This is yet another entry in the venerable category of “designers congratulating each other for designing something that is either useless or completely impossible”
Solar chargers for phones have existed for quite some time now. I’ve got one, it’s mildly handy.
So, the product segment really does exist. This is not blatantly impossible. But it’s got three problems.
First.) The on/off switch appears to work by rotating the plug, since designers hate obvious physical controls.
This is not “intuitive”. This is the literal opposite: no product in the world turns on by rotating the AC socket, because you can’t pass UL certification with that design. This product could not be sold as designed.
Second.) The problem isn’t solar cell efficiency so much as the solar constant. The panel just wouldn’t get enough light, even if it was perfectly efficient. It is just too small.
Eyeballing it, I’d say the cell’s about 30mm in radius. 2*pi*r^2 = 5654mm^2 = 0.005654 metres square. That’s tiny.
Assume 1000 watts per square metre solar irradiance, times 0.005654 solar cell area, times .20 cell efficiency, and you get 1.308 watts.
But that’s pointing directly at the sun, and you’re meant to stick this to a window. So reduce the effective area by 30%, maybe. 0.9168 watts. An iPhone 5 draws five times that while charging.
That’s before you lose power to electrical resistance in the wires, and the voltage step-up converter, and battery charging losses.
They say it takes 5-8 hours to charge the 1000mAh internal battery, which seems to indicate it holds about 5 watt-hours, maybe. So, it’d take 5-8 hours to charge an iphone, or an hour if the internal battery was full. But…
Third.) The product photos show an Europlug. All solar chargers use DC output (with a barrel jack or a USB plug) because inverters are damnably inefficient, and running the output AC voltage through another AC to DC converter, the phone’s plugpack, throws away even more power, which this does not have to spare. It’s entirely possible that a line voltage plugpack would refuse to work at all when running off of this— a perfectly efficient inverter would only be able to source 5.4 milliamps at 240 volts, and plugpacks expect to be plugged into the wall, where they can suck down thousands of times as much current.
If this was a real product, which it ain’t, then it would really, really suck.
right in the feels
most relevant quote in the movie
this is literally how I feel right now omg I don’t want you to leave
This scene almost made me cry
I truly hope this goes down in history as one of the most moving/memorable monologues ever executed in a movie.
In one of my first art classes back during my time at DigiPen, one of the required books we had to read through had this certain painting. Now, it was nothing special, it was just some boats on water. Rather rough. Turns out, it was created by a man named Alfred Wallis. Wallis was a retired fisherman who took up painting at the age of 70 “for company” after his wife died. He used leftover ship paint with crayons on pieces of cardboard boxes for his work.
This man died in 1942, across the ocean from me. Out of some quirk, I see a piece of his in a book, making enough of an impression on me to look up more about him. From what I can read of Wallis, he started creating art to fill a hole, something just for him. There wasn’t too much care in being right or wrong in what he did, just that he DID.
How do we lose that? If you ask a child if they like to draw, they’ll invariably say “yes.” If you ask in adult if they like to draw, how FEW of them will say “yes?” And I can just guess that the reason is because they think they CAN’T or that it’s just not worthwhile.
I think… I think we have to stop losing the feeling that we can create art. Stop letting the pressure and the critique and the attention and the comparisons get to us. Let’s just make things, make them as best we can, and improve ourselves in whatever way we wish to. You have NO IDEA who you are impacting with what you create, don’t lessen that impact by diminishing yourself.
And that’s the hardest thing to do. But whenever I start in on that downward spiral, I try to think of Alfred Wallis again.
In a 5-4 decision issued Tuesday morning, the Supreme Court of the United States has decided that individuals and organizations cannot challenge the constitutionality of FISA’s global surveillance regime without proof that they, in fact, are being spied upon, despite the fact that no one can know for sure that he’s being spied upon until after being arrested and shown the government’s evidence—to the extent that, too, isn’t deemed too secret to share. Justice Alito wrote the majority opinion for the five justices you’d suspect; Justice Breyer dissented on behalf of the other four.
I can’t even comment on this, because it infuriates and sickens me so much.
Welp. Where did I put that torch and pitchfork set again?