- cross-posted to:
- [email protected]
- cross-posted to:
- [email protected]
A tiny radioactive battery could keep your future phone running for 50 years::A glowing horizon for phones
You must log in or # to comment.
And now for 50 years worth of security updates for a phone like that. Not to mention what people might do with throwing a phone in the trash or something
The EU are going to mandate removable batteries in phones, so I don’t see any reason you can’t take a standardised battery that lasts decades and swap it into your next phone, if they’re all designed properly with compatibility with this miracle battery in mind :-D
Perfect. Then they’ll sell the battery separately and it’ll cost $5000
A battery that last several years and can be used in a plethora of devices would be reasonably expensive yes. $5000 is a lot but maybe $500 is more reasonable for something like that?
Exactly; if Usually, it takes years, if not decades, before laws and regulations are actually in place
I’m not so optimistic.
When ever we discover a new, much better power source, the cartel who is going to lose a shitton of business go on a smear campaign. Look at solar power. Look at electric cars. Hell, look at hemp.
Companies would bury this so fast, and this tech would be a niche thing.
Like a phone would last 50 years.
A tiny radioactive battery could keep a piece of e-waste using power for 48 years
Generating power…
… that go on to mutate rats who grow old and train mutant turtles in the ninja arts.
Sounds like alot of infertility and ass cancer in the future… lets see how this plays out
How long can it power a disposable vape? Lol jk
Don’t give them any ideas…
Finally, Asimov got it right
He got it right in a lot of aspects, partially because he didnt gave many details about certain stuff, but I remember a pretty good description of a nuclear powered e reader… if I remember it correctly, the nuclear part was a tiny nuclear reactor though
Ya know we keep these things in our pants right?
No offense but it’s a “I wasn’t paying attention in high school physics” comment. It being beta decay with a half-life of 100 years should already indicate it’s relatively safe. In fact someone else in this thread already already added the references showing how safe it is. If it’s safe enough to power a pacemaker it’s safe enough to sit in your phone that sits your pocket.
Personally I think that battery would have much bigger issues than safety, such as power requirements which are much harder to control with nuclear decay. Also obviously the device itself deprecating before the battery because tech will definitely advance a lot in 50 years, I imagine after a decade the phone will be useless. And finally the pricing considering Ni-63 doesn’t occur in nature which means you need a specific process to create the materials necessary for the batter.
That’s a silly comparison. You’re not dropping your pacemaker down escalators or throwing it the trash when the screen breaks, and middle schoolers aren’t dissambling them with butter knives. You’re not throwing them out every few years. Please teach me more about high school physics though you smug sob.
Most current phones use lithium ion batteries that can combust or explode in your pocket if tampered or damaged, but you don’t seem to be worried about that. You only seem to be worried about the battery in the article because the only thing you remember about radiation from your high school physics is “radiation bad”. Had you paid more attention in school you wouldn’t need my smug ass correcting you.
You are just moving goalposts here. None of these scenarios are particularly relevant anyway. Even if the phone shell cracked, the battery casing would be enough to shield from the radiation. And what does throwing the phone in the trash have to do with keeping it in your pocket.
You’re just not trying hard enough.
Nuclear power at small scale is already in use in devices. Some medical devices, smoke detectors etc. As long as there is proper shielding, the enclosure is robust enough, and the overall device is made easily serviceable, I’m all for it. I can understand the fear sentiment of anything flagged as radioactive, but radiation is all around us already. Idk, but the less we can ditch super toxic and explosive lithium the better.
The issue is not the radioactivity, it’s the power density. Per the article, this is ~24x smaller than an average phone battery, but can supply only 100uW.
I have a relatively conservative phone use, and on average, my phone uses 450mW. That means that you’d need 4500 of those batteries in your phone. But the battery would also need to cover the power usage peaks, which are multiple times higher than the average power consumption.
Remember when folks wore watches with radioactive paint on them? Good times.
It was more a problem of licking the little brushes than wearing the teeny bit on the wrist.
Some of the people here don’t realize that our smoke detectors have radioactive elements inside it
Depends, in my country ionization detectors have been banned over 20 years ago, you’ll mostly find optical / photoelectric detectors here.
I wonder if its because of a valid reason, or just a precaution
It’s probably safe until someone decides to go look what’s inside their smoke detector
Some people havent read the article where it states they use radioactive batteries like this in pacemakers and that there is no external radiation from the battery.
I’ve heard of these kinds of batteries before and it’d be cool to have long-running electronics, but would these produce enough power?
They do, if you give them enough room. And if you are born into an oil family.
The power density is about 0.01125m³ per watt. A high end smartphone (11w of peak power) with a body size similar to Galaxy s23 ultra, would be almost 10 meters thick.
Not last I saw. They produce way too little power at that scale.
Yeah. Sure.
I see no downside whatsoever.
No need for flashlights anymore!
deleted by creator
life steal battery because of the radiation! /j
