Showa Aircraft shows off contactless charging system, world backs on up a little
By Donald Melanson 
posted July 16th 2009 7:21PM
posted July 16th 2009 7:21PM
We've been hearing about true contactless charging systems for some time now (as opposed to simple wireless chargers like the Pre Touchstone), but it looks like Japan's Showa Aircraft is among the first to actually show off the real deal in action. Like some of those other proposed systems, Showa's rig uses an electromagnetic induction method, which lets it charge or power devices up to one meter apart, although it apparently works best at distances less than 60 centimeters, where it's able to reach a 90% transmission efficiency. Now, all that energy floating through the air can understandably raise a few eyebrows, but Showa assures us that it is completely safe, and they've demonstrated as much placing a frying pan between the two massive coils, which apparently did not heat up.
[Via SlashGear]
[Via SlashGear]
As long as it's safe as it is and incredulous people keep the bashing low, I guess we can expect great things from this technology in the future. :o
they should get together with Steorn and trojan and make the ultimate product.
I would hate to be the hand holding that frying pan...
I think this is awesome!
Just think you would never need to charge your phone or ipod.
Or have no cables runing behind your tv and stereo
You could keep behind your refrigerator clean with out unplugging it!
You could have a radio in the shower.
electric shavers stay charged.
laptops would not die.
alarm clocks would wake you up on time all the time ( i don't know if i would like this one)
You could have an electric car that runs forever
They said atomic energy was safe.
It is if you're not russia.
not just Russians, http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Three_mile_island#Accident
Let me guess, you're american and your radioactive materials smell like roses?
I've a question for you calgaryalta, how many people died as a result of 3 Mile Island? According to reports, the answer is zero. Yes, that's right, NO fatalities as a result. There have been reports of a increase in lung cancer rates, but those have some problems.
I can attest that TMI didn't kill anyone...as I live close enough to see the steam rising from TMI right now and have lived here since the accident.
Remember when we used to say more people were killed in Ted Kennedy's car than by nuclear power plants?
It is safe.
Safety is relative. Is your car safe? Are planes safe? Over 20,000 people in the US die each year in cars. Airplanes crash.
Number of fatalities in the US as a direct result of nuclear energy production: Zero. Not zero per year, zero total.
Coal is much more dangerous than nuclear. Coal contains, for starters, uranium (U), thorium (Th), and their numerous decay products, including radium (Ra) and radon (Rn). All of which are known to cause cancer, specifically lung cancer. Coal fired plants pump this stuff into the air on a daily basis. Luckily the stuff is very heavy so it ends up at the bottom of rivers and lakes, where it does little harm (relatively speaking)
Build a nuclear plant in my back yard, although I'd prefer a pebble bed design to even a modern Rickover design.
Atomic energy is safe, but only if you do it with enough safety measures, a well trained crew and a well designed reactor. The Russians had none.
However, one of those "safety measures" is "keep the radioactivity out of the air".
Wireless energy is being intentionally put up in the air.
Still, since they got 90% efficiency, it seems there is little energy being thrown outside of the "line of sight", so it'd be safe to be around.
I'd not stick my head in there yet, though, but I can see this being useful in a couple things.. Like electric car charging. Just leave your car parked and it'll charge itself.
It is safe. It's one of the safest forms of power... it has a lower death rate than even coal from what I understand.
Properly designed reactors are completely safe. Stop with the backwards "omg nuku-leer powererrr BADD!!11111omgomg" thinking that's held us back for decades.
Please, tell us examples of all the danger of nuclear power. Chernobyl? Poorly designed and constructed Soviet reactor. 3 Mile Island? No one died, and the safety systems eventually stopped any real disaster from happening. that's the difference - properly designed reactors have multiple safeties to ensure nothing goes wrong.
Today's reactors have multiple passive safeties as well; by their very design, if the reaction rate gets too high, it'll actually start reducing the reaction rate as a consequence of the design. No external system necessary. Pretty cool.
