Slashdot Mirror
Digital Camera Powered By a Fuel Cell
An anonymous reader notes a development from the world of photography that could spread to notebooks and cell phones. Canon has filed for a patent on a fuel cell-powered DSLR. The fuel cell would power not only the camera body but also all accessories attached to it, doing away with the need to power flashes (for example) with AA or other batteries. The patent covers other electronic devices generally, but is clearly directed toward DSLR cameras, given the diagrams and examples used. "Canon continues to push its fuel cell development by devising a method for powering not only the internal DSLR body electronics, but also external components such as lenses and hotshoe flashes."
Ethanol based fuel cells would seem to be perfect for this equipment, based on some professional photographers I've met in the past.
"One for you," pours vodka into the camera. "And one for me," while pouring some vodka into self. Rinse, repeat.
"The patent covers other electronic devices generally, but is clearly directed toward DSLR cameras, given the diagrams and examples used."
Canon and Nikon et al are pillars of openness and are renowned for sharing their technology freely. This will in no way hinder the adoption of fuel cell technology in electronic devices at all.
*cough*
The fuel cell would power not only the camera body but also all accessories attached to it
looking at the picture I'm pretty sure that's not what the patent covers. Instead all accessory will include it's own fuel cell.
The patent is about distributing the H2 to the different attachments.
Unless they have a new type of fuel cell, what gives them the ability to patent "using a fuel cell in a camera"
Nobody has said anything about their ability to patent a fuel cell powered camera. The summary incorrectly says "patent" when it is actually an application which has not yet been examined.
as a patent examiner, I'm not allowed to post my opinion of patentability, but I will say that most cases are heavily modified from their original application form as this one is in now.
Well, back to rejecting software patent applications.
As with fuel cell powered laptops, I have to wonder how exactly I would get this through airport security.
Big tubes of toothpaste and sticks of deodorant get confiscated, but they're going to let me waltz through toting a canister of (m)ethanol?
If libertarians are so opposed to effective government, why don't they all move to Somalia?
...As for fuel cells, you better have special ordered a new one if you run out cuz you can't recharge it like a lithium one or run to a gas station to get more like AAs.
From everything i've seen about fuel cells, when they get low you just refill them with alcohol or whatever fuel they use, which only takes a few seconds. You don't have to "special order a new one" when it runs low... Where did you even get that information? Did you honestly think this was a non-replenishable technology?
-Taylor
Worldwide Military budgets: $2100 billion. Worldwide Space Exploration budgets: $38 billion. Really, world? Really?
The summary is incorrect - this is a patent application. It has not yet been examined in any way shape or form. I can't give my own opinion of patentability because I am an examiner, but I can say that due to obviousness requirements produced by KSR v. Teleflex the combination of a known object (such as a power source) to another known object (such as a camera) for the same purpose as provided by the original object (such as providing power) is considered obvious - and therefore not patentable.
Well, back to rejecting software patent applications.
I am not a patent lizard...
But it seems to me from a quick read of the patent that this is exactly what this is.
It is more than an assertion that "although fuel cells can be used to power things, a camera is not a thing, hence this crap is patentable !"
It seems that some other manufacturer saw that a camera might supply power to or control and monitor the power within various strap-ons, like flash, power drive.
Canon seems to have added the idea that the camera body might also supply the fuel and monitor fuel cells within these strap-ons.
Nullius in verba
That's what I thought too, until I looked at the diagram in the article. Instead of generating all the power in the camera and sending electricity to the attached devices, they are pumping fuel from the tank in the camera to individual fuel cells in each device. That's what the patent covers, not just "insert powerplant x into device y, patent, license, profit".
Seems kinda loony and ass-backwards, but it's definitely a unique idea I suppose. I still don't know if it satisfies my definition of non-obvious. One assumes an engineer came up with this when faced with the problem about how to provide enough power for arbitrary configurations without wasting fuel generating power that doesn't get used.
All kings is mostly rapscallions. -Mark Twain, The Adventures of Huckleberry Finn
Anything think it's not OBVIOUS? We've been talking about fuel cells for YEARS. Now someone's come up with the idea to - and get this - Use it somewhere.
what gives them the ability to patent "using a fuel cell in a camera"
The exciting thing about these new fuel cells is the form factor- they are proposing fuel cells in the shape of a small cylinder, about 50 mm long by 14 mm diameter, with the positive and negative terminals on opposing ends. You can even use more than one in a device, by connecting them in series or parallel. Have no doubt that this innovative idea is worthy of a patent (at least from the current patent office).
I am a fuel-cell researcher and when I RTFA'd I gasped—it seems they want to run this on hydrogen. They must be kidding. Normal H2 fuel cells run at about 80 C and require a hell of good cooling. Portable electronics is the domain of passive direct-methanol FCs.
Good luck selling people a can of explosive pressurised gas they have to hold close to their body, and a machine that has to heat up to 80 Celsius before it starts delivering power.
Anyway, I fail to see the inventive step in the camera. Fuel cells are not new. This type in particular does not seem new. The only new thing is that they stuffed it into a camera. Doesn't that qualify for trivial? Or can I file a patent for FC-powered drills and mixers?
Victims of 9/11: <3000. Traffic in the US: >30,000/y
Hydrogen bombs are the Next Logical Step in blowing up the customer.
No.
"Fuel cell" refers to the module in which a membrane allows the following reaction to occur:
2H2 + 02 = 2H20
Or some variant if the reagent H2 source is a hydrocarbon.
A fuel cell will always have a reservoir of fuel, as will any engine or energy output mechanism. Thus a fuel cell can have a refillable "fuel tank" in which the user just ads the H2 source fuel, be it alcohol or some other liquid hydrocarbon.
I hate printers.
The whole idea behind a fuel cell is the factory fills it up and then you use it until it's empty and swap it out and the factory refils it.
That's just wrong, sorry. The whole idea behind a fuel cell is that it's like a battery only you fill it with fuel instead of recharging it, and they last much longer in between fillings than a a battery does between charges. Fuel cells are generally intended to be quickly refilled by the user. There are variations on the concept but that's the most common scenario. Quick refilling is one of the two main advantages of fuel cells, yet you seem to have missed that...
-Taylor
Worldwide Military budgets: $2100 billion. Worldwide Space Exploration budgets: $38 billion. Really, world? Really?