Nokia: the Sun Can't Charge Your Phone
itwbennett writes "Nokia's research into solar-powered cell phones ended with a (barely audible) thud. Under the best of conditions researchers were able 'to harvest enough energy to keep the phone on standby mode but with a very restricted amount of talk time,' Nokia wrote in a blog post on Tuesday. Not surprisingly, the prototype phone, which had a solar panel on the back cover, performed better in Kenya than in other testing locations, like southern Sweden and the Arctic Circle."
a tablet then
Nullius in verba
My phone resides in my pocket. Even if I left it on the dash of my car, the casing is only so large, even on my Galaxy S II. I don't see how even the most efficient of solar panels in the most effective of locations would provide enough power.
It's noble of them to try, but at the moment I'm not surprised this was the outcome.
Do not look into laser with remaining eye.
They spent god knows how much money and time to send this team of researchers around the world to exotic locations to talk on a cellphone with a solar panel duck taped to the back of it? Where the hell was THAT career option on career day?
But the solar panel will be much bigger than the phone. Solar power has always been quite weak, especially for something as power hungry as a cell phone. The fact that solar is going so far today is only the result of large, well-designed panels.
This research shows one thing, for now the phone and the charger still need to be separate.
I can see a separate charger that folds or rolls out, creating a large enough surface to harvest enough energy from the sun for a full charge or ideally: for a couple of full charges; you then connect the phone to this charger (which has stored the energy internally) at your convenience.
What did they do, try using it like a calculator? Why not have a larger group of solar-cells that would mount on a car-top? Or just unroll to place on the ground, even? Not knowing the particulars it is tough to call here. But it seems possible. SOmetimes you just have to GET outside the box you're in.
A combo solar USB battery/charger: http://shop.philips.co.uk/store?Action=DisplayProductDetailsPage&Locale=en_GB&SiteID=rpeeub2c&productID=202504800
So, you can charge the battery via USB or via the solar panel. Now, how long it takes to charge the battery . . . it might help if you live some place where there is a lot of sunlight . . . like on Mercury.
I used something similar a while back on vacation in Portugal in summer . . . the solar charge of a whole day wasn't able to top off my cell phone at night.
Hey, but if you like to pretend that you're green, leave it out on your towel at the beach . . .
Schroedinger's Brexit: The UK is both in and out of the EU at the same time!
I mean, if I can have this in combo with a battery that would be moderately cool. If it maintained standby power and I only drained from the battery when actively using the phone I'm sure it would reduce the frequency I'd have to recharge. Surely that's worth something.
Rather than making solar-powered phones, Nokia have pretty much solved the problem already by making simple high-efficiency phones like the 1280, which can run for 2 weeks between charges.
"I bless every day that I continue to live, for every day is pure profit."
This explains why they kept getting closer and closer to windows. Maybe now that they've realized this isn't the way to go they can get back on track.
rimshot
Maybe if they took the phone outside they'd get better results. All the imperfections in the windows are probably cutting into the amount of actual power the device gets.
rimshot
Thank you, I'll be here all week. Try the veal.
You can't get more than 100mA of charging current out of a collector on the back of a cell phone.
With a typical battery capacity of 2700 mAh, that means it would take 27 hours of vertically incident sunlight to charge your battery.
Good luck with that.
Only lacked an exploding battery, and, well, trying another approachs, like wearable solar charging clothes (could be the next fashion, or at least for cellphones for soldiers, police or other professions with uniforms), or taking energy from other sources (heat from body or environment, sweat, walking/running, or even heartbeats)
Like many in the developed world I carry a considerable surplus fuel stockpile on my abdomen which it would be nice (and perhaps healthy) to take advantage of.
Maybe a combination if an in-body blood sugar energy harvesting rig and inductive charging coils on each hip? If your fuel stockpile is running low then make it a solar charging rig with a symbiotic algae/cyanobacteria in the skin to produce sugars from sunlight.
I nearly always keep my cell phone where the sun does not shine.
Did they try hurling the phone directly into the sun? I bet the battery would charge so fast it would explode!
The way I see it is the same as how a solar batter charger won't run the electronics in you vehicle. That solar charge, despite being inadequate to RUN things still works to charge the battery when there is no load, though it may not be fast nor will it be horribly convenient.
