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."

43 of 197 comments (clear)

  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 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
    3. 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).

    4. 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!
    5. 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.
    6. 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!
    7. Re:Isn't this fairly common already by rgo · · Score: 2, Insightful

      +1 Funny

    8. 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?"
    9. 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)

  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
  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 Gerzel · · Score: 4, Funny

      His heart implant is failing hand me a vibrator stat!

    4. 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.

  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?
  5. 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...
  6. 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.

  7. 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 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.

  8. 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.

  9. 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.
  10. 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?)

  11. 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 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...

    3. 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.

  12. 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.
  13. 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
  14. 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."

  15. 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?
  16. 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?

  17. 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.

  18. 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.
  19. 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.

  20. 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.

  21. 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.
  22. 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.