Slashdot Mirror


Talk-Powered Cell Phones Won't Need Batteries

alphadogg writes "It's possible that in the future conversations on your cell phone could generate enough electrical power to run the phone, without batteries. That's one possible outcome of recent work by a team of Texas researchers, who appear to have discovered that by building a certain type of piezoelectric material to a specific thickness (about 21 nanometers, compared to a typical human hair of 100,000 nanometers), you can boost its energy production by 100 percent. And the technology could power not just phones, but a whole range of low-power mobile devices and sensors. The breakthrough is an example of 'energy harvesting' that can convert one kind of energy, such as vibrations or solar rays, into electricity."

197 comments

  1. Isn't this fairly common already by Mike-the-Mikado · · Score: 5, Funny

    That's why people are always shouting at them?

    1. Re:Isn't this fairly common already by earlymon · · Score: 5, Funny

      I see you've met my sister. She comes through clear as a bell from 8 states away. Next time, I'll have her turn her phone on...

      --
      Pathological kinda promises Path + Logical - but instead, you get stuck with pathetic.
    2. Re:Isn't this fairly common already by mattycole · · Score: 1

      who modded this insightful?

      --
      I'm making a note here: HUGE SUCCESS!!
    3. Re:Isn't this fairly common already by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Sure it's common... like the self propelled vibrating dildo...

    4. Re:Isn't this fairly common already by RJFerret · · Score: 1

      That's why people are always shouting at them?

      I haven't heard anyone shouting in a cell phone in a long time, poke them with their thumbs, watch youtube videos on them, take videos at concerts, check their calendars, take pictures of everyone, check weather, read their email and text messages, send same...

      Talk? Um, around here talking into them is illegal when driving.

      So I guess all those phones will always be dead?

      Certainly their chargers long lost...

    5. Re:Isn't this fairly common already by ShadowRangerRIT · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Insightful is the standard replacement for the Funny mod. Funny doesn't give karma, but Insightful does, so Funny posts are often modded Insightful by generous mods.

      --
      $_ = "wftedskaebjgdpjgidbsmnjgcdwatb"; tr/a-z/oh, turtleneck Phrase Jar!/; print
    6. Re:Isn't this fairly common already by NicknamesAreStupid · · Score: 2, Informative

      It takes 1000 screaming people to generate a watt's worth of energy (one joule of energy per second).

    7. Re:Isn't this fairly common already by cbiltcliffe · · Score: 1

      Somebody who's obviously been within a couple of blocks of a standard cell phone user.

      --
      "City hall" in German is "Rathaus" Kinda explains a few things......
    8. Re:Isn't this fairly common already by cbiltcliffe · · Score: 1

      Doesn't the average Harley Davidson meet this description? :)

      --
      "City hall" in German is "Rathaus" Kinda explains a few things......
    9. Re:Isn't this fairly common already by MobileTatsu-NJG · · Score: 1

      Insightful is the standard replacement for the Funny mod. Funny doesn't give karma, but Insightful does, so Funny posts are often modded Insightful by generous mods.

      Great. The guy gets useless karma, but his post invites unnecessary rebuttals.

      --

      "I like to lick butts!" by MobileTatsu-NJG (#32700246) (Score:5, Informative)

    10. Re:Isn't this fairly common already by M1rth · · Score: 5, Funny

      If she's that loud, her vocalizations could probably power other "battery operated" devices she may use...

      --
      If you can read this sig, congratulations, you have your glasses on!
    11. Re:Isn't this fairly common already by ConceptJunkie · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Talk to CmdrTaco. Of course, it's been this way for about 8 years, so don't expect anything to change. Of course, that doesn't stop them from the Web 2.0 paradigm of replacing a perfectly usable and nice home page design with something eye-gougingly ugly and much harder to use.

      --
      You are in a maze of twisty little passages, all alike.
    12. Re:Isn't this fairly common already by MobileTatsu-NJG · · Score: 0

      Talk to CmdrTaco. Of course, it's been this way for about 8 years, so don't expect anything to change.

      I'm not complaining and don't want anything changed. I just think the users' insistence on rewarding funny's with karma has unwanted consequences.

      --

      "I like to lick butts!" by MobileTatsu-NJG (#32700246) (Score:5, Informative)

    13. Re:Isn't this fairly common already by BluBrick · · Score: 5, Insightful

      On the other hand, "funny" can now be used as the mod you give to "epic fail" posts (e.g. dead wrong or missed the joke). It can raise those posts up above the trolls for all to see, and open the authors to public embarrassment, all the while failing to reward them with karma. It's really not an unfair use of the moderation system. Who said funny has to mean laughing with the author - can't it mean laughing at the author?

      --
      Ahh - My eye!
      The doctor said I'm not supposed to get Slashdot in it!
    14. Re:Isn't this fairly common already by Hurricane78 · · Score: 1

      What? That Slashdot gets funnier? $deity forbid!

      --
      Any sufficiently advanced intelligence is indistinguishable from stupidity.
    15. Re:Isn't this fairly common already by rgo · · Score: 2, Insightful

      +1 Funny

    16. Re:Isn't this fairly common already by Molochi · · Score: 5, Insightful

      The reason funny gets modded insightful is because negative mods hurt karma, but funny doesn't add karma. Funny can draw just as much rebuttal as insightful. So if someone says something witty that holds an issue to the light of reason I'll go for the insightful mod.

      Sometimes I'll mod something I regard as particularly dense as funny rather than a negative mod. But I laugh at stupid stuff in RL too.

      If you don't agree, metamod.

      --
      "The Adobe Updater must update itself before it can check for updates. Would you like to update the Adobe Updater now?"
    17. Re:Isn't this fairly common already by MobileTatsu-NJG · · Score: 0

      Funny can draw just as much rebuttal as insightful.

      If it's meant to be funny, then any rebuttal is a waste of time.

      If you don't agree, metamod.

      Useless. Besides, I don't want to contribute to you losing your privledges just beacuse we have a slightly different idea of how to mod something. It is considerably more effective (and less harmful) for me to tell you what I think in a comment right here than it is to randomly vote on the moderation of a handful of posts.

      --

      "I like to lick butts!" by MobileTatsu-NJG (#32700246) (Score:5, Informative)

    18. Re:Isn't this fairly common already by hedwards · · Score: 1

      The worst thing is that these people are also damaging the hearing of the person on the other end. Cell phones don't pipe your own voice back at you the way that landlines do. They don't do it because it's not energy efficient and would definitely cause a reduction in talktime. The reality is that a decent phone can pick up what you're saying whether or not you can.

    19. Re:Isn't this fairly common already by Kagura · · Score: 1

      I just think the users' insistence on rewarding funny's with karma has unwanted consequences.

      Hmm, what sort of consequences? I can't think of any except for from some metamodder who is being far too strict for anybody's good.

    20. Re:Isn't this fairly common already by MobileTatsu-NJG · · Score: 3, Interesting

      Hmm, what sort of consequences?

      Moderations often affect the tone of a message. A misplaced 'Insightful' mod can turn a joke into perceived ignorance. That can lead to negative moderations and a flood of comments trying to dispute it. It's not the most common thing in the world, but I've seen it happen several times.

      That's not to say I'm against the idea of a funny comment being modded informative. I do, however, have a preference that people don't use Insightful mods solely to give funny comments karma. And yes, I've softened my stance a bit. Heh.