Even if the phone cannot charge itself enough to stay alive, it could essentially bring up the battery enough while off to have sufficient power to turn back on and make a phone call or two. Ever been horribly lost? Had your phone die, and you're quite confident you could get reception otherwise? Perhaps its even a phone with a GPS!
That solar feature would be GREAT even if you could only get the power to run the phone for ten minutes.
It seems like a bit of a waste, and I'm sure it is, but it can still prove useful should a situation arise.
On the other hand, if I could get a hold of a phone with a crank on the side to charge it up, you can bet I'd use it. ;) I'm not a picky person and I could care less about the visual appeal of my phone. As long as it's functional, I'm happy.
( The new Iphone has a fair bit of real estate on the back that could be used for a solar panel, but it's also a power hungry monster. )
A nuclear powered phone.
I eat only the real part of complex carbohydrates.
Well, I wonder what I've been doing then with my Samsung E1107 from time to time.
It's certainly not as fast but it works and if you ever get lost you won't be one of those poor sods in movies.
They physically tested the phone at the equator and in Sweden and that was the only way they could figure out that the solar flux would be higher at the equator?
Like, someone couldn't sit down at a desk with a calculator and trig it out and find out how much exactly the phone would get at 50 degrees N latitude as opposed to 0?
Someone fucking hire me. I will figure this shit out for you. I won't even need to be flown out anywhere (though southern Italy would be nice). I'll just crunch out the numbers and they will be accurate and a lot faster than what Nokia got their results.
--
BMO
Such devices already exist, eg. the SolarMonkey.Supposedly it works okay.
I'd think they'd be better off making a snazzy clothing accessory and marketing it with the phone instead. Solar vest, maybe? Vests are just waiting for an excuse for a comeback. There are already backpacks with solar panels, but those aren't really practical for non-students.
Would it be such a jump to simply create a solar powered phone battery charger with a battery that you swapped out on a daily basis much like how we have to recharge our phones every night at the moment?
A 100dB sound pressure at 10cm (lets assume you can achieve that by screaming very, very loudly into the phone, say when you're talking to your boss ;-) will have a sound power of maybe around 90dB (sound power & sound pressure are two different things).
As sound power is referenced to a level of 1 picowatt, 90dB represents an actual acoustic power of 0.001 watts. This is how much power you're putting into that scream. The phone only sees a small part of it, the rest 'leaks' into the surrounds (letting the neighbours three doors down overhear your latest 'performance review').
I can't see that charging a phone any time soon. Even microphones, which are specifically designed to be as efficient as possible in converting sound waves into electrical signals, usually require pre-amplification before you can do anything useful with the signal.
As an aside, the very low power levels associated with actual sound waves is why most stereos / home theatre setups are grossly overpowered. I have a 65w per channel amplifier, and with some custom-built high-sensitivity speakers, I've never turned it up much above -20dB, and that's painfully loud. That's less than 5w per channel...
(Note: really low-frequency *does* require a lot of power, as it needs to move a lot of air to get the same sound pressure level, which is why subwoofer amplifiers are often rated at 5-10 times the main amp - my sub has a 450w amp in it, for example)
Obligatory: http://fortnightlitpress.files.wordpress.com/2011/05/knapp01.png?w=480
--Reaper924
This research was killed by several three-letter agencies who shiver at the prospect of people not actually carrying their phones ON THEIR PERSON. Those hellfire missiles aren't cheap and they want them to hit those nasty mujahadis when they're least expecting it - having the missile crash through the roof - not blowing the poor bugger's Nokia up while it's sitting on the porch and he's sitting in the outhouse.
I have a cheap pocket solar charger, and from a days charge it was able to bring my phone up to half a charge. Nokia doesn't know what the hell they are doing, as clearly you can get a significant charge from a small solar panel, mine is about 1.5"x3".
I have seen windup torches you can buy in the shops that allow you to charge your phone off them. This seems like a much better option than solar power. This would also work at night which of course solar panels dont. Maybe one day they will invent lunar panels ;)
Hmmm..... deep vee cleavage tops for chicks.... glittery solar cell appliques for their breastesess... motorized bras that cause nipples to auto-track the sun when the sun is in front of said chick... woven golden wires leading to cellphone pocket like a necklace...
