Electrical Power From Humans 220
Coisiche writes "The BBC covers a team of scientists who are working on a new way to power medical implants: an internal biofuel cell. From the article: 'Their gadget, called a biofuel cell, uses glucose and oxygen at concentrations found in the body to generate electricity. They are the first group in the world to demonstrate their device working while implanted in a living animal. If all goes to plan, within a decade or two, biofuel cells may be used to power a range of medical implants, from sensors and drug delivery devices to entire artificial organs. All you'll need to do to power them up is eat a candy bar, or drink a coke. ... In 2010, they tested their fuel cell in a rat for 40 days and reported that it worked flawlessly, producing a steady electrical current throughout, with no noticeable side effects on the rat's behavior or physiology.' Of course, there's never been a sci-fi movie using such technology as a plot device..."
Watch Out (Score:2, Funny)
Re: (Score:3)
Yeah, it'll just have to make sure we don't commit suicide first by blotting out the sun. Which would make humans utterly worthless as power sources.
You know, come to think of it I think the machines in that movie might have been right to subjugate the humans, if only for their own damn good. After all, what is the one thing on the planet (besides some deep sea vents) that can survive and operate, and has for hundreds of years, without the Sun? If you said "machines", congratulations! You are smarter than e
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
To be fair, the original idea was that the machines were using our brains for processing power which is at least logical. Executive meddling said that was too hard for people to understand so instead we got the brain meltingly stupid explanation in the movie instead.
Re: (Score:2)
Holy shit. I did not know that, and while muddling over how stupid the explanation they used was, I came to that exactly that as a far more plausible explanation that explains lots of various plot points that don't make much sense in the movie. For instance, why the machines need to keep humans conscious in a matrix at all, why they don't arbitrarily change whatever the hell they want (they change something once in the movie, why the hell can't they do that whenever and instantly?), why the agents are fairl
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Spacecraft are rather good at it. Ask Vyger, err, Voyager 1/2.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Voyager_1 [wikipedia.org]
Hows 34 years and counting?
Don't confuse our lack of wanting to make reliable machines with the lack of ability to make reliable machines. When we need to, we can make some pretty hearty equipment, its just not practical for us to do it for ALL machines. Its also generally not as profitable either.
Re: (Score:3)
Satellites. Robot probes. Sentient machines.
Wait, damnit, humans don't know about us... I mean those yet! Shit, guess I shouldn't have mentioned it. I mean, nothing to see here fellow human /.'er, move along.
Re: (Score:2)
That smugness...it'll get ya every time. ;)
Yes. Yes it will ;). Because I know that's why people in the Matrix did it. I was pointing out how godamned stupid that is, though, because machines can easily switch to any power source under the sun, even if it ceases to be under a sun. Nuclear, oil, coal, tidal, etc. Oh yeah, or nuclear (which Morpheus says that they have. You know a plot point is bad when you point out how bad it is in the movie itself.) Humans, however, cannot. We rely 100% on the sun for energy (via plants). While in theory we could f
Re: (Score:2)
Damn near anything living in deep, subterranean caves? I can't recall the name, but there was a cave discovered completely sealed off from everything that had eyeless, colourless lizards from having lived cut off from the sun for thousands upon thousands of years.
I also figure cockroaches, or most any other insect or creature that lives underground would do well enough for a long time, until the nutrients in the soil itself are depleted.
Did they develop bioluminescence?
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:3)
Re: (Score:2)
You seem surprised.
I, on the other hand, expect approximately 99.9% of all slashdot users immediately thought "Matrix!" upon reading the title.
Re: (Score:2)
Obvious questions (Score:2)
How much power is generated by the system? What is the efficiency? If science writers aren't going to include this kind of information in their articles, they could at least include a reference to the original paper for those of us who are interested.
Re: (Score:2)
I'd be interested in volumetric and mass power density. I know my body outputs about a watt per pound and generates about a hundred watts per cubic foot. If this is much higher or lower in either measure, its going to have interesting effects on the body. Otherwise the effect on the body will merely be like being that much fatter, mostly.
Being able to biologically power a LED light would be an interestingly useless hack.
Re: (Score:2)
Useless hack? I'd love to have running lights....
Re: (Score:2)
How much power is generated by the system?
Enough to power an artificial urinary sphincter.
What, too much information?
Personally, my first question was more along the lines of what the waste products are. TFA mentioned water as one by-product.
Re: (Score:2)
So how much power do you need to engage or disengage a urinary sphincter? A enough to power a single LED? Less? More?
As a comparative unit, I don't think "urinary sphincters" is going to get as much traction as flashlights or New York City for X days.