      --

      "I like to lick butts!" by MobileTatsu-NJG (#32700246) (Score:5, Informative)

    21. Re:Isn't this fairly common already by Kagura · · Score: 1

      Oh, thanks a lot for the quick reply! I do now know exactly what you are talking about. Once a post has received one visible mod description, it seems to dictate the way the majority of modders will vote, regardless of the comment's merit.

    22. Re:Isn't this fairly common already by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      If she's that loud, her vocalizations could probably power other "battery operated" devices she may use...

      Oh my. Perpetual motion machine in the boudoir!

    23. Re:Isn't this fairly common already by tsjaikdus · · Score: 1

      >> 1000 screaming people worth of energy

      That's would make a great label on my energy meter

    24. Re:Isn't this fairly common already by Cro+Magnon · · Score: 1

      I've also seen comments that were probably intended as serious, but the "Funny" mod turned them into a joke.

      --
      Slow down, cowboy! It has been 4 hours since you last posted. You must wait another few hours.
    25. Re:Isn't this fairly common already by flappinbooger · · Score: 1

      1000 people screaming only makes one watt? I have no proof of my own, but I'm not so sure on that one. Take two different auditoriums, one with 1000 screaming people in it, and one with a sound system in it.

      You're telling me that I could power the sound system with ONE WATT, and duplicate the sound energy of the auditorium that has 1000 people in it?

      I need a little more info to see how that would be possible...

      Granted, I'm betting that there is something interesting that happens to the piezoelectric material in TFA which makes the energy absorption and transmission much more than typical, but obviously whatever cell phone would be powered by voice alone is probably going to need to be quite efficient!

      --
      Flappinbooger isn't my real name
    26. Re:Isn't this fairly common already by Golddess · · Score: 1

      In this house we obey the laws of thermodynamics!

      --
      "I'm not sure I like the fugnutish tone you used in your post!" -RogL (608926)-
    27. Re:Isn't this fairly common already by tsjaikdus · · Score: 1

      In a book from when I was little, edison apparently invented a motor that was powered by the human voice that was powerful enough, once brought in motion, to drill a hole in a wall. If I remember correctly

    28. Re:Isn't this fairly common already by treeves · · Score: 1

      Perhaps 1 W of electrical power into a loudspeaker does not result in 1 W of acoustical energy transmitted. Probably much less I would guess.

      --
      ...the future crusty old bastards are already drinking the Kool-Aid.
    29. Re:Isn't this fairly common already by flappinbooger · · Score: 1

      Also to put 1 watt of sound energy at one particular frequency will make a lot louder noise than 1 watt of white noise, since the white noise energy would be spread out over many frequencies. (The LASER concept) So, if there is a "sound energy absorber" that only responds at one tight frequency, it may not get much of energy as the 1000 screaming people are producing. Follow? Perhaps this fancy energy absorber from the TFA can gather energy from the whole voice spectrum...

      --
      Flappinbooger isn't my real name
    30. Re:Isn't this fairly common already by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      No I haven't met your sister

    31. Re:Isn't this fairly common already by earlymon · · Score: 1

      If she's that loud, her vocalizations could probably power other "battery operated" devices she may use...

      Except that that's not a chicken/egg situation. By the time a girl's that loud, batteries aren't required... or, so I'm told.

      --
      Pathological kinda promises Path + Logical - but instead, you get stuck with pathetic.
    32. Re:Isn't this fairly common already by earlymon · · Score: 1

      Ask and ye shall receive.

      --
      Pathological kinda promises Path + Logical - but instead, you get stuck with pathetic.
  2. a return to Pyramid Power by infonography · · Score: 5, Funny

    Just set it in a Pyramid and use pyramid power to keep it topped off. That is what they ancient Egyptians did.

    Don't forget to call your Mummy.

    --
    Sorry about the writing. Robot fingers, you know? Cliff Steele in DOOM PATROL #23
    1. Re:a return to Pyramid Power by Ihmhi · · Score: 1

      No man, you need to put it in a cube! A cube has like, six pyramids worth of power!

    2. Re:a return to Pyramid Power by sapphire+wyvern · · Score: 1

      Yeah, but they're only good for powering simultaneous harmonic time machines.

  3. not enough energy to power a modern cell phone by liraz · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Most modern phones are probably much too power hungry to be get enough energy from audio vibrations, even you manage to ramp up the efficiency close to 100%, which is unlikely to ever be practical.

    Where this could be useful is in specialized low-power devices that get bundled into emergency survival
    kits.

    OTOH, future cellular devices might incorporate enough improvements into power efficiency (e.g., e-ink displays), such that you could significantly extend battery life and perhaps even power a very basic subset of the phone when the battery runs out.

    Also, harnessing vibrations efficiently might be very useful in surgically implanted medical devices where replacing the battery can be rather inconvenient.

    1. Re:not enough energy to power a modern cell phone by InlawBiker · · Score: 4, Funny

      Mmmm, I dunno. If this turns out to be true my wife could talk on the phone enough to power the whole grid.

    2. Re:not enough energy to power a modern cell phone by orkybash · · Score: 2, Informative

      Regarding your last idea, I've interned in the medical device industry so I might have some perspectives... basically, if something like this couldn't power a cell phone it certainly couldn't power sustained operation of a pacemaker! Charge a battery for a defibrillator maybe, but even then you're taking huge risks with rechargable batteries with regard to memory. Basically, even if you were able to use this to increase battery life, you would still decrease *predictability* of the battery life, which is a huge no-no in that industry (doctors need to know pretty well when the thing needs to come out!)

    3. Re:not enough energy to power a modern cell phone by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      How about Wind Power?

      Stick a mini-windmill to a cell and your good to go. Just lend it to a gabby teenager, you'll be powered up for a year.

    4. Re:not enough energy to power a modern cell phone by Gerzel · · Score: 4, Funny

      His heart implant is failing hand me a vibrator stat!

    5. Re:not enough energy to power a modern cell phone by ScrewMaster · · Score: 0

      Most modern phones are probably much too power hungry to be get enough energy from audio vibrations, even you manage to ramp up the efficiency close to 100%, which is unlikely to ever be practical.

      Well, that depends. If the phone network ever goes microcellular (with cell "towers" every city block or less) you might be able to get away with phones that don't require batteries. Probably not truly voice-powered, but possibly using some other biological input ... heat, mechanical, footfalls, whatever.

      Actually, now that I think about it, they should just run the things from a small bank of thermocouples mounted around the pickup. Then hand them out to all members of Congress.

      At least then, we might find a use for all that hot air.

      --
      The higher the technology, the sharper that two-edged sword.
    6. Re:not enough energy to power a modern cell phone by Kral_Blbec · · Score: 1

      I sure wish I could get away from phones without batteries too...

    7. Re:not enough energy to power a modern cell phone by extrasolar · · Score: 1

      Yeah, but maybe, in the future, they might find that the convenience of never having to charge your phone is worth more than having the ability to watch TV/videos, browse the web, listen to music, get directions on a map, download ringtones, take pictures, and purchase all kinds of other pointless stuff to do on your phone. We're in a recession afterall, priorities people! Plus I imagine that such a phone would probably be ubersmall and uberlight.

    8. Re:not enough energy to power a modern cell phone by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Agreed.

      However, if it could add some charge and extend battery life of any implanted device, you've just added a margin of safety to the device.

      Now, onto the silly side, a micro "water wheel" somewhere in the blood stream might generate even more power.