PROFIT!
Wait, did I say that out loud?
I've fallen off your lawn, and I can't get up.
I think rectothermal energy is the solution here.
we'll have the ability to collect solar energy on a large scale and transfer it to some sort of storage device that attaches to the phone . . .
If i need a secondary source for power i can always use my wind up charger. Only limited by cramps of the hand!
...Contradict? Damn, I must have missed the solar panels that automatically shorten your sentences for convenience, was this at CES?
Its for places with no charging infrastructure. Places where people have to pay to charge their phones.
The blog is here:
http://solarcharging.nokia.com/
Deleted
It probably can't charge it for daily use on a phone-sized solar panel, though. It'd still be nice to have some solar panels on the phone so that you could get SOME talk time after 8 hours of charging if you were in the desert or something...
I'm sure if you have a backpack (or larger) charger, you'd be able to charge your phone just fine...
http://solarcharging.nokia.com/
Deleted
Super-efficient photo-electric solar cells in 2012: are about 18% efficient. The total amount of energy coming to earth as provided by the sun at mid-latitudes: 8 watts per square meter. Unless you go out and build another Sun, this number won't change. What also won't change: night time, seasons, and clouds. At noon-day sun in the best of conditions, a 1 square meter panel (39.4 inches x 39.4 inches) produces 1.44 watts. Night time produces nothing. Cloudy days produce less. When the Sun is lower on the horizon, you get less. If the phone needs 2 watts (at full power), you need a panel bigger than 1 meter square. Apart from nuclear power, the sun is the source of all energy on earth. Petroleum comes from animals that eat plants that grow because of photosynthesis which converts solar energy into sugars that makes plants grow. Wood heat comes from trees (hello photosynthesis). Wind is caused by atmospheric heating (solar energy). Wind causes ocean waves. Unless you talk nuclear, its all sun, but you need enough to make a go of it. I have a couple of solar panels. They are oriented away from the sun for the most part (and I can't change that). They are large, and I charge batteries with them. They are effective for that, but I know what the limits of the panels are. Correctly purposed, they are indispensable. But you have to know their limits.
typical slashdot post with title suggesting nokia concluded "the sun can't charge your phone" the article says it can; just not in very practical way yet. As the article concludes: Reasonably good results were also obtained when the tester was able to carry the phone while moving around outdoors, for instance in a holder around his neck. However, this isn’t necessarily the most stylish or convenient arrangement, and another solution is needed. So it is more saying "the sun can't in a practical way charge your phone right now and improvements are needed before it's practical" I'm sure we'll see improvements in phones to become more energy efficient & better solar panels which may make this more practical in the future.
Need to double the electricity.
I prefer the "u" in honour as it seems to be missing these days.
My phone is used for various low power computing tasks and some txt. Talk is secondary. Extending the time between docking is a win.
"When carefully positioned, the prototype phones were able, at best, to harvest enough energy to keep the phone on standby mode but with a very restricted amount of talk time"
Even if standby is extended for say 1.5 times - that is a win.
twelve bucks and do some cranking. seems much much much more feasible than solar powered right now.
buy one of those 'africa' nokias and a crank charger if you want to be an eco hippie right now..
or just six bucks. http://www.dealextreme.com/p/dynamo-hand-crank-cell-phone-emergency-charger-3669 hell, you can get a phone and a crank for under 50 bucks if you go with ultrabasic nokia(40 dollars for 1280 and that six bucks for crank chager and since it's an 'africa model' it's got a standby of 22 days).
for what's it worth, they've been making those(hand crank chargers) for a decade now, my sister had one with pretty much identical design about ten years ago. if you're going to do some hc wilderness hiking, I'd recommend getting one.
world was created 5 seconds before this post as it is.
It doesn't work so well, even in theory. 82g (only for the solar panel) and 65 pounds (GBP) would cover multiple spare batteries. And even one battery would bring you more energy than chasing the sun every day for multiple hours the whole week.
