moving parts as a conventional battery.

    Can someone please change the headline so it doesn't say "gasoline-powered?"

    end of line

    --
    end of line
  49. Cock smoking by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    How exactly do you smoke a cock?

  50. Background Information by gunnk · · Score: 3, Interesting

    This technology appears to be some I've read about previously (as far back as 98). You can see the Los Alamos press release or an ABC News article (with a pic). Both give a little more background and tech info on the cells.

    --
    Life is short: void the warranty.
  51. Fuel Cell Link by Alien54 · · Score: 5, Informative
    here is a links on Fuel Cells:

    http://www.fuelcells.org/

    Good introduction.

    Strangely enough, I do recall the proposal to use gasoline for fuel cells, say in cars, for pollution control, etc. The idea is that you need to have a cheap source of hydrogen and oxegen. And you do not what to use tap water because of the impurities. (never mind that producing a system that could handle impurities would cut the legs from under the Oil Companies)

    Any number of complex hydrocarbons could be used as a fuel for such a system. Methane is just one.

    And the one that some people like is to derive the hydrogen and carbon from ordinary gasoline. Although this is a wild mix of things, it has the advantadge of that it continues to feed the Oil Companies, and it takes advantadge of the distribution system already in place.

    Technology is partly based on the profit center, after all.

    --
    "It is a greater offense to steal men's labor, than their clothes"
    1. Re:Fuel Cell Link by Mr.+Slippery · · Score: 2
      The idea is that you need to have a cheap source of hydrogen and oxegen. And you do not what to use tap water because of the impurities.

      Not quite. Distilling water is E-Z.

      The fuel-cell problem is one of storage. A fuel cell basically is a hydrogen burner - all you need is hydrogen and oxygen.

      Oxygen is, fortunately for us with aerobic metabolisms, readily available from the atmosphere. Hydrogen can be easily made from electolysis of water, but how do you store it? The answer seems to be, "with great difficulty".

      It turns out to be easier to store hydrocarbons, and nab hydrogen out of them for the reaction.

      However, the means that instead of

      H2 + O2 -> H2O + power + heat

      you get

      CH4 + O2 -> H2O + CO2 + power + heat

      i.e., you've got greenhouse-effect CO2 as an emission.

      If your source of hydrocarbons is biomass methane, than that CO2 gets absorbed by plants which become the source of more fuel - it all becomes an indirect means of solar power. So long as your biomass is sustainably produced, it's all good, as cheap and clean as you're going to find.

      Using fossil hydrocarbons might be a useful intermediate step, but it's dirty, unsustainable, and results in more greenhouse gasses being released.

      (Me, I want a home unit into which I can chuck vegetable peels, grass cuttings, raked leaves, etcetera, and out comes electricity.)

      --
      Tom Swiss | the infamous tms | my blog
      You cannot wash away blood with blood
    2. Re:Fuel Cell Link by Corgha · · Score: 2

      The idea is that you need to have a cheap source of hydrogen and oxegen. And you do not what to use tap water because of the impurities. (never mind that producing a system that could handle impurities would cut the legs from under the Oil Companies)

      No, this has nothing to do with impurities in tap water.

      The energy comes (in lay terms) from combining the hydrogen and oxygen (the latter often obtained from the surrounding air) to produce water. In water, the hydrogen and oxygen are already combined, so to use water, you'd have to separate the hydrogen and oxygen first, which takes as much (actually more, thanks to inefficiencies) energy as you would get from recombining them.

      The reasons fossil fuels are used have nothing to do with an oil company conspiracy, and everything to do with their abundance and convenient chemical and physical properties (and, incidentally, are the same reasons we use them as fuels generally).

  52. Re:I guess we're trying to "recycle" with this one by Quizme2000 · · Score: 2

    "I didn't fart....it was my cell phone battery"

    --
    "Get them before they get....
  53. I wonder what airline security... by ChaoticCoyote · · Score: 2

    ...will think of these devices?

    Note that the automotive industry has struggled to make batteries and fuel cells crash-safe. When airlines panic about nail clippers, they're likely to reject anyone boarding a plane with a gas-powered device.

    1. Re:I wonder what airline security... by psych031337 · · Score: 2
      Note that the automotive industry has struggled to make batteries and fuel cells crash-safe. When airlines panic about nail clippers, they're likely to reject anyone boarding a plane with a gas-powered device.

      Well, what is the current situation on other gas-or gasoline powered devices? Can you take your BIC disposable lighter onboard? What about Zippos? The final product will most likely be an anonymous black block with wires... The risk of this being mistaken for a bomb is higher than having ir barred from flight because it contains methane, methinks.

      After all, you are allowed to take gameboys and laptops onboard. Ever wondered what hazardous and noxious chemical reactions are going on inside such a rechargable battery?
      --
      +++ath0
    2. Re:I wonder what airline security... by __aaahtg7394 · · Score: 2

      as a quick side note, they weren't allowing butane lighters on when i flew last week. even in checked bags.

      they did allow on batteries, though. and they didn't check my coins to see if i had sharpened them. nor did they check any of my potentially-sharpened metal devices.

  54. Fuel Cells for digital Cameras by savaget · · Score: 1

    These fuel cells would be great for all those battery hungry digital cameras that have to be fed batteries a few times a day when in constant use.

  55. so it's methane, not gasoline, then by protein+folder · · Score: 1

    I was wondering how you would fill it up--
    would there be a great big fitting on the side of the phone complete with gas-cap
    or would you have to drive around untill you found a gas station with the little teeny-tiny nozzles?

    --
    Your mind is squeezed by a blast of pain!
  56. Stupid! by soybean · · Score: 1

    Methane gas, not gasoline!

    Read the article first!

  57. A bit of clarification. by justin_schoeman · · Score: 1

    This is not actually the primary battery of the phone. Instead, it is a (semi)independant power source for recharging the primary cell.

    Sure, it may be illegal (or impractical) to use it in certain situations, but then you can just disconnect it, and carry on on the standard rechargable cell.

    Think of it as the nifty little portable power pack Luke Skywalker used to recharge R2D2 on Degoba (spelling?), just smaller, and (hopefully) without the disconcerting glow. ;-)

  58. Re:Yeah, I know... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Funny

    ...and all you got was this lousy t-shirt.

  59. I wonder... by evenprime · · Score: 1

    ...how many of these propane fuel cells would be needed to power an electric car. Think about it, decent range, fast speeds, and the low end
    torque of an electric.

    --

    "Weapons should be hardy rather than decorative" - Miyamoto Musashi
    I think that goes for OS's too
    1. Re:I wonder... by e.a.kendrick · · Score: 1

      Why bother? If you generate electricity from propane to drive an electric engine, why don't you just pump the propane directly into a normal engine?

      Over in the UK, we've absorbed a lot of US culture - we like our cars, even if they are not as big as in the US. But we are slowly catching on to the greenies in Europe and have introduced LPG (Congratulations Gordon Finlay, you're top of the search list, and informative - welcome to the Slashdot effect). You take any modern gasoline car, add a gas tank and some piping to the engine, and you can switch the car back and forth between LPG and gasoline at will. If your local gas station has LPG you can stick to LPG for all local trips, and only use gas when you run out.

      This propane electricity generator could be a useful replacement for the battery in a fully LPG car - the spark is created by LPG in order to ignite the LPG in the engine. The perfect balance of Yin and, well, some more Yin I suppose.

  60. What about the price of Gas? by DaHat · · Score: 1

    What happens when oil prices go up again? This doesn't seem to smart in lue of how the oil industry has been latly, we need to get away from use of oil, not find new uses... 10 bucks says this project was funded by Shell.

    1. Re:What about the price of Gas? by Ghengis · · Score: 1

      How are oil prices going to effect my purchasing (or naturally producing) methane?

