CES: Tiny Fuel Cell is Supposed to Charge a Cell Phone for Two Weeks (Video)

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

CES: Tiny Fuel Cell is Supposed to Charge a Cell Phone for Two Weeks (Video)

Posted by Roblimo on Thursday February 14, 2013 @07:46AM from the maybe-a-whole-bunch-of-these-could-power-your-house dept.

Many of us have plug-in external batteries of one sort to recharge our smart phones when we're away from power outlets. Or we have gigantic aftermarket batteries that make our phones so fat they barely fit in our pockets. So there is this company, Lilliputian Power Systems, that is just starting to market a tiny, butane-powered fuel cell they call the Nectar that plugs into your cell phone (or whatever) through a USB port and supposedly charges it for up to two weeks. That's a lot better than an add-on battery. It looks expensive, although the power "pods" aren't too pricey at $19.99 for two. But wait a minute: Why aren't fuel cells, not internal combustion engines, the "range extenders" in plug-in hybrid cars? A decade back, fuel cells were going to revolutionize our power delivery and consumption systems. A cell phone charger is cute, but is that really all we can get fuel cells to do?

33 of 204 comments (clear)

Min score:

Reason:

Sort:

Small print by Anonymous Coward · 2013-02-14 07:49 · Score: 2, Informative

*Only applicable to phones powered by Atom Chip.
1. Re:Small print by Phasma+Felis · 2013-02-14 08:17 · Score: 4, Informative
  
  The actual small print: $19.99 is for the power cells. The charger that the cells and your phone plug in to doesn't even have a price listed yet, which probably means it costs hundreds. Oh, and it's also not available yet, and pre-orders are sold out.
  Slashdot fact-checking fails again. Great job, guys!
2. Re:Small print by hawguy · 2013-02-14 09:03 · Score: 4, Informative
  
  And to answer the question in the article:
  
  "Why aren't fuel cells, not internal combustion engines, the "range extenders" in plug-in hybrid cars?
  It's because electric cars use a *lot* of power - this is the same reason electric cars don't come with solar panels on the roof so you never need to charge them - it takes a lot of energy to charge an electric car.
  Since the power cells cost $20, they must contain more than fuel, they probably include some consumable electrodes or membranes.
  The fuel cells are are rated to produce 55Wh (with 2.5W maximum draw).
  A Nissan Leaf goes 73 miles on its 24KWh battery pack - so that's 328 Watt-Hours per mile.
  It would take about 6 of these $20 power cells to power your car for one mile or $120 (though you may need 150 of these chargers in parallel to generate enough power).
  Even if you assume a 90% drop in price when scaling this up to car size, that's still $12 per mile.
  I've seen refrigerator-sized, $20,000 natural gas fuel cells for powering (and heating) your home, but if you're going to power your car from natural gas, why not just make it a hybrid that uses an natural gas powered engine instead of an electric car that has a bulky and expensive natural gas powered fuel cell?
3. Re:Small print by v1 · 2013-02-14 09:04 · Score: 3, Insightful
  
  nah, they are probably playing the "Razor Scam". Sell you the main product for cheap, break-even, or even at-a-loss, then gouge you with the consumables it uses all the time, at a great markup. See also "printer ink cartridge scam".
  So I'd expect the gadget itself to sell reasonable, but then these "pods" will go for $10 ea, and contain about a nickel's worth of hydrogen. And maybe a DRM chip to prevent you from refilling it.
  A "solution good for the consumer" would be rechargeable pods, that you can simply fill to the line with water and then plug into the wall, where they split some water and generate some hydrogen to recharge themselves. (and either store the oxygen in the cell too, or maybe vent it outside, or pressurize some O2 cylinders you can sell back to your local airgas co?) Though they'd take awhile to recharge. I suppose it may generate O2 slowly enough to not be a hazard.
  The only non-cheap part of the system is the membrane for the cell or the catalyst for the recharger.
  Maybe I'm just being pessimistic about it. But I think the biggest challenge in fuel-cell technology right now is the big players in the market that will find serious new competition in fuel cells. Look at the rechargeable battery industry. When you threaten to dump a new product on the market with a much higher energy density and lower cost than the alternative they're offering, they tend to freak out. I haven't seen any public account of pressure and sabotage from those groups on fuel cell tech, but I'd expect it's happening, on a significant scale, even if out of the current public eye.
  That reminds me, I recall reading a year or so ago that someone came up with a way to convert natural gas to H and 2O in the cell, and that made it powerable directly from natural gas. Imagine that, a computer that runs on a little cylinder like a 20gram CO2 from your pellet gun, full of natural gas. Fuel cells are cool. Wish we used them more.
  
