Energous Says Its Truly Wireless Charging Technology Will Ship Later This Year — In Next iPhone?

[jimothyGator]

[Y]ou can be damn sure that the last people who are going to deeply investigate health issues are the ones who plan on profiting from this technology

I agree with your overall sentiment, but not the above statement. The people who plan on profiting from the technology are certain to be concerned about potential health risk because they (and their investors) don't want to be blocked by regulators, or sued by consumers.

 

[rGiskard]

Low energy microwaves like BT, WiFi, and LTE probably aren't a health risk, though a few recent studies highlight the need for further study. But beaming high energy EMF over a distance of several or more meters? Count me out:

“I don’t think I would want to be in a room with free moving power signals,” an executive with a leading hardware technology company said on the condition of anonymity.

Short distance magnetic resonance charging should be fine, but then what's the point? Maybe it'd be nice in a car but Carplay would still need a USB cable. Seems like added cost and complexity for only a tiny benefit.
[doublepost=1483570256][/doublepost]

Oh boy... Don't go outside then. There's radiation from the sun.

Don't buy a cell phone then because that's radiation.

Bad analogy: excessive sun exposure causes highly aggressive skin cancer.

Cell phone radiation is VERY low energy and does not (to our knowledge) penetrate beyond the dead skin layer. It's probably harmless.

In other words, all radiation is not the same. Just because you can walk around with a cell phone in your pocket doesn't mean you want to pack a lump of plutonium alongside your testicles.

 

[Mildredop]

What would they gain from it?

Exclusivity, patents etc.

 

[macsrcool1234]

ive been critical of apple as of late but this is a game changer if true. hopefully additional receivers aren't too expensive.

 

[ksnell]

You don't need to remove it now. In the time most people take a shower, the AW charges. You don't need to leave it on the charger all night long.

It really only needs to charge 5-10 minutes a day? I honestly never check the battery level of my watch and just put it on the charger each night. Guess I will have to give that a shot.

 

[The Game 161]

You don't need to remove it now. In the time most people take a shower, the AW charges. You don't need to leave it on the charger all night long.

depends how late you get up for work, 10 mins wouldn't be enough to charge

 

[borgqueenx]

what about the radiation? I am not interested in a product that beams power everywhere but does not yet make me get this nice warm green glow.

 

[Fenez]

Are people really constantly charging their phone enough to have to be that worried about charging them all day?

 

[inscrewtable]

Sound great in theory...

but honestly I would be worried about safety. Do I want electromagnetic radiation strong enough to charge a phone flying through my house or car that I am exposed to continuously? I don't think so personally.

You walk around outside with electromagnetic radiation raining down upon you that is strong enough do penetrate your skin, destroy dna and cause cancer, every day.

 

[kepler20b]

If Energous's tech is so amazing, why doesn't Apple just buy the company?

maybe its not proprietary enough.

 

[Gorms]

You mostly remember your science correctly. RF (Radio Frequency) waves are too *long* to do damage.

Radio waves don't usually pass through us; they are absorbed. However, the waves do not have enough energy to do damage; they only warm us very slightly. It's exactly the same mechanism by which you feel warm when sitting next to an incandescent light bulb.

Not until waves get short enough to get past the UV range do they start causing damage. Shorter waves have more energy, and UV and shorter waves can start to knock atoms about in our cells, including DNA, which is where the damage comes from.

Everything visible light and longer is harmless though.

THAT SAID, though...

Wireless charging is inefficient, and not likely to work very well. RF is great for transmitting information, but not so much for energy. The inverse square law comes into play; available power drops sharply as you move further away from the transmitter. The power required might damage other equipment in the path of the signal, not to mention interference. No thanks, really.

Inductive charging is much more efficient; IE laying your phone on a charging mat. But even that is only a fraction as efficient as a simple wire connection.

Thanks! great reply. Very informative. Exactly what I wanted to read.

Great point about the inefficiency and whilst it does instantly make me think on a practical level "yeah actually, would I want/need to use this all the time? Is this a great use of my cash?". The flip is that I instantly see it as something more viable for low power devices e.g. magic mouse/keyboard/pencil/IoT and finally AirPods which then made me think about a completely wireless wifi Sonos competitor from a company that just developed a W1 chip which syncs audio. Then I drooled a little.