      --

      "The best laid plans of mice and men gang oft agley..." - ROBERT BURNS

    2. Re:What about the price of Gas? by sgups · · Score: 1

      You lose. Give me 10 bucks now. Methane need not be produced by gas companies. They can be produced in 2 ways:
      1: Personally (in keeping with the lame attempts at humour by most posters here on this topic)
      2. Landfill sites, any place with organic waste like a barn.

      --
      Democratic USA - Government of the corporations, by the Corporations, for the corporations.
  61. Re:New meaning for "Fill 'er up!"? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    1-900 numbers. Aside from "fill me up, oh YEAH, I want YOU in my BODY", you'd be filling up the phone, too.

  62. Re:Stupid person. by trcooper · · Score: 3, Informative

    One, this could allow a cell phone battery to last months, not days. Two, it's a clean independent fuel source. Three, how many moving parts do you think there are? Plug it in, you push down a lever that releases an amount of methane into a chamber. Know how long a Bic lighter can last? Certainly longer than most folks keep their phones. Cell phone makers ALREADY consider their devices disposable. Motorola's Timeport with OLED will burn out with regular use in about 3 years.

    Finally, this has more application than just phones. Laptops, PDA units, GPS units, tools, toys could all use this technology. This allows people not to be tethered to power lines to use these devices.

    Fuel cells offer a great alternative to conventional energy sources. They promise a cheap portable and realistic power source. Its not a stupid idea. Its a forward thinking idea that has a lot of potential.

  63. How many charges would it give you? by ers81239 · · Score: 1

    The article never mentions how many times you could charge you phone with this thing. Obviously, if its just once, you could just carry another charged battery. Does anyone have an idea on how much electricity could be produced with "an area the size of a ballpoint pen's ink holder" of methane?

    --
    there are 2 kinds of people. those who divide people into 2 kinds, and those who don't.
  64. Mr. Methane by Carnivore24 · · Score: 0

    Ohh no my battery is getting low. Good thing I ate those baked beans last night!!

  65. Byproducts by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Informative

    Fuel cells generate power (and heat) by combining hydrogen and oxygen into water. The hydrogen would be made from methane, using a catalyst developed by NASA. The heat, I guess, would lend new meaning to the term "a hot call". And the water? If you keep you cell phone in your pants pocket for a while, it may look like you have a bladder problem.

    BTW, an article in today's Wall Street Journal (available only to paid subscribers) described how auto manufacturers are getting heavily into fuel-cell manufacturing. They expect that fuel-cell powered vehicles will be common by the end of the decade.

  66. Masta Blasta! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Masta Blasta run bartah town!

    I think it wouldn't be an all too bad idea to produce methane by farming pigs underground. Satisfy the need for pork & energy & ummm, farming needs. (:

  67. Gasoline? by nochops · · Score: 0

    Since when does methane = gasoline?

    So I guess my Mitsubishi will run nicely on that nasty fart I just let go, right?

    Someone please tell me when slashdot is going to start actually reading the articles they post....

    fsckin c'mon people, it was in the first paragraph of the article...

    --
    "A terrorist is someone who has a bomb but doesn't have an air force." -William Blum
  68. Re:Stupid person. by sfritzd · · Score: 1

    i agree... battery life in a notebook and many other devices is pathetic. they weigh an awful lot, some of them need to be fully drained for optimum battery longevity, the list goes on. nobody's done anything "revolutionary" in the world of power sources for decades. Li-ion is nice in that you can top it off whenever, but its still heavy and they still do die in about a year with normal to heavy use.

  69. Cool idea by ZigMonty · · Score: 2, Informative
    Firstly, to all those making jokes about methane smelling, yes they're funny but methane doesn't smell. IIRC, methane is the major component of natural gas and that is odorless (They add the smell so you are warned of gas leaks). Farts smell because of the *other* gases in them.