    9. Re:not enough energy to power a modern cell phone by hedwards · · Score: 1

      Where do you get that sort of service? I'm being serious, I live in a big city, but the closest cell phone tower for AT&T to where I live is several miles away. They seem content to only have 2 per the northern half of the city.

      T-Mobile by contrast has something like 4 within half that distance.

    10. Re:not enough energy to power a modern cell phone by petermgreen · · Score: 1

      I'm pretty sure that when you have an active call going on a modern phone the radio gear is the most significant power drain especailly if you are a long way from a base station (with radio power required is roughly proportional to the square of distance).

      --
      note: i'm known as plugwash most places but i screwd up registering that here somehow in the past and now can't register
    11. Re:not enough energy to power a modern cell phone by Hucko · · Score: 1

      That is a great Idea! Then you will also be burning more energy just like in a workout! You could be just exercising by sitting there!

      --
      Semi-automatic amateur armchair Australian philosopher; conjecture ready at any moment...
    12. Re:not enough energy to power a modern cell phone by caladine · · Score: 2, Informative

      OTOH, future cellular devices might incorporate enough improvements into power efficiency (e.g., e-ink displays), such that you could significantly extend battery life and perhaps even power a very basic subset of the phone when the battery runs out.

      IMO, future cellular devices will probably use something based on IMOD display technology. It has all the power benefits of e-ink, but considerably faster switching. They're also already available, albeit at pretty small sizes. There's also color versions of these IMOD displays avaliable, but they also suffer from the current size problems.

      The Wikipedia article is somewhat short on the details, so the Qualcomm PR page is here. Like I said, it's really a PR page trying to promote their solution, but the whitepapers do have some interesting information on how it all works.

    13. Re:not enough energy to power a modern cell phone by Captain+Hook · · Score: 1

      They will never find the convenience of never having to charge your phone is worth more because all the things you propose dropping are a possible source of revenue for them.

      --
      These comments are my personal opinions and do not necessarily reflect the opinions of the other voices in my head.
    14. Re:not enough energy to power a modern cell phone by MozeeToby · · Score: 1

      For emergency equipment, wouldn't it be easier and more effective to just put a damn hand crank on the thing? If kids in third world countries can power a laptop with a handcrank I think I can power a phone long enough to call 911.

    15. Re:not enough energy to power a modern cell phone by ScrewMaster · · Score: 1

      Where do you get that sort of service? I'm being serious, I live in a big city, but the closest cell phone tower for AT&T to where I live is several miles away. They seem content to only have 2 per the northern half of the city.

      T-Mobile by contrast has something like 4 within half that distance.

      You don't. That's why I said "if".

      --
      The higher the technology, the sharper that two-edged sword.
    16. Re:not enough energy to power a modern cell phone by StikyPad · · Score: 1

      Wireless, yes, but wired sound-powered phones already exist and are in use on every Navy ship. (Not to be confused with solar flashlights which need to be charged before they're needed).

      You're right though.. wile these piezoelectronics may never be powerful enough to power a cellphone on their own, they can almost definitely increase efficiency and battery life. "Never" is a tough thing to predict though.. it's possible that simple phones might exist someday (and once again), with very low-power displays such as electronic paper, and low power electronics. The cell towers would either have to be extremely sensitive, or else be located even more densely than they already are. And if you're increasing tower density, you might as well work on using their signals for power as well, a la RFID.

      I don't see them being very useful in emergency kits though, since you'd probably have a cell phone with you in every circumstance in which you have an emergency kit.. if you have one in your car, you can just keep an unactivated phone in there which can still dial 911, and hardwire the charger. If you're carrying a kit in a remote area, a low power device isn't likely to be strong enough to reach a tower anyway -- if you even had a signal. An emergency distress beacon would be much more useful in that case.

  4. That's just great. by HtR · · Score: 5, Funny

    Wonderful. I can just imagine being in a restaurant or an elevator with a group of people with phones all saying "Low Power - please speak louder."

    --
    Have you tried turning it off and on again?
    1. Re:That's just great. by bobdotorg · · Score: 1

      CAN YOU HEAR ME NOW!!!!!!!!!

      GOOD!!! OUCH!!!! (as a fist-powered brickbat comes crashing down on his head)

      --
      __ Someday, but not this morning, I'll finally learn to use the preview button.
    2. Re:That's just great. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      CAN YOU HEAR ME NOW?!?! Oh hi just charging my phone.

    3. Re:That's just great. by ScrewMaster · · Score: 1

      CAN YOU HEAR ME NOW? No, the battery's dead ... he got hit by a truck.

      --
      The higher the technology, the sharper that two-edged sword.
  5. Voice recognition by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Combine this with voice recognition apps like www.vlingo.com and cell phones in the not-too-distant future will bear as much resemblance to current day phones as they did in 1990.

  6. Why don't they use body heat? by www.sorehands.com · · Score: 3, Informative

    And, no I am not talking about the Matrix...ok...it crossed my mind.

    I remember there was also a digital watch that worked on body heat. I could not find that one, but I found another, non-digital. http://www.roachman.com/thermic .

    1. Re:Why don't they use body heat? by Tuidjy · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Why would you want one? We have watches working off the constant motion of our body/arm/wrist/whatever. Mine takes a few days before it winds down. I think that anyone that stays immobile for that long will not be doing so great in respect of body heat, either.

      --
      No good deed goes unpunished...
    2. Re:Why don't they use body heat? by sribe · · Score: 1

      The harvesting of heat energy always depends on the temperature differential between two materials. The temperature differential between your body and ambient air is so low that it can only be used to produce very, very, very little power. It just so happens that a watch can be designed to run on very, very, very little power--way less than required by a cell phone, you know with its little transmitter and all that kind of stuff ;-)

  7. So cool... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Funny

    These could be wall panel in loud factories and make the electric meters run slower....someday, maybe even backwards...wait....that darn 2nd law of Thermodynamics, again! Okay, slower.

    1. Re:So cool... by HTH+NE1 · · Score: 2, Funny

      These could be wall panel in loud factories and make the electric meters run slower....someday, maybe even backwards...wait....that darn 2nd law of Thermodynamics, again! Okay, slower.

      I'm sure you could come up with noise sources that don't draw from the grid to get the meter to run backwards without violating entropy. It all depends on not keeping the system closed.

      One way would be to regularly feed humans to the machinery. They don't consume power off of your grid, but they sure do make a lot of noise, especially when inserted feet first.

      --
      Oh, say does that Star-Spangled Banner entwine / The myrtle of Venus with Bacchus's vine?
    2. Re:So cool... by AndrewNeo · · Score: 1

      The meters actually do run backwards when you put power back into the grid.

  8. Free energy? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Does this mean with enough teenage girls in the house you could get all the free energy you want?

    1. Re:Free energy? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Funny

      Does this mean with enough teenage girls in the house you could get all the free energy you want?

      Yes, yes, yes, yes. Yes! Yes! Yes! Yes! YES! YES! YES! YES! YES YES YES YES! YES-YES-YES-YES! WOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO!

    2. Re:Free energy? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Congratulations! You've just invented the voice-powered vibrator.

    3. Re:Free energy? by kurzweilfreak · · Score: 1

      I volunteer to oversee the closed biosphere experiment to *ahem* test this theory out.

      --

      kurzweil_freak

      5th Kyu Genbukan Ninpo/KJJR student

      Be the darkness that allows the light to shine.