  --
  I work for the Department of Redundancy Department.
4. Re:Small print by firex726 · 2013-02-14 09:05 · Score: 3, Interesting
  
  Well they have competition with a similar setup, but it uses hydrogen, not butane.
  http://www.horizonfuelcell.com/store/minipak.htm
  But looks like you'll also need a refiller, but depending on the life of it all, it might pay for itself vs. buying these butane ones.
  http://www.horizonfuelcell.com/store/hydrofill.htm
5. Re:Small print by g5g5g5 · 2013-02-14 09:17 · Score: 2
  
  PC World reports that the price on the charger is $300.
  http://www.pcworld.com/article/2024382/nectar-brings-fuel-cell-tech-to-the-mobile-charging-game-video-.html
6. Re:Small print by Guspaz · 2013-02-14 10:05 · Score: 2
  
  Yikes, I had written up a long reply comparing the density and cost to existing solutions and against the Horizon unit, and lost it all. Suffice it to say that the Nectar was about $490 to hit the first kilowatt, the NewTrent IMP120D battery was about $77, and the Horizon as (due to free refills) only $378.
  Also, the Nectar actually provided roughly double the power per weight or volume as compared to the lithium ion (a first for a fuel cell to do so well), while the Horizon was about even in weight and terrible in volume (the thing only provides 15 Wh, compared to 55 for the Nectar and 44.4 for the IMP120D).
  The Nectar is the first mobile fuel cell to actually be a better alternative than lithium ion. Everything else anybody has put out before (especially the Horizon thing) has been a laughable joke of a product.
  The only downside is cost. $10 per refill (which is what everybody reports, not the $20 Brookstone has) is incredibly expensive when compared to the half cent it would cost to recharge a lithium ion battery (based on HydroQuebec pricing, anyhow). The Nectar, despite its advantages, is only useful in two cases. Either you're rich, or you need to be able to carry a whole lot of refills with you.
  Ultimately, the low amount of power produced by the Nectar is a problem. Two watts is not even enough to provide the same amount of power as a regular USB 2 port (2.5W), let alone USB 3 (4.5W), and nowhere near enough to charge a tablet (10W). In fact, most modern cellphones need more power than a USB port can provide to charge at full speed, and an iPhone draws more power under full load than USB 2 can provide. So if an iPhone's battery will slowly drain under heavy use even while charging, the lesser power provided by the Nectar would be even worse.
  Still, for pure density, throwing a bunch of the pods in a backpack will beat out any competing solution, problems notwithstanding.
7. Re:Small print by mattack2 · 2013-02-14 11:36 · Score: 2
  
  The Karma charger only charges the *accessory* battery, not the actual "drive the car" cells.
  From Wikipedia:
  
  The Karma includes as standard a solar paneled roof manufactured by Asola Advanced and Automotive Solar Systems GmbH, a Quantum Technologies affiliate, to aid the cabin climate control system. The solar roof is capable of generating a half kilowatt-hour a day and was estimated to provide up to 4 to 5 miles (6.4â"8.0 km) of additional range a week assuming continuously sunny days; however, the solar panels as delivered only recharge the 12-volt lead-acid accessory battery.
Because: Patents. by Anonymous Coward · 2013-02-14 07:52 · Score: 5, Insightful

We'll all eventually have cheap fuel cell chargers, but not for about another 20 years or so when the developers are sure they wont get patent-trolled for releasing a product.
1. Re:Because: Patents. by pieterh · 2013-02-14 08:30 · Score: 5, Insightful
  
  Yup. Don't know why your comment modded down. Whenever you see a promising area of technology stagnate and stop moving for 20 years, then pick up magically, it's patents.
  
  --
  My blog
Scale matters by gurps_npc · 2013-02-14 07:53 · Score: 5, Interesting

As to why you can't power a car with them, scale matters. Some electrical sources work great at providing a trickle charge over hours, but can't power a car, even if you put 1000 of them in sequence or serial.
Sometimes it's a heat issue, sometimes it's weight, sometimes its some other physics law.

