Nicely put. I would certainly favor improved efficiency over enhanced processing power. Actually, I wish the industry would reorient so that “improved performance” would mean higher efficiency, not just enhanced processing power. But they’re so focused on getting you to buy a new phone every other year - and to be fair, perfectly understandable from a business / profit perspective.
Maybe product efficiency standards is an area the EU could focus its regulatory might on - certainly they forced Apple to accept and change to a common USB-C charging standard.
To give Apple Credit they do push performance per watt a lot with their new laptops. To be clear I want high performance stuff too, I just also want devices optimized for amazing battery life to the same extent
Batteries have always been my biggest gripe with modern phones and computers, and I feel the same about how limiting current battery tech is for electric cars (another reason why electric transportation should be from overhead wires).
I think the consumer device industry is leading development on new battery technology, or at least has been doing that during the last decades. LIBs were first applied there and only then began finding their ways into motor vehicles. Maybe that has now changed but as you note expensive new chemistries are more viable if one doesn't need the energy storage to move a car 100s of kilometers.
Perhaps, but there really doesn't seem to have been a big improvement over the last decade or two - which is what I am mostly talking about. I think they perhaps have not felt a huge impetus to make revolutionary as opposed to evolutionary improvements
It kind of does feel like that. Though I'm not super interested in consumer devices/gadgets personally (more so the big EV batteries) so I couldn't really tell.
Maybe small battery innovation is simply directed to keeping up with larger screens and more resource intensive applications so we don't notice it as much.
(i've worked in batteries R&D since 2016) lots of ressources are being spent improving battery technology since 1990, and as a result we got steady improvements of ~5%/year or something. It's not that there aren't big plans to improve things a lot, but usually what happens is that while you work on you 5 year plan to improve stuff by 30%, you iteratively can make slightly worse versions of that before the full goal.
another thing is that at a given tech level, you actually can make many different versions that prioritize different aspects of performance (cost, weight, volume, how much energy, how fast it can charge, and how many years will it last). We've known for a long time how to make pacemaker batteries that last many decades, but they are expensive, charge slow, weigh a lot and are bulky relative to the energy they can store. also if you want to maximize the power (for some drill or something), you can trade-off how much energy very easily. I think the thing you are sad about is more that most customers buy based on how many hours of autonomy is written on the box, how lightweight, and of course the price, and it's only a year or two later that they regret the degradation. Ironically, I think this will only stop being true once progress on batteries stalls! but even then, I think recycling will eventually become efficient enough that you will just be able to replace your battery at very low cost.
another thing that goes underappreciated is that batteries used to be 100% cobalt, which is very rare and expensive, and every year people push to replace the cobalt with more nickel (only rare), and also separately using iron (super abundant). the costs of the underlying materials have gone up a lot, so it is a real achievement that the costs of the final product are going down (IMO).
regarding the 80% idea, I wonder if you knew that apple phones already lets you do this? its an option that "learns when you wake up" and waits at 80% all night until just before you wake up and then charges all the way. most degradation mechanisms only depend on the time you spend above 90%, so you actually get close to the degradation you would get if you always locked your phone at 80%.
I think it would be very easy to also do this on your laptop yourself. The sad truth however, is that even if I had a charger that could keep your laptop battery lasting 10 years instead of 2, almost nobody will pay anything for that charger *on their new laptop*. (you could actually buy such a thing a few years ago, btw)
They are still cars, but reducing the externalities of cars is an enormous win for cities. I don’t drive but if everyone around me had a car that was quiet and polluting less I’d take that in a heartbeat.
Yeah for sure, well designed MVP phones are probably a really promising option. Give me something I can use to communicate and thats often literally all I need
Except that larger screen phones tend to have a better battery life than smaller ones, because the additional space available for extra battery more than offsets the extra power draw from the larger screen.
Sure when the expectation is a modern smartphone with more processing power etc than necessary. I think a phone that could do with less would make the screen size much less relevant
Nicely put. I would certainly favor improved efficiency over enhanced processing power. Actually, I wish the industry would reorient so that “improved performance” would mean higher efficiency, not just enhanced processing power. But they’re so focused on getting you to buy a new phone every other year - and to be fair, perfectly understandable from a business / profit perspective.
Maybe product efficiency standards is an area the EU could focus its regulatory might on - certainly they forced Apple to accept and change to a common USB-C charging standard.
