The world’s first nuclear-powered battery, which uses a radioactive isotope embedded in a diamond, could power small devices for thousands of years, scientists say.
The nuclear battery uses the reaction of a diamond placed close to a radioactive source to spontaneously produce electricity, scientists at the University of Bristol in the U.K. explained in a Dec. 4 statement. No motion — neither linear nor rotational — is required. That means no energy is needed to move a magnet through a coil or to turn an armature within a magnetic field to produce electric current, as is required in conventional power sources.
The diamond battery harvests fast-moving electrons excited by radiation, similar to how solar power uses photovoltaic cells to convert photons into electricity, the scientists said.
Yo this makes me think of the long lasting nuclear powered gadgets in the Foundation books
Or how every time you enter some ancient ruins on some game, EVERYTHING is still working despite not having seen a person in a millenia
walk up to abandoned building in STALKER 2
30+ years after Chernobyl
the lights are on
…
enter dangerous bunker overridden by monsters in STALKER 2
someone locked up the bunker to contain the monsters, been like that for 10 years
find fresh sausage and bread in a locker
If video games have taught me anything, it’s that ghost towns and ancient ruins apparently require less maintenance and upkeep than my own fucking house.
The secret is that rats are committed Luddites. They chew through wires, but maintain and restore the elegant mechanisms of times long past.
You may expect that a few rats couldn’t roll a 6 ton stone boulder back up a hill, but rats are also capable of growing to very different sizes depending on their environment.
Meanwhile, Apple and Samsung are probably actively trying to sweep this under the digital rug. They can’t have devices out there that last more than 2, maybe 3 years…
From the article:
A single nuclear-diamond battery containing 1 gram [0.04 ounce] of carbon-14 could deliver 15 joules of electricity per day. For comparison, a standard alkaline AA battery, which weighs about 20 grams [0.7 ounces], has an energy-storage rating of 700 joules per gram. It delivers more power than the nuclear-diamond battery would in the short term, but it would be exhausted within 24 hours.
It seems that even a 100 gram nuclear-diamond battery would not be able to sustain a modern smartphone.
My calculations might be off, but it seems even a highly optimized low powered smartphone (say 10 watthours for 24 hours under regular use) would need x25 lower power consumption to work with a 100 g nuclear-diamond battery. And you would likely still need an additional battery of some sort (which would need to be replaced) to handle peaks (don’t think modern smartphones can function under ~420 mwatt peak max).
I’m gonna drop an addendum…
A wristwatch should be able to at bare minimum last at least 24 hours (you know, like a full day), before it needs recharge.
Apple Watch is like the absolute worst example of this, it has an expected battery life of around 18 hours. It doesn’t even function as a proper watch if it can’t even last 24 hours.
My watch (not my first merry go round with dumb watches), can at least perform their intended timekeeping function for 5 to 10 years, depending on how often you use the backlight button.
Sometimes dumb tech is nice, I don’t wanna talk to my watch anyways, it’s just there to tell time…
Who uses something for 24 hours straight? 18 hours is a full day of use. How many need this things to run through the night too and how many resources would be wasted actually making it that way?
Gotcha, understood.
Still, why is it that an Apple watch can’t even last 24 hours without needing a recharge, when I’m literally wearing a Casio designed to last 10 fucking years on a single button cell battery (that ain’t even rechargeable no less)?
To be fair, a standard (non-smart) watch uses a fraction of power compared to an Apple Watch which is still essentially a iPhone.
With that said, I have a Samsung watch, and though I charge it daily, it could probably last up to 3 days, so I don’t know what Apple is doing.
The Apple Watch can easily last over 24 hours if you only use it as a watch and nothing else. The 18 hour estimate Apple provides is if you use all the features throughout the day such as exercise tracking, notifications, quick replying to messages, etc. If anything the 18 hour number is under selling the battery life.
Imagine having your vibrator never run out of power, even on the go.
What irks me is that neither the article nor the press information of the university linked within the article mentions how much power one can draw from such a battery. They only mention that it could be used for RFID like devices, which is not exactly a precise information.
15 Joules per 1g batteries over 24 hours. So around 0.416 watthours split linearly over 24 hours for a 100 g battery.
Yall are thinking about personal computers.
How about diffused led light markings on every road, vehicle, in every public building. Motion and other sensors build in so they are only active when someone is near.
I hate current street lamps, super bright and on all night.
Give us tron *aesthetic and bring back dark nightsky.