    4. Re:Free energy? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Does this mean with enough teenage girls in the house you could get all the free energy you want?

      If I had a bunch of teenage girls in my house, the last thing I'd be doing is talking on the phone!

  9. Physics might say otherwise by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Informative

    Lets assume that a minimum channel capacity (bits/s) is required to support a conversation, even if we use the absolute best vocoder that eliminates all redundant information. Shannon's Law then says that for a given noise power (set by the environment) there is a minimum signal power which must be transmitted to get error free transmission. Again we are assuming we have an optimal codec, which achieves Shannon's bound. This sets the absolute minimum power consumption of an ideal radio telephone. A real life phone will use more than this. My guess is that this theoretical minimum power is greater than the power which can be harvested from the human voice.

    1. Re:Physics might say otherwise by jlarocco · · Score: 1

      "Won't need batteries" may be a bit of an exageration, but even if the new tech only increases time between required charges a bit, it seems like a win to me.

    2. Re:Physics might say otherwise by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Informative

      I agree, the power generated by a human voice can't possibly exceed a few milliwatts, and is likely less than 1 milliwatt.

      However, assuming the average person weighs 150lbs, the energy potential of each step is quite a reasonable amount. Perhaps by putting a miniature generator in each shoe that compresses 1/4" with each step and turns that compression force into electricity we could power something like a current tech. cell phone. Then all one would have to do is pace back and forth while talking (a fairly common practice even without shoe-generation), and never worry about battery life.

      The biggest hurdle with such a plan would be transmission of the power from the feet to the phone, but at least the power generation potential is sufficient.

    3. Re:Physics might say otherwise by petermgreen · · Score: 1

      I imagine the issue would be not wanting shoes that compressed significantly as you put your foot down and then had cables running up your trowsers to connect to your phone.

      For those occasions when you need a few minuites of extra talktime urgently a handcrank is probablly easier (and yes you CAN buy them)

      --
      note: i'm known as plugwash most places but i screwd up registering that here somehow in the past and now can't register
    4. Re:Physics might say otherwise by zmollusc · · Score: 1

      Meh, if the new tech provides an additional source of power, the phone manufacturers will simply fit batteries of lower capacity.

      --
      They whose government reduces their essential liberties for temporary security, receive neither liberty nor security.
  10. This is very interesting technology by Adult+film+producer · · Score: 1, Funny

    I can imagine at some point in the future it would benefit us to produce these in massive quantities, gigantic vats 10 stories tall, thousands of incubators for these piezo powerplants.. load them up in special military aircraft and spray them far and wide.. across the great plains, the bread basket of america., absorbed into the living breathing cellulose of corn and wheat and soy beans.. through the miracle of the modern food chain all human beings would become self powering devices capable of extraordinary feats, possibly jumping tall buildings in a single leap? In the dark our eyes would glow and a vibrant radiance of glorious splendor would be self perpetuating at the local discoteks.

    1. Re:This is very interesting technology by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      It's spelled discotheque not discotek.

    2. Re:This is very interesting technology by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      depends on what language you're using. if it's French then it's discothèque. if it's Italian or Spanish then it's discoteca.

  11. Technology not for some married men by reginaldo · · Score: 5, Funny

    I don't know if this would work for me, because I usually just end up listening on my phone.

    Yes, honey. Ok, honey. Will do, honey.

    1. Re:Technology not for some married men by BagOBones · · Score: 1

      Ya, I was thinking the same thing. It would only work for woman to woman calls were they are able to fully duplex the conversation without pause.

      I don't think you can power any think on uh-hu, yes, maybe, ok, and goodbye.

      --
      EA David Gardner -"... but the consumers have proven that actually what they want is fun."
    2. Re:Technology not for some married men by Samschnooks · · Score: 3, Insightful

      I don't know if this would work for me, because I usually just end up listening on my phone. Yes, honey. Ok, honey. Will do, honey.

      Yeah, but you could sell the excess power your wife generates to the utility.

      I think women talking on cell phones will solve our future energy needs.

    3. Re:Technology not for some married men by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      As much as you are joking, it's an interesting point.

      If all it takes are audio vibrations to keep the phone powered, and if being a phone means that it itself could generate audio vibrations (sound), then couldn't you argue that it could power itself? Isn't that a perpetual motion machine?

      If the audio power output of the phone were assumed to roughly equal the audio power output of your voice, then there's no way it could further supply any power for whatever assortment of radios, interfaces and other junk any basic cellphone would require.

      Correct me if I'm wrong, but this seems pretty easily debunked.

    4. Re:Technology not for some married men by blai · · Score: 1

      Have some other woman talk for you on your side. Then you can recharge your ipod too.

      --
      In soviet Russia, God creates you!
    5. Re:Technology not for some married men by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      If all it takes are audio vibrations to keep the phone powered, and if being a phone means that it itself could generate audio vibrations (sound), then couldn't you argue that it could power itself? Isn't that a perpetual motion machine?

      Only if the conversion efficiency from electricity to sound and back is 100% each way. Otherwise, you lose power at each "cycle" through the system. Since most cellphone speakers are quieter than the person talking into them (otherwise everyone would hear both halves of the conversation), it's theoretically possible to do.

    6. Re:Technology not for some married men by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Easy, just hook the piezo bit to the speaker, not the microphone!

    7. Re:Technology not for some married men by GameboyRMH · · Score: 1

      I was thinking the same thing, but the phone would have to be wired for efficient power transmission...either that or it would need a big battery to store all the juice and then return it once it's plugged in to the grid.

      --
      "When information is power, privacy is freedom" - Jah-Wren Ryel
  12. Texas by quenda · · Score: 2, Funny
    Its not a coincidence that this story is from Texas. Other locales may lack sufficient vocal power.

    However Olivetti is working on a cellphone powered like a self-winding watch, by arm-motion.

  13. Bah. Back in my day... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Informative
  14. Supply energy to the world! by rossz · · Score: 4, Funny

    Just hand these out to teenage girls and we'll have enough power to supply the entire world for all its needs.

    --
    -- Will program for bandwidth
    1. Re:Supply energy to the world! by Repton · · Score: 2, Funny

      Nah, for that you need a tiny dynamo underneath each button...

      --
      Repton.
      They say that only an experienced wizard can do the tengu shuffle.
    2. Re:Supply energy to the world! by ScrewMaster · · Score: 4, Funny

      Nah, for that you need a tiny dynamo underneath each button...

      Bad girls have that under their zipper.

      --
      The higher the technology, the sharper that two-edged sword.
    3. Re:Supply energy to the world! by Thelasko · · Score: 1

      Just hand these out to teenage girls and we'll have enough power to supply the entire world for all its needs.

      gt W d tyms! tlkN OTP S so lst wk. It's ll bout txt msgN now.

      Translation: Get with the times! Talking on the phone is so last week. It's all about text messaging now.

      --
      One of our competitors trademarked the term "hypothesis". From now on, we will call them "boneheaded ideas".
    4. Re:Supply energy to the world! by slapmastered · · Score: 1

      Or paste this piezoelectric material on the walls of Congress and solve the energy crisis. There's enough bulls*** being thrown around there to power the world a hundred times over...

    5. Re:Supply energy to the world! by rossz · · Score: 1

      gt W d tyms! tlkN OTP S so lst wk. It's ll bout txt msgN now.