Maybe in theory you might "get even" both in terms of weight and price if you have some kind of "base" where you can leave things to charge all day long AND if you are on some multiple weeks expedition without access to any other type of power (from villages, cars, etc). But in most cases no way.
Note that all the commercial "solar" thingies come with some internal battery that needs itself to be charged (and you have a non-solar way to charge it). These small solar panels wouldn't even start charging a smart(ish) modern phone by themselves as those phones are drawing 500-800 mA and they usually can provide 100-200mA.
How about one of those self winding watch mechanisms then?
they needed this for communities without electricity.
the next, or last, billion. it's not like Nokia's business to go there and build a power grid.
However, it's nokias business to sell them phones and them having phones might actually help them to get on the electrical grid, by connecting people and all that jazz. so what they need is cheap solutions for people who have very little money and no access to an electrical socket. long standby phones is one, so the phone can be charged on the weekly trip to some bigger community centre. mechanical chargers seem more feasible at this time than solar too. they're cheaper and charging is faster.
and getting those people connected accelerates their regional advancement quite lot. for example if they do have a phone, that enables access to banking, advice services, information services, makes it easier to coordinate with your extended family unit etc, again accelerating progress..
world was created 5 seconds before this post as it is.
Let's say you live in an area where the power goes out occasionally. You need medical assistance. Or someone is trying to break into your house. Or your house is on fire. Or there's a tree down across your driveway, and it's a 20 minute drive into town. And it's snowing like crazy.
Would you rather have a phone which goes dead and stays dead? Or would you rather have a phone you've been able to keep in the window, off, but charging off the sun, which you can now flip on and make a call with?
You're hiking with a friend. Your cell phone runs out of battery because GPS used a lot more power than you expected trying to find your way to the site.
Your friend falls and breaks their ankle.
Would you rather have that solar panel, and be able to make send a text/make a short phone call to emergency services after a 30 minute stint in the sun? Or would you rather save $5 on the cost of the phone?
An earthquake hits your city. Power is knocked out across the area. You end up at a shelter. You can keep your phone off but charge it in daylight - enough to power it up and make a call or send a text to a loved one saying you're OK.
There are lots of situations where having a solar panel on the back of the phone would be pretty handy.
Please help metamoderate.
they needed this for communities without electricity.
My phone has a battery in it with 3.7V and 1300mah. My old high school memories tell me that P=IV, so 1300mah*3.7V = 4.8Wh.
From wikipedia:
120 W – tech: power output of 1 m2 solar panel in full sunlight (approx. 12% efficiency), at sea level.
120/4.8 = 25.
I don't think that communities without a electricity-distribution network are worrying for ways to charge their cell-phones. Get some PV panels out there, or a hand-cranked generator will do the job nicely.
These days phones are gluttons for power. Why don't they research into finding a way to seriously diminish the amount of power necessary to use the phone instead of trying to charge a power hungry cell phone off a tiny solar panel? Nanotechnology is still only starting to see more play now but even with non-nano equipment, phones really have nowhere to go but up in terms of efficiency...
I think everyone is looking at this article from the wrong perspective. Ultimately, I don't think that current solar cell technology is efficient enough to charge a phone battery, however a better alternative (presuming we could fit it in existing phone casings) is the kind of charger that works on shaking/body movement.... you know those flashlights you shake? Well most of us keep our phones in our pockets and I think it would be great if our body movement (walking, running, etc) was able to charge the phone as it shakes in our pocket... whether it can developed in an efficient and small enough package is a different story....
> so what they need is cheap solutions for people who have very little money and no access to an electrical socket.
Maybe they should include a portable solar panel instead of a charger? 10cm x 10cm should be enough to generate a decent amount of power in the sun.
Having the solar cell on the mobile phone is a bad idea in so many ways that it is hardly worth commenting on.
Lets say it was feasible - wouldn't it require you to *leave* your phone in the sun somewhere.....? What could possibly go wrong?
It's hardly fucking rocket science to calculate the ability of a given number of particular type of solar cell to charge a certain battery - yet we're asked to believe this was undertaken "as a trial", with the intention of marketing the end product? Seriously? No drugs involved?
