[CES 2010] RCA Airnergy Charger Harvests Electricity From WiFi Signals

By Evan Ackerman

This thing is, seriously, the highlight of CES for me (so far) this year. 3D TVs and eBook readers are fine, but there’s nothing amazing about them.

The Airnergy Charger is amazing. Forget your android battery saver/iphone battery saver, this charger handles everything via WiFi directly. This little box has, inside it, some kind of circuitry that harvests WiFi energy out of the air and converts it into electricity. This has been done before, but the Airnergy is able to harvest electricity with a high enough efficiency to make it practically useful: on the CES floor, they were able to charge a BlackBerry from 30% to full in about 90 minutes, using nothing but ambient WiFi signals as a power source.

The Airnergy has a battery inside it, so you can just carry it around and as long as you’re near some WiFi, it charges itself. Unlike a solar charger, it works at night and you can keep it in your pocket. Of course, proximity to the WiFi source and the number of WiFi sources is important, but at the rate it charges, if you have a home wireless network you could probably just leave anywhere in your house overnight and it would be pretty close to full in the morning.

Here is the really, really unbelievable part: RCA says that the USB charger will be available this summer for $40, and a battery with the WiFi harvesting technology will be available soon after. I mean, all kinds of people are pushing wireless charging, but this would hands down take the cake… It doesn’t need a pad and it’s charging all the time, for free, in just about any urban environment.

We didn’t think you’d believe all this, so we made RCA explain it all on video:

Yeah, we’ll definitely be keeping you updated on this one.

Anonymous

Don’t be so open minded that your brain falls out. As many have noted, this is nothing more than snake oil.
http://twitter.com/lordmauve Daniel Pope

Sounds like a con. They prepare a dummy prototype, and make astonishing claims about it, purely to get investment from some credulous investors. After 12 months, they turn around and say “we can't make it work yet; it's going to take more money”. Maybe after years of stalling, they eventually market a product that bears no resemblance to the original pitch.
lurgee

Good news, though, an earlier poster had some cheap snake oil that cures cancer.
chinalily

Wait, what? Yes, the map of electrical and physical inconsistencies is maddening. I think I may finally understand what that whole sceptical revolution is coming from.
Anonymous

I think what everyone here is forgetting is that the number of WiFi signals has little to do with charging capacity. The most important factors are antenna size and conversion percentage, as Cynake has pointed out, even with 100% conversion of WiFi signal to captured energy the device just will not produce the output required to replace the charge in a 4,000 mWh battery in a reasonable time.
You can direct the output from hundreds of WiFi signals to the antenna in the device but the bottlneck is still the efficiency and size of the antenna.
ellisgl

Fractal antennas use harmonic tuning to up the gain. Of course I think this would be too small of an antenna, even if it were a highly tuned fractal antenna with a reflector.
http://andyjacobson.com andyjacobson

Sounds cool, but doesn't this highlight a concern about electro magnetic fields being a health hazards? If sitting in a Starbucks can charge my battery—what's it doing to my body?
Anonymous

It pays for itself in only 4000 years!
http://twitter.com/gfors gfors

<insert joke about ethernet cable probably charging a device faster>
nonscalable

Yes Daniel Koch from above is right, my math was an order off!
And Daniel Hall is right too, if we basically turn the whole room/apartment into an antenna, floor and ceiling also if this is an apartment somewhere off groundfloor or top floor, then we would be intercepting all other signals, and only my own wifi signal within the room would be visible to my computer. So my Airnergy would be intercepting 16 signals from all my neighbors from outside, and then my signal from inside to harvest the energy.
But as per the inverse square law those other neighbors sources would be very low energy; Im skeptical that this thing could recharge its battery in 40 days let alone 40 hours.
It would be cool to make some wall hanging antennas and just check how much energy i could collect, though.
http://www.facebook.com/profile.php?id=616140581 facebook-616140581

I will surely buy one!
anniemoose

So I've got this bridge lying around I want to sell…

OK, so this is a cool idea and an interesting technology, but it's simply not feasible. I agree that it is possible that a small amount of energy could be harvested from wifi signals, but that amount is negligible, and certainly not enough to recharge anything! You'd be better off buying a pack of AA batteries, IMO…/
dsly1

I like the discussion more than i like the product!
(popcorn)
josh126

“So-called physics”!? Ever heard of the law of conservation of energy? An EM wave (suck as a wifi signal) carries a certain amount of energy, and the device cannot possibly output more energy than it absorbs from the EM waves. Before you start being snarky, make sure you are right. If being reality-based is”close-minded” then what's the benefit of being open-minded?
http://www.facebook.com/people/Jose-Pena-Villalobos/100000440817634 José Peña Villalobos

Cool … for my wish list ..
Mdidly

If this could work, why wouldn't we have harvested other forms of RF prior to wifi? What percent of the RF spectrum (energy-wise) is wifi in the average city?
rhinct

David Sarnoff must be spinning in his grave, so perhaps we can hook his spinning body to a generator and use THAT energy to run a few Wi-Fi hotspots…..
Anonymous

While I agree with most of the math, assume instead you’re only a foot or two away. That ups the value quite a bit. But I think (assuming it’s not snake oil) maybe it’s harvesting more than just Wifi. What if they found a way to apply this to a rather large spectrum of waste energy? Say from 30Mhz to 30Ghz or so? Then you’d be adding some rather large transmitters in the VHF/UHF range, TV, FM, GSM, CDMA… Lots of those signal towers transmit from 50 to 100KW. Add up all the residuals and it may be a reasonable amount, even with inverse square drop off.

