Phone charging stations—will they increase or become obsolete?

[mrsman]

My understanding is that there's deep skepticism that battery technology can advance much more than it already has, so while devices probably will become more power efficient over time people will likely find new reasons for phones and tablets to draw the same power they already do (higher-density screens, larger displays, more sophisticated sensors, higher speed connectivity, etc.). So I don't see the need for public mobile device charging going away anytime soon.

You're right to point out that, even though technology improves, our demands on it seem to increase just as rapidly. Whereas I used to boot up my whole computer with just an 800kb floppy, I now seem to require storage in the tens of gigabytes for the system alone.

And the trend is definitely toward ubiquity of charging. When airplanes go into the shop to get new seats, they're almost always including USB ports and often 110V outlets as well. It's an expected amenity on high speed rail and finding its way into commuter rail as well.

Trains and planes, sure. But I'd still call that a fairly niche market (a big niche, perhaps, but a niche regardless); I'm not seeing that ubiquitousness in my day-to-day routine such as at workplaces and restaurants. Though perhaps that's because my day-to-day routine takes place in New York, where the on-to-go nature of things means that there's both a bigger need and a bigger challenge for getting devices charged. I'd probably never notice this if I had a desk I was at all day, and any interval in my time involved a trip in my car where I could catch up on a quick charge.

Yes, so places where people do not drive as much would require charging stations (or outlets) to be more common, as these are places where people don't drive as much.  And yes, these are also places where people tend to walk around while lookikng at their phone more.

[roadman]

There are new charging kiosks on the sidewalk here with a solar panel and a whole lot of advertising on them.

More excuses to sell out to the marketing types, and to force even more chezzy messages for unnecesary products and services on the public.  In a word - pathetic.

[empirestate]

Yes, so places where people do not drive as much would require charging stations (or outlets) to be more common, as these are places where people don't drive as much.

Yes, and so far I don't really see it happening. But is that just New York, where so much of the infrastructure is so old that it's almost impossible to get anything upgraded (cf. the subway)? Or are other cities similarly far behind?

[freebrickproductions]

And Europe has total compliance, even if the UK-style plugs are different (and waaaay better than the other types - mostly as our house wiring used to be total shite) - the voltage is a standard 230V with some leeway either side (to meet UK/Ireland's 240V and everyone else's 220V without requiring a change).

America's low voltage is the big issue why kettles, hairdryers, etc have to be different either side of the Atlantic. No such issue exists when it comes to either side of the English Channel/La Manche. The frequency is different on the different continents too.

And then you have Japan where they can't even keep a standard voltage/frequency combination throughout their country.

[cl94]

Yes, so places where people do not drive as much would require charging stations (or outlets) to be more common, as these are places where people don't drive as much.

Yes, and so far I don't really see it happening. But is that just New York, where so much of the infrastructure is so old that it's almost impossible to get anything upgraded (cf. the subway)? Or are other cities similarly far behind?

It wouldn't be that hard to upgrade the Subway to include charging stations. Put them into new car orders. The energy used for charging would be made up for by the energy saved by new technology.

[empirestate]

Yes, and so far I don't really see it happening. But is that just New York, where so much of the infrastructure is so old that it's almost impossible to get anything upgraded (cf. the subway)? Or are other cities similarly far behind?

It wouldn't be that hard to upgrade the Subway to include charging stations. Put them into new car orders. The energy used for charging would be made up for by the energy saved by new technology.

No, but it is hard to upgrade the subway itself. Or the expressways, or the steam lines, or...


iPhone

[Pete from Boston]

There are new charging kiosks on the sidewalk here with a solar panel and a whole lot of advertising on them.

More excuses to sell out to the marketing types, and to force even more chezzy messages for unnecesary products and services on the public.  In a word - pathetic.

I suspect they are not built to endure being encased in a snowbank.  It will be fun watching them weather.

[roadman]

It wouldn't be that hard to upgrade the Subway to include charging stations. Put them into new car orders. The energy used for charging would be made up for by the energy saved by new technology.