--
excitingthingstodo.blogspot.com
1. Re:Scale matters by P1h3r1e3d13 · 2013-02-14 08:02 · Score: 2
  
  In the case of cars, it was largely supply and logistics. Car fuel cells were supposed to be hydrogen-powered (not butane, like these) and there is very little infrastructure for generating and transporting large amounts of hydrogen. Storing it on board the car is also a tricky issue.
2. Re:Scale matters by Digital+Pizza · 2013-02-14 08:14 · Score: 4, Interesting
  
  A few years ago I read of research being done by General Motors (I think) about using a gasoline-powered fuel cell, a process that although still using gasoline, would be far more efficient and clean compared to burning it, and of course there would be no problem refueling.
  I wonder whatever happened to that project?
  
  --
  We apologize for the inconvenience.
3. Re:Scale matters by mlts · 2013-02-14 08:20 · Score: 2
  
  A gasoline powered fuel cell would still be very useful.
  If it could do high amounts of energy, it would be useful as a generator replacement, and have the added bonus of being quiet. Heat could be used for heating water and air in the winter, or be vented away in the summer.
  If it could produce only relatively small amounts of usable electrical output, it still would be very useful, even just to keep the starting battery topped off and maintained.
4. Re:Scale matters by h4rr4r · 2013-02-14 08:27 · Score: 2
  
  Until you can find a way to do without platinum series metals you can forget about that.
  As to refueling I have some very bad news for you, no fuel cell is going to run on pump gas. That stuff is far too contaminated for this use. Some of it is intentional like detergents others are just because it needs to be cheap.
5. Re:Scale matters by Lije+Baley · 2013-02-14 08:35 · Score: 5, Insightful
  
  Studies show that Reality is a leading cause of failure in the development of promising technologies.
  
  --
  Strange things are afoot at the Circle-K.
6. Re:Scale matters by Binestar · 2013-02-14 08:42 · Score: 2
  
  The project was/is worked on in my home town, although the person who owns the land they are leasing wanted to force them to sign a 10 year lease instead of a shorter lease has dropped their lease and they are leaving the area in first quarter 2013 to go back to Detroit. There were fuel cell cars driving here on test runs constantly, although since the announcement that has pretty much stopped. On the outside the cars looked like normal GM cars (Of course with nice "GM FUEL CELL CAR" decals branded on it)
  
  http://media.gm.com/media/us/en/gm/photos.detail.html/content/Pages/galleries/us/en/facilities/honeoye_falls.html#
  http://www.whec.com/news/stories/s2790586.shtml
  
  --
  Do you Gentoo!?
7. Re:Scale matters by Binestar · 2013-02-14 08:48 · Score: 2
  
  This is a picture of what the car looks like, although this wasn't taken in my area, so I can't say if it is the same car as the one that was cruising around the village. http://www.fuelcelltoday.com/media/1726184/equinox_project_driveway_gm_489x285.jpg
  
  --
  Do you Gentoo!?
Re:Isn't it about efficiency? by Algae_94 · 2013-02-14 07:57 · Score: 2

no, your blanket statements are wrong. You don't give any indication of the conversion processes used. Combustion of chemicals for kinetic energy is a lot different from the fuel cell conversion of chemical energy to electric energy that is used for motion.
Butane by ravenscar · 2013-02-14 07:58 · Score: 4, Informative

To answer the question of "Why aren't fuel cells, not internal combustion engines, the "range extenders" in plug-in hybrid cars?" posed in the TFS...
In this case, the fuel cell is powered by butane. Butane is not readily available, in pure form, in large, easily transferable quantities all over the world. Gasoline, however, is. I understand that butane itself isn't rare, but the ability to get a fair quantity of it safely into my vehicle in a few minutes is.
Smartphone? by nospam007 · 2013-02-14 08:01 · Score: 3, Funny

"Many of us have plug-in external batteries of one sort to recharge our smart phones when we're away from power outlets."
You mean your iPhones not Smartphones.
We with real Smartphones just switch the internal battery with one of our dozen full ones.
1. Re:Smartphone? by Anonymous Coward · 2013-02-14 08:13 · Score: 4, Funny
  
  We with real Smartphones just switch the internal battery with one of our dozen full ones.
  
  Not always. At my company we've got our web server (with online shop) running on a Nokia N900. The idea was to lower our electricity costs by having employees charge the phone at libraries and bus stations, where we'd just look like ordinary people and no one would suspect business use. Anyway, turning the phone off to change the battery would result in downtime that we can't afford. An external battery pack has proved a lifesaver in cases where we couldn't find a free outlet in time.
2. Re:Smartphone? by somersault · 2013-02-14 08:30 · Score: 2
  
  Strangest troll I've ever seen.. o_0
  
  --
  which is totally what she said
3. Re:Smartphone? by Anonymous Coward · 2013-02-14 08:42 · Score: 4, Funny
  
  Typical slashdot. Baths are supposed to be intentional, and frequent, not accidental.
Raspberry Pi/Arduino power source by ScienceofSpock · 2013-02-14 08:05 · Score: 3, Interesting

Depending on the cost, this might make a nifty power supply for Raspberry Pi or Arduino based robots.
Bloody hell.... by fuzzyfuzzyfungus · 2013-02-14 08:05 · Score: 5, Funny

"A dead battery means important missed calls and emails, no GPS when you’re lost, no e-reader on your train ride, no communication in an emergency, and an overall feeling of dread and anxiety."
Yes, they actually say that. May I be the first to recommend spending less on fancing charging gadgets and more on anxiolytic lifestyle aids, like benzodiazepines or heavy drinking?
Butane, huh? by CanHasDIY · 2013-02-14 08:12 · Score: 5, Insightful

So, that means I should be able to go down to the tobacco shop, get a can of compressed lighter fluid, and refill the charger on the cheap, right?
No? You're telling me I have to go buy proprietary cartridges that will, without doubt, cost far more than a can of commercial butane?
Yea, you can shove that over-priced, over-hyped bullshit right where the sun don't shine, Bucko.

--
An enigma, wrapped in a riddle, shrouded in bacon and cheese
Re:Fuel Cells by fuzzyfuzzyfungus · 2013-02-14 08:12 · Score: 2

Only once somebody clones the fuel cartridges.
According to their site, a fuel pod is ~55 cubic centimeters. Brookstone wants $20 for two. A liquid fuel had better be nigh-indistinguishable from magic for $180/liter.
Research was in batteries by nebular · 2013-02-14 08:19 · Score: 2

The car companies put most of their research dollars into batteries. Really that exactly what the should have done because the batteries are the workhorse. As a range extender the gasoline engine is readily available, cheap and fuel is available everywhere.
Now that Hybrids are common they can start working on alternate options for range extension. Hydrogen engines are probably next, followed by fuel cells.
Re:Fuel Cells by dyingtolive · 2013-02-14 08:22 · Score: 3, Insightful

Ask those guys who make the TSA body scanners.

--
Support the EFF and Creative Commons. The war is coming, and they're supporting you...
stupidly dangerous by slashmydots · 2013-02-14 08:24 · Score: 4, Informative

I have a 1500mAh battery pack module with a full-sized USB port and a power-pin-only 5-pin USB micro cable, 4" long, in my jacket pocket at all times. So it's a reserve battery for any device and it'll charge 1 phone or 1/4 of 1 tablet or some portion of a GPS unit but so what? On the other side, it has a solar panel and a charging indicator, that's what! Take that, pocket full of unstable, flammable gas. So solar panel vs butane....yeah, I'll stick with my solution, thanks. In direct sunlight, it doesn't take real long to recharge the entire battery pack either. Yeah, I'm out of luck at night but considering I can get 21 days of idle runtime on my Samsung R640 on one charge from this reserve battery, I think I can find some sunlight after depleting it.

I believe I heard this Nectar device exceeds $300, or so they stated at CES. Mine cost $17 and it's from Scosche, which makes decent products.
Re:Fuel Cells by h4rr4r · 2013-02-14 08:25 · Score: 2

If this is to be used in a fuel cell it likely has to be far more pure than the butane commonly sold for lighters. Else you foul the many hundred dollar cell and get to buy that all over again.
Re:Fuel Cells by realilskater · 2013-02-14 08:26 · Score: 2

They claim the cartridge is not refillable to meet TSA regulations. Hah, give me a refillable one that I can squirt a canister of lighter/torch butane into and I might consider it.