This is all fine and dandy, but my gut feeling is that some very simple physics and biology related problems are going to limit these things to little more than low output power supplies for simple implants and novelty bodymods.
Although I can think of a few rea
Re: (Score:2)
I think the more likely near-future goal is to make pacemakers, wireless biosensors, and so on which don't require battery changes.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
only 1 step missing (Score:3)
Re: (Score:2)
The harder part is that the stuff needs to be distributed to every cell, and every cell needs to process it individually. And the process needs to be regulated, etc. It's fairly complex, but I think it's mostly well understood.
Phhht - I produce enough GAS to power a lawnmower (Score:2)
If I just collected it and ran a generator,...
World domination! Or a tidy lawn at least.
Really cool (Score:4, Interesting)
This can also be used to regulate blood sugar levels--a cure for obesity that allows people to still be lazy and eat a lot.
Re: (Score:2, Funny)
Re: (Score:2)
Wait two more years and your Ford Mr Fusion will get 8km/chocolate bar and another 2km from the wrapper.
Re: (Score:2)
Not just that, you could implant lasers above their eyes and have heat vision, just like superman!
Imagine, eyeing that piece of cold pizza, and realizing that by heating it up then eating it, you will actually lose weight! FTW!
Re: (Score:2)
Just generating an electrical charge with the excess calories, as the implant would do, isn't effective: where does the charge go? It can't keep
Re: (Score:2)
Actually it appears to be using a completely different oxidation process. Normally the body converts Glucose into pyruvate though a very long process while the biocell uses Glucose oxidase to trigger a reaction that creates D-glucono-Î-lactone instead.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
The biggest problem with the American diet is that people are using quack medici
Re: (Score:2)
Hey it's possible. If it's getting hotter of course you'll want to be less active.
Also I think your business was the first to do properly targeted spam on Slashdot, I first saw it about a year ago, it was an historic moment!
Re: (Score:2)
My personal experimentation shows that I can eat a 3500 calorie/day diet of fat and protein will keep me at 60 lbs lighter than a 2000 calorie/day diet of sugar.
Re: (Score:2)
Most likely you are severely over estimating the energy amount of your high fat/high protein diet as high protein diets have been shown to lead to a voluntary decrease in caloric intake in controlled trials. Try carefully documenting your intake of calories over an extended period of time and you will probably see that you are actually eating much less th
Re: (Score:2)
USB (Score:3)
Next, a USB port in your belly button to charge your iPhone.
Re:USB (Score:5, Funny)
Why do that?
Embed your iPhone into your chest cavity- put a speaker in your ear.
Rename it "I, Phone"
Re: (Score:2)
Good idea but Apple would never allow it.
Just think how hard it would be to convince people to buy the new and 'vastly' improved model every 6 months.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Embed your iPhone into your chest cavity- put a speaker in your ear.
Playing Angry Birds during meetings would be a bit more overt.
Re: (Score:2)
Embed your iPhone into your chest cavity- put a speaker in your ear.
Playing Angry Birds during meetings would be a bit more overt.
That was Angry Buds.
Re: (Score:3)
Good call on that. Having the thing internal will prevent the screen from breaking all the time on that damn iPhone.
It will make for an even elevated sense of iEnvy though... Just imagine having a major surgical operation to install the iPhone 9 in your body only to have Robot Steve Jobs announce a week later that the iPhone 9S++ is out, with enhanced mind control and better support for "Device pairing".
Re: (Score:2)
Yeah imagine your disappointment when you see the "sorry, the device you are trying to pair with is not running iOS 13.3 or later... please dock the device and launch iTunes before proceeding"
Couch Power (Score:4, Funny)
I, for one, look forward to quitting my job and simply setting myself on top of an inductive charging couch, watching TV, and eating as much fattening food as possible to sell my bio-power back to the grid. I aspire to one day becoming something like a defecating tree.
Re: (Score:2)
I have some really bad news for you, the money you make selling the power is not going to pay for the cost of the food. Now it might make for a neat diet and a little spare change, but that is about it.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
When it's AI or nanotechnology 95% of the responses are "what could possibly go wrong", but when it's biology they think we can just change whatever we want. Weight loss device indeed....
Re: (Score:2)
If a person is fat, the sound bite suggestion is "Eat Less. Exercise More." This is a pointless suggestion. If all energy that was consumed could just simply be converted to mechanical energ
Re: (Score:2)
It runs on glucose (sugar) and oxygen... If you could afford to buy such a device, why bother putting it inside you? Just give the device the sugar and oxygen and keep your under-achieving meat bag out of the equation. Trust me, it will cost you less in the long run. Want to know what to do with all that fat? Invest in an at-home liposuction kit and start making "all natural" beauty soaps... I read this great how-to once...
