this post was submitted on 04 Apr 2025
117 points (93.3% liked)

Technology

68305 readers
4837 users here now

This is a most excellent place for technology news and articles.


Our Rules


  1. Follow the lemmy.world rules.
  2. Only tech related news or articles.
  3. Be excellent to each other!
  4. Mod approved content bots can post up to 10 articles per day.
  5. Threads asking for personal tech support may be deleted.
  6. Politics threads may be removed.
  7. No memes allowed as posts, OK to post as comments.
  8. Only approved bots from the list below, this includes using AI responses and summaries. To ask if your bot can be added please contact a mod.
  9. Check for duplicates before posting, duplicates may be removed
  10. Accounts 7 days and younger will have their posts automatically removed.

Approved Bots


founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
top 49 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] frezik@midwest.social 21 points 19 hours ago

These aren't new.

https://youtu.be/nEmO8DcOap4

They have tiny current output. Only suitable for a few niche applications. The company's claim to fame is making them cheaper, but don't expect much.

[–] ExcessShiv@lemmy.dbzer0.com 47 points 23 hours ago* (last edited 21 hours ago) (3 children)

100 microwatts

This is a very important spec to include...this battery can deliver 0.03mA of power, which is incredibly little.

[–] GamingChairModel@lemmy.world 17 points 20 hours ago (1 children)

this battery can deliver 0.03mA of power

0.03mA of current. That times the 3 volts = 0.1 mW of power.

[–] frezik@midwest.social 15 points 19 hours ago

Technology Connections, we need you to make another video.

[–] sugar_in_your_tea@sh.itjust.works 18 points 22 hours ago (2 children)

Should be plenty for watches and IOT devices.

[–] Blue_Morpho@lemmy.world 5 points 22 hours ago (4 children)

Google says a Casio watch needs .004mA so not quite enough.

[–] dnick@sh.itjust.works 20 points 21 hours ago

Did you typo or did he? .03 is significantly bigger than .004

[–] libra00@lemmy.world 17 points 21 hours ago (1 children)

0.03 is 7.5x more than 0.004 tho?

[–] Blue_Morpho@lemmy.world 14 points 21 hours ago

You are right! I didn't count the 0's!

[–] sugar_in_your_tea@sh.itjust.works 7 points 22 hours ago* (last edited 22 hours ago)

That's definitely in the ballpark though. Surely they could cut 25% power draw to support a 50 year battery.

[–] mesamunefire@lemmy.world 1 points 22 hours ago (2 children)

I wonder how much we really need for a clock (555 eq) to work?

[–] piecat@lemmy.world 3 points 21 hours ago (1 children)

https://www.ti.com/lit/gpn/LM555

2mA minimum, and that's just q current. It's gonna be much higher when you're actually using it for a clock.

I'm sure the casio's main power sink is the display. I bet the refresh rate could be reduced for better battery life.

[–] Tangent5280@lemmy.world 5 points 21 hours ago (1 children)

Isnt the refresh rate just 1 Hz?

[–] piecat@lemmy.world 3 points 16 hours ago
[–] cubism_pitta@lemmy.world 1 points 21 hours ago* (last edited 21 hours ago)

A lot more than that. 2ma

Analog circuits are weird though

https://www.ti.com/lit/ds/symlink/ne555.pdf

[–] ExcessShiv@lemmy.dbzer0.com 2 points 22 hours ago* (last edited 22 hours ago) (2 children)

Not really actually...not from a single cell at least

[–] sugar_in_your_tea@sh.itjust.works 3 points 21 hours ago* (last edited 21 hours ago) (1 children)

Why not?

A CR2032 has 235 mAh, which I believe Casio watches use, and their batteries last 5-7 years. So, if we divide that out, that's something like 5-6 microamps (235 mAh / 5 years / 365 years / 24 hours * 1000 = 5.36... microamps). Converting this to watts @ 3v: 15-18 microwatts.

I think that math is correct (this question reaches a similar conclusion), and it leaves some headroom as well.

If you remove RF from the equation (Bluetooth, WiFi, etc) and custom build the chip, you can get some very low power draws. If all you're doing is sampling temps or something, you could send an update periodically over serial or something and fit under 100microwatts or so. You could probably even do RF if you have a large enough cap and send once it charges.

[–] ExcessShiv@lemmy.dbzer0.com 3 points 20 hours ago (1 children)

CR2032s are used in many things that require significantly more power than that, and this cell is absolutely unfit for almost all other uses than barebones old school digital watches.

Sure. I'm not saying it's a drop-in replacement, just that it has a number of applications. A simple digital watch or even a bare bones IOT device (with periodic serial signaling) could work well with it. You'd essentially set it up once and you'll forget it's still there many years later.

[–] cubism_pitta@lemmy.world 0 points 21 hours ago

Cell != Battery

Battery = MANY Cells

I am not correcting you just hate the headline.

If you made a battery with 666(667 if we round up) of these you could supply 2ma of power at 3v for 50 years!

I don't have sizes available so assuming 2032 sized batteries... If you stacked them that would be over 2meters tall.

With further advancement these could be viable

[–] reksas@sopuli.xyz 1 points 22 hours ago (2 children)

what kind of things could you power with that amount?

[–] KoboldCoterie@pawb.social 4 points 22 hours ago

Almost nothing... Maybe some very basic scientific equipment, but they do note that they'd be able to use multiple batteries layered to produce higher output, and that they're expecting to have a 1 watt version later this year; that'd be far more useful in practice.

[–] frezik@midwest.social 2 points 19 hours ago

An RTC that you want to leave on its own for a very long time. Like underwater.