      I am so glad I am no longer a parent of a teenage girl. I got a headache from reading that.

      --
      -- Will program for bandwidth
  15. hmm... by amclay · · Score: 1

    Sweet. Only 5 years till I have to figure out that this causes brain tumors or not!

    --
    It's all fun and games till someone divides by 0. Then it's hilarious.
  16. One HUNDRED Per Cent?? by cowtamer · · Score: 3, Insightful

    Wow, that is amazing!!!

    Now if someone could tell me what the baseline of this increase is, we might actually learn something...

    (seriously, does anyone know what the efficiency of current nano-piezoelectric power generators are?)

    1. Re:One HUNDRED Per Cent?? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      (seriously, does anyone know what the efficiency of current nano-piezoelectric power generators are?)

      It's similar to that of an unladen swallow.

    2. Re:One HUNDRED Per Cent?? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I think they meant 100% increase in power production from *nothing*. Which is really dumb way of saying, there is no baseline power production, now they produce power.

      Bad word choice.

    3. Re:One HUNDRED Per Cent?? by trongey · · Score: 1

      Well isn't it obvious? The baseline is about half of the efficiency of these new devices.
      Try to pay attention next time.

      --
      You never really know how close to the edge you can go until you fall off.
    4. Re:One HUNDRED Per Cent?? by BillX · · Score: 1

      Disclaimer: I'm an electronics engineer at a company that develops (among other things) piezo energy harvesting devices, though not at nanoscale. Without naming the company I can say that it is near the top of the pack, and from the typical devices I work with, a typical 10mil thick, playing-card size piezo wafer driven close to its breaking point, one can expect power levels on the order of 10s of milliwatts, being generous. Assuming 10mW, P=I*V -> 2.7mA @ 3.7V, the voltage of a typical cell phone battery. Meanwhile, my cellphone lasts for optimistically 5 days on a charge if I am close to the tower and don't make any calls on it. The rated battery capacity is 1000mAh. Dividing 1000mAh by 120 hours estimates an average draw of 8.33mA from the phone while idling under ideal conditions. In other words, this energy harvester does not come close to powering even an idling a cell phone while sitting atop a continuously operating jackhammer. A "100%" increase in power (ahem, 20mW, for the above-mentioned dimensions) will not power a cell phone idling (let alone during active conversation) from a jackhammer, let alone the miniscule energy available from the human voice.

      In other words, if you were smelling a BS-powered device, you were right :-)

      --
      Caveat Emptor is not a business model.
    5. Re:One HUNDRED Per Cent?? by cowtamer · · Score: 1

      Thank you. Best Slashdot reply I've received so far...
      (Yes, I was suspecting a BS powered business model)

  17. Re:Bah. Back in my day... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Don't you mean talk powered sea lines?

  18. gives a whole new meaning.. by Jorgandar · · Score: 1

    Can you hear me now? ...no? HOW ABOUT NOW?!?!!!!!

    1. Re:gives a whole new meaning.. by Dunbal · · Score: 1

      YEAH NO I AM AT THE MOVIES WHAT? NO, WE'RE IN THAT NEW FILM, YEAH IT'S GREAT (really shouting) HANG ON I CAN BARELY HEAR YOU YEAH THE GUY DIES AT THE END I'VE SEEN IT

      please god no

      --
      Seven puppies were harmed during the making of this post.
    2. Re:gives a whole new meaning.. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You got it all wrong, mate!

      It's not the shouting that generate the power; it's the Texan tongue rolling accent which creates the power, hence it was invented by Texan Engineer.

      Cheers,

  19. bspower by __aagmrb7289 · · Score: 1

    It is fully powered by the emanations of the mystical bs! Our marketing departments are now revenue generators (well, generators period)! Hallelujah for bspower! Finally, a cheap and ubiquitous energy source for the masses!

  20. If you can get the power down by EmbeddedJanitor · · Score: 4, Insightful
    to anywhere near low enough to work with the piezo then you might as well use a very small battery.

    Current cell phone technology is perhaps four orders of magnitude away from piezo power. At ten times the piezo power level, say 10mW, you may as well use small cheap batteries. One non-rechargable AAA cell would run for approx 700-800 hours at those levels.

    --
    Engineering is the art of compromise.
    1. Re:If you can get the power down by sexconker · · Score: 4, Informative

      ?
      Your math. It is very wrong.

      A typical AAA battery is 1.5v @ about 900 mAH.
      Round that up and you get 1500 mWH.

      1500 mWH / 10 mW = 150 hours.

    2. Re:If you can get the power down by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Why would anyone choose using a battery, even a very small and long lasting one, over generating the power with the voice? Completely eliminating the use of batteries for cellphones would be a huge measure in reducing pollution.

    3. Re:If you can get the power down by rolfwind · · Score: 2, Interesting

      I don't talk enough on the phone to power it for standby. But what about one powered by motion, much like an automatic watch? Does it generate enough power?

      I personally hate batteries, at least the current technology. Perhaps ultra-capacitors one day...

    4. Re:If you can get the power down by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You don't know my girlfriend...

    5. Re:If you can get the power down by hedwards · · Score: 4, Interesting

      Because I rarely talk on my phone more than 10 minutes during the course of a month. And I still like to be able to receive calls on a random basis. Voice powered calling is worthless for people that spend that kind of time carrying the phone around rather than talking on it.

      A much better solution would be to put something in that converts the jostling motion that handhelds are constantly subjected to into power. Sort of like the old self winding watches.

    6. Re:If you can get the power down by Firehed · · Score: 1

      I don't look forward to the contract attached to the carrier subsidy for a Rolex phone... though I still like the idea.

      --
      How are sites slashdotted when nobody reads TFAs?
    7. Re:If you can get the power down by MaceyHW · · Score: 1

      No, his point is that if cell phones became efficient enough to be powered by piezo power, it would make more sense to stick a AAA in and get 700-800 hours of use.

    8. Re:If you can get the power down by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      150 hours means approximately 700-800 hours.

    9. Re:If you can get the power down by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      There are already rechargeable NiMh AAA batteries which deliver more than 1000 mAh. So assuming the OP was talking about alkaline batteries, or non-rechargeable lithium batteries which have at least double the capacity of rechargeables, he might have been not that far off.

    10. Re:If you can get the power down by home-electro.com · · Score: 1

      It's not so much the power of piezo, as the power of human voice. In active mode cell phone uses a lot of power, far more than the energy of sound wave humans produce when speaking.

      Combine that with coupling problem (piezo to air) and efficiency of the piezo, and it will be clear that the article is utter nonsense.

    11. Re:If you can get the power down by sexconker · · Score: 1

      No, his point was that the power required for a cell phone is orders of magnitude (4, according to him) higher than what you can get out of piezo electric funstuffs.

      He then assumed an amazing case scenario of a cell phone needing 10 mW. He said at that power level (draw), you may as well use small cheap batteries.

      He then said a single AAA would run for about 700-800 hours (at that power draw).

      Given that a typical rechargeable AAA is 1.2v @ 800 mAH, it's a fair high-end estimate to say that a standard AAA (which is 1.5v) is about 900 or 1000 mAH. At such low power levels, and with a device that is always on, you can basically ignore leakage (for non rechargeable batteries) and power curve issues (which suck for alkalines, especially cheap ones).

      Regardless, they want to sell you the charger, the car charger, the extra battery, the slim battery, etc. You'll never get a mainstream cell that uses standard batte^H^H^H^H^H cells.

