Rechargeable aids: wanted by customers or by factories?

@DanH said:

I find it astonishing the amount of conversation on this topic.

The conversation is because disposable battery aids are an endangered species, due to business not technical reasons, so those of us who prefer them feel it's necessary to keep on explaining why. Especially in these forums which, besides being one of the main sources of hearing aid info on the internet, now presumably influence chatbot answers also.

@x475aws said:

due to business not technical reasons

Environmental arguments apply too in some countries. Making something that uses several disposable metal batteries a month runs counter to environmental design criteria. There’s an ISO standard that covers this, which takes into account the associated ‘Total Carbon’ and waste byproduct of the lifecycle.

As I’ve said before: I don’t have a horse in the race, but just as there’s Car firms who’ve never made a petrol engined vehicle, there’s going to be/are HA firms who’ll never make a non-rechargeable or possibly even a custom shelled aid.

I SO relate to that sentiment about the bipolar discussions on this topic!!! I have both Phonak rechargeable and 312-battery aids and use/need them both.

The rechargeables are the only model that's truly water resistant for the very humid place where I live (and go to the gym!); but they just can't work on long trips off the grid where there is no place to plug in a charger, and over several days, even a portable battery pack would run down.

I SO wish that HA makers would have options for us all: rechargeable, battery, and how about some zany color options, too? It seems that the HA makers have PROFIT as #1 objective, followed by MASS appeal #2. Even the surveys these makers put out don't ask if users prefer battery over rechargeable. They don't want to know. They only ask "What do you use now?" and assume that the universe is shifting to rechargeable option. That skews the survey results.

Sigh.

Just a quickie regarding your rechargeables winding down SO early in the evening. Check your phone's operating system. I had to update my Android's OS a couple years ago to get 3 more hours of use from my Phonak rechargeables. With my hearing loss, I was getting 11 hrs a day off the Audeo Lumity Life; then up to a whopping 14 hrs a day after the OS update. O'course this was 3 yrs ago, and things have improved, but I very much feel like Cinderella when I'm using my rechargeables. By contrast, I can go 4 full days on tiny 312s before swapping them out.

well that is interesting.... my phone is a few years old, and is past the supported life for updates....so maybe taht has something to do with it....

um, I don't know..... perhaps because zinc air aids are superior in almost every way.... (says me anyway)

Yet another reason came to mind today. Just today I was shutting down my aids to put in a waterproof case while I was out on the boat. Reminded me of trying to take my aids off and shut them down when making myself comfortable at the barber recently. I could do it one-handed under the barber's cape "with my eyes closed" in about 3 seconds with my old aids, and slip them into my shirt pocket by feel. With these, it very much took full attention, both eyes and both hands...and probably took about 15-20 seconds to get them both shut down. Granted that's not a lot of time, but the attention part is a little annoying. Still It would be a fair enough tradeoff I suppose if these aids were really all that much better in other ways.

Yes, it's very much 'each to his own' with zinc-air v lithium-ion. Having used both, I've made a choice. I'm not concerned about the IP rating of either. I take them out in the shower, don't go to the gym (although you'd have to work up a hell of a sweat to get wet behind the ears), certainly wouldn't swim wearing them and don't cycle in the rain (my helmet covers my aids anyway).

@1Bluejay said:

Just a quickie regarding your rechargeables winding down SO early in the evening. