• themeatbridge@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    11
    ·
    edit-2
    11 months ago

    Inductive charging requires exponentially more power over distance. Even the space between the undercarriage and the ground would waste a dramatic amount of energy. Ideally, you’d have some sort of connector in the ground and a foot that drops down to connect to it, but then it wouldn’t need to be inductive then.

    • threelonmusketeers
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      5
      ·
      edit-2
      11 months ago

      Instead of a foot that drops down, could one have a charging pad that raises up?

      Still seems like more trouble than it is worth, though. Is plugging in when one gets home really that much of a hassle? It’s already so much simpler than filling up with petrol.

      • themeatbridge@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        11 months ago

        That would work, too, but I agree either solution seems like an awfully long walk for a short drink of water. I would put all the moving parts in the car, and then the charging pad could be a mat you lay down. Oh, or maybe it’s rigid and curled, with a spot where you drive over it with one tire and the weight of the car levers the contact up into the undercarriage.

        I still don’t see why it needs to be inductive. Qi chargers use almost 50% more power to charge your phone, and that’s only a few millimeters of distance. It’s not a huge problem when you’re talking about a phone battery, but charging a car you drive every day?