    Secondly, this was only a matter of time. I hope we switch from methane to hydrogen soon though. Anywho, Scientific American has a pretty informative article on fuel cells in mobile devices. It's a bit old (1998) but still relevant. A quick Google search turned up some more:
    CNN: NEC develops fuel cell for handhelds
    ABCNEWS: Fuel Cell Batteries Could Power Next Wave of Technology

  70. I think I'll wait for the next version by bazzman · · Score: 1

    I think I will wait for the next version of this cell phone wich will be nuclear powered.
    My personal nuclear power plant in my belt... enough power to supply my cellphone, laptop, car, house, everything.
    Once every ten years I'll have to stop at a gas station and refuel with some grams of uranium.

  71. Transmeta PDA by Corrado · · Score: 1

    Wow! What if you combined this with a Transmeta PDA! You could run for a year on one "charge" (or 6 hours with color :). Cool!

    --
    KangarooBox - We make IT simple!
  72. Fart balloons? by MowserX · · Score: 1

    Soon, there'll be a run on water balloons ...

    Fill a couple up with your own gas ... carry around fart balloons in case your cell phone dies on you.

  73. Do we replace these or recharge these? by rrdejay · · Score: 2, Insightful

    How would you go about recharging a methane fuel cell? Would you plug it in to the wall? Carry a container of methane gas? How long is the cell life with recharge? Or would you just throw it out and buy a new one?

    --
    Gone but not... ummm
  74. Don't even DARE bring it on an airplane! by MtViewGuy · · Score: 2

    Folks,

    While using these tiny fuel cells may be great to extend battery life of cellphones, you can forget about bringing such a thing onto an airplane (for obvious security reasons).

    Even the equivalent of the volume of ink in most ballpoint pens of methane is enough to cause quite a lot of damage inside the plane, especially inside a pressurized fuselage at altitude.

  75. Re:Mercaptan (Re:A conversation in the car pool... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    If you are wondering why they chose methyl mercaptan: butyl mercaptan is the primary ingredient in skunk musk.

    :o)

    -Jeff Baitis

    Learn from your parents' mistakes: use birth control.

  76. Re:Stupid person. by Shotgun · · Score: 3, Insightful

    Don't forget the most important propertis.

    -Most of the waste in a standard battery is highly toxic, regardless of which battery technology you choose, with the only differentiating factor being how deadly. The only waste from one of these fuel cells will be a little platic canister that may take eons to degrade, but environmentally will resemble a rock.

    -Buy a pack of batteries and let them sit 6 months before you put them to use. How often do you use that flashlight? Do you check to batteries regularly to make sure that it will work when needed? Assuming a reliable enclosure system, methane cells will easily have a shelf life of something bordering on FOREVER!

    -Batteries are damned inneficient. AC power is produced from burning fossil fuels, travels over miles of cables, gets stepped down through several transformers, converted to a DC and then very innefficiently charges the battery. Even when your not using you device, the charge slowly drains from the battery due to internal currents. Methane cells will deliver all the energy straight to the device, and energy isn't lost during storage.

    There are advantages to miniature feul cells that go far beyond convience.

    --
    Aah, change is good. -- Rafiki
    Yeah, but it ain't easy. -- Simba
  77. My ultimate intiminidation device by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Funny

    Back in college, I had an idea for a great intiminidation devices during tests. Most people had calculators, and some had graphing calculators. And two of us had that great machine-language-programmable HP48SX calculator. But I wanted something more... (and remember, no one had a laptop nor cellphone when I was in college) Sure the 48sx was huge, but it still didn't properly convey how serious I was... so here's my idea:

    A gasoline powered calculator. Imagine the surprise as I start on the test, and then pull this huge calculator out of my bag. I pull the ripcord to start up the little model-airplane motor connected to a generator... it makes a high whiney sound, and you can hear the RPMs go down as the calculator sucks more power down each time I press a key. I pity the poor guy who's downwind of my calculator, exhaust fumes wafting...

    Anyway, the device never got built. But I did try to build a gasoline-powered bike light (why carry batteries when gasoline has a much higher energy density!)... I imagined this to be a helmet-mounted device, whineing away just inches from someone's ear. I gave up when I burned up the electric motor trying to start the engine.

  78. Darn by PinkStainlessTail · · Score: 1
    Screeeeeech!!!

    So, (pant) I've got (pant) this great fart joke...

