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

[kdarling]

So if I have to make a skype video call that will take let's say 2 hours... I can duck into a Starbucks or whatever. Once I am inside using their charging my battery life goes up while I do my business.

The battery won't go up while using your device with just a trickle charge, which is all you're likely to get, unless they made each table top an antenna surface.

For a laptop, plugging in makes far more sense. For a handheld, there's the problem that your hand itself will block the signal. So holding it while charging probably isn't going to work well at all. This setup is more designed for laying down your device relatively close to a power transmitter.

 

[SmoMo]

Have you been worried about radiation every time you went outside on a sunny day? For years....

There seems to be two common mistakes people make when thinking about the dangers of radiation.

Firstly, the word radiation sounds a lot like radioactive, and normally when we hear about things being radioactive it is when describing highly radioactive elements ,which we wouldn't want to be near for very long.

The other mistake is that a photon interacts with organic matter primarily by its frequency, and upping the wattage of the transmitter should be creating more photons of the same frequency, rather than photons of higher frequencies.

Consider photons with the frequency of green light, as they hit the rod ( or cone ) in your retina they are just about able to bend the tiny receptor by a very small degree.

If you are outside on a summer's day then the energy in the green photons is perhaps 100,000 times stronger than the energy of the photons emitted by your mobile phone.

So it is hard to see where the cancer risk would be coming from, if the energy from your phone is 0.0001% that of the sunlight hitting your head, and the sunlight is only just about able to bend a tiny receptor, then it is not clear how it will be able to affect other organic molecules in your body.

 

[cyanite]

Tell you what then, you turn the feature off and let the rest of us use it.

You might want to wrap yourself in all the electromagnetic energy that is already penetrating your brain in your house though.

There is a big difference between low power energy which permeates your body (for cell phones it's at most 2W, mostly lower. For Wi-Fi etc. also lower) and high power energy in a local field. To charge a phone with 10W you need at least a 10W elelectromagnetic field, and a good deal more in practice.

There aren't a lot of studies concerning how this might or might not have long term effects. Things aren't safe by default; remember DDT.
[doublepost=1483624303][/doublepost]

So it is hard to see where the cancer risk would be coming from, if the energy from your phone is 0.0001% that of the sunlight hitting your head, and the sunlight is only just about able to bend a tiny receptor, then it is not clear how it will be able to affect other organic molecules in your body.

Penetration is one factor. Visual light doesn't have a lot of penetration while radio waves do.

 

[burgman]

It's a bit silly to be living in fear.

We have a longer life expectancy now than we did back in the day and that's despite the fact that we have much more "hazards" coming at us everywhere we go.

People make issues out of anything and unfortunately with the internet, you can find an article backing any agenda you're trying to push.

I can find you articles that say water is bad for you and some idiots probably believe it.

Nothing to see here now move along...
Another variation of trust me, Until something like the Note 7 or exploding washing machines, now there is something new to the lexicon. Add hover board batteries, and other tech unforeseen mistakes. We have become the lab rat for tech.

 

[thespacekid]

Hopefully placement of the device to be charged will just need to be within some reasonable distance instead of lying on a charging pad.

 

[burgman]

There seems to be two common mistakes people make when thinking about the dangers of radiation.

Firstly, the word radiation sounds a lot like radioactive, and normally when we hear about things being radioactive it is when describing highly radioactive elements ,which we wouldn't want to be near for very long.

The other mistake is that a photon interacts with organic matter primarily by its frequency, and upping the wattage of the transmitter should be creating more photons of the same frequency, rather than photons of higher frequencies.

Consider photons with the frequency of green light, as they hit the rod ( or cone ) in your retina they are just about able to bend the tiny receptor by a very small degree.

If you are outside on a summer's day then the energy in the green photons is perhaps 100,000 times stronger than the energy of the photons emitted by your mobile phone.

So it is hard to see where the cancer risk would be coming from, if the energy from your phone is 0.0001% that of the sunlight hitting your head, and the sunlight is only just about able to bend a tiny receptor, then it is not clear how it will be able to affect other organic molecules in your body.

WTF? You make a great point. Focus on the ludicrous and ignore the UV causing skin cancer. What's the analogy for EM field density long term exposure, observing chocolate chip cookies in a dish?

 

[Paul Dawkins]

There seems to be two common mistakes people make when thinking about the dangers of radiation.

Firstly, the word radiation sounds a lot like radioactive, and normally when we hear about things being radioactive it is when describing highly radioactive elements ,which we wouldn't want to be near for very long.