The same surface area covered in the best cells will barely charge a battery sufficient to run a small LED torch under average conditions in Australia. And if you can't get enough sunlight in Australia you're in trouble - and don't forget things tend to get hot in the sun.
Disclaimer: I've only built self-charging remote devices a couple of times - for mobile phones - and each time the real life charge times were pretty close to the design. I'm not a qualified electronic engineer, or particularly good - maybe I just got lucky.
Just invent a folding solar cell panel. Usually stored in the phone, while charging unfolded to a size of at least 1m^2.
those testers needed to listen to their inner Jobs
Not surprisingly, the prototype phone, which had a solar panel on the back cover, performed better in Kenya than in other testing locations, like southern Sweden and the Arctic Circle.
The Arctic Circle have 24 hours of sun/day in the summer. Southern Sweden has 18h sun light/day in the summer. Kenya must have at most less then 10 hours (I'm guessing, I’m not an astronomer or meteorologist). Over a full year, you generally (if you are not in a cloudy area) get more sun hours and sun energy the further you get from the Equator and the closer you get to the Arctic Circle.
There are more solar energy each year distributed at the Polar Circle then there is at the Equator. During the summer crop season, there is twice as much solar energy distributed over the fields of S. Sweden then there is over the fields of S. Italy (but of course, a farmer in S. Sweden have at most two crop season, if he choose two very fast growing and temperature hardy crops and sow the spring crop in the fall (the seed will start growing when the soil gets thawed), most crops grown in Sweden take both the spring and fall seasons to grow (hence called summer crop)). During summer crop season, there is more then twice as much solar energy distributed over N. Sweden (at the Arctic Circle) then there is in S. Sweden. During winter N. Sweden has no daylight, but during summer it has 24 h daylight.
As solar energy is distributed over more time, the energy that is released each moment at the Arctic Circle (even during the summer) is weaker then that released at the Equator. Apart from being weaker it is also distributed at different frequencies. Solar power can't be collected as effectively by the solar panels of today at the Arctic Circle as it can at the Equator and the energy can't be stored effectively for the dark season; but that could change with the solar panels and energy storage solutions of tomorrow.
http://press.nokia.com/1997/01/15/the-nonstop-nokia-1611-features-the-unique-solar-battery-option-nokia-introduces-the-most-mobile-phone-under-the-sun/
I am really not surprised that current engineering are inadequate for this... Nokia had best engineering skills in the 90's, today, not so much..
Acquire the original Sun, charge everyone money for all the different spectrums of the rays of the sun.
Atleast if Oracle was the one doing the acquiring.
New things are always on the horizon
...what kind of 'research' is this? IMHO quality of an slightly above average problem for some school homework.
Should not be too difficult to get the average/max power you can get from todays solar cells. The average usable area for solar cells on a cell phone is no secret either. I suppose when I google a bit I can easily find data about power consumption in cell phones. The rest is simply, let me exaggerate a bit, the application of the rule of proportion. To call this 'research'... ridiculous.
"cell phones blast out a fair bit of RF power, on the order of 1 W,"
Holy crap, what decade do you think this is?
was called Maria.
No brain, no pain.
If they had done the math before testing they could have saved themselves the costs.
DUH. 10 seconds with a calculator would have told you this BEFORE you fricking made a prototype and flew all over the planet testing it....
Wait..... I get it!
I have a great idea for a product, I need to go to Hawaii for 4 weeks to test it.
Honestly the article is stupid. I regularly charge an iphone and an IPAD in 2 hours with a solar panel, in fact I also run a laptop off of it while they charge.
Yes, it's a larger 3 panel fold out array I have for camping, but I'm still charging on solar.
They need to clarify, you CANT charge a cellphone in a reasonable amount of time with a $1.99 garbage cell glued to the back of a cellphone. Their design was no better than taking a couple of solar panels from yard lights and thinking they were innovative.
Do not look at laser with remaining good eye.
I have a better idea: microwave emitters in every city to charge our phones wirelessly. Side effects may include skin burns and strange sparks on metallic surfaces, but hey.
I could have told them that solar power works better in Kenya or Arizona than it does in Sweden, London, or Oregon.
Slow down, cowboy! It has been 4 hours since you last posted. You must wait another few hours.