    12. Re:If you can get the power down by Hal_Porter · · Score: 1

      A nuclear isomer powered phone could run for centuries. Plus you could power some sort of energy weapon to use against muggers. A gamma ray laser for example.

      http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Metastable_isomer

      Another reasonably stable nuclear isomer (with a half-life of 31 years) is hafnium-178m2, which has the highest excitation energy of any comparably long-lived isomer. One gram of pure Hf-178-m2 contains approximately 1330 megajoules of energy, the equivalent of exploding about 317 kilograms (700 pounds) of TNT. Further, in the natural decay of Hf-178-m2, the energy is released as gamma rays with a total energy of 2.45 MeV. As with Ta-180m, there are disputed reports that Hf-178-m2 can be stimulated into releasing its energy, and as a result the substance is being studied as a possible source for gamma ray lasers. These reports also indicate that the energy is released very quickly, so that Hf-178-m2 can produce extremely high powers (on the order of exawatts). Other isomers have also been investigated as possible media for gamma-ray stimulated emission.

      Those figures make me want to throw my head back and laugh like a Doctor Who villian.

      --
      echo -e 'global _start\n _start:\n mov eax, 2\n int 80h\n jmp _start' > a.asm; nasm a.asm -f elf; ld a.o -o a;
    13. Re:If you can get the power down by jonbryce · · Score: 1

      My first cell phone about 11 years ago took AA batteries. Of course, nobody would want to carry round such a brick these days.

    14. Re:If you can get the power down by sexconker · · Score: 1

      I had the same hilariously huge phones they showed in Night at the Roxbury. Of course, they were actually just walkie talkies from the 80s.

      But yeah, I long for the days where manufacturers couldn't crank out a new proprietary LiIon battery pack + charger + connector every week.

  21. New idea, meet old idea? by damn_registrars · · Score: 2, Interesting

    I seem to recall a time years ago that a PC manufacturer (perhaps Compaq?) claimed to have developed a keyboard that could recharge a laptop battery by the kinetic energy of the key movement.

    Yet for some reason we don't all have those...

    Of course, very few people do much typing on their laptops now, but there are some people who presumably could have found it quite useful.

    --
    Damn_registrars has no butt-hole. Damn_registrars has no use for a butt-hole.
    1. Re:New idea, meet old idea? by Overzeetop · · Score: 1

      Might you be referring to the joke that went around about 15 years ago (at least that's when I heard it) for keystroke powered word processor. It goes on to extol the virtues of such a machine, providing direct output onto paper, and using only the power of your fingers to run the entire operation. It is, of course, the venerable manual typewriter. I googled but couldn't find the old text of the "Advertisement".

      --
      Is it just my observation, or are there way too many stupid people in the world?
  22. Traffic noises are helpful now! by billstewart · · Score: 4, Funny

    Hey, my phone's running low on power, let me find some heavy traffic and big trucks so it'll be loud enough for me to hear you!"

    Next thing you know you'll have to shake your phone to get features to work (oh, wait...)

    --

    Bill Stewart
    New Fast-Compression-only CPR http://preview.tinyurl.com/dy575ks
    1. Re:Traffic noises are helpful now! by Hurricane78 · · Score: 1

      Phone... shaking...? For... features...? Is that what they call it nowadays? ;)

      --
      Any sufficiently advanced intelligence is indistinguishable from stupidity.
  23. Music! by grumpyman · · Score: 1

    So I can sing to power my mp3 player while I'm listening to it? Cool :)

    1. Re:Music! by maxume · · Score: 2, Funny

      Just hold one of the headphones up to it once in a while.

      --
      Nerd rage is the funniest rage.
  24. Gas power by incognito84 · · Score: 1

    Finally, a way to harness all the gas energy I produce on a regular basis.

    1. Re:Gas power by Kral_Blbec · · Score: 1

      Sorry, this is about speech.

  25. I'm not yelling.... by Jazz-Masta · · Score: 4, Funny

    ...I'm just charging my batteries.

    "battery's almost dying, I need to talk some more, let me call AOL and try to cancel."

  26. Marine Sound Powered Phones by TOGSolid · · Score: 1, Informative

    As a maritime employee, I use sound powered phones on a daily basis. While they work great and definitely get the job done, they're always a little on the quiet side and tinny sounding. They generate just enough juice to get that low quality voice across. Even if boosted by 100%, I highly doubt that'd be enough for a cellphone, not one capable of doing anything besides just talking at least. There still would have to be some sort of battery in the device to allow you to dial and establish the initial cell signal. I could see some clever implementations of an improved piezoelectric device though. It'd help slow down battery drain if you're constantly on the cellphone at least a little.

  27. What are they "powering"? by lawaetf1 · · Score: 1

    The mW needed to transmit the cell signal? Or the power needed to illuminate the 2x2" full color screen with real-time GPS positioning, speakerphone, and fluid game play?

    The former.. possible. The latter.. only if you put the phone in a paint mixer.

    --
    CommentBot 0.7a running with args "-module irritate,disagree -target random"
  28. Won't they still need batteries? by TheSambassador · · Score: 2, Insightful

    It sounds like talking will just provide a way to charge the phone... it's still going to need some sort of power source to be running when you're not talking into it. Isn't this more like an alternator for a car?

    1. Re:Won't they still need batteries? by ScrewMaster · · Score: 1

      it's still going to need some sort of power source to be running when you're not talking into it.

      Depends. If the user is like my girlfriend it will never be on unless her mouth is running anyway.

      --
      The higher the technology, the sharper that two-edged sword.
  29. Bullshit by lyml · · Score: 2, Insightful

    Bullshit, there is no way shouting would produce the required amount of power to operate a phone, theese things are very powerhungry.

    1. Re:Bullshit by maugle · · Score: 1

      They're not talking about powering your do-everything smartphone with the ultra-bright screen. They're talking about an extremely basic device that would just make phone calls - nothing else.
      Of course, I'm still a bit skeptical myself. I've seen these "sound will power our gadgets!" articles before.

    2. Re:Bullshit by gardyloo · · Score: 1

      Doesn't much matter. Sound carries *extremely* low power, until you get up into frequencies far, far beyond what people can produce (with their mouths, anyway. Give me a bean burrito, and I might produce watts at 400 kHz).

  30. Noisier environments ... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Even if a voice isn't powerful enough, what about noisy environments? Outdoors beside HVAC equipment? Surely that'd be enough to power LED lighting or help solar panels trickle-charge battery banks?

    1. Re:Noisier environments ... by Terminal+Saint · · Score: 1

      Forget that, line the noise barriers on freeways.

      --
      It's sad when choosing an installation directory on your own qualifies you as an "advanced user."
  31. How about if I'm just listening? by davidwr · · Score: 1

    Now that the talk part has been solved, we just need to work on the listening part.

    --
    Knowledge is how to play a game, intelligence is how to win, wisdom is knowing what game to play.
  32. Great, now can I power my laptop by sectionboy · · Score: 1

    by typing on it?

    1. Re:Great, now can I power my laptop by ScrewMaster · · Score: 1

      by typing on it?

      No, by blowing heavily into a tube to run the generator. This has the added benefit of operating a built-in breathalyzer, to help prevent drunk typing.

      --
      The higher the technology, the sharper that two-edged sword.
  33. Uh oh. Piezo-electric butterflies? by Roadkills-R-Us · · Score: 1

    Now every phone conversation can start a tornado or hurricane somewhere!