The other mistake is that a photon interacts with organic matter primarily by its frequency, and upping the wattage of the transmitter should be creating more photons of the same frequency, rather than photons of higher frequencies.

Consider photons with the frequency of green light, as they hit the rod ( or cone ) in your retina they are just about able to bend the tiny receptor by a very small degree.

If you are outside on a summer's day then the energy in the green photons is perhaps 100,000 times stronger than the energy of the photons emitted by your mobile phone.

So it is hard to see where the cancer risk would be coming from, if the energy from your phone is 0.0001% that of the sunlight hitting your head, and the sunlight is only just about able to bend a tiny receptor, then it is not clear how it will be able to affect other organic molecules in your body.

It's not hard to see.

 

[DotCom2]

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).

GAH! I was just thinking the same thing!

 

[desktopgeo]

Here's the thing- if the technology actually works as well as the company claims it does, the most exciting thing is not a somewhat simpler charging solution like QI is, but for most intents and purposes you wouldn't even need to think of charging. It'd just be passively charging the entire time you are in the places you are most often in. I don't know if this will have the same issues as QI, but if it's not too slow or doesn't runs too hot, this is a complete game changer as outside of most scenarios it'd be removing the mental burden of wanting to charge.

Was this statement just aimed at the Verge interviewers or an audience or as a wider press release? I only ask as I know lots of people who don't have any Apple products and don't believe that anyone would make the assumption that everybody has something of theirs on their person, desk or at home.

Makes me think that he is referring to another company.

I'd also prefer batteries to last longer rather than to rely on wireless charging. I used a QI charger some months ago and my phone got really, unpleasantly hot with not much charge to show or it.

 

[MacBH928]

I already worry about radio waves, microwaves, Bluetooh, IR, and Wifi. Now electricity transfers via waves?

I don't know, cancer seems to be on the rise.

 

[bennyf]

Next we need a Redbull - Energous joint venture where we can wear a patch to absorb a charge when we need an energy boost. Energous could certainly use a little Redbull in the marketing department.

 

[kdarling]

Firstly, the word radiation sounds a lot like radioactive, and normally when we hear about things being radioactive it is when describing highly radioactive elements ,which we wouldn't want to be near for very long.

This. When engineers talk about radio waves "radiating", they simply mean spreading out like waves in a pond. Or as I keep pointing out, it has the same meaning as "she's radiating happiness".

Unfortunately, too many people hear "radiate" or "radiation" and instead of thinking "to radiate outward", they incorrectly associate it with nuclear "radioactivity", as you said.

A cell phone doesn't have nuclear radiation. It has radio waves spreading out. It's the same as if you mentioned "light radiation" from a bulb, or "heat radiation" from a steam radiator.

 

[bollman]

All "radiating" electromagnetic waves excite particles in our body depending on how much energy they carry. 2W from a GSM phone in a bad reception area is not nice next to your brain, it will heat it just a little bit, if it is bad for you, there's still debate. But a wave able to excite a phone battery with 5W would scare me as it could possibly heat parts of my body to a unsafe level, think microwave. And, 5W at 5 meters means scary levels at the source.

 

[ryanwarsaw]

I can see this being somewhat how it goes. Apple has made it clear that they want to remove everything from the phone that they think is unnecessary. A port mainly used for charging would definitely fall on that list. The question to me is a matter of when. This year may be a starting point, but I think we are still about 3-5 years away from being completely wireless. I personally hate the idea of a charging pad that is associated with the current "wireless" systems. To me there is no point in calling it wireless charging if all that I'm doing is plugging a charging station in which my phone must be on instead of plugging the phone itself in. Some sort of charging pad or clip would be a solution for a mobile charger for a phone without a charging port though. I can see there being a ton of issues that need worked through still as well as the mentioned health concerns people will have and many of those issues won't truly be worked out until this type of system is in a large number of people's hands. It will likely be a technology filled with baby steps, as it already is. I'm sure if this system is launched, Samsung, Motorola, or some other tech company will have a competitive strategy against it, despite the easy solution being all manufacturers going on board with one system. One way or another, I think we are headed towards a future where we won't be plugging in phones to charge and eventually many other things will follow.

My idea as a stop gap is the pad would also be wireless. Basically people that would be worried about charging would buy a wireless pad if they want a fast charge option.

Imagine for example if the Airpod case had this chip in it and didn't need to be plugged in. You could choose to bring a fast charge pad with you or not and only use it when you need a fast charge.