Why is this necessary?  Kind of like wi-fi on commuter trains.  Focus on running the trains on time, reliably, and safety (which includes necessary maintenance), instead of adding pointless gimmicks that have nothing to do with what should be the prime mission of ANY transportation system - moving people from place to place.

If people are too stupid or lazy to not keep their cell phone charged, then that's their problem.  The public transit agency be not required to accommodate them.

[empirestate]

It wouldn't be that hard to upgrade the Subway to include charging stations. Put them into new car orders. The energy used for charging would be made up for by the energy saved by new technology.

Why is this necessary?  Kind of like wi-fi on commuter trains.  Focus on running the trains on time, reliably, and safety (which includes necessary maintenance), instead of adding pointless gimmicks that have nothing to do with what should be the prime mission of ANY transportation system - moving people from place to place.

If people are too stupid or lazy to not keep their cell phone charged, then that's their problem.  The public transit agency be not required to accommodate them.

Well, that escalated quickly...


iPhone

[Pete from Boston]

It wouldn't be that hard to upgrade the Subway to include charging stations. Put them into new car orders. The energy used for charging would be made up for by the energy saved by new technology.

Why is this necessary?  Kind of like wi-fi on commuter trains.  Focus on running the trains on time, reliably, and safety (which includes necessary maintenance), instead of adding pointless gimmicks that have nothing to do with what should be the prime mission of ANY transportation system - moving people from place to place.

If people are too stupid or lazy to not keep their cell phone charged, then that's their problem.  The public transit agency be not required to accommodate them.

The public transit agency be obliged to treat its riders like customers, just as the highway agency does.  Yours is an argument for shutting down rest areas ("If people are too stupid or lazy to not keep their gas tank full or bladder emptied...") as well.

Even the airlines, who are leaders in the kind of contempt for the public expressed above, realize people's phones run out when they're away from their home or work, just as they realize that people get hungry, just as they realize that people need the bathroom. These are all basic facts of a travel mode that requires one to be away from some kind of base of one's own for a prolonged period of time.

Customer service means presenting a service that is desirable, not just one that does the bare minimum, remembering that your customers have other options.

At the very, very least, building goodwill among customers does not exactly hurt the T when the monthly public-relations disaster comes along.

[jeffandnicole]

It wouldn't be that hard to upgrade the Subway to include charging stations. Put them into new car orders. The energy used for charging would be made up for by the energy saved by new technology.

Why is this necessary?  Kind of like wi-fi on commuter trains.  Focus on running the trains on time, reliably, and safety (which includes necessary maintenance), instead of adding pointless gimmicks that have nothing to do with what should be the prime mission of ANY transportation system - moving people from place to place.

If people are too stupid or lazy to not keep their cell phone charged, then that's their problem.  The public transit agency be not required to accommodate them.

Really, it's a marketing thing.  Would people be more likely to use mass transit if they can use a Wifi network rather than having to use data? 

It also depends how long they're on the train.  Someone on a train for an hour could make good use of that Wifi.

[english si]

^^ Long distance operators in the UK have it as a first class perk, and available for a token fee for standard class users (depending on the train - some have it in standard class for free as well).

The London Underground has free wifi (passworded, so its not that easy to get on to it unless you've sorted it out in advance) at stations - part of that is dealing with the lack of decent 3G/4G signals (they did roll out cell phone coverage).

[empirestate]

A couple things before we get too far off base:

—Just remember this question is essentially about what you predict will happen, not what you think ought to happen. So even if you think it's frivolous and irresponsible for companies to provide charging amenities to their customers, if you foresee this happening before battery technology makes it unnecessary, that's still your answer.

—I didn't bring up the subway as someplace where charging amenities could be increased. Rather, it was an example of a system in NYC that is very slow in being upgraded (in terms of new lines, new stations, updated signaling, etc.) because it is so old and entrenched into the cityscape. I speculated that the same might be true of the city's building stock and public spaces, and wondered whether that sets off NYC as being behind the times with respect to charging amenities.

