phil4
Member
I wouldn't pay for one at home if only for the convenience of not having to plug in a cable ... I use a CAT5 cable for network whenever I can rather than use WiFi ... but that's me!
But for in-street charging, rather than trailing cables near to pavement (and no doubt copper-theft will become an issue at some point ...) I was pleasantly surprised that losses seems to be "a couple of percent" ... assuming that will be borne out in reality with rollouts outside of a few carefully monitored test sites
I'm with you (both on the CAT5 vs wifi), and not bothering at home. It literally takes a few seconds to plug in and unplug, there's no way I'd be paying thousands (or tens of thousands) to fit a wireless charger at home.
Street side, yes, I can see the benefit, but when it costs >£50,000 to paint a crossing on a road, and fit a flashing lamp either side, the cost to do a street of these would run into the millions, if not more. It just won't happen.
As for the efficiency, I'd be wanting that's independently verified. Never trust the salesman of a new tech to tell you what you the truth. It might be 98% between mains supply and transmitter, or 98% between receiver and battery, but the whole thing, end to end... it might be, but I'd expect them to have cherry picked the stats that make their proposition sound good. Cynical? Me? Very.