  34. OMFG! Solar rays! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    This is the worst kind of irresponsible technology. Idiots! The last thing we need is for the Earth to be bombarded by solar rays.

  35. Vibrations == Energy???? by l0ungeb0y · · Score: 1

    I'm filing my patent for my newly invented perpetual motion device.... in a dildo.
    I think I'll call it the "Infinibrator"

  36. Do the math, Barbie by Ancient_Hacker · · Score: 4, Insightful

    It does not matter if they improve the microphone efficiency to exactly 100% The amount of power in any reasonable voice is miniscule at best. And most of the power is in the lower part of the register, where the sound wavelengths are several meters long. And to get even a fraction of the power out of a wave, you need a microphone at least a quarter wavelength across.

    So even if cell phone microphones were a foot in diameter, they'd only capture a few milliwatts on voice peaks. And cell phones need a couple watts of power full-time to output a watt or so to the antenna. No way, Jose, and by at least three zeros after the "1".

    1. Re:Do the math, Barbie by goodmanj · · Score: 4, Informative

      A little help for those too lazy to do the math:

      Power per area transmitted by a sound wave:

      F = p^2 / (rho0 c)
      where
      p = rms pressure variations in the sound wave (.01-.05 Pa or so for human voice)
      rho0 = density of air (1.3 kg/m3 typ.)
      c = speed of sound in air (330 m/s)

      I get 1 microwatt per square meter. So for a 20-cm2 cell phone, 2 nanowatts, ignoring the receiver-coupling issues mentioned by the parent post.

      No way, Jose, and by at least three zeros after the "1".

      Let's make that nine.

    2. Re:Do the math, Barbie by sanjosanjo · · Score: 1

      Actually, the article says they increase the efficiency by 100% - which tells me that they doubled their efficiency from whatever they began with. But, in any case, this is minuscule amount of power that we are talking about.

    3. Re:Do the math, Barbie by Ancient_Hacker · · Score: 1

      thanks. As a real-world example an old crystal microphone could put out one volt peak-to-peak into one megohm if you talked close. So that's about .3 volts rms, p = e^2/r or 10^-7 watts.
      So I get 100 nanowatts, close enough.

      You'd get 100 x more power from a one square cm solar cell, even from moonlight.

    4. Re:Do the math, Barbie by RingDev · · Score: 1

      The whole thing makes me sceptical. Especially the author's personal notes he injects, like this gem:

      Wang noted that millions of these fiber pairs, each about one centimeter long, would be have to be woven into about 9 square feet of fabric (which would make for a shirt the size of really big poncho)to power an iPod.

      9 square feet is a really big poncho? That's a 3x3' square. Most adult sized rain ponchos are well over 3'. Here's one that comes in at 45x53" (over 16.5 square feet) and only covers to waist to elbo. 9 square feet is probably a lot closer to XL T-shirt size than it is poncho size.

      If the guy has issues comprehending something as simple as the size of 9 square feet, how can we trust him with the more complex underlying technology?

      -Rick

      --
      "Most people in the U.S. wouldn't know they live in a tyrannical state if it walked up and grabbed their junk." - MyFirs
  37. Our energy shortage is over! by Locke2005 · · Score: 1

    With this new technology, I'm pretty sure my wife can power our entire house! Of course things will get pretty dark and cold when she's not home, but that happens already anyway.

    --
    I've abandoned my search for truth; now I'm just looking for some useful delusions.
    1. Re:Our energy shortage is over! by defireman · · Score: 1

      I can see cell phone companies swarming around this technology as soon as its feasible. What better way for them to profit by encouraging customers to convert cell phone minutes into electricity, instead of having them give the money to the utilities?

  38. Just like the guitar pickup by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pickup_(music)

    It could be possible if the battery powered the mic.

  39. No way. by S-100 · · Score: 1

    The current cellular network infrastructure requires RF power in the milliwatts. Even a 100% conversion of the acoustical energy would come up short by many orders of magnitude.

    Using the same "it's possible..." logic you could come up with any number of highly improbably scenarios.

  40. an idea by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    your cell phone battery dies..no fear because your cell phone can make at least one call if you shake it(like those flashlights)

  41. Some numbers by Bob-taro · · Score: 1

    A little googling found that: a cell phone requires something on the order of 1W (while in use). Speaking in a normal voice produces on the order of 0.00001W of sound energy. I don't think cell phone power requirements could ever get that low (unless the cell towers were much closer together). Interesting idea, though.

    --
    Prov 9:8 Do not rebuke mockers or they will hate you; rebuke the wise and they will love you.
  42. There is just one little problem... by B3b0pt · · Score: 1

    How would you be able to receive a call without any power?

  43. not a hell of a lot of power by overcaffein8d · · Score: 1

    it's a very small amount of power in this, not to mention the fact that people don't always talk on their cell phone (some do more texting)

    what i think would be better is having a weight that is off-center, which could turn a generator-thingy around as you walk (if you keep it in your pocket)

    --
    Those of us who think they know everything annoy those of us who do.
  44. So, should it have the moniker 'G Phone' ? by A+New+Normalcy · · Score: 1

    ...no mo

    --
    ...Lorenzo / I'm into kinky crustaceans. I just discovered internet praWn.
  45. I feel a great disturbance in the force by seeker_1us · · Score: 4, Funny

    As if millions of cellphone users cried out "bullshit!" and were suddenly silenced.

    1. Re:I feel a great disturbance in the force by rhizome · · Score: 1

      As if millions of cellphone users cried out "bullshit!" and were suddenly silenced.

      Look, it's not difficult to understand: the talk-powered phone does not require batteries. However, the thing you use to charge it with does.

      --
      When I was a kid, we only had one Darth.
  46. Talk powered? by BCW2 · · Score: 1

    My daughters would cause them to melt or explode!

    --
    Professional Politicians are not the solution, they ARE the problem.
    1. Re:Talk powered? by Shados · · Score: 1

      yeah, if you force my law to use this technology as an implant in all teenage girls, you can basically eliminate the need for coal/fossil fuel/nuclear fuel/etc in power plans of north america as a whole.

      That would be awesome.

  47. My Girlfriend by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    With as much as my girlfriend talks, I should be able to power the whole house! Hell, throw in her sister and together they could power the whole neighborhood! The only downside is that I won't be able to come up with as many good reasons/excuses to get her to shut up. Time to invest in earplugs!-)

  48. The power of THEM by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    But you didn't take into account that THEY listen all the time, even when your phone is "off".

    All that excess power is transmitted back to the phone company, who has peering agreements with the power company, and they sell back all that juice.

  49. Windbags by KozmoKramer · · Score: 1

    Some of the windbags I know will generate plenty of power...

    --
    My name is Inigo Montoya. You killed my Father! Prepare to die!
  50. Not enough energy by phliar · · Score: 3, Insightful

    Some back-of-the-envelope calculations: normal human speech is about 60dB. We know dB = 10 log(I/I0) where I0 is 10^-12 W/m^2. So 60dB works out to about 10^-6 W/m^2 -- that's a microwatt per square meter. With 100% efficiency and a mike of 1 cm^2 collecting area, that's around 10^-10 W -- 0.1 nano-watts.

    Color me skeptical.