[–] SoftestSapphic@lemmy.world 19 points 20 hours ago (2 children)

Are these ones ocean disposable like lead acid batteries?

[–] pHr34kY@lemmy.world 13 points 16 hours ago

Someone's gotta charge the eels.

[–] Glitterbomb@lemmy.world 13 points 18 hours ago (1 children)

These types of batteries are called wafer batteries because you just eat them

[–] SplashJackson@lemmy.ca 4 points 15 hours ago

It's wafer thin

[–] KoboldCoterie@pawb.social 26 points 22 hours ago (2 children)

This is wild; the battery would outlive the electronics it's powering in almost all cases.

The output is incredibly tiny, but I wonder if it could be used to trickle-charge a higher-output battery for use in electronics that only need to be used infrequently for short durations.

[–] Blue_Morpho@lemmy.world 10 points 22 hours ago (1 children)

That was my immediate thought too. Hook it to a super capacitor. The only problem is the self discharge is probably higher than what the nuclear cell can feed.

[–] KoboldCoterie@pawb.social 4 points 22 hours ago

That's a good point; it becomes less economical if you need multiple of these cells just to counteract the self-discharge. Even so, it's really just a demo of the technology; they do mention they expect to have a 1 watt model later this year.

[–] pHr34kY@lemmy.world 2 points 16 hours ago

It's becoming quite rare to change the CR2032 on a PC motherboard these days. Even those tend to outlive the hardware.

[–] Badabinski@kbin.earth 12 points 21 hours ago (2 children)

I was concerned about what happens when someone accidentally throws away a device with a fresh battery, but this:

The BV100 harnesses energy from the radioactive decay of its nickel-63 core. The two-micron thick core, sandwiched between two 10-micron thick diamond semiconductors

makes me feel a bit better. That really isn't much radioactive material. Still, it'd be good to see some environmental impact studies done in some worst case scenarios.

[–] db2@lemmy.world 3 points 18 hours ago

It has to be. Making a big one is effectively impossible, the amount of shielding needed goes up much faster than the amount of radioactive material used.

[–] IsoKiero@sopuli.xyz 1 points 20 hours ago

Without any expertise, I'm going to say that minuscule amounts of radioactive nickel from your CR2032 replacements compared to wasted lithium on pretty much every battery your all current devices have plus single use LiIon-cells on e-cigs, single use toys and whatever is a pretty good improvement. In 100 years or so all that nickel is converted to copper with small amounts of radiation and heat as byproducts, in today's technology, is pretty good.

And the radiation is beta-negative. I'm not an nuclear physicist, but if I'm not mistaken your common 3032 cell has enough metal to shield pretty much all of the radiation. Just don't eat them and maybe stick with li-ion on your wrist watch.

[–] Toes@ani.social 7 points 23 hours ago (1 children)

I wonder if it's a compatible replacement for a cr2032

[–] ExcessShiv@lemmy.dbzer0.com 6 points 22 hours ago

Its not, power output is less than 1/1000th of what a cr2032 can deliver

[–] TedDallas@programming.dev 4 points 21 hours ago

So you’re saying that if I buy about 500 million of these I can use them to charge my electric car?

[–] shortwavesurfer@lemmy.zip 4 points 22 hours ago

Damn. I had to look up the SI prefix scale to make sure i got this right. 100 microwatts would be 0.1 miliwatts. If they truly do end up releasing a 1 watt version of this battery, it would be fucking perfect for meshtastic nodes. Currently, the most common radios used in those nodes transmit at 22 dBm, which is about 150 milliwatts. In client mute mode, the radio by itself transmits one packet every six to eight minutes on average. A 1W battery should constantly run the node without ever having to charge it or, even if not, only have to charge it extremely rarely. I'm not sure how long it takes to actually transmit a packet, but assuming it takes a minute per packet, which I think would be incredibly unlikely, then it would transmit seven times per hour if it transmitted every five minutes and would use about 21.4 milliwatts. As efficient as the NRF-52 chip is, I suspect it is the thing that's taking up most of the power.

[–] darklamer@lemmy.dbzer0.com 3 points 21 hours ago (2 children)
[–] sbv@sh.itjust.works 3 points 20 hours ago

and "enters" ( ͡° ͜ʖ ͡° )

[–] Empricorn@feddit.nl 1 points 21 hours ago (1 children)
[–] whaleross@lemmy.world 1 points 21 hours ago

No "lifespan" people around?

[–] lemmie689@lemmy.sdf.org 2 points 21 hours ago
[–] Nougat@fedia.io 2 points 21 hours ago

Reminds me of Asimov's Foundation.

[–] rebelflesh@lemm.ee 1 points 18 hours ago

Read the article guys, yes it is extremely low amperage how ever they are meant to be used in parallel, as you would expect, you use this right now in real life applications I don’t see the niche part but 5 cels the size of a nikle can power most iot micro nodes.

[–] Rhaedas@fedia.io 1 points 23 hours ago (1 children)

searching Walmart website

Not yet.

The real market if this does hit actual shelves is whoever creates adapters for existing products.

[–] Ledivin@lemmy.world 2 points 22 hours ago* (last edited 22 hours ago)

Maybe for the 1-watt version they teased, but this one isn't powering consumer-level anything.

[–] WheelcharArtist@lemmy.world -3 points 21 hours ago (1 children)

yay nuclearwaste for everybody 🥳

[–] Cephalotrocity@biglemmowski.win 9 points 20 hours ago

The radioactive nickel decays into stable copper and has a half life of 100 years. Not really 'waste'