All right, carry on. :-)

[roadman]

It wouldn't be that hard to upgrade the Subway to include charging stations. Put them into new car orders. The energy used for charging would be made up for by the energy saved by new technology.

Why is this necessary?  Kind of like wi-fi on commuter trains.  Focus on running the trains on time, reliably, and safety (which includes necessary maintenance), instead of adding pointless gimmicks that have nothing to do with what should be the prime mission of ANY transportation system - moving people from place to place.

If people are too stupid or lazy to not keep their cell phone charged, then that's their problem.  The public transit agency be not required to accommodate them.

The public transit agency be obliged to treat its riders like customers, just as the highway agency does.  Yours is an argument for shutting down rest areas ("If people are too stupid or lazy to not keep their gas tank full or bladder emptied...") as well.

Even the airlines, who are leaders in the kind of contempt for the public expressed above, realize people's phones run out when they're away from their home or work, just as they realize that people get hungry, just as they realize that people need the bathroom. These are all basic facts of a travel mode that requires one to be away from some kind of base of one's own for a prolonged period of time.

Customer service means presenting a service that is desirable, not just one that does the bare minimum, remembering that your customers have other options.

At the very, very least, building goodwill among customers does not exactly hurt the T when the monthly public-relations disaster comes along.

Forgive me for sounding old school when I state that theprincipal mission of a public transit agency should be to provide a transportation service.  And I could probably accept wi-fi, phone charging stations, etc. if these amenities weren't being provided at the same time the agency is continually raising fares, cutting back service, and skimping on maintenance.

[cl94]

It wouldn't be that hard to upgrade the Subway to include charging stations. Put them into new car orders. The energy used for charging would be made up for by the energy saved by new technology.

Why is this necessary?  Kind of like wi-fi on commuter trains.  Focus on running the trains on time, reliably, and safety (which includes necessary maintenance), instead of adding pointless gimmicks that have nothing to do with what should be the prime mission of ANY transportation system - moving people from place to place.

If people are too stupid or lazy to not keep their cell phone charged, then that's their problem.  The public transit agency be not required to accommodate them.

The public transit agency be obliged to treat its riders like customers, just as the highway agency does.  Yours is an argument for shutting down rest areas ("If people are too stupid or lazy to not keep their gas tank full or bladder emptied...") as well.

Even the airlines, who are leaders in the kind of contempt for the public expressed above, realize people's phones run out when they're away from their home or work, just as they realize that people get hungry, just as they realize that people need the bathroom. These are all basic facts of a travel mode that requires one to be away from some kind of base of one's own for a prolonged period of time.

Customer service means presenting a service that is desirable, not just one that does the bare minimum, remembering that your customers have other options.

At the very, very least, building goodwill among customers does not exactly hurt the T when the monthly public-relations disaster comes along.

Forgive me for sounding old school when I state that theprincipal mission of a public transit agency should be to provide a transportation service.  And I could probably accept wi-fi, phone charging stations, etc. if these amenities weren't being provided at the same time the agency is continually raising fares, cutting back service, and skimping on maintenance.

It's also part of increasing fare revenue and providing justification for government funding. Especially in places where driving is an option, providing internet service will encourage people to take public transportation, theoretically increasing ridership. Even if a ride takes 25-50% longer via public transit, there are quite a few people who would take advantage of the commute to get work done. The point of the amenities is to get wealthier individuals who would normally drive on the train or bus.

[Pete from Boston]

It wouldn't be that hard to upgrade the Subway to include charging stations. Put them into new car orders. The energy used for charging would be made up for by the energy saved by new technology.

Why is this necessary?  Kind of like wi-fi on commuter trains.  Focus on running the trains on time, reliably, and safety (which includes necessary maintenance), instead of adding pointless gimmicks that have nothing to do with what should be the prime mission of ANY transportation system - moving people from place to place.

If people are too stupid or lazy to not keep their cell phone charged, then that's their problem.  The public transit agency be not required to accommodate them.

The public transit agency be obliged to treat its riders like customers, just as the highway agency does.  Yours is an argument for shutting down rest areas ("If people are too stupid or lazy to not keep their gas tank full or bladder emptied...") as well.

