Login:
Password:

Intel works on wireless laptop battery recharging

By Ed Oswald, BetaNews

August 22, 2008, 4:22 PM

The groundwork may have been laid by Nikola Tesla for wireless transmission of electricity, but Intel is putting it to good use through a new effort to charge a laptop in much the same manner.

At the Intel Developer's Forum in San Francisco this week, a demonstration was shown where researchers were able to power a 60 watt light bulb from an energy source that was three feet away. About 75% of the power from the source was retained.

Researchers based their tests on work done by the Massachusetts Institute of Technology last year. In the simplest terms, the transmission of electricity occurs through the use of two resonant objects of the same frequency. This allows the transmitted power to react strongest with those objects.

They were able to transmit the power at a distance of seven feet, although apparently with less efficiency. Similar technologies, known as power induction, are already fairly widely used. A current example would be Philips' Sonicare electric toothbrushes, which don't have contacts but which draw their power charge through induction, just by sitting in contact with the base.

(More on MIT's system -- called WiTricity -- including a more complex explanation of how it works, can be found here.)

Intel's system is similar, though it uses two electric coils to transmit the power over a short, though measurable, distance. Any device operating on the same frequency would then be able to draw power from the source.

Conceivably, furniture manufacturers could embed these coils within tables. This way, charging a compatible device would be as easy as placing it on or near the table, for example.

Still, Intel's technology still appears to be years away from mass production. Some of the considerations to still be worked out include how to prevent the electromagnetic fields from interfering with other components within the devices, or anything else.

Add a Comment (32 Comments)

BetaNews reserves the right to remove any comment at any time for any reason. Please keep your responses appropriate and on topic. Foul language and personal attacks will not be tolerated.

Name (required):

E-mail (required):

Enter Your Comment:

By darkfire79

posted Aug 25, 2008 - 5:18 PM

Wow.. Tesla finally gets some credit.

Score: 0

By M^3

posted Aug 25, 2008 - 9:56 AM

Not to mention the 25% efficiency loss at a distance of 3 feet. Not green at all and will just help worsen the the strain on the electric grid. There are likely some niches where this would be more helpful than harmful, but laptop recharging almost certainly isn't one of them. Except maybe a sealed laptop made for marine use.

Score: 0

By Mecanoroid

edited Aug 24, 2008 - 2:57 PM

and we so need more EM radiations in our daily environment, just to avoid plugging a cord.

Right.

Score: 0

By afewtips.com

posted Aug 23, 2008 - 10:47 PM

I agree with foxfyre. What's the point? In 40 years we can place our laptop in front of the energy and not have to plug it in?
"Solution looking for a problem" I think says it best.

http://afewtips.com

Score: 0

By foxfyre

posted Aug 23, 2008 - 4:11 PM

In perspective, this is a solution looking for a problem.

The future is not environments saturated with transmitted power. Not unless they come up with a version for which all other transmitted signals are immune to its interference.

If they want to make an inductive node one can set their laptop on to recharge batteries, fine. But if it is in an environment where you can securely leave your laptop for a recharge (your home!), you may as well plug it in and use it while it is recharging and eliminate the additional inefficiencies.

As they mention, this technology is years away from fruition, so any postulating at this point is little more than noise.

Score: 0

By David Gerard

posted Aug 23, 2008 - 2:52 PM

I'm sure wireless power is totally harmless, nothing to worry about! http://notnews.today.com...less-power-for-the-home/

Score: 0

By foxfyre

posted Aug 23, 2008 - 4:05 PM

LOL!

Score: 0

By hackztor

posted Aug 23, 2008 - 1:18 PM

Its a start in the right direction. Technology changes 3 feet today next year miles. Thats the key. Then you work on efficiency once u have the technology working. Who would waste time making it 100% effecient if the range is so limited and the kinks still need working. What if intel made it 100% efficient, but could not get the technology to go any further ever. What would be the point?

Score: 0

By foxfyre

posted Aug 23, 2008 - 2:18 PM

I won't ask what grade you received in physics...

Score: 0

By dvferret

posted Aug 22, 2008 - 9:20 PM

Im sorry but if its only 75 percent efficient then that's just sad. It shouldn't be developed if this cant be improved GREATLY upon. There are much better things to be spent time on. Go green.

Score: 0

By foxfyre

edited Aug 23, 2008 - 2:09 PM

Like so many of the other recently converted (Go green my @ss - as consumers simply think they are green by virtue of changing what they buy!), name an electrical device that is 100% efficient?

A power supply that is rated at 80% efficient is considered excellent!

Its one thing to tout numbers, and quite another to know what they mean.

Heck, the typical consumer buys light bulbs based on the wattage thinking that it tells them how much light is output, when all they are buying it on is information regarding the heat output! Let's see, my 100 watt amplifier is equivalent to my 100 watt speaker which is equivalent to my 100 watt light bulb which is equivalent to my 100 watt space heater....

Just as folks are erroneously focused on cars when they can actually make a much larger difference (and save more money) by insulating their homes which account for 60% of the energy use!

Slogans are cute. Understanding works better.
But as you look around, posturing based upon slogans unfortunately wins hands down.

Score: 0

By Paul Skinner

posted Aug 25, 2008 - 12:21 PM

Watt is not a measurement of heat you berk. It is energy per second. Heat is a by-product.