    Oh. Too late.

    --
    "Slashdot is about legos and staplers." -Cmdr. Taco
  79. Gas or Wind Up by squaretorus · · Score: 1

    New power sources have the potential to revolutionise the world of electronics. Some interesting things are happenning with Wind Up, Fuel Cells, ultra low poer consumption circuits etc... that could soon mean we hardly think about charging at all.
    Personally I'd rather crank up my notebook for 2 minutes every half hour than have it burning methane!!! Environmentally sound AND I get to excercise one of my arms more than the other legitimateley!

  80. Pollution by !Xabbu · · Score: 1

    Great.. does this mean I'm gonna have to bring my cell in for pollution testing every year too?

    --

    - Jimbob
  81. What About Laptops? by Syris · · Score: 1

    Is it me, or do laptops seem a better application? Of course you do have extra current draw, heat to dissipate, etc, but you also have a little more room to work with. It would be very cool to have a laptop batter that lasted a week before it needed recharging.

  82. Umm... Lighters?? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Not even now, after everything, are cigarette lighters being confiscated at the gate..

    Methane, butane, whatever..

    1. Re:Umm... Lighters?? by MtViewGuy · · Score: 2

      Mind you, if I smoked I'll dump my lighter in the checked luggage. Especially now the majority of international flights don't allow smoking anyway.

  83. Re:Mercaptan (Re:A conversation in the car pool... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    They use Menthal Mercaptian on Propane. Natural gas distributors use Sulfur Dioxide. They use this particular chemical because humans are most sensivite to it than almost any other chemical. In high concentrations, it's deadly, and in the concentration they use in natural gas, it's harmless. It's also the same chem that gives ritting eggs and carcasses their lovely odour.

  84. Fuel cells, eh? by __4096 · · Score: 1

    Sure beats my idea of attaching a lawnmower engine and generator to a cell phone!

  85. Recent Times by Null_Packet · · Score: 1

    Given the current events out there, I find it doubtful this technology will succeed. Not only is this technology inherently dangerous, but you will not be allowed to travel on a plane with these devices, not be allowed to ship these devices, and not be allowed to even stow them in your luggage when you travel.

    They're simply too easy to be altered/overheated for destructive purposes.

  86. Replace Nicad? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    "The consumer-electronics industry has been hunting for a way to replace nickel cadmium batteries that power most portable electronic devices in the world today. "

    NiCad? What decade is he from? NimH and Lithium Ion batteries have been out for like 10 years. I haven't touched a NiCad battery since the 80s.
    Time to go recharge my lead-acid powered laptop.

  87. kids meal by RoLlEr_CoAsTeR · · Score: 1

    imagine getting a cell phone in your taco bell kids meal or family pack?

    :D

    --

    Insert mind here.
  88. You better not be a smoker.... by mandria · · Score: 1

    Otherwise you may have accidents while you are on the phone.

  89. Re:Stupid person. by PTBarnum · · Score: 1

    Just to pick a really obscure nit, I was under the impression that plastic was too porous to hold gasses long term, so if you want a battery you can leave on the shelf for a long time, it would have to be metal or glass. Still, the environmental impact of an aluminum battery would be just as minor as plastic.

  90. Gas Powered Motorola Ph0nez by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Imagine a Beowolf Cluster of THESE!! All your gas powered phone are beong to us, ha ha ha!!!

  91. blood powered phones by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    potential difference between feet and ear. or mhd . what about isotope powered phones ( sure lead covering will be bit heavy ). why not improve solar cell tech in the first place.

  92. Business case and nagging chemistry questions by ehud42 · · Score: 1
    First the business case issue:

    This sounds like an unfortunate 'service' vs 'product' market migration. Why would I pay $xx / month for either disposable batteries or fuel for the cell when I can essentially charge the phone for free using an existing infrastructure? If it's to replace a forgotten charger, who's to say I wouldn't forget the fuel cell? If it's to power the phone where there is no infrastructure, I wonder where I would be for days with cell phone access, but no electricity?