Assuming the transmitter is smart enough to only emit power when required by a device. Is it more wasteful to have a low energy bluetooth device with small battery requirements for long usage topped up only when it needs it via an inefficient method than it is to have a wired system powering speakers constantly but unnecessarily?

If so, whilst I can definitely see this as wasteful energy use, I can definitely see potential uses that solve two huge user experience issue with low power connected devices around the home: wires and batteries running out. I guess they could be angling it at the wrong devices initially, but magic phone charging is gonna be a pretty easy sell for the marketing team

 

[teknikal90]

What would they gain from it?

exclusivity

 

[gertruded]

Interfere with a pacemakers? Or will it try to charge your knee replacement? Of course it could never cause cancer. Cigarettes are safe too, right?

 

[sideshowuniqueuser]

Cue the concerns about how this might affect our physical health (yes, in my ignorance, I think I'm one of those who's concerned).

I'm an electrical engineer, and have the following to say: yes electromagnetic radiation can be harmful, but only in high power doses, and the inverse square rule applies. For example, if you go to a transmission tower of a commercial radio station, and get close enough to where the radio signal is being generated (by overriding the safety precautions, and getting within 1m or so), you will start to smell your flesh cooking, and your brain will be effected. But this is an example of very high power, at very close proximity (inverse square rule means that if you are 2m distant, you will be affected 1/4 of 1m distant, and if you are 3m distant, the effect is 1/9, etc, the power diminishes exponentially with distance). So that's an example of extreme power at extremely close distance. In everyday life we are constantly exposed to low power electromagnetic radiation, for example from power lines and mobile phone towers, and it is self evidently safe, as we aren't all dying of cancer at a young age. There is, however, debate about the safety of living within proximity of high power lines, and whether or not cancer rates are higher in this situation. Personally, I avoid living or working near high power lines. As for this charging technology, presuming that it works as claimed, due to the inverse square law, the only way this could possibly work, is if the stream of electromagnetic radiation that is doing the charging, is intensely directed in a very narrow beam directly at the device to be charged. The paranoid side of me would make me avoid having my phone charge in my pocket, or sitting in line with me. The logical side of me says that testing has been done and for this product to be released, it would have to pass safety standards.

 

[Appleaker]

Why too late exactly? It's not like any other company has achieved the miracle of true wireless charging yet.

Are we trying to strip Apple of this achievement by suggesting there was a magical arbitrary deadline they failed to meet?

What are you talking about? I was referring to the product not the market.

 

[Soccertess]

Glad someone is innovating!!!

If Apple adopts this tech, then we start a wireless world. Then it makes sense to ditch the magsafe charger, and have less ports, and really boasts the appeal of the Apple watch.

Let's hope for the best and hope that Tim dongle head Cook doesn't screw this up. I'm scared he might only include it on gold iphones :S

 

[Glideslope]

Wireless charging sounds cool. But will it take longer to charge a device? And what if any health concerns are there?

I share your concerns.
[doublepost=1483578330][/doublepost]

Feel free to climb into an industrial microwave any time you like mate, and rid us of your stupidity. Or stand next to a giant IR, UV or gamma wave emitter. Even sunlight has a very well known, strongly correlated health risk - skin cancer.

All of the EM spectrum has known health risks, and sure, radio waves are non-ionising, so you're in luck, this probably isn't going to directly give you cancer, but there is a massive difference in power needed to transmit a message, and the power needed to charge a phone, or a laptop. Last I checked my MacBook charger puts out 65W: jump on a treadmill and see how much power that really is, then image a fraction of that being absorbed by your body 24/7, 365 days a year, when charging, say, the watch on your wrist, the phone in your pocket, the laptop in front of you, and the glasses on your face.

I'm not saying that he's right, but don't mock his caution because you completed a science class at school that taught you that visible light is part of the EM spectrum, because you can be damn sure that the last people who are going to deeply investigate health issues are the ones who plan on profiting from this technology.

Thank You.

 

[sudo1996]

My problem with this is how do you prevent battery decay - If Everytime i walk into a room the pjone will just start charging. I try to charge my phone just once a day.

