Your Body, the Battery: Powering Gadgets From Human "Biofuel" 67
An anonymous reader writes: This article takes a look at the future of electronic devices powered by the human body. From the electric voltage in mammal ears called the endocochlear potential, to body heat, and muscle motion, there are a number of exciting new areas of energy research being explored. Ars reports: "Staying alive guzzles energy. In order to keep us ticking, our bodies need to burn between 2,000 and 2,500 calories per day, which is conveniently enough to power a modestly used smart phone. So if just a fraction of that energy could be siphoned, our bodies could in theory be used to run any number of electronic devices, from medical implants to electronic contact lenses—all without a battery in sight. Recently, researchers have taken important strides toward unlocking this electric potential."
Soylent Green? (Score:2)
I didn't make it past TFH.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2, Funny)
"Fred, did you check to see if you put him in backwards?"
enough to power a huge smartphone (Score:3, Informative)
Re: (Score:2)
Or a very efficient "computer", considering the things humans are capable of on 2000 calories.
Re:enough to power a huge smartphone (Score:5, Interesting)
GP said calories (implying kilocalories) and did the conversion right. It's 96.9 watts [wolframalpha.com] according to Wolfram Alpha.
Re:enough to power a huge smartphone (Score:5, Interesting)
~~ (1 to 5) × typical laptop power consumption ( 20 to 60 W )
~~ (1 to 1.1) × human daily average power ( 85 to 100 W )
~~ 0.81 × power output from a 1 square meter solar panel in full sunlight at 12% efficiency at sea level (~~ 120 W )
~~ 0.75 × peak power consumption of a Pentium 4 CPU (central processing unit) (~~ 130 W )
Re: (Score:3)
Technically, it would have to have been either Calories or kilocalories. Note the capital letter in the former.
Yes, it is very confusing.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/... [wikipedia.org]
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Yes, it is very confusing.
Re: (Score:2)
Yes, it is very Confusing.
FTFY.
Re: (Score:2)
Except of course in the many European places where they require KJ to be displayed instead.
Re: (Score:2)
" which is conveniently enough to power a modestly used smart phone". Actually 2000 calories per day is about 100W. That's a pretty damned big smartphone.
New smart phones are often more power efficient. The article is talking about a "used" one, the modest kind.
Seriously, humans tend to shed far more than 100W of heat energy per day (~350,000 Jph), so - that's a "bunch" (psyntifik term) of those old Motorola bricks (nothing modest about those used phones, though they were consider smart in their heyday).
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Sigh. A Watt is a unit of power, not energy. Every second our bodies consume 100J of energy, which means on average we're burning about 100 watts (J/s). We consume around 8Mj per day, or 2000 Kcalories, or the equivalent of 40 of my laptop's batteries (56Wh) or 634 of my phone's batteries (3.5Wh).
Seriously, the average human sheds the equivalent heat of a 100W incandescent light bulb. (~350,000 Jph)
There, fixed that myself. (distracted by the more interesting Cicada/Cycura/Ashley Madison story)
Thanks.
Re: (Score:2)
My problem is that I'm very efficient. I don't burn 100W.
Anything that hooks me up to power something else without requiring my attention is worth exploring.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:1)
How arrogant those people are for being parasites on others without taking responsibility for themselves and their spawn. You talk like a welfare queen
Would I have to eat extra? (Score:3)
Re:Would I have to eat extra? (Score:4, Insightful)
Re:Would I have to eat extra? (Score:4, Funny)
Re: (Score:3)
I would think the answer would be a qualified yes. Athletes like marathon runners, hikers, swimmers, cyclists etc who participate at the competitive levels of their sports tend to consume a lot more calories and other folks at their same approximate height and weight; same for people who do physical labor, farm workers, construction etc.
So on some level more energy out, means you will get to put more energy in. I suspect however you can't just "plug in" you 80W smart phone and double you calorie intake.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:1)
It might not take additional calories unfortunately. The body generates a lot of waste heat that could be used. The things we ware usually have a "hot" side against our bodies, and a "cold" side on the other; that kind of temperature gradient is exactly what is needed to capture energy.
Re: (Score:2)
To generate extra energy to power my devices? I could see myself enjoying that :D
We've already been on that merry-go-round with trying to shove corn into automobile fuel tanks. In all likelihood, powering your device this way will be dirtier and less fuel efficient than burning coal for the same amount of power.
Re: (Score:2)
Eat extra? Sure, that would be a *benefit*..
But I wish some of this stuff would provide enough power to be useful (let my phone last longer on a charge), but would be only slightly inconvenient, maybe imperceptibly slow. In other words, getting extra exercise throughout the day. Yeah, I realize it's probably impossible to get enough power without being noticeable (e.g. don't make it feel like I'm walking on the beach to get some power out of the walking).
