Slashdot Mirror
Mobile Fuel Cells Soon?
Mark Leaman writes "Motorola has made a strategic investment in Vancouver based, micro fuel cell developer Tekion with a view to the inevitable rise of the fuel cell as a power source for mobile products. Tekion is creating a new "personal power source", known as the Formira Power Pack, that will fit inside mobile products and enable consumers to stay connected for as long as needed. "
will . . . enable consumers to stay connected for as long as needed.
The problem is this: battery life is never long enough. This is true for three reasons. First, as battery life improves, consumers come to expect more. Second, electronics manufacturers will see the marketing opportunity in "we have the smallest $gadget on the market", and will put in the smallest acceptable battery. Third, as we have seen with computers, manufacturers will continue to pack (some useful, many not) features, sapping that additional power.
Granted, fuel cells have considerable energy-density advantages over current chemical cells, but it will never be enough until we have devices that will *never* need a recharge, battery replacement, or refill.
Help find a cure for cancer. Join the [H]orde
Honestly, if 1.5hrs talk time on a cellphone is too little for you, then you made a poor choice when deciding which phone to get (ie the features vs battery life dilemna). I keep my old feature-free Nokia 6310i for when I just need a phone, and my nice shiny new 6680 for when I want to pose with a fun gadget.
We've already had batteries exploding in Nokia phones, can you imagine it with fuel cells - "Oh, the Humanity!".
Jolyon
Please read my Canon EOS tech blog at http://www.everyothershot.com
Don't those fuel cells (which iirc commonly work on hydrogen and oxygen) produce water? So you're going to be walking around with a wet spot in your pants...
Is that your phone or are you happy to see me?
I'd like to think that one benefit of a fuel cell is that it can be recharged more rapidly. Given the choice between an 8-hour traditional battery that needs me to be tethered while it's charged, and a fuel cell with a 2-hour life that can be recharged in 2 minutes from a bottle, I'll go for the fuel cell. For most people, it's not battery life that's the problem, it's recharge time.
Our technology uses Formira(TM) as a fuel (as opposed to methanol which is used by most other micro fuel cell developers). Formira(TM) is purified and modified formic acid. Formic acid is abundant in nature and its name was derived from the scientific name for the red ant, Formica Rufa, which produces it in large quantities. The high power capability and simple chemistry of Formira(TM) fuel cells allow us to build a product that is less complex than methanol systems and actually fits within portable devices.
It is interesting that a fuel cell that is very technologically advanced uses formic acid, a chemical produced by one of the smallest of animals, the ant. How many other innovations can be derived from studying the chemical processes in nature?
Nowhere on the Tekion site does it say how long the cell lasts, but from the chart shown here: http://www.tekion.com/business/index.htm you can derive that it will be at least twice as long as a conventional Li Ion battery. Excellent work!
He who knows best knows how little he knows. - Thomas Jefferson
Boy, that's a light press release. The main question is unanswered: what does it use for fuel? Gin? Composted elderberries? It says "non-flmmable." Does that mean that the fuel cell itself won't catch fire while you're using it? Does it require a handy liquid-hydrogen refill tank?
And what the HELL is the deal with the light-blue on white typeface?
Never attribute to malice that which can be explained by mere idiocy.
true mobility. Connected and powered 24/7, anywhere.
Would be nice wouldn't it? Unfortunatly, there are exactly three devices that can make this happen:
1) A portable solar generator and battery. This only works as long as the generator is able to produce more than ample power to cover periods where sunlight is unavailable and the panels are always facing the sun. e.g. The roof of a car. Plus you still have to charge devices in it.
2) Beaming power to devices. This is actually related to solar power as it reqires that a laser or maser hold a targetting lock on your device's power converter. Besides how tricky this is to implement, it's also dangerous to be broadcasting a number of lased transmissions in the multi-watt range.
3) Harnessing the radiation from radioisotopes. This is the most promising option as there are several types of radioisotope that are easy to contain, and no more dangerous than today's battery chemicals. This option could easily provide power in the 1-50 watt range, 24x7 for 10-30 years. The drawbacks to this method are a) radioisotopes are too expensive, b) the public has an irrational fear of anything "nukular", and c) the radioisotopes must be treated as hazardous waste (just like batteries) and disposed of properly.
I fully expect that option 3 will be embraced by future space explorers. It just wouldn't do to have equipment that can't survive long spans of time away from a charging station.