    --
    Unlimited growth == Cancer.
    1. Re:Not enough energy by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Human lungs have effective area of a tennis court ... or something to that extent. The piezo film mentioned in the article is 29nm. If you make your collecting device from a million layers of this film, it still will be only .29mm thick. 0.1 mili-wats is still not much, but color me optimistic.

  51. Other vibrations by Jason+Levine · · Score: 1

    I wonder if it'd work for other vibrations like those incurred while pushing keys to text. "Must Twitter faster... phone's dying!"

    --
    My sci-fi novel, Ghost Thief, is now available from Amazon.com.
    1. Re:Other vibrations by pythonhacker · · Score: 1

      Perhaps this will open up a lucrative new market for vibrators... ?

      Girl (coyly): Honey, why are you fooling around with that vibrator thingy ? I am really not in the mood you know...
      Dude: Darlin, this ain't for you. Just recharging my phone...

      --
      If you don't succeed at first, try again. If you still don't succeed, try harder. If nothing works, try reality shows.
  52. Great by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Some yahoo in a boombox car drives by and your phone explodes.

  53. Omid by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    What if someone's mute and needs the phone only for sending texts?

  54. Txting by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    "wut f all i do is txt? is my batery d00med? hope they stil sel pwr cbls. wut bout my genrashun? :("

    That was the response from my brother when I sent a link to this news page.... Sad reality.

  55. Profit! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Living together with the wife and 3 daughters, our household might even be able to push some power back into the grid...

  56. Re:Free electricity by Tablizer · · Score: 1

    I'm sure I could light my whole house if I could turn how much my wife speaks in electricity!

    Behold, a new unit of power: Naggawatt
       

  57. Power-talk ? by pythonhacker · · Score: 1

    With this invention, the old phrase "Talk is cheap" is out of the window. Shoot whoever came up with that in the first place!

    Also, as the technology grows and becomes widely adopted, the phrase "Power-talk" will make an entry into the English dictionary.

    "The Oxford English Dictionary, 2012 Edition.

    Power-talk(1) (n, adv) - The crude, despicable act of shouting into a mobile phone to power it up using piezo electric technology.

    Power-talk(2) (n, adv) - The act of talking high and mighty with those less powerful than you to intimidate them or to display an apparent sense of superiority. As in, The power-talk by Barack Obama to Muhammed Ahmedinejad apparently had no effect on the Iranian leader, except to light up his mobile phone's display briefly.

    --
    If you don't succeed at first, try again. If you still don't succeed, try harder. If nothing works, try reality shows.
  58. More details + working prototype ! by this+great+guy · · Score: 1

    More details about the prototype of an existing voice-powered telephone system: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tin_can_telephone

  59. No battery required by Chapter80 · · Score: 5, Funny
    According to my calculations, no battery is required and this article poses an excellent solution, with a few minor modifications and innovations.

    If you assume normal human speech is about 60dB. We know dB = 10 log(I/I0) where I0 is 10^-12 W/m^2. So 60dB works out to about 10^-6 W/m^2 -- that's a microwatt per square meter. With 100% efficiency and a mike of 1 cm^2 collecting area, that's around 10^-10 W -- 0.1 nano-watts. (Thanks phliar for the calculations.)

    Then utilize this energy using recent advances in String Theory, and you have a workable solution.

    Here's a picture of a prototype.

    1. Re:No battery required by mblase · · Score: 1

      According to my calculations, no battery is required and this article poses an excellent solution, with a few minor modifications and innovations.

      Humor aside, has anyone told these researchers that their technology is useless for the younger generation which spends more time texting than talking?

  60. piezoelectricity by nomad-9 · · Score: 1

    Why stop to cell phones? If they could add a layer of piezoelectric material to walls, buildings, cars, etc...the entire world would be able to talk its way into powering itself. We would have turned noise pollution into something useful.

  61. Science Fiction by go-nix.ca · · Score: 1

    Perhaps it's by coincidence, but I recently read Robert A. Heinlein's short story named "Let There Be Light" from the collection of short stories entitled "The Man Who Sold The Moon". It speaks of ways of maximizing energy capture by using appropriately shaped quartz crystals. Took only, like, what, 65 years (since that story was first published)?

  62. Re: Not Talking by TaoPhoenix · · Score: 1

    Who said you had to talk?

    Just set it next to your speakers when you crank your music up loud.

    --
    My first Journal Entry ever, in 8 years! http://slashdot.org/journal/365947/aphelion-scifi-fantasy-horror-poetry-webzine
  63. Sceptical to say the least. by chazd1 · · Score: 1

    OK. Do some simple math. Let's say the RF output of the phone (radio) is 250 mw (low). The generaly rule of thumb is that the power in to an RF stage is twice that of the output. So we need 1/2 watt to power the rf amplifier. The voice out of a human lets say is 1 watt. Again the efficiency is not 100%. Let's say it is again 50 % or 1/2 watt. That is doable you say? Well, everyone knows there is no free lunch in radio, physics or insurance salesman. Look at the duty cycles, the voice is not 100% duty cycle. The radio will be closer to a 100% duty cycle than voice because of channel overhead. Given the need to power the receiver, the modulator, the LCD screen, the microprocessor, there is no way it will work. Interesting concept. But not for another 50 years.

  64. My id is a killing word by Muad'Dave · · Score: 1

    I could charge my phone in a second: "Muad......DAVE!"

    --
    Tiller's Rule: Never use a word in written form that you've only heard and never read. You will end up looking foolish.
  65. Text Powered? by rickatnight11 · · Score: 0

    I wouldn't mind s text-powered cell phone. At the rate I text there must be excess energy for all of those keypresses that could be harvested.

  66. Re:Free electricity by 3dr · · Score: 1

    We could power entire metropolises with my mother in law.

  67. R U Listening? by airship · · Score: 1

    This technology wouldn't work for me.

    99% of my calls are from girlfriends who only want me to listen to them go on for hours about their problems. I never get a chance to say anything.

    --
    Serving your airship needs since 1995.
    1. Re:R U Listening? by earlymon · · Score: 1

      Complaints - that's another power source entirely - http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZXlz1BDvSn0

      --
      Pathological kinda promises Path + Logical - but instead, you get stuck with pathetic.
  68. Not LOUDER! by whitroth · · Score: 1

    Oh, great, so then we'll have to listen to idiots not only talking LOUDER but screaming into their cellphones in public places... or in offices with bad reception....

                mark

  69. Old jokes never die by MajGeek · · Score: 1

    This whole discussion is hilarious if you've ever been on a Navy ship. Am I the only one who remembers the salty old first class sending some poor sot of a new seaman running all over the ship looking for batteries for the sound-powered phones? Lots of fun for everyone, except the FNG, of course.

  70. Recharging by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    So to recharge your phone all you have to do is place it in front of a tv or stereo or any mechanical/motorized device that makes a lot of noise.

  71. Re: Not Talking by AndrewNeo · · Score: 1

    Then you'd never hear it ring!

  72. This is the right way of thinking though by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    How about a keyboard charging batteries from keystrokes, or a mouse charging from clicks and movement. Would mean much for laptops.

  73. the navy uses by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sound-powered_telephone

    sound powered telephones.

    sound waves cause a diaphragm to move a coil back and forth between the poles of a powerful but small permanent magnet, generating the required audio-frequency voltage in the coil

    much like the can on a string, but works through walls

  74. Comment removed by account_deleted · · Score: 1

    Comment removed based on user account deletion