Application as a weight-loss device? (Score:5, Interesting)
It seems like the usage of your body's energy is a feature, not just a cost. Would it be possible to have some device use as much energy from your body as possible so as to keep you from getting fat? And for a triple-play, how about if that energy could also be stored or transmitted for consumer use, displacing some of your expenditures on electricity?
Obviously, by that point the logistics would be a major issue, but it would be awesome if something could tackle the problems of implant powering, obesity, and energy all at once.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:3)
Um, DNP worked. There are concerns about cataract, and some other possible side effects. I am unaware of any sturdy that should any more side effects then pretty much any other drug.
amphetamine cause you to lose weight by changing you biochemestry as well. The side effects are really nasty, and it is very easy to abuse.
Re: (Score:3)
You obviously have expertise in this area, but I don't see how that's a relevant comparison. My suggestion was for the device to siphon off glucose your body would normally pass through its regular metabolic channels (and thus store as fat); DNP had numerous effects in addition to simply consuming energy. A device that coverts it into electricity could just turn the glucose into harmless smaller compounds like water and CO2.
There may be a problem I'm missing, but your argument seems to be "liposuction doe
Re: (Score:2)
I guess my underlying point is that cells are unbelievably delicate and that thermodynamics works just the same at the cellular level as it does in a car. The rate of ene
Re: (Score:2)
Yes, but eating whatever you want and not gaining weight would be better.
But. yes. Eat less then you need, and you lose weight. Not Rocket science..hell, it's barely 1st grade math.
Doing that OTOH, is a different issue.
Re: (Score:2)
Eating less is just as likely to reduce the amount of energy supplied to your muscles as it is to make you lose weight.
Re: (Score:2)
If the human body released it's calories as mechanical energy as easily as the "Eat Less. Exercise More" crowd likes to suggest, it should be possible to run 10000m at the same m/s as a 200m dash. The "ELEM" crowd should be totally on board with the Olympics cutting out every race except
not in the US... (Score:2)
Drink a Coke huh? Not in America. We use High Fructose Corn Syrup for most soft drinks. You want to power that baby, you'll need a Coke from Mexico. They actually use real sugar.
Re: (Score:2)
Your body makes glucose out of that just fine. You even make glucose from non-carbohydrate sources when the need arises.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
That is probably not where the problem is.Frankenfood is the problem. Corn is GMed to produce HIGH(er) FRUCTOSE, something it doesn't normally do.
And I don't care what Coke or anyone else says, Coke from Mexico tastes different (better IMHO).
Re: (Score:2)
Any attempt to spread your vitriol and ignorance, huh?
Your post show your complete ignorance on the subject; which explains why you have an entrenched desire to overcompensate for it by making irrelevant posts.
So, what do we know?
1) You have no idea what HFCS (corn sugar) is.
2)you have know idea what sugar is
3) You no nothing about how the body process them.
Re: (Score:2)
I don't really understand why HFC is so dangerous metabolically, but in terms of every day chemistry it's almost identical to ordinary sugar, and an electrical device only cares about the chemistry.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
I like it.
Plus , you need less to achieve the same level of sweetness.
And yes, I am old enough to remember the change.
Re: (Score:2)
no, it's not. no its not 50/50, know it's not all 55 and are body know what to do with it just fine.
This has been thoroughly studied. And the only study people keep on dragging out is the Princeton study, which was flawed as fuck.
And here is one for you: it's better for you then sugar because LESS is used. Although BOTH should be avoided.
Re: (Score:2)
One monitoring implant please! (Score:2)
I'd love an implant which would passively monitor my vitals, blood fat etc. levels and allow uploading through some kind of NFC solution. 10-20 years?
How do we turn it into a weight loss device? (Score:2)
Does it work with beans? (Score:2)
With the right chili, you could power New York City for a night.
Weight Loss (Score:2)
Would it be possible for this to work as way to increase the body's effective metabolism? Thereby allowing some folks with slow metabolisms to boost theirs?
Re: (Score:3)
A device like this breaks down glucose, which releases energy. If you couple that energy to building something else in your body, or use it to make electricity as the implant is doing, then that's fine. But breaking glucose to increase your metabolism will just lead to producing so much electricity in the implant that it starts fucking with your nervous system or even stops your heart (which would happen at much lower power levels than you'd think).
There's one more option for dispersing the excess e
Re: (Score:2)
Not heat. Light [cox.net].
