There are literally dozens of ways they could address the discharge issue without making users wet their pants!
Oxygen has 8 times the mass of Hydrogen so for every mass of Hydrogen, it will produce 9x the mass of water. If the fuel cell is half the weight of the iPhone ~60g, it will produce 540grams (540ml) of water.
The current iPhone battery is about 7Wh and lasts a working day in use. To last a week would need 49Wh. If the fuel cell can manage 1000Wh/kg then it would only weigh 49grams. The cell wouldn't be pure Hydrogen though so the amounts of water, power, weight will vary. Pure Hydrogen can provide 39kWh/kg so the material they use containing the Hydrogen will contain a portion of Hydrogen and the conversion to electricity will have a certain efficiency.
0.5 liter of water is quite a lot of water but would be put out over 7 days so ~70ml/day or 0.1ml per minute (working hours). People sweat 0.5-1l per day or 0.8ml per minute.
The fuel cell is described as putting out an imperceptible amount of water. It's isolated in one location, unlike sweat but when the phone is in a pocket, it's most likely on standby so the power usage would be a small fraction of when it's in use. The fuel cell doesn't need to deplete at all on standby. It can even use a small battery or capacitor for standby power and switch to the fuel cell for active use.
Collecting the water is an option but this would build it up and require having to empty out the water manually. I don't think the vapour in active use would be too much of a problem, maybe an odd droplet forms now and again, not even as bad as using the phone in the rain.
Battery tech is progressing too slowly, it's good to at least try other options and see if they work out better. One hurdle with the cartridge idea is having to keep buying them where electricity is already in the house. If they are inexpensive enough, people can buy enough to last a few months at a time. $5 per cartridge (per week) would be too much IMO, they'd need to be about $2 each at most.
Currently there are several types of batteries, the more recent being Lion which needs to be sealed tightly or it burns very hot.
Hydrogen doesn't just burn, it can explode with great force.
I'll pass on this battery; they probably wouldn't even allow in an aeroplane.
I mentioned that a fuel cell is a battery in the context of SpamSandwich's comment which I quoted, viz: "If it was a superior technology providing vast improvements over a battery, Apple would've used it already."
It's a common misconception that Hydrogen cells are an energy source whereas they are batteries, for energy storage.
Water vapor is a byproduct of a hydrogen fuel cell. There would be some measure of water. Not a bucket of water, obviously...
If it was a superior technology providing vast improvements over a battery, Apple would've used it already.
Wow, no offense SpamSandwich, but your last sentence is completely idiotic. That's like saying a few years ago that if TouchID was a superior technology providing vast improvements over manually entering a password, Apple would've used it already. I mean, really?!?!? There are thousands of companies in the world developing the 'next great technologies' that Apple can take advantage of if they so choose.
Can imagine the news stories "man survives in desert for seven days by sucking on iPhone exhaust"
And then Samsung copies the energy system, but its byproduct is3H2O and their users start dying off. " src="http://forums-files.appleinsider.com/images/smilies//lol.gif" />
Wow, no offense SpamSandwich, but your last sentence is completely idiotic. That's like saying a few years ago that if TouchID was a superior technology providing vast improvements over manually entering a password, Apple would've used it already. I mean, really?!?!? There are thousands of companies in the world developing the 'next great technologies' that Apple can take advantage of if they so choose.
Fuel cells are not something brand new to the world.
Fuel cells are not something brand new to the world.
True, but fuel cells that fit inside the cramped space of the relatively thin iPhone ARE brand new to the world. Well, to be honest, I suspect they are, but not positive of that. From what I've heard, fuel cell development has focused on larger sizes/applications, and I have never heard of a focus on micro fuel cells.
True, but fuel cells that fit inside the cramped space of the relatively thin iPhone ARE brand new to the world. Well, to be honest, I suspect they are, but not positive of that. From what I've heard, fuel cell development has focused on larger sizes/applications, and I have never heard of a focus on micro fuel cells.
Click on this B&H link, at 8 ozs with a core,that's a rather small device and it's an entire standalone unit.. 4000mAh per charged core isn't bad either.
No, actually not. They are a generator that "burns" (oxidizes) hydrogen to produce electricity (directly) and water (rather than going via the more traditional thermal/Carnot cycle/mechanical to generator route.
A capacitor (particularly given the newer super cap/ Graphene/ superconductor technologies), has a much better chance of replacing L-ion batteries than a Hydrogen-Oxygen fuel cell ever will.
No, actually not. They are a generator that "burns" (oxidizes) hydrogen to produce electricity (directly) and water (rather than going via the more traditional thermal/Carnot cycle/mechanical to generator route.
A capacitor (particularly given the newer super cap/ Graphene/ superconductor technologies), has a much better chance of replacing L-ion batteries than a Hydrogen-Oxygen fuel cell ever will.
