Wireless Charging Looks to Go Mainstream in 2015

CommanderFrank

CommanderFrank

Cat Can't Scratch It
Joined
May 9, 2000
Messages
75,399
Wireless charging stations have been with us a while now, but due to the industry limitations which make the stations inconvenient to use, they failed to go mainstream. Enter new technology made especially for those who just want to drop and run and have the unit charge without much fuss and bother.
 
Wireless charging was already sort of mainstream before this year. Lots and lots of phones and other devices use it. Even my toothbrush has been charged wirelessly for like a few years.

Either way though, I think its a good thing because I look forward to a time when there's no dumb connectors to wear out or break between a device and stuff that currently plugs into it. Then I can put my MP3 player on a pad someplace on a desk and have it go to desktop mode and connect to a keyboard, mousey, monitor, and charge itself without docking. That'd be around when I'd start thinking a lot harder about the value proposition of a smartphone versus the invasiveness of Google's Android platform as beginning to sort of balance out.
 
Price is the problem with wireless chargers.

But I have one in my car that works well. Its a magnetic mount, and it holds and charges my Nexus 7 quite well, so I can use it on the road for music/gps/etc but then just literally grab it and go if I want to stuff it in my pocket to use while shopping or killing time or whatever.

Plugging and unplugging was always a PITA in that situation, and you can't reasonably hide the cable since you need slack in it to plug/unplug which you don't when using a wireless charger.
 
The problem with wireless charging is it goes against everything that people have been trying to push us too. Kids now days are sent home from school with propaganda telling them to run around the house and unplug chargers not in use. Wireless charging is inefficient in a time when global warming and electric efficiency is a front and center issue. Its simply sitting their wasting some amount of electricity and putting off heat to get a simple job done. I don't even know why anyone cares that much , phones can charge in 30 minutes now days, if you care laptops last plenty long enough to get you through a day. I have never bothered to use wireless charging. About my only current complaint is that most small connectors can be damaged by careless people. All they ever had to do to make wired charging fine was implement a magnetic standard like what is in a surface tablet or MacBook. That would pretty much solve all the complaints as it doesn't get damaged if someone tries to force it in wrong or rips it off a desk without unplugging it.

So one has to ask why don't they implement a magnetic standard? My guess is cost, and similar cost issues with wireless charging. USB is dirt cheap and ubiquitous.

Its kind of ironic that 15 years ago we had phone makers being smart enough to make docks that you just dropped a phone in to charge and now we have connectors that can be bent or damaged.
 
Mainstream? It's not already?

For christ sake my toothbrush has wireless charging, how is this not already mainstream?
 
I was thinking about the environment too - on the Witricity website they say that energy transfer can achieve something over 95%. As I remember Wireless QI (one of the current in use standards) is ~80%. So this is actually sustainable.
 
OK, this is firkin cool, imagine if this is like free wifi everywhere, and they can downsize battery sizes and actually put more ram or stuff.
 
95% based on what? My guess is that is 95% of what a hard wired charger would provide which is still not 95% efficient. Since that is almost certainly a best case and not real world efficiency you still just waste 5% electricity for very little gain. Lets say this took off, you now have just lost 5% efficiency on many or most electronics across the whole country that adds up to a lot of electricity, and I assume that number also does not count all the time the charger is running and nothing is charging. Also the 95% number only counts when the devices are close together which essentially means if you are holding the phone you have lost that, and you have to place it on or very close to the charger station, after what is done why don't you just plug it in?

I understand in some places, like say air ports wireless charging may be very positive as most people probably don't want to leave a cell phone unattended while it charges. Having wireless charger banks behind chairs I can get. For toothbrushes where water is a concern it has obviously taken off. But at your desk at an office or computer its not needed at all its simply burning up extra energy in an era of global warming and energy efficiency pushes.
 