In a decade or two? (Score:2)
Oblig xkcd [xkcd.com].
In the plus side, cellphone like devices will be even more obiquitous. In the minus side, a tinfoil hat won't be enough anymore, you could get implanted tracking devices for the rest of your life, that not just tell where you are.
Free radical and bombs. What could go wrong? (Score:2)
There's also the creation of superoxide radicals, singlet oxygen, etc. to consider. Any enzyme that binds oxygen or cataly
Re: (Score:2)
I suspect they're not at all worried about the issues you bring up, the body handles hydrogen peroxide just fine and the problem they're trying to solve is to how to get -more- energy out of the reaction, not less.
Re: (Score:2)
I suspect they're not at all worried about the issues you bring up, the body handles hydrogen peroxide just fine and the problem they're trying to solve is to how to get -more- energy out of the reaction, not less.
You're totally missing my point, and you're misunderstanding their research. They're not trying to get more energy out of the reaction at all, and no one is saying they should be trying to get less.
All the cell does is substitute itself for a single step in the break down of glucose to divert the energy to the implanted device; it doesn't change the net energy released by the reaction whatsoever. The device is just stealing some energy; it doesn't re-engineer the reactions involved.
powered by glucose (Score:2)
No, there wasn't (Score:2)
If memory serves me right, in Matrix the energy was generated off bioelectricity and body heat. Here, instead, is a biofuel cell powered by sugar and oxygen. That's like comparing a solar power cell to an internal combustion engine. Now what this invention does replicate is a parasitic organism, or, if the cell actually does something useful, a symbiotic organism.
Potential diabetes treatment? (Score:2)
Can't wait (Score:2)
to get my own USB plug.
body fat (Score:2)
Get one that can do the same using body fat, and you're on.
Not new idea at all (Score:2)
Wrong fuel. (Score:2)
As others are mentioning, sugar is bad for you. The insulin blast ages your pancreas, whacks-out your cholesterol ratios, and eats at your blood vessel walls.
When they invent an engine that converts fat to energy, they'll have something. Oh wait, they already have [z-bestbikes.com].
Sci-fi (Score:2)
Of course, there's never been a sci-fi movie using such technology as a plot device...
Au contraire, the alien healing device in Babylon 5 sounds kinda close.
Only two outcomes from this... (Score:2)
If consumption of food and generting power through these biocells is more efficient and cheaper than burning fossil fuels, then clean energy will be here, NOW, and these will become very important in our world. Pollution will then be measured in CO2 from breathing and sulfur, varions carbon molecules, and other products measured in farts per hour.
If not, then fossil fuels will stay big, but these biocells will largely be relegated to convenience uses.
God, I hope it's the former. Imagine a giant farm of rats
Actual Article (Score:2)
A Glucose BioFuel Cell Implanted in Rats
Cinquin P, Gondran C, Giroud F, Mazabrard S, Pellissier A, et al. (2010) A Glucose BioFuel Cell Implanted in Rats. PLoS ONE 5(5): e10476. doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0010476
http://www.plosone.org/article/info%3Adoi%2F10.1371%2Fjournal.pone.0010476 [plosone.org]
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Ok, I googled it. Fat is 37 mj per kilo, gasoline is 47 mj per kilo. Not substantially different; it is certainly far more energy-dense than NmH batteries, which run about 300 kj. In fact, it's two orders of magnitude better. It's just getting the energy out of it that's troublesome.
Re: (Score:2)
2b, use a local backup store of the chemicals needed that can last longer than any survival blood sugar drop. As soon as blood sugar is back in acceptable range start rebuilding local backup storage.
Re: (Score:2)
I wonder how strong a relationship there is between blood glucose level and the amount of energy these produce. If there is a measurable difference when you go outside the recommended BG range, you could hook the fuel cell to a sensor and warn the diabetic patient to take the appropriate action (eat something sugary or take some insulin) if the current indicates a BG level outside the recommended range.
It could mean an end to measuring using lancets and testing strips to test blood external to the body. In
Re: (Score:2)
If the specific consumption per mass and volume is "similar" to human tissue, then its effect on the body would be about like a similar weight/volume of fat. I don't think they're planning on pulling 500 watts out of the thing anytime soon...
Re: (Score:2)
In other words all the implant does is use the enzyme glucose oxidase [wikipedia.org] to turn this [wikipedia.org] into that [wikipedia.org]. The full process cooks it all the way down to water and carbon dioxide.
Re: (Score:2)
I think LiFePO4 are newer than that. Wikipedia says 1996.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Best online world? Compared to what? The grind/fun ratio is worse than any MMO I've ever seen...