With the way they're advancing solar cells, incorporating them even into paper. Yes, they have printed solar cells. (Here:http://www.pcworld.com/article/235667/mit_prints_solar_cells_on_paper_but_are_they_recyclable.html)
How effective, well, that's another story but the point is it can be done. What we need is basically a solar weave, something that incorporates solar technology into clothing. So you can wear clothes that almost look identical to regular clothes, except that it has micro-solar weaving through out to generate electricity.
If you're needing some warmer clothing it could be a bit heavier with piezoelectric weave that generates energy on movement. Naturally this would be more useful in colder climates that have less sunlight as it would make the clothes naturally a little heavier / thicker and warmer.
So through a combination of piezoelectric / solar weave clothing, you could probably generate enough power to charge or at least greatly extend your phones battery life. Could even have clothing that creates an induction field, just like certain 'wireless' phone charges do, then no wires, just battery charging/extending.
(Inductive charging: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Inductive_charging)
If you don't care about displaying video or color illustrations, a black-and-white tablet with an E Ink display uses next to no power.
I was working for Nokia when they first came out with the solar battery charger on the back of the handset. At the time, the 2120 and 2160 models could accept those batteries, and the cells had no problem with the power requirements. Unlimited stand-by time while in the sun and something like 20 hours of talk time, in 1996, was astounding.
Of course, the 21xx series of phones isn't exactly what you'd call high-end these days. I still have one and when I'm not marveling at it's 8 lines of text on the massive 2 inch LCD screen, I'm amazed by it's nearly microscopic 1.5 inch width and ability to connect to CDMA AND AMPS cellular systems.
The plastic pull-out whip antenna is just that extra bit of bling that pushes this phone over the edge of cool.
Should not some math have been enough to calculate the amount of available energy and figure out if, for typical efficiencies of solar cells, it is enough?
Also, the idea of using light to recharge the battery would either require see-through pockets and bags (because the pockets and bags cell phones normally are in during the day, are pitch dark) or that the sun shines during the night (when cell phones are usually less used and being recharged).
This subject is horribly misleading. Nokia said, In fact that it charges the phone quite fine, running it on the other hand is a whole different issue. Nokia pretty much said unless you want a phone the size of a barn door we wont be running phones on solar any time soon but solar chargers do work.
That Nokia is in a death spiral from top-tier cell phone manufacture to novelty act.
I haven't thought of anything clever to put here, but then again most of you haven't either.
Oh right, they used to be a cell phone company didn't they? Then Microsoft bought them or something.
So they've concluded that your call phone, which spends what 99% of its time hidden in pockets, bags, etc, cannot be charged by the sun. They now plan to invest $10m to determine if you can fry an egg underwater.
"Nine times out of ten, starting a fire is not the best way to solve the problem." - my wife
They tried that already for a laptop. I think they were trying to create a low-cost laptop that could be distributed in Africa, in areas where there might be no electricity. They ended up equipping it with a crankhandle.
I do not see why we are writing this idea off. I still want one. It would extend battery life between charges, and get me that all important emergency text after the wall charge is lost. I remember the first generation of mobile batteries: after they phone ran out of power, if you leave them alone for 20min would give you enough power for one more text. It was often very useful.
I will not say how it is possible but I will say that I know for a fact that it is possible ... And any company not doing so will be doing so for extended battery life at least in the near future to say that it will not work is utter stupidity on there part it will not work to charge the phone but will it allow the phone to charge enough not to have to put it on the charger with there current design. Hell even there current design is enough to make people happy. Once you put these things on products to lengthen the life of a charge advancements will take place if we never put solar panels anyway the research into making it a possibility will never take place... There has been much research done and with the scientific proofs available I am 100% sure it could be made to work ;)
To clarify the phones thickness may increase a bit but for most people this would be a fair trade. And there have been other solar like discoveries in 2011 that could potentially charge the phone in your pocket ;)
There is plenty of information here to chew on but I've done the research and did it freely at that.
I can be found at www.mopowah.com if you care to reach me.
I kinda like the idea of somebody adding a wind-up charger to a smartphone, like the kind they have in some torches and radios. :-)