I have worked at nuclear power plants in Pennsylvania, New Jersey and Florida... they aren't really dangerous. we all go through vigorous testing and shit and everything is done by the books... now u wanna say TMI was bad, but really one (almost) major disaster out of the couple hundred plants that are through this country. and the only other (almost) major incident occured at Davis Bessey in Northern Ohio, where it had a cracked head. There are so many protocols to make things safe. so dont worry about Nuke Plants... worry about chinese and koreans with nukes!
i can't wait for this tech to develop further i have way to much wires in my house.
and here comes more cancers.....
you can't get cancer in a can!?
It's a huge electric toothbrush charger.
Then why didn't he put his hand between the coils?
Funny how they used an aluminum frying pan. (speculation)
Aluminum conducts electricity and heat more than steel...
msalivar has it right... induction only works on magnetic materials. If you put your hand on it you'd be fine (I have an induction cooktop) unless you had a ring that was magnetic. Cooktops have safety feature where you need a lot of metal for it to start working (so a ring or keys would not let it work) - but if we are talking about batteries - they are not that magnetic.
No... actually hamerhead has it right. Induction works in any conductive material. For a simple example, consider aluminum foil in the microwave.
microwaves do not heat by induction.
msalivar does have it right. Magnetic materials only work with induction.
"but if you already have a stock of mostly expensive aluminum or copper or glass or pyrex cookware and little or no cast iron or stainless, you might be up for a cookware investment."
from http://theinductionsite.com/proandcon.shtml
Internet is always right.
I'm so glad it is safe for frying pans. Now lets see him stick his head in there.
You beat me to it.
Yep. "How much do you trust your Engineers, mister salesman?"
I think it's telling they couldn't use something more reassuring than a frying pan. Like say, a mouse?
They probably used a frying pan because the only experience the typical layperson might have with induction is from an induction cooktop, and those are not very popular yet outside of pro kitchens.
That and the fact frying pans have handles...
Tesla was a Genius, don't you agree?
with a capital G
...cause that's the standard by which I judge safety, especially with this cell phone I stick next to my head
hmm, Tesla 2009??
Comments on the TMI incident. TMI was serious and did have a release. The incident related to human error and could have been more catastrophic than what occurred.
Chernobyl was a training issue on an experiment, on a reactor that required coolant to maintain flow even when shut down.
Both were preventable. and for those that counter that TMI didn't kill anyone don't realize how close that reactor was from a complete meltdown.
Douglas
So close to my dream of becoming Magneto.
Cool i'm gonna charge my hard-drive-containing netbook with this
It's all fun and games until your d!ck falls off.
I suppose it's the 'do not touch' sign that makes it contactless.
Those multilingual dayglo-yellow DO NOT TOUCH signs aren't exactly confidence inspiring
I think the most important thing to realize here is that we are just now approaching some of the energy concepts Tesla developed before people were ready for it. I might be impressed if this thing charged at a significant distance - Plugs reach a lot further than 60 centimeters (that's about 2 feet if you're an American like me).
How is this technology any different from the Touchstone? It too uses a contactless electromagnetic induction, just at a lower power and consequently shorter distance.
Touchstone does not come with free cheesy gameshow-orange set and 70s lightbulb display. You can't put a price on that.
Cancer?
They are boldly finding new ways to overprice a battery charger. That's it, that's why this exists.
but they haven't even tried faux chrome trim and gloss on them yet?!
Sticking a frying pan into a box is a sure way of testing for carcinogens...trust me, the cigarette & asbestos companies used this signature test back in the 50's and we are all doing great!
Awesome comment.
I don't expect it's really dangerous, but all this effort seems utterly pointless. 90% efficient sounds great until you realise this means that 10% of the energy is being pointlessly wasted because somebody couldn't be bothered to plug in a little wire. I mean ffs, ordinary chargers aren't that hard.
There are probably lots of ways to improve the mechanical design of existing chargers and docks without needing to use 'wireless' (but really short range) technology.
Tesla did this a long time ago. Show me something new.
Anyway, I do hope he got his frying pan charged. Nothing worse than a frying pan that's out of juice :)
Meanwhile, Tesla utters in his grave, "it's about damn time."