    Now the nagging chemistry question:

    What happens to all the carbon atoms? I have read many hyped up press releases expounding the virtues of fuel cells: They only produce water, heat and electricity. That may be true if you have a pure hydrogen source, however, using a carbon based fuel like methane leaves me wondering - after I've stripped off the hydrogen to make the heat, water and electricity, what happens to the carbon atoms (and any hydrogen or oxygen atoms)? Surely these are being vented as carbon-dioxide, or worse being fused into some catalyst which will require proper disposal / cleanup.

    --
    I'm in my right mind and I have the answer to everything!
    1. Re:Business case and nagging chemistry questions by Fixer · · Score: 1
      I cannot answer your chemistry question, but I believe I have an answer to your business case:
      First the business case issue: This sounds like an unfortunate 'service' vs 'product' market migration. Why would I pay $xx / month for either disposable batteries or fuel for the cell when I can essentially charge the phone for free using an existing infrastructure? If it's to replace a forgotten charger, who's to say I wouldn't forget the fuel cell? If it's to power the phone where there is no infrastructure, I wonder where I would be for days with cell phone access, but no electricity?
      What if the battery and fuel-cell were combined into a single unit? Or more precisely, an ultracapacitor, a bit of battery and alot of fuel cell packed into the same volume? I believe that is the real intention and where you would see the long term value.

      If other articles on these FC's are accurate in terms of durability, then with a hybrid FC/Ultracap unit, you'd only ever need to add fuel to have power. No more batteries to wear out. Ultracaps can go millions of cycles before needing replacement (as long as you don't abuse them).

      And if what I have just described is not the real intentions, then I'm going to hie myself down to the infernal patent office and make a quick buck :-)

      --
      "Avast! Prepare for the rodgering!" THWACK! "Arrr.. me nards.."
  93. Re:Mercaptan (Re:A conversation in the car pool... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Not always true. I've smelled gas coming right out of a methane well, and it does have a gas odor, although not as strong as the treated gas.

  94. I want units in OEM / engineering formats. by Fixer · · Score: 1
    Right now. NOW I said!

    This tech could really kick some Duracell ass. I am so fucking sick of buying batteries every few weeks.

    Long term, I need the power density that methanol would provide. Hook this baby up to an ultracapacitor from here and burst-power needs are taken care of.

    And looking laterally, what about plates of these suckers, laid down in stacks a dozen at a time? PowerBrick.

    I read someone along this thread was spewing noise about terrorist applications. Hah. Like they'd need this technology. There are literally hundreds of things out there right now that are potentially far deadlier.

    But enough of that. This tech looks wonderfully promising and, I think, should be promoted.

    --
    "Avast! Prepare for the rodgering!" THWACK! "Arrr.. me nards.."
  95. Motorola released the same info almost a year ago- by Jarged · · Score: 1

    Check out this page on zzn.com.ru. It was January 2000, and Motorola said they had these fuel-powered cells ready. I wonder how much longer they'll keep hyping it before they're made widely available?

  96. What about the water? by MBCook · · Score: 1

    Don't fuel cells give off water? What do they plan to do with that?

    --
    Comment forecast: Bits of genius surrounded by a sea of mediocrity.
  97. Fuel cells do NOT run on gasoline... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    ... and whoever said they do is a moron.

    How Fuel Cells Work

  98. FIX IT! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    For God's sake, post a correction to this story. You've got hundreds of people reading that headline and rolling their eyes at how stupid Motorola is to come up with a phone that runs on gasoline, when the real idiocy here belongs to those who didn't bother reading the article before creating the headline for it.

  99. Huh? by cr0sh · · Score: 2

    Two things:

    1. Why are they running these off of methane? Methane isn't exactly everywhere, you can't just go to the store to refill it. Thus, you are left with either buying new "fuel cell" units for the phone, or building up a new infrastructure to sell methane in small cans for refill - both which equate to more money (for the corps - yay corps!) out of pocket, and more waste for the environment (if the units aren't recycled, etc). Why not use the obvious - compressed butane? Found in every Walgreens on the planet, cheap, hundreds of refills (and probably at the size they are talking about for the fuel cell tank, thousands of refills), delivery system well established, the units would be refillible eliminating waste - the only downside would be that the corps wouldn't have a steady revenue stream in batteries (wah!!).