To give Apple Credit they do push performance per watt a lot with their new laptops. To be clear I want high performance stuff too, I just also want devices optimized for amazing battery life to the same extent
Batteries have always been my biggest gripe with modern phones and computers, and I feel the same about how limiting current battery tech is for electric cars (another reason why electric transportation should be from overhead wires).
I think ebikes are my favorite battery powered transport, they clearly just work incredibly well, especially ones with battery swapping!
I think the consumer device industry is leading development on new battery technology, or at least has been doing that during the last decades. LIBs were first applied there and only then began finding their ways into motor vehicles. Maybe that has now changed but as you note expensive new chemistries are more viable if one doesn't need the energy storage to move a car 100s of kilometers.
Perhaps, but there really doesn't seem to have been a big improvement over the last decade or two - which is what I am mostly talking about. I think they perhaps have not felt a huge impetus to make revolutionary as opposed to evolutionary improvements
It kind of does feel like that. Though I'm not super interested in consumer devices/gadgets personally (more so the big EV batteries) so I couldn't really tell.
Maybe small battery innovation is simply directed to keeping up with larger screens and more resource intensive applications so we don't notice it as much.
(i've worked in batteries R&D since 2016) lots of ressources are being spent improving battery technology since 1990, and as a result we got steady improvements of ~5%/year or something. It's not that there aren't big plans to improve things a lot, but usually what happens is that while you work on you 5 year plan to improve stuff by 30%, you iteratively can make slightly worse versions of that before the full goal.
another thing is that at a given tech level, you actually can make many different versions that prioritize different aspects of performance (cost, weight, volume, how much energy, how fast it can charge, and how many years will it last). We've known for a long time how to make pacemaker batteries that last many decades, but they are expensive, charge slow, weigh a lot and are bulky relative to the energy they can store. also if you want to maximize the power (for some drill or something), you can trade-off how much energy very easily. I think the thing you are sad about is more that most customers buy based on how many hours of autonomy is written on the box, how lightweight, and of course the price, and it's only a year or two later that they regret the degradation. Ironically, I think this will only stop being true once progress on batteries stalls! but even then, I think recycling will eventually become efficient enough that you will just be able to replace your battery at very low cost.
another thing that goes underappreciated is that batteries used to be 100% cobalt, which is very rare and expensive, and every year people push to replace the cobalt with more nickel (only rare), and also separately using iron (super abundant). the costs of the underlying materials have gone up a lot, so it is a real achievement that the costs of the final product are going down (IMO).
regarding the 80% idea, I wonder if you knew that apple phones already lets you do this? its an option that "learns when you wake up" and waits at 80% all night until just before you wake up and then charges all the way. most degradation mechanisms only depend on the time you spend above 90%, so you actually get close to the degradation you would get if you always locked your phone at 80%.
I think it would be very easy to also do this on your laptop yourself. The sad truth however, is that even if I had a charger that could keep your laptop battery lasting 10 years instead of 2, almost nobody will pay anything for that charger *on their new laptop*. (you could actually buy such a thing a few years ago, btw)
Do you remember the Mirasol screens? It is a pity they never became a thing:
https://youtu.be/sDe0pEwHXzg?si=cvbHKnoFyglDgXJV&t=148
I'm more excited to see the impact of better batteries on cheaper eBikes and the effect that will have on cities. Electric cars are still cars.
They are still cars, but reducing the externalities of cars is an enormous win for cities. I don’t drive but if everyone around me had a car that was quiet and polluting less I’d take that in a heartbeat.
Meh, unless they are doing under 15mph electric cars are still as noisy as petrol cars as most of the noise is wheel noise.
A lot of urban traffic is low speed! And the CO2 is an issue too.
Smaller smart phone screens are a potential solution to the battery problem
The Unihertz Jelly Star has a battery life of 1-2 days, and sells for about $200
Also smaller screens appear to reduce overall screentime, by making a smartphone less engaging
Yeah for sure, well designed MVP phones are probably a really promising option. Give me something I can use to communicate and thats often literally all I need
Except that larger screen phones tend to have a better battery life than smaller ones, because the additional space available for extra battery more than offsets the extra power draw from the larger screen.
Sure when the expectation is a modern smartphone with more processing power etc than necessary. I think a phone that could do with less would make the screen size much less relevant