Score: 0

By lvthunder

posted Aug 22, 2008 - 6:15 PM

I hate to be the green one of the group, but shouldn't we be trying to find more efficient ways to power our stuff. A 25% drop is huge when you look at how many laptops there are. Plus if your three feet away what's the advantage.

Score: 0

By dvferret

posted Aug 22, 2008 - 9:20 PM

Agree with you 100 percent.

Score: 0

By auiotour

posted Aug 23, 2008 - 2:15 AM

Guess that would be why they are saying they are developing it. Not everything is designed perfect among it's first release. Hell I demand a car that can go 0-60 in 2-3 seconds, along with ZERO emissions and can drive forever, oh and did I mention that the process to create every aspect of the car is ZERO emissions as well. sigh well maybe someday the world will be 100 percent.

Score: 0

By dvferret

posted Aug 25, 2008 - 4:51 PM

Hummers have been out for years now. They still get terrible gas mileage.

Score: 0

By poundsmack

posted Aug 22, 2008 - 5:08 PM

what i am more owrried about is the electro chemical engine that everyone of us has at home with us, the human brain. there is no way to tell if this will cause long term nerological damage. with all the singals flying around wirelessly these days i wouldnt be suprised if it could be linked to the increasing mental illnesses that are sooooo much more prevelent these days. and while this is rather off topic, its something to think about...

Score: 0

By Paul Skinner

posted Aug 22, 2008 - 6:37 PM

The fact that there are more people on this planet than two decades ago is also a factor.

We have millions of other signals going through us already (mobiles, television, radio, gps, wifi etc), I doubt it's going to make that much difference on top of all the other crap.

Score: 0

By gumpster

edited Aug 22, 2008 - 5:46 PM

It Does, well sorta. There has been research that shows that wireless signals are affecting our health in a bad way, but the governments would never admit to it cause then they would be liable for what could be trillions of $$$$$ in legals stuff.

Score: 0

By lvthunder

posted Aug 22, 2008 - 6:18 PM

I don't think (at least in the USA) you can civilly sue the federal government. Plus they would just have to raise taxes to pay us the legal judgment anyways. Now the private companies on the other hand are a different story, but it would turn out like all the cigarette companies.

Score: 0

By foxfyre

edited Aug 22, 2008 - 4:54 PM

Inductive coupling isn't new.

But a range of 7 feet?
Even with 1-3% efficiency, the EM is going to reek havoc with LOTS of RF devices! Its going to make high power UWB disruption look like a wannabee. And I hope no other similar devices are in range...lots of potential unintended interactions!

They do have their hands full if they want to use the system outside of a tightly controlled limited environment. And getting the industrial herd of cats to all agree on a standard? Right... Sounds like fun.

Score: 0

By Paul Skinner

posted Aug 22, 2008 - 6:41 PM

I imagine they'll find a way around it. We already have a large number of items broadcasting in the 2.4GHz region and they don't interact with each other in a bad way.

I see no reason why it can't be the same principle as WIFI (and I've thought wireless electricity would be possible since I was 6 - it's the one thing I wish I'd tried to develop first).

Score: 0

By foxfyre

edited Aug 23, 2008 - 2:17 PM

Long distance work around?

There is a vast difference between a FM modulated carrier and an EM field capable of transmitting real amounts of power sufficient to charge any device with which we are familiar!

Such power requirements will interfere with all sorts of RF signals - regardless of the specific frequency they are on.

You effectively have a 'jammer'.

Not to mention that any item that resonates at that frequency will absorb the power transmitted as well! Oops

Score: 0

By Paul Skinner

posted Aug 26, 2008 - 6:36 AM

Well neither of us are going to invent it.

I am certain that it will be 'perfected' to a reasonable range and won't interfere with other RF signals within 30 years.

Score: 0

By Skawt

posted Aug 22, 2008 - 5:27 PM

I just want to weaponize it and aim it at my upstairs neighbors.

Score: 0

By Paul Skinner

posted Aug 22, 2008 - 6:41 PM

Build a large Tesla coil in your front garden.

Score: 0

By foxfyre

edited Aug 23, 2008 - 2:12 PM

You sound like a defense contractor. Its pretty worthless as a weapon - but it looks cool as you intimidate the enemy with static cling.

Score: 0

By Paul Skinner

posted Aug 26, 2008 - 6:37 AM

Depends if your neighbour is tall/stands under it.

One things pretty certain: any robbers aren't going to mess with your house.

Score: 0

By foxfyre

posted Aug 22, 2008 - 6:19 PM

Its easier to simply make an impulse weapon from a microwave oven klystron/magnetron.

Score: 0

By TubeMountain

edited Aug 24, 2008 - 11:26 PM

Bury the coils in the roadways and give me an electric car! I'd love to drive around for free.

Score: 0

By paulm

edited Aug 25, 2008 - 3:43 AM

This is all pretty boring really. Funny how the Intel name makes it news worthy.

If you stand next to transmission lines out of a radio/TV transmitter, or near a transmission tower, and hold a flourescent tube near it, but not touching, that tube will light up. Just like magic.

Isn't that phenomena the same?

That's been around since RF transmission was first invented.

Score: 0

By Paul Skinner

posted Aug 26, 2008 - 6:38 AM

^This^

Score: 0