Even the airlines, who are leaders in the kind of contempt for the public expressed above, realize people's phones run out when they're away from their home or work, just as they realize that people get hungry, just as they realize that people need the bathroom. These are all basic facts of a travel mode that requires one to be away from some kind of base of one's own for a prolonged period of time.

Customer service means presenting a service that is desirable, not just one that does the bare minimum, remembering that your customers have other options.

At the very, very least, building goodwill among customers does not exactly hurt the T when the monthly public-relations disaster comes along.

Forgive me for sounding old school when I state that theprincipal mission of a public transit agency should be to provide a transportation service.  And I could probably accept wi-fi, phone charging stations, etc. if these amenities weren't being provided at the same time the agency is continually raising fares, cutting back service, and skimping on maintenance.

Replace "agency" with "company" and "user" with "customer," and it becomes even more of a no-brainer to provide revenue-generating charging stations.  Why is that when the riders are just "users" it's better to just leave them sitting on the floor every rush hour because that's where the outlets are, and because the agency judges massive public demand to be the result of its users being "too stupid or lazy" to provide them with a revenue-generating service?

This only strengthens arguments to privatize the whole system.

[mrsman]

It wouldn't be that hard to upgrade the Subway to include charging stations. Put them into new car orders. The energy used for charging would be made up for by the energy saved by new technology.

Why is this necessary?  Kind of like wi-fi on commuter trains.  Focus on running the trains on time, reliably, and safety (which includes necessary maintenance), instead of adding pointless gimmicks that have nothing to do with what should be the prime mission of ANY transportation system - moving people from place to place.

If people are too stupid or lazy to not keep their cell phone charged, then that's their problem.  The public transit agency be not required to accommodate them.

The public transit agency be obliged to treat its riders like customers, just as the highway agency does.  Yours is an argument for shutting down rest areas ("If people are too stupid or lazy to not keep their gas tank full or bladder emptied...") as well.

Even the airlines, who are leaders in the kind of contempt for the public expressed above, realize people's phones run out when they're away from their home or work, just as they realize that people get hungry, just as they realize that people need the bathroom. These are all basic facts of a travel mode that requires one to be away from some kind of base of one's own for a prolonged period of time.

Customer service means presenting a service that is desirable, not just one that does the bare minimum, remembering that your customers have other options.

At the very, very least, building goodwill among customers does not exactly hurt the T when the monthly public-relations disaster comes along.

Forgive me for sounding old school when I state that theprincipal mission of a public transit agency should be to provide a transportation service.  And I could probably accept wi-fi, phone charging stations, etc. if these amenities weren't being provided at the same time the agency is continually raising fares, cutting back service, and skimping on maintenance.

It's also part of increasing fare revenue and providing justification for government funding. Especially in places where driving is an option, providing internet service will encourage people to take public transportation, theoretically increasing ridership. Even if a ride takes 25-50% longer via public transit, there are quite a few people who would take advantage of the commute to get work done. The point of the amenities is to get wealthier individuals who would normally drive on the train or bus.

I think another related issue is whether the wi-fi or the charging should be free or whether there should be a charge for it.

For charging, I believe that there should be a charge as the electricity is not free.  I view this as similar to pay phones which used to be very common in many subway stations.  You want to call, you can put a couple quarters in the machine for some charging time.  This would also be fair, so that no single person would hog the outlet.

For wi-fi, I am not sure.  I am not sure to what extent the extra costs involved are really measurable.  Wi-fi may be useful for subway operations (MTA staff can communicate with each other) and I don't know if the extra cost to provide it to all users would really be significant.

Blut I do agree that in the era of rising subway fares, these extras should be funded by the users.

[Pete from Boston]

Why by the users that are already burdened?  Why not by some other third party?

[rawmustard]

There was an article about this published here a couple weeks ago. It's similar to what someone mentioned upthread, but without the cost to the end consumer.

[cl94]

Why by the users that are already burdened?  Why not by some other third party?

My thought. Get some company to sponsor it. Advertising opportunity.