    2. Size - 2"x4"x.5" - why does that have to hang off a belt? The thing could easily go on the back of a phone - sure the phone might be a bit thicker, but IMO, I think cell phones NEED to be bigger, as well as more rugged - I have a friend/brother-in-law who is a truck driver, and his fingers on his hand are easily big enough to cover two buttons on his cell phone, making it difficult for him to dial it or pick up calls. This has caused him a lot of problems, not to mention that the phone lasts about 2 weeks in the dirty conditions he works in (his truck is a 10 wheel dump truck - he hauls dirt, rock, whatever pays). He used to have an old Motorola 9000 classic brick phone - rugged, big buttons - had it for years - hell, I have it now, and it still works fine! Today's phones suck for that kind of environment - make them a little bigger, less screen, larger numbers (its a phukin phone, for cryin' out loud!) - and drop this battery on - perfect.

    When are these manufacurer's going to learn that cute != practical?

    --
    Reason is the Path to God - Anon
  100. Fuel cell nice for storage, but not generating by SysKoll · · Score: 2

    Cell fuels have the potential to truly make PDA and portable computers these semi-magical thingies that SF authors keep raving about. Add an SVGA microscreen in goggles, a yet-to-be invented data entry method to replace keyboards, and wearable computers are suddenly not a mad dream anymore.

    Chemical energy has an energy density (in terms of Watt.hour per kilogram) easily 10-100 times higer than even lithium batteries. And methane is not a neurotoxic, contrary to lithium, cadmium and other nastiums that are used in regular rechargeable batteries.

    Of course, I tend to favor alcohol-based fuel cells. Not only do they present less explosion risks than methane cartridges or tanks, you could also refuel your laptop with a squirt of vodka... :-)

    Now, before long, some journalists will misread that press release and start ranting about revolution in transportation. As a slashdotter, your sacred duty is to thwap them with a physics manual. Or even better, write to their editors and remind them that fuel cells are not a generating but a storage technology.

    In order to produce methane or alcohol, you need either petroleum byproducts (and hence oil) or a lot of energy. And do I mean a lot. Of course, you can produce methanol artisanally, but a sustained production cannot rely on cottage industry methods that, BTW, generate huge quantities of waste. Have you ever been downwind of a still when it's dumped after a batch of fermented molasses has been boiled? Not a pretty smell, believe me.

    So next time you hear a tree-hugger^H^H^H^H^H^H^H^H environmentally conscious fluffhead raving about nature-friendly, fuel-cell powered busses, heartily approve and remind them to support the construction of that nuclear power plant we'll need to generate said nature-friendly fuel. That generally does the trick.

    #insert<cynicalsmirk.h>

    -- SysKoll
    --

    --
    Mad science! Robots! Underwear! Cute girls! Full comic online! http://www.girlgeniusonline.com/

    1. Re:Fuel cell nice for storage, but not generating by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Neither methane nor methanol requires a large input of (nuclear or other) energy to produce -- except input from the sun. Virtually all of the "alterna-fuel" vehicles are running off of either biodiesel (from soy), methane (from anything that rots), or methanol (from fermentation of corn). Further, even though they are all hydrocarbons, fuelcelling them doesn't have any large negative effect on the atmosphere. The C02 you're releasing was just sucked out of the atmosphere last summer by some corn plant in Iowa, and not by a fern or algae 120 million years ago, so you aren't bringing any net C02 increase into the atmosphere.

      Now, the environmental effects of growing that much corn are another matter... but methane production from manure or garbage is hard to argue against.

  101. Re:As is Paris wasn't dumb enough by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    What do you expect from redneck blowhards? (Thank you for the new president - can we please start World War III now!)

  102. this is old by AssFace · · Score: 1

    this was posted ages ago, back when I bought stock in them (MOT). so over a year ago.

