Physics question - how useful is this power harvesting research?

Yeah, I rolled my eyes at this one to. Until I read closer and confirmed the Applied Physics Letters is peer reviewed. The research is coming from Duke University.

I have an associates degree in electronics. I recall studying AM/FM and tv receivers. The signal levels they receive are tiny. It required a lot of amplification to get anything useful. I’ve never studied microwave receivers. My focus was consumer electronics, radio/tv servicing in the 80’s.

I’d appreciate hearing from people with more physics training. How useful and practical is this research?
to
Anyone have a subscription to Applied Physics Letters? Any additional info there?
main article
http://www.eurekalert.org/pub_releases/2013-11/du-wdc110713.php

Another one with pictures.

The big claim is that they’ve achieve efficiencies on par with solar cells ~30% or so.

Of course harvesting 37% of 1mW/m[sup]2[/sup] compared to harvesting 37% of 800,000 mW/m[sup]2[/sup] is a less impressive headline.

It strikes me as interesting but not game changing.

I suspected the signal strength had to be miniscule. Hard to imagine it even charging a cell phone.

I saw a project plan similar to that idea back in high school ('78). It was a receiver circuit tuned to 60 Hz. If you built one near a substation, the plans said you could get a few volts good for about a hundred mA.

Couldn’t this be really useful for something like RFID tags? Wiki sez there are RFID tags in the microwave band, but they require power for active transmission. These tags have higher data transmission rates but aren’t cheap because of the need for a power source. With a 5-fold increase in power harvesting you might be able to make cheaper passive RFID tags that use microwave frequencies.

(I suppose that would have to be MFID for the pedants.)

This was all the farther I needed to read:

The key to the power harvester lies in its application of metamaterials

Dallas Jones: it isn’t as bad as it might seem. “Metamaterials” is a real branch of engineering/physics/science. It involves creating real materials which display certain desired properties which might not exist in ordinary materials. For instance, there is a way to create a surface that exhibits a negative coefficient of refraction.

So…don’t throw away the real science here, just because the name being used seems absurd. “Dark Energy” isn’t stupid just because the name is.

I know there is a lot of inaccuracy in science reporting but they lost me at this:

Volts ain’t power. I could probably get a few hundred volts out of a cat and a comb on a dry day: doesn’t mean I’ve got any power worth speaking of.

The abstract from the Journal is worded more precisely. The article is available online but costs $4. Cheap for a peer reviewed article.
http://scitation.aip.org/content/aip/journal/apl/103/16/10.1063/1.4824473