Inductive charging (Qi) was actually only designed to be about 70% efficient, although it can reach higher than that in some circumstances. There are other forms of wireless charging that are less efficient (50-70%). Places quoting 95% efficiency for wireless charging are probably applying it to very high-power situations, like automobiles. You won't achieve that with a mobile device. Also, the rates I give are under optimal circumstances. Wired is definitely and significantly more efficient.
 
Maxx said:
Inductive charging (Qi) was actually only designed to be about 70% efficient, although it can reach higher than that in some circumstances. There are other forms of wireless charging that are less efficient (50-70%). Places quoting 95% efficiency for wireless charging are probably applying it to very high-power situations, like automobiles. You won't achieve that with a mobile device. Also, the rates I give are under optimal circumstances. Wired is definitely and significantly more efficient.
Click to expand...
True, but who even cares about efficiency as long as it gets 2V or whatever to it for fast charging?

We're talking about devices that cost like $2 a year tops to charge.

Sounds like the definition of pound smart and penny dumb.
 
Sounds like a bunch of marketing crap to me, from nerds.

The energy falls off with distance quickly, just basic physics. No MIT miracle geek bullshit will alter basic physics.

If we all end up bathed in magnetic fields there will likely be some health effects .... until they invent non-ferrous red blood cells.

Is it really THAT difficult to plug in a charger, really?
 
Ducman69 said:
True, but who even cares about efficiency as long as it gets 2V or whatever to it for fast charging?

We're talking about devices that cost like $2 a year tops to charge.

Sounds like the definition of pound smart and penny dumb.
Click to expand...

2 A. (actually, 2.1 A)

I have a LG G2 which has a 3000 mAh battery, Li-Ion, which means it's probably 3.7-3.8 V (4.2 V charging). That's 11.1-11.4 Wh. How long it lasts depends on my usage but on average it's about 5 days, or 73 cycles per year. So maybe .832 kWh a year, or about 10 cents. The difference in efficiency would save about 2 cents per device per year for a user like me.

However, as of this year there are around 7 billion cell phones in the world. So that's $140 million in savings per year. Of course many of these phones use less power, but for every one of those you have burner phones and smartphone users who do a full charge every day. It does add up.
 
I got inspired by Kyle's post and I did a few hours of research on witricity. It seemed pretty legit. They're talking to care companies and will be publicly avail in 2 year mass production.

You can read the full article at my personal site. →Kevon.me/wireless-electricity←
 
I only have to charge mine once every couple of weeks. Usually after a work week I'm still around 80%.
 
I use wireless charging since Lumia 920 so fo about 2+ years now and I cannot stand wired charging anymore. Wireless is SO convenient.
 
Eh... while it sounds great, I am curious about efficiency, especially over distance. Not sure where this 95% number everyone is throwing up but hell wired transmission rates usually aren't that efficient. So you put your phone right on top of the docking platform you get 80% efficiency (or whatever it is) then what if I put my phone on a table 3 feet away? 10% efficiency? Then how much power would these things use when they're sitting around waiting for something that's "in resonance" with it? How does something get in resonance with it? Do you have to bring it close let it zap up, then you can charge it at any distance? I'm not going to be screaming "TAKE MY MONEY PLEASE" at this technology, I'll let others do that, and then find out where the issues lie.

I do have to say, I'm surprised no one is screaming this is stolen technology that Nicolai Tesla came up with :D
 
almalino said:
I use wireless charging since Lumia 920 so fo about 2+ years now and I cannot stand wired charging anymore. Wireless is SO convenient.
Click to expand...

How so? You come home put your phone on a pad which charges it up, where the pad has a wire connected to an outlet, versus pluggin a micro-USB cable into the phone, where the cable is connected to an outlet? (which FYI in my house is always in an outlet, so I only have to plug in the uUSb side of things.
 
There are certain applications for it. In a car it makes sense, since it can be a pain to plug in all the cables. At home it makes sense to just put one of these on a counter or something and just throw your phone on when you get home and take it off when you leave. None of these are absolutely necessary, but neither are most other things we use. It's mostly for convenience.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top