I’m quite confused about someone noting a German law making it illegal to extract power from such things. Upper VHF/UHF energy is strong enough to break through the ionosphere in most cases and make it out to space. Unless you’re directly under a tower a field would not form enough to cause a drain effect. (Like it would putting coils under power lines for example.)

Personally, I’m betting on the snake oil. But if it’s harvesting a much wider spectrum? It may be able to keep itself topped off, or maybe even trickle charge a small battery inside of a week (being generous).

I love how people here (and other places) are all about “I could charge my iPhone!”, not realizing all their iGadgets have a non-user-replaceable battery. So, no, integrating such tech into batteries will not help the iCrowd at all. The rest of the planet though, which uses user replaceable batteries, could see a small bump, depending on how close they work to an big transmitter tower. (I work 100 feet from a 35kW VHF transmitting tower, so I’m all for it.
http://pirround.pip.verisignlabs.com/ pirround

ACR has just announced a prototype battery-powered wifi router. The battery is recharged from the free electromagnetic waves carrying cell signals. WooHoo.
pssssssstt

Adding so many good charging methods from sources and elements is just what my kinetic ebike was ordered

The Electric & Kinetic Powered Vehicle
lustaystru

Back in June Nokia claimed they could get a 5mW charge in a similar manner. It's not too hard to believe that the technology has been improved to the point where at least 20 mW is feasible which is good enough for me since 90% (at least) of the time my phone is in standby anyway.

Now let's say that only 20 mW will be possible using this technique well here's some math for you all out there. 1 minute of talk time equals 12.5 minutes in standby time (remember that). If you use 200 minutes a month (you may have more each month but studies show most people under use their minutes) that only equals 6.66 minutes a day. Let's round that up to 7 (why? because it makes the math easier lol). Seven minutes of talk time equals 175 minutes of standby or 2.92 hours. Let's round that up again to 3. You with me so far?

Now let's say you charge your phone once every two days (When it drains completely). All this means is that for every 14 minutes of talk time, you charge your phone for 42 hours of standby time. Now with a 20 mW charge we eliminate the need to charge your phone for all that time in standby.

Easy to understand right? Let's do some more math. 42 hours multiplied by 60 is 2520 minutes. Divide that by 12.5 to get talk time instead of wasted standby time and you have 201.6 minutes! That's a whole month of minutes! I doubt you'd talk more just because you got more battery life so when it's all added up you'd only need to wall charge your phone only once a month!

I hope you got all that since i have an easier time understanding math than explaining it sometimes. Also I haven't done any sort of heavy math in like 5 years so my numbers could be wrong. It's up to you to prove or disprove my numbers yourself if you don't feel they add up.
Cleon7177

I am not a scientist but you seem not to be considering that power intake and power output are two separate issues. You may trickle charge your car battery, but this does not prevent it from outputing times that amperage to start your car. The point is that as long as the device has harvested(accumulated) the desired power, then it can output it at a rate achieved by the manufacturers. Hope this helps.
http://askreet.myopenid.com/ Kyle

You're not taking into account the value of development of this technology. Sure, this one isn't efficient, but in 30 or 40 years they may be able to manufacture devices like this that are cheaper and more efficient, resulting in a new, useful technology.
http://www.facebook.com/profile.php?id=1069602543 facebook-1069602543

RCA Airnergy Charger Harvests Electricity From WiFi Signals
JoelKatz

Think it through. At best, the device could convert 100% of the WiFi energy that would otherwise pass through the space it occupies into electrical energy in the battery. Under anything remotely resembling realistic conditions, that's at most 6mW.
JoelKatz

Nokia's claims were not plausible. At least RCA has not make any specific claims to how much energy they can capture from WiFi. I'll bet nobody can replicate Nokia's claims under realistic conditions. As an absolute limit, a device can capture all the electromagnetic energy that passes through the space it occupies. There is a fundamental physical wall here.
rob_r

Entropy is the disorganization of energy vectors resulting in null space (zero energy). It doesn't mean there is no energy, it's just disorganized.
There are conditions, like an EMF event, that can temporarily organize the energy into a common vector that can be converted into kinetic energy. This is not limited to WiMax energy, but all disorganized energy, which would explain the “impossibly” fast charging time.

