- cross-posted to:
- technology@lemmy.ml
- cross-posted to:
- technology@lemmy.ml
You must log in or register to comment.
This is wild; the battery would outlive the electronics it’s powering in almost all cases.
The output is incredibly tiny, but I wonder if it could be used to trickle-charge a higher-output battery for use in electronics that only need to be used infrequently for short durations.
It’s becoming quite rare to change the CR2032 on a PC motherboard these days. Even those tend to outlive the hardware.
Are these ones ocean disposable like lead acid batteries?
These types of batteries are called wafer batteries because you just eat them
It’s wafer thin
Someone’s gotta charge the eels.
100 microwatts
This is a very important spec to include…this battery can deliver 0.03mA of power, which is incredibly little.
this battery can deliver 0.03mA of power
0.03mA of current. That times the 3 volts = 0.1 mW of power.
Technology Connections, we need you to make another video.
Should be plenty for watches and IOT devices.
Not really actually…not from a single cell at least
Why not?
A CR2032 has 235 mAh, which I believe Casio watches use, and their batteries last 5-7 years. So, if we divide that out, that’s something like 5-6 microamps (235 mAh / 5 years / 365 years / 24 hours * 1000 = 5.36… microamps). Converting this to watts @ 3v: 15-18 microwatts.
I think that math is correct (this question reaches a similar conclusion), and it leaves some headroom as well.
If you remove RF from the equation (Bluetooth, WiFi, etc) and custom build the chip, you can get some very low power draws. If all you’re doing is sampling temps or something, you could send an update periodically over serial or something and fit under 100microwatts or so. You could probably even do RF if you have a large enough cap and send once it charges.
Google says a Casio watch needs .004mA so not quite enough.
0.03 is 7.5x more than 0.004 tho?
Did you typo or did he? .03 is significantly bigger than .004
That’s definitely in the ballpark though. Surely they could cut 25% power draw to support a 50 year battery.
These aren’t new.
They have tiny current output. Only suitable for a few niche applications. The company’s claim to fame is making them cheaper, but don’t expect much.
I was concerned about what happens when someone accidentally throws away a device with a fresh battery, but this:
The BV100 harnesses energy from the radioactive decay of its nickel-63 core. The two-micron thick core, sandwiched between two 10-micron thick diamond semiconductors
makes me feel a bit better. That really isn’t much radioactive material. Still, it’d be good to see some environmental impact studies done in some worst case scenarios.
It has to be. Making a big one is effectively impossible, the amount of shielding needed goes up much faster than the amount of radioactive material used.
Without any expertise, I’m going to say that minuscule amounts of radioactive nickel from your CR2032 replacements compared to wasted lithium on pretty much every battery your all current devices have plus single use LiIon-cells on e-cigs, single use toys and whatever is a pretty good improvement. In 100 years or so all that nickel is converted to copper with small amounts of radiation and heat as byproducts, in today’s technology, is pretty good.
And the radiation is beta-negative. I’m not an nuclear physicist, but if I’m not mistaken your common 3032 cell has enough metal to shield pretty much all of the radiation. Just don’t eat them and maybe stick with li-ion on your wrist watch.