In the original context of my post what I said is the case. I've read so many times that people think Hydrogen fuel cells are a source of energy, but no, they store energy - hence they are batteries.
In the original context of my post what I said is the case. I've read so many times that people think Hydrogen fuel cells are a source of energy, but no, they store energy - hence they are batteries.
No they don't, and no they aren't (by any normal definition of the word) They burn hydrogen (stored in an external vessel) and produce electricity there is no "storage" within the fuel cell.
Not sure what point you are arguing. We agree fuel cells don't produce energy. Really... nothing does. Energy can only be moved from one form to another (which always incurs losses (entropy) )
Laws of thermodynamics notwithstanding, and not wanting to go even further off-topic I was just throwing in a response to a seemingly common perception that when we start having issues powering everything with diesel and petrol then it won't matter because Hydrogen will power the vehicles (or iPhones) of the future. That was the point I was making .. Badly!
One hurdle with the cartridge idea is having to keep buying them where electricity is already in the house. If they are inexpensive enough, people can buy enough to last a few months at a time. $5 per cartridge (per week) would be too much IMO, they'd need to be about $2 each at most.
Nice breakdown. I also seem to be in the minority who seems to be mildly excited about this tech.
One thing I'm wondering is about all the people fretting over replaceable cartridges.
I would imagine that a more "Apple like" solution would be to simply collect the water vapor on the device/in the battery, and when docked, use the electricity to convert the water back into hydrogen. I'm no chemist, but the way I understand it, this is possible, theoretically anyway. Apple isn't going to make people bother with clumsy cartridges imo.
One thing I'm wondering is about all the people fretting over replaceable cartridges.
I would imagine that a more "Apple like" solution would be to simply collect the water vapor on the device/in the battery, and when docked, use the electricity to convert the water back into hydrogen. I'm no chemist, but the way I understand it, this is possible, theoretically anyway. Apple isn't going to make people bother with clumsy cartridges imo.
They need the Hydrogen to be solid state, not liquid or gas. Turning water into solid state Hydrogen wouldn't be possible just by applying electricity, nor would it be safe. This would be better not being done in the phone either but a separate standalone device like a coffee machine. Even then it needs separate chemicals to be bought:
That site has a video showing a vehicle running on the compound and the water it puts out is noticeable because of the amount needed. The danger with any chemical reaction is the risk of it going out of control. You don't want a situation where a device gets warm enough to start a reaction of the whole power source at once. The batteries used in devices just now with Lithium can cause severe burns but enough Hydrogen exploding at once could probably kill someone and/or sever a limb. They have to be very careful when dealing with chemical compounds for large amounts of consumers.
The cartridges would be small so say that you bought a 6 month supply, that would be a pack of roughly 25 cartridges for $50 and the pack would be smaller than an iPhone box. As they improved the power draw of the phone and the efficiency of the cartridges, the purchases and cartridge replacement would get less frequent. They could get to a point where you switch the cartridge once a month and a pack of 25 would last the lifetime of the phone as long as the cartridges don't deplete when they are just sitting unused (they might have to be kept stored in certain conditions).
Comments
Oxygen has 8 times the mass of Hydrogen so for every mass of Hydrogen, it will produce 9x the mass of water. If the fuel cell is half the weight of the iPhone ~60g, it will produce 540grams (540ml) of water.
The current iPhone battery is about 7Wh and lasts a working day in use. To last a week would need 49Wh. If the fuel cell can manage 1000Wh/kg then it would only weigh 49grams. The cell wouldn't be pure Hydrogen though so the amounts of water, power, weight will vary. Pure Hydrogen can provide 39kWh/kg so the material they use containing the Hydrogen will contain a portion of Hydrogen and the conversion to electricity will have a certain efficiency.
0.5 liter of water is quite a lot of water but would be put out over 7 days so ~70ml/day or 0.1ml per minute (working hours). People sweat 0.5-1l per day or 0.8ml per minute.
The fuel cell is described as putting out an imperceptible amount of water. It's isolated in one location, unlike sweat but when the phone is in a pocket, it's most likely on standby so the power usage would be a small fraction of when it's in use. The fuel cell doesn't need to deplete at all on standby. It can even use a small battery or capacitor for standby power and switch to the fuel cell for active use.
Collecting the water is an option but this would build it up and require having to empty out the water manually. I don't think the vapour in active use would be too much of a problem, maybe an odd droplet forms now and again, not even as bad as using the phone in the rain.
Battery tech is progressing too slowly, it's good to at least try other options and see if they work out better. One hurdle with the cartridge idea is having to keep buying them where electricity is already in the house. If they are inexpensive enough, people can buy enough to last a few months at a time. $5 per cartridge (per week) would be too much IMO, they'd need to be about $2 each at most.
But quite a unique battery.