It's not “free energy” or perpetual motion as such, just an intelligent way to get “work” out of supposed “lost” or “spent” energy. I suspect the WiMax explanation is used to keep the technology from sounding too “woo-woo”.
joelb59

With this device a Blackberry with wifi could charge itself
flexgunship

I solved it for flux through 10cm x 10cm at 1m distance. Assuming a 1w radiator. I also used my 3V battery with 2100mAh (6300mWh). My findings were a little better assuming 100% conversion from radiation to electric potential). I got 3.6 years to charge my battery.

Again, my WiFi antenna is 1W and I'm 1m away.

No matter how you look at it, the argument in favor of this device is weak. It's a shame, I thought we would all be living R.A. Heinlein's story “Waldo.”
http://www.nayjest.ru/ Nayjest (Виталий Степаненко)

Жесть Мне теперь страшно ходить возле WiFi антенн
stephen222

Acording to the math, it's more effective to include a solar cell in the back of the Blackberry, or maybe the technology of an automatic watch (very small), multiplied.
Anonymous

I believe your math, I really do. But I also believe the ppl behind the device might have noticed something you didn’t and took advantage of it. What was it? I have no idea. And actually, if I had, I’d build such device before them and be rich.

I find it easier to believe that “you”, internet forum guy, are wrong, then that a big company would risk it’s reputation in the world’s most important eletronic event, by showing a gizmo so “easily” proven unfeasible.

So I’ll stick with the “I’ll wait and see” stand. Maybe it’s snake oil as some ppl said, but maybe, just maybe, they’ve found a way to make it work.

Either way, I bet that when Santos Dumont (or Wright brothers if you are american =P) announced he would fly an airplane, a lot of scientists presented very well based formulas to prove it was impossible. Until someone actually did it, and then the formulas explaining how it was possible begin to show up….
http://twitter.com/doctorslime mike garlick

Self charging Rechargable batteries, this will change the face of the battery industry…
This is the world as Tesla saw it. I wonder what it does to wi-fi field strength in a given area?
jackfeder

Noone mentioned that this is similar to the solar chargers where the real brunt of the utility comes from the charger getting charged by mains or USB or some other such. Of course, a solar cell will be able to harvest much more energy than a wiFi harverster, so in some cases a small solar charger may actually provide a benefit.
Tomtomae

I own one works great with the 4 wifi networks at my school. All of you are retarded.
http://www.cigreds.com/ Electronic Cigarette Girl

Damn technology, you scary!

-Bella
http://www.paragraf.su/ Типография

This is a really amazing bit of kit. Thanks to Dave for bringing it to my attention.
http://www.paragraf.su/ Типография

This is a really amazing bit of kit. Thanks to Dave for bringing it to my attention.
http://swsait.ru Misha

Жесть я думал от WIfi только польза. и халява. а тут такое
http://swsait.ru Misha

Прикольная статья жалко не на русском
Exile714

So if any device, regardless of feasibility, were to appear at an electronics show you would give it the benefit of the doubt? What if I said my device harvests energy from dead souls near graveyards and brought it to a booth at CES? Would you give me the benefit of the doubt?

What if the item were cheap, would you buy it on the off chance that it would work? After all, what's 40 dollars compared to the amazing savings of energy out of thin air, right? Well, that's 40 dollars from you, 40 dollars from the moron next to you, etc etc until a company with a completely bogus product has made a nifty profit from something that cannot possibly do what it says.

It's all about the profit. No company desires ANYTHING else.

And I support their profit seeking venture, so go ahead and buy one… I won't.
http://techsupportninjas.com John Richards

This is real cool! I'm not sure how well it would work in the long run but the idea is pretty cool.
http://twitter.com/Deprogrammer9 Depro9

Another one of Nikola Teslas ideas might become a reality. SO COOL! fti Nikola Tesla's nephew worked for RCA for many years.
http://coleman-generator.co.cc Coleman Generator

fool april yeah
kohlergenerator

I like the video
mayhap

ok, so what's the update on this one?
http://www.valwriting.com/research_paper research paper

What if the item were cheap, would you buy it on the off chance that it would work? After all, what’s 40 dollars compared to the amazing savings of energy out of thin air, right? Well, that’s 40 dollars from you, 40 dollars from the moron next to you, etc etc until a company with a completely bogus product has made a nifty profit from something that cannot possibly do what it says.
http://www.valwriting.com/research_paper research paper

What if the item were cheap, would you buy it on the off chance that it would work? After all, what’s 40 dollars compared to the amazing savings of energy out of thin air, right? Well, that’s 40 dollars from you, 40 dollars from the moron next to you, etc etc until a company with a completely bogus product has made a nifty profit from something that cannot possibly do what it says.
Deepthroat99

Never enter a Starbucks without a tinfoil hat to save your brain from the radiation!!! Customers in Japan and Europe have been doing so since the early 70s as wifi routers especially back then were notorious for brain burns!! Starbucks in the US has been able to keep people from finding out about this.
kerin peterson

I think ultimately Cynake and Rick have it pinned down. There is no practical way this could work. It obviously is better thought out than most “free” energy schemes in that you do end up with a trickle, but not nearly enough to be useful.

← Previous Story

Next Story →

[CES 2010] RCA Airnergy Charger Harvests Electricity From WiFi Signals