@Nancy- Kiva is an incredible platform for adults and kids to further their education. I had no idea that existed, great find. I do agree with you that textbooks, pens and paper still have their place but the future is here with cheap sub-$200 tablets that could be implemented into the curriculum as an added tool.
Excellent post Cabe--Very informative. I came from the appliance industry where most cooking products adhered to and were certified by UL 858. Manufactureres are extremely active in creation, maintenance and enforcement of standards affecting there products. UL goes about this in the proper fashion by asking for representations on varioius "standard boards". The ultimate goal is user safety AND performance--but primarily safety. Manufacturers are very happy to comply since they will ultimately feel the effects of any changes or modifications. I feel, this is the way it should and must be relative to wireless power standards.
Nancy and Cabe, thanks for actually putting some numbers on the best efficiency of wireless power transmission. NONE of those touting how wonderful it is have ever been willing to do that. What I have wondered about is why none of the folks who are so very concerned about th hoorible effects of stray magnetic fields have not been up in arms about the electromagnetic fields involved in wireless charging systems. Perhaps hazards are acceptable if they come with a luxury package.
Hi Cabe, thanks for the article. It was timely because I've been working on a wireless power design, and I also got a little newsletter from one of the groups this morning in addition the the DN newsletter with this article.
Now, I'm not out to be rude, but would like to point out a couple of facts. You say that there are no standards for wireless power. However, that's exactly what Qi is. I know because we designed a wireless power product using it over a year ago (I'm working some follow-up issues right now).
Your mention of QI makes it sound like it is a separate company, with a wireless power method competing with methods from other companies, like LG and Samsung. However, Qi is in fact a standard developed by the Wireless Power Consortium, which is (like the A4WP) "several tech companies banded together"....and the WPC in fact includes Samsung and LG!
Basically, what it appears like to me is that A4WP (sounds more like a ham radio call sign from some other country?) and Qi have created/are creating competitive "standards". Think Beta vs. VHS, or Blu-Ray vs. whatever that other one was called.
Here's the article I got from WPC this morning, which gives a technology overview and talks about how Qi is also capable of the resonant transfer mode described above. And yes, they make it sound like Qi is the best thing in the world, just like A4WP's articles make it sound like Rezence is. Which one's actually better? I don't know.
This article could have been a lot better by doing a little bit more investigation first. No offense, but right now it sounds like you read a press release and then added a little bit of personal commentary, without digging into the facts. I just mean that as a suggestion for improvement...I do appreciate your work here.
And lastly - No, I have no affiliation with any of these, other than having used a couple of Qi-compatible devices in designs. I also am greatly interested to see how these things all pan out, and if they're actually mass adopted. And finally, yes, efficiency is a big issue!
Oh I agree with you, Cabe. It just ain't the way the world works - as you know so well from your own example. By the way - do you know about Kiva? Very cool way to help folks along...
Oh, and I am not okay with little kids using $500 iPads. Much less expensive child-focused ones on a limited basis - maybe. But that is my own personal opinion - my poor deprived son did not get a cell phone until 8th grade and his video game system was the old nintendo when everyone else had X boxes. He is in the top 10% both in school and in the school-district on PSATs. His lack of technological toys doesn't seem to have hurt him any...
20% loss is insane to me. I had a design once for a car lighting system. As it stepped down the voltage to 5v, it lost all that excess power through heat. I insisted on using an efficient stepping power supply. But that convenience wasn't considered due to cost. Same will follow in wireless power in the beginning.
Again, while people have 3L soda bottle for lights, we dump 20% because it's too hard to handle.
Ouch, Cabe...that is a whole 'nother topic. Efficiency is something we should all be striving for, but if you want to talk on those terms - wireless charging is a luxury - just like most of our technology. Little kids running around with $500 iPads in the U.S. (you know it's true, no matter how ridiculous that sounds!) while children are starving in third world countries...yup - that is a whole 'nother can of worms...
My only argument to wireless power.. what is lost.
Power will be lost.. there is no lossless wireless option (or wired). With Witricity, for example, getting only 80% means 20% was lost for no reason except convenience. As the rest of the world starves.
Although plastics make up only about 11% of all US municipal solid waste, many are actually more energy-dense than coal. Converting these non-recycled plastics into energy with existing technologies could reduce US coal consumption, as well as boost domestic energy reserves, says a new study.
Focus on Fundamentals consists of 45-minute on-line classes that cover a host of technologies. You learn without leaving the comfort of your desk. All classes are taught by subject-matter experts and all are archived. So if you can't attend live, attend at your convenience.