Currently there are several types of batteries, the more recent being Lion which needs to be sealed tightly or it burns very hot.
Hydrogen doesn't just burn, it can explode with great force.
I'll pass on this battery; they probably wouldn't even allow in an aeroplane.
I mentioned that a fuel cell is a battery in the context of SpamSandwich's comment which I quoted, viz: "If it was a superior technology providing vast improvements over a battery, Apple would've used it already."
It's a common misconception that Hydrogen cells are an energy source whereas they are batteries, for energy storage.
Water vapor is a byproduct of a hydrogen fuel cell. There would be some measure of water. Not a bucket of water, obviously...
If it was a superior technology providing vast improvements over a battery, Apple would've used it already.
Wow, no offense SpamSandwich, but your last sentence is completely idiotic. That's like saying a few years ago that if TouchID was a superior technology providing vast improvements over manually entering a password, Apple would've used it already. I mean, really?!?!? There are thousands of companies in the world developing the 'next great technologies' that Apple can take advantage of if they so choose.
And then Samsung copies the energy system, but its byproduct is 3H2O and their users start dying off.
" src="http://forums-files.appleinsider.com/images/smilies//lol.gif" />
Fuel cells are not something brand new to the world.
Fuel cells are not something brand new to the world.
True, but fuel cells that fit inside the cramped space of the relatively thin iPhone ARE brand new to the world. Well, to be honest, I suspect they are, but not positive of that. From what I've heard, fuel cell development has focused on larger sizes/applications, and I have never heard of a focus on micro fuel cells.
Aww... I expected to be able to use “Is that an iPhone in your pocket or are you just happy to see me” unironically.
True, but fuel cells that fit inside the cramped space of the relatively thin iPhone ARE brand new to the world. Well, to be honest, I suspect they are, but not positive of that. From what I've heard, fuel cell development has focused on larger sizes/applications, and I have never heard of a focus on micro fuel cells.
Click on this B&H link, at 8 ozs with a core,that's a rather small device and it's an entire standalone unit.. 4000mAh per charged core isn't bad either.
http://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/995175-REG/brunton_f_reactor_or_reactor_charger_orange.html
Hydrogen fuel cells are batteries.
No, actually not. They are a generator that "burns" (oxidizes) hydrogen to produce electricity (directly) and water (rather than going via the more traditional thermal/Carnot cycle/mechanical to generator route.
A capacitor (particularly given the newer super cap/ Graphene/ superconductor technologies), has a much better chance of replacing L-ion batteries than a Hydrogen-Oxygen fuel cell ever will.
In the original context of my post what I said is the case. I've read so many times that people think Hydrogen fuel cells are a source of energy, but no, they store energy - hence they are batteries.
In the original context of my post what I said is the case. I've read so many times that people think Hydrogen fuel cells are a source of energy, but no, they store energy - hence they are batteries.
No they don't, and no they aren't (by any normal definition of the word) They burn hydrogen (stored in an external vessel) and produce electricity there is no "storage" within the fuel cell.
Not sure what point you are arguing. We agree fuel cells don't produce energy. Really... nothing does. Energy can only be moved from one form to another (which always incurs losses (entropy) )
Nice breakdown. I also seem to be in the minority who seems to be mildly excited about this tech.
One thing I'm wondering is about all the people fretting over replaceable cartridges.
I would imagine that a more "Apple like" solution would be to simply collect the water vapor on the device/in the battery, and when docked, use the electricity to convert the water back into hydrogen. I'm no chemist, but the way I understand it, this is possible, theoretically anyway. Apple isn't going to make people bother with clumsy cartridges imo.
They need the Hydrogen to be solid state, not liquid or gas. Turning water into solid state Hydrogen wouldn't be possible just by applying electricity, nor would it be safe. This would be better not being done in the phone either but a separate standalone device like a coffee machine. Even then it needs separate chemicals to be bought:
https://engineering.purdue.edu/H2Lab/Ammonia_Borane/index.html
That site has a video showing a vehicle running on the compound and the water it puts out is noticeable because of the amount needed. The danger with any chemical reaction is the risk of it going out of control. You don't want a situation where a device gets warm enough to start a reaction of the whole power source at once. The batteries used in devices just now with Lithium can cause severe burns but enough Hydrogen exploding at once could probably kill someone and/or sever a limb. They have to be very careful when dealing with chemical compounds for large amounts of consumers.
The cartridges would be small so say that you bought a 6 month supply, that would be a pack of roughly 25 cartridges for $50 and the pack would be smaller than an iPhone box. As they improved the power draw of the phone and the efficiency of the cartridges, the purchases and cartridge replacement would get less frequent. They could get to a point where you switch the cartridge once a month and a pack of 25 would last the lifetime of the phone as long as the cartridges don't deplete when they are just sitting unused (they might have to be kept stored in certain conditions).