This is an old debate... I always thought you were supposed to always keep it charged to prevent decay. The device is supposed to know how to charge itself optimally. Could be wrong, but I certainly don't see any evidence saying you should try going for full drain/charges, and Apple kinda suggests that you don't need to: http://www.apple.com/batteries/why-lithium-ion/
[doublepost=1483578944][/doublepost]

I had this thought, as well. I've always heard that the best way to keep rechargeable batteries healthy for as long as possible is to keep the electrons flowing (i.e. deplete, recharge, and repeat). Maybe that's no longer the case? I'm no battery expert.

Keeping the electrons flowing may help in some ways but definitely hurts in one way, which is that you use up cycles.
[doublepost=1483579071][/doublepost]

You walk around outside with electromagnetic radiation raining down upon you that is strong enough do penetrate your skin, destroy dna and cause cancer, every day.

Hey, some of us don't go outside.
In all seriousness, the sun can cause skin cancer and eyesight degradation if you aren't properly covered. But that's from UV, not radio/microwaves. Nobody really knows whether these wireless charging devices are dangerous, just that cellphones are most likely safe.

 

[- rob -]

So, iMac and Apple Watch aren't getting form factor updates this year because redesigns for all products, specifically for wireless charging are coming in 2018?

 

[Pman17]

They better get this in the next iPhone or else Samsung will get it and make iPhone look uninnovative again, haha. Seems like this will be a trickle charge. They'll still keep the lightning cable for getting a boost.

 

[ButteryScrollin]

I'm genuinely concerned with yet another type of "wave" bouncing around inside my house. And call me one of those "get off my lawn" types - but would we really know how safe it is now? Or in 10/20/30 years after it's been used a long time.

if it's bad for you, you'll be long dead by then!

 

[Altis]

If Energous's tech is so amazing, why doesn't Apple just buy the company?

Because it's highly questionable.

Looking around at their company, it certainly appears to be among the ones I'd consider to be sketchy.
[doublepost=1483582801][/doublepost]

Oh boy... Don't go outside then. There's radiation from the sun.

Don't buy a cell phone then because that's radiation.

It doesn't matter how long it takes to charge the device, forget running the phone to 10% and then plugging it in, the idea is you'll trickle charge it ALL the time no matter which room you're in with a transmitter, it should be slow, but just fast enough to continue to charge the phone in a positive manner when in heavy use, thats all thats needed, to keep it topped up, not fast charge it from 0.

Radio waves have been around long before humans, there are no health concerns - that doesn't stop people turning their wifi off at night though does it, or refusing to wear bluetooth headphones cos of zapping it straight to their (borderline useless) brains.

Cell phones have a maximum energy they can emit so that it does not put too much electromagnetic energy into your body, which at the very least raises temperatures inside your body.

In order to charge devices at a distance, the energy output would be quite high, more so as you are closer to the transmitting device.

It would seem that the plan this company has would not be within the permissible levels. It's not like their ideas or technology are anything new or different, so you have to think for a moment why nobody else has put this forward yet given the push for wireless charging for years now.

 

[Eriamjh1138@DAN]

Obviously, using bluetooth and wifi, the system can detect the wireless device is within range and then activate the charging field. Having it on continuously would waste so much energy as to be utterly ridiculous.

In addition, there is still the question of efficiency. An Iphone charger now is 5W (output) and when not connected to your phone draws very little energy and costs very little even if you left it plugged in all year. This device, however, will draw more energy looking for your phone, waste more charging your phone, lather rinse and repeat.

It will still be a nice thing to see. Maybe Apple can implement some wonderful ways to keep the efficiency up without killing our electric bills.

 

[kdarling]

Now, the possible downside:

There are people out there who think Energous is full of BS.

For one thing, this will require transmitting at a pretty high output. How high is unknown.

In fact, their company filings note that whoever uses their method, is going to need to get FCC approval in a way that's never been done.

"... because our technology involves the transmission of power greater than the power threshold limits of Part 15, we also expect to need to obtain FCC Part 18 approval. To our knowledge, the transmission of power using RF energy waves by a consumer product at the ranges we are proposing is novel and there can be no assurance that we will be able to obtain this."

 

[Tech198]

Wonder if this technology could also be used in Apple retail stores, so when everyone walks in with an iPhone they all start charging (I suppose it would actually make u stay there all day as "I can't leave yet, i'm waiting for my phone to complete).. or weather it would be limited to consumer use. or other businesses.