Javascript + Nintendo DSi = DSiCade
Even if something like this isn't as portable as modern flip phones, it could still mean the difference between communicating, and not being able to when electricity from the wall
You just need a big supply of "highly purified and modified formic acid" and off you go! This sounds suspiciously like inkjet cartridges to me.
Don't disappoint your bird dog. Go to the range.
I was at AIChE 2005 (Chemical Engineering stuff if you don't bother to click the link), and followed the fuel-cell topical. These cells did make a few appearances (also last year in Austin already).
The cell is being researched by professor Richard Masel and his group. It has a relatively low power density, but that's enough for mobile electronics (no, it will not be usable on cars). The reason Masel's group is the only one working on these is that previous results discredited formic acid as a fuel, but Masel's group found out that they were using the wrong catalyst: platinum was being used (as in any other fuel cell), but for formic acid the correct one was actually palladium. Apparently, formic acid has much less problems in membrane permeation than methanol (that is, it does not burn without you using it), and has already passed tests of over 2500 consecutive hours of power production without failure.
Masel actually complained a bit that this very press release had been delayed one week, last week he could have had the press release at the same time of the conference, and could have mentioned the name of Motorola explicitly.
Another curious fact is that probably everybody of you reading has eaten some formic acid (it's in various foods), even if the high concentration at which it is used in fuel cells makes it unsuitable for a snack (it is actually going to be "burn" the skin).
For those interested, here are some abstracts: Present Status of Formic Acid Fuel Cells, High Performing Air Breathing Passive Direct Formic Acid Fuel Cell (Dfafc), Magnetic Resonance Imaging (Mri) Microscopy of Operating Direct Formic Acid Fuel Cell (Dfafc), Formic Acid Electro-Oxidation by Pd: Particle Size Effects. Proceedings are however not free for the taking, and one has to buy the CD (135 $). No guarantee they contain anything more than the abstracts for the given papers, however.
Victims of 9/11: <3000. Traffic in the US: >30,000/y
I am concerned about the standardization of the "refueling" functionality. If every fuel cell maker out there uses different valves, nozzles, ports, connectors, whatever for putting fuel in and removing the wastewater, we will jump directly into a confusing nightmare of incompatible plumbing. "Oh, yeah, my cell phone takes a 0.7mm bayonet fuelling nozzle, but my PDA takes a 0.05 inch tapered friction connector." So you still carry four little fuel tanks with you to power your cell phone, PDA, iPod and laptop.
A different question is what airline is going to let people take devices powered by flammable liquids on board, when they're already disallowing butane lighters?
John
You could have longer talk time, but "the public" insists on smaller phones/laptops whatever every year. If consumers would be content with the size phones were 5 years ago, not giant bagphones like in the olden daze, just what size was common back 5 years ago, with smaller and better electronics but bigger batteries, they would last much longer, even with todays battery technology and more powerful features. When you shrink *both* the battery and the electronics, it's like, what do you (anyone you I mean, joe consumer) expect? Lithium ion tech is pretty spiffy now, make it big enough, it'll last all day long easy. And it doesn't have to be ridiculous large, but then again, phones are getting ultra ridiculous small. I know I can't use the teeny phones, can't see the screen easily nor use the buttons. My "choice" is extremely expensive larger PDA like phones with reasonably sized screens and buttons and bateries, or teensy tiny phones that are barely useable. Older phones with good enough screens you can't get batts for hardly anymore, plus the providers won't activate them if they don't have that location feature in them for e911 stuff. Just went through that at the cell store. My older phone they refuse to activate now, even though it works perfectly fine and they used to provide service for it. Had to buy a cheaper smaller one. Nuts...grumble... this is verizon by the way, they have the best coverage and cheapest rates around here, but it could be any of them really.
/geezer tightwad rant
What I would like to see is standaridzation WITH the batteries themselves. Propietary sizes and configs are a pure ripoff, you go to replace the battery it costs 2/3rds what the entire device costs new. I just happen to get a new phone two months ago, it cost IIRC around 65$. I asked what a replacement batt was-50$.
Ripoff. We have standard sized batts, AAA, AA, C, D etc but they just won't use them, has to be different, force you more or less to keep upgrading the entire phone. I have HAM portable transcievers that run multiple watts output, they run fine on regular config batteries. What are cell phones, half a watt or something? I just got some GMRS/FRS talkies, they just use normal rechargeable AAs, no need for some weird "package" battery pack that costs ten times would it should.
heh