In other words, burn off what I'm already eating.
Deliberate 'overextraction'? (Score:2)
Off the top of my head I would think no, because I would still need to generate that 4,000 calories in a consumable form in order to make them available for extraction. From reading though, I can't tell if the devices are pure extraction or whether they also stimulate the conversion process.
Re:Deliberate 'overextraction'? (Score:5, Interesting)
The article talks, among other things, about biofuel cells which target glucose - so, actually, yes, using those devices would lead to weight reduction. Because that's one of the more important ways to distribute energy throughout the body: delivering glucose where it's needed which the cells then convert again in the citrate cycle to more readily usable stuff.
Thus, using machines based on this kind of fuel would lead to weight reduction the same way it would when you exercise.
Re: (Score:2)
The article talks, among other things, about biofuel cells which target glucose - so, actually, yes, using those devices would lead to weight reduction. Because that's one of the more important ways to distribute energy throughout the body: delivering glucose where it's needed which the cells then convert again in the citrate cycle to more readily usable stuff.
Thus, using machines based on this kind of fuel would lead to weight reduction the same way it would when you exercise.
That's what I was thinking, although it seems likely I would just eat more to compensate for any additional caloric expenditure.
Personally, a device that sources power from my truck and prevents me from entering the drive-through lane at the Burger Palace would be a better solution for me.
Re: (Score:1)
Nah.
When people try to walk across the Antarctic continent, they have to force themselves to eat more. They cram super-energy dense foods down their throats, because _even if they do that_ they get to the far end looking skeletal. The maximum amount of sugars and fat from food your body can turn into useful energy works out slightly less than the energy budget needed to try to pull a sledge across frozen hills for weeks in what appears to be a semi-permanent snow storm, so you don't have any choice - in fac
Re: (Score:2)
A gadget might make it practical for them to have that sneaky bar of chocolate in the evening and not buy bigger clothes, or to look pretty good in a bikini and yet also put bacon on the breakfast plate.
This gadget of which you speak...
It would be a rainmaker.
Re: (Score:2)
I think this is exactly where most people go wrong. It's very hard to not overeat, especially after working out. I'm into cycling, and after a big ride, I feel absolutely famished. I could very easily eat way more calories than I burned in a ride. And people also overestimate their intensity and how many calories they've burned. 20 minutes on a treadmill really doesn't burn that many calories. It would probably be completely offset by a single sports drink. Personally I really like cycling because it's real
Re: (Score:2)
Well, probably closer to the weight reduction seen when you have a parasite. Exercise is a fair bit more nuanced than just being an energy sink.
plenty of sugar (Score:2)
one serious problem that western society has is the overuse of sugar in our foods. it's lead to the fat american and has already infected europe. if these technologies can actually take the sugar out of our blood before it hits the liver, that would be great. however, seeing as how people are going to start dying off in droves from diabetes, i think there will be a correction in the food market before this technology is mature enough to be useful for general use.
Re: (Score:2)
if these technologies can actually take the sugar out of our blood before it hits the liver, that would be great
Avoiding the liver will be difficult as bloodstream from the guts first goes through hepatic portal vein into the liver.
However, sugar overdoses is a problem for the whole body, therefore even if it would be removed somewhere else, it would still be interesting. But in the context of fixing sugar overdose, that will make a lot of energy to deal with. We probably cannot convert everything to heat, we need to figure a way to use it (make vitamin C? Omega 3 fatty acids?) or to waste it (make acetone? lactitol?
Low tech solution (Score:1)
If all this walking seems like too much effort, and you don’t like their idea of people wrapping fabric around your heart, never fear—you’re also full of hot air.
I'm afraid this hot air inside me could be made to generate electricity using a simple turbine...
Prescient xkcd, as usual. (Score:2)
Reminds me of a sci-fi short story (Score:2)
Many, many moons ago I had picked up some books about the size of a Reader's Digest which had stories from various authors. I cannot remember the name of the publication but one story in them talks about this very subject.
In short, concerts of the day had people wearing headbands which drew upon the electrical energy from each person. This energy was then transmitted to the performers to power their equipment. The more energetic the fans, the more power.
The lead singer of a group eventually uses this energ
Sounds like the early days of Matrix (Score:1)
1. Charge your phone from your body
2. Enjoy this Direct-To-Brain entertainment.
3. Real AI research.
4. Matrix.
Combined with a form of fusion... (Score:1)
Why stop there? Why not gather all of the body heat produced by an average adult and use it to power whatever you desire.
Maybe you could put people in suspended animation, and then allow them to play in a virtual world, while you harvest the power produced by their body, to run the simulation.
Combine this with a form of fusion, and I'm sure this would look pretty cool.