    --

    There are some odd things afoot now, in the Villa Straylight.
    1. Re:this is old by AssFace · · Score: 1

      SD doesn't give you the year in the date - but here:
      http://slashdot.org/article.pl?sid=00/01/19/1452 24 3&mode=thread

      --

      There are some odd things afoot now, in the Villa Straylight.
  103. Methanol, not Methane! by Cougar1 · · Score: 1

    Don't give CmdrTaco too hard of a time, even ZDNet got it wrong. The Motorola cell phone uses Methanol (a liquid), not methane (a gas).

    see:

    http://www.cellular.co.za/battery_technology.htm

    and

    here

  104. motorola by Kewlhand`tek · · Score: 0

    a month would be great.........right now my motorola talkabout last around 8-12 hours on a charge.........geez arent there better batteries than this?

    --
    The Arkie Libertarian
  105. Re: Antennas by Talkischeap · · Score: 1



    >>don't discoutn the power usage of the antenna on your cell.

    >>The downside of having the smaller batteries is the decrease in talk time due to the power consumed by the antenna.

    Whoa... You need a quick lesson in radio my friend.

    Antennas radiate RF (radio frequency) power, but never consume power.

    The physical size of the antenna has no direct effect on battery life at all.

    Just thought you might want to know.

    - 73

    --
    If it don't GO... chrome it. ~ Frank Banks
  106. Methane, a "greenhouse" gas... by sittingbull · · Score: 1

    That's right kiddies Methane is a "greenhouse" gas that is 10 times more effective than carbon dioxide in causing climate warming. This could pose a problem when the fuel cell is mass produced .

    Go to the USGS site to read more the attributes of Methane -- http://marine.usgs.gov/fact-sheets/gas-hydrates/ti tle.html

    1. Re:Methane, a "greenhouse" gas... by ers81239 · · Score: 1


      I think the above post is slightly misleading. If you release methane, it is a very harmful greenhouse gas. However, if you burn it, its not too bad. References below:

      http://www.naturalgas.org/ENVIRON2.HTM
      http://www.iclei.org/efacts/natgas.htm

      Also you can actually harvest naturally occurring methane to power things:
      http://www.att.com/press/0692/920625.cha.html

      --
      there are 2 kinds of people. those who divide people into 2 kinds, and those who don't.
  107. Re:I guess we're trying to "recycle" with this one by __aaahtg7394 · · Score: 1

    oh, shove it up yo.... oops. yah.

  108. Re:As is Paris wasn't dumb enough by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Fucking pacifist. As if killing SIX THOUSAND PEOPLE wasn't enough reason to retaliate.

  109. Re:Mercaptan (Re:A conversation in the car pool... by tricorn · · Score: 1

    No, natural gas does NOT have added Sulfur Dioxide. That's one of the primary pollutants that expensive scrubbers are used to remove from coal exhausts and such, why would they ADD it? It is also a significant allergen in very small concentrations (I can't eat most dried apricots or golden raisins because they are treated with SO2; it is also used in making some wines, but is usually low enough concentration that it doesn't bother me). If there was SO2 in natural gas, you'd end up with it in your house from a gas stove. You need a substance that will break down when burned. Sulfur Dioxide is also not the substance that gives rotten eggs their wonderful odor; you're thinking of Hydrogen Sulfide.

  110. Re:Mercaptan (Re:A conversation in the car pool... by morie · · Score: 1

    If I recall correctly, Mercaptan is used because it also decomposes into odourless products on incineration. One of the products is SO2. So it isnt added, but is produced due to an addition to the gas annyhow.

    --
    Sig (appended to the end of comments I post, 54 chars)
  111. Re:Stupid person. by Shotgun · · Score: 2

    Do the same thing that they're starting to do for candy and pastry wrappings. Apply a thin layer of aluminum. It only takes a few microns. Check out the wrapping the next time you eat a PopTart.

    --
    Aah, change is good. -- Rafiki
    Yeah, but it ain't easy. -- Simba