Agreed this all won't happen over night. This is just the very beginning of it. It will be interesting to come to this thread ten years from now to see who had the closest prediction to what really happens.

 

[nawk]

I see a HUGE waste of electricity here - even if it just turning on when charging required. The power available at any distance is defined by the inverse square law. An iPad charger is 12w and say you wanted 12w of power at 15ft. The power source will have to be over 3000 watts! (3,152.1 to be precise). This assumes 100% efficiency in power transmissions and efficiency drops dramatically with distance as well.

A more reasonable 450 watt power supply at 10 ft with about 30% efficiency would translate to only 1 watt of power.

 

[Altis]

Have you been worried about radiation every time you went outside on a sunny day? For years....

People limit sun exposure and wear sunscreen to reduce the damage to their body.

 

[jwrose]

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).

"a truly wire-free, over-the-air charging technology that uses radio frequencies"
​

They use radio waves- your body has been bombarded by these your whole life. Its an old technology used in a different way.

 

[Altis]

This is why battery size will soon be irrelevent and Apple is making devices thinner and thinner...because inevitably your device will always be connected to power, just wirelessly.

At that point it will be clear the device is only intended to be used by people with a very specific lifestyle. Everyone else will still need good battery life.
[doublepost=1483638414][/doublepost]

"a truly wire-free, over-the-air charging technology that uses radio frequencies"
​

They use radio waves- your body has been bombarded by these your whole life. Its an old technology used in a different way.

It isn't the type, but the intensity. There are limits that cannot be exceeded.

 

[theheadguy]

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

What an ignorant comment. There are many amazing companies with amazing technology that Apple doesn't buy. Apple technology in and of itself is not "so amazing".

 

[ksnell]

I like that idea. But with a 15 foot charging range, I'd probably need a handful of them to cover the house. Maybe a 'main' unit with WiFi and charging, plus some 'satellite' units with simply charging and maybe WiFi repeater/signal booster?

That would work too, but you definitely see a lot of companies starting to release these "mesh" wireless networks to combat dead or slow spots in the house. I guess it would really depend on the size of the house.

 

[Paul Dawkins]

People limit sun exposure and wear sunscreen to reduce the damage to their body.

Dear Charles is turning in his grave.

 

[stanman64]

Hopefully placement of the device to be charged will just need to be within some reasonable distance instead of lying on a charging pad.

And here we have another commenter that doesn't read the article.
[doublepost=1483647037][/doublepost]

People limit sun exposure and wear sunscreen to reduce the damage to their body.

The electromagnetic spectrum is a spectrum. Some wavelengths are dangerous, some aren't. The sun emits all kinds of EM waves. UV radiation (which is what causes sunburn) is dangerous, but visible light from the sun is not.

I'm just saying, you are comparing apples to oranges. Without knowing the specifics, (i.e. wavelength, frequency, etc.) of how Energous' tech works, we have no reason to believe it is harmful.
[doublepost=1483647337][/doublepost]

There seems to be two common mistakes people make when thinking about the dangers of radiation.

Firstly, the word radiation sounds a lot like radioactive, and normally when we hear about things being radioactive it is when describing highly radioactive elements ,which we wouldn't want to be near for very long.

The other mistake is that a photon interacts with organic matter primarily by its frequency, and upping the wattage of the transmitter should be creating more photons of the same frequency, rather than photons of higher frequencies.

Consider photons with the frequency of green light, as they hit the rod ( or cone ) in your retina they are just about able to bend the tiny receptor by a very small degree.

If you are outside on a summer's day then the energy in the green photons is perhaps 100,000 times stronger than the energy of the photons emitted by your mobile phone.

So it is hard to see where the cancer risk would be coming from, if the energy from your phone is 0.0001% that of the sunlight hitting your head, and the sunlight is only just about able to bend a tiny receptor, then it is not clear how it will be able to affect other organic molecules in your body.

Exactly. Staring at your phone screen is more likely to cause problems with accommodation, but people just love to throw the word "cancer" around...

 

[borgqueenx]

Have you been worried about radiation every time you went outside on a sunny day? For years....

Ah you should read my post again

 

[stanman64]

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

Are people really constantly stopping to get gas enough to be that worried about constantly having a full tank?
[doublepost=1483647562][/doublepost]

Ah you should read my post again

...green lantern reference?

 

[orev]

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.

Not 5-10 minutes, but you can get a pretty good charge in 25-30 minutes. Do that once in the morning and then once at night.