Is Wireless Power Closer Than We Think?
Tesla Would Be Proud
A few years back, Marin Soljačić was driven from bed by the insistent beeping of his mobile phone. But it wasn’t beeping for him to answer it, it was beeping for him to plug it in. Since that night, the assistant professor of physics at MIT, has been thinking about ways to start his phone charging as soon as he enters his home - without the need for plugs or wires.
Jennifer Chu at Technology Review writes that Soljačić considered using radio waves, but found that most of their energy would be lost in transmission. Targeted methods like lasers require a clear line-of-sight and could be dangerous for anything in their way. According to Chu, he eventually settled on a phenomenon called magnetic resonance coupling, in which two objects tuned to the same frequency exchange energy strongly but interact only weakly with other objects.
“A classic example is a set of wine glasses, each filled to a different level so that it vibrates at a different sound frequency. If a singer hits a pitch that matches the frequency of one glass, the glass might absorb so much acoustic energy that it will shatter; the other glasses remain unaffected.”
Now, Soljačić and his team have successfully demonstrated the use of magnetic resonance coupling to power a 60 watt light bulb from a distance of roughly two meters - and through a thin wall.
The most effective setup, thus far, transfers power over a distance of two meters with about 50 percent efficiency. The team is looking at other materials to decrease coil size and boost efficiency. “While ideally it would be nice to have efficiencies at 100 percent,” says Soljačić. “So realistically, 70 to 80 percent could be possible for a typical application.”
While some wireless power technologies have emerged in the marketplace, Soljačić’s technique differs in that it might one day enable devices to recharge automatically, whenever they come within range of a wireless transmitter.
Since 802.11b came onto the scene (popularly in … say, 2001/2002) I’ve always been astonished that we haven’t yet figured out wireless powering.
The less wires in my world, the better. I think this idea - embryonic, but great. I’m excited to watch it progress and fully anticipate seeing consumer-ready implementations in a few years (say, hopefully, by 2015 mainstream?)
Not concerned about energy efficency. Charge a price-premium to compensate for the differential and reinvest a portion of the profits. Markets can handle this efficiently - don’t know why people don’t understand econ 101. You’ll STILL scoop up a great bunch of $$$ from early adopters … probably like myself!
Danjuyo
The only thing stopping us from efficient energy sources is fear. Nuclear power plants are the best source of energy we have invented and there’s no reason they shouldn’t be providing 100% of limitless energy needs. Fear.
A remarkable invention, but nothing new, here is the original patent: http://www.google.com/patents?id=CLJIAAAAEBAJ&pg=PA9&dq=tesla&source=gbs_selected_pages&cad=0_1
I think it would be cool if they could find a way to use nano technology to improve the applications and efficiencies.
Don’t get your hopes up yet. The RF field strengths required for this technology to work far exceed OSHA and CE limits for human RF field exposure. Further, it will wipe out nearby AM, FM and terrestrial TV broadcast receivers. This technology will be nothing more than a laboratory curiousity.
Obviously as an emerging tech, we’re going to be seeing low efficiencies at introduction. I think that its definitely worthwhile to develop this for various applications in the future. Especially if you consider it as an optional feature in devices, as long as users are willing to pay extra (say 20 - 30% more once the idea is optimized) for that wireless convenience, which they will be if past trends are any indication. Honestly, i wouldn’t mind paying an extra 30% on my energy bill for that.
That would be nice, no more wires and cables, hopefully the last thing this technology should do is to power/charge a cellphone.
Let’s take this to an extreme possibility and then see what your reaction is.
How about satellites sending a certain frequency down to earth which will light up light bulbs, or recharge cell phones for the poor in Africa who have no access to electricity lines?
(solar cell power has less efficiency)
Or larger scale: Satellites sending a certain frequency down to a power station which then send out electricity on the current established lines.
More extreme: no electrical lines, no electric bricks, no wall warts, and all products have a PhD (Push here Dummy).
I had the general concept of wireless energy a few years back when I was merely a child. I’m pissed. I should have been been smarter at the time… coulda made me wealthy.
to all the people who thing that this is inefficient chew on this what if “they” had solar fields in space that would operate 24/7 and send the power to earth wirelessly than you would solve any power crises. even if your at 80%
Wait so people here are saying “oh 80 percent isn’t good enough why even bother?”
come on are we so close minded that we aren’t even interested in investigating new emergent technology because we can’t see an application for them at day one, or just because by their stats they don’t sound perfect. Imagine if the Wright brothers saw they’d never get off the ground for more than a couple minutes, or Benjamin Franklin realized he’d never have a hot tub, so all of them went and instead of investigating their thoughts just went on the internet and just bitched about how their idea wouldn’t work?
God people always piss me off with their negativity. Rather than get interested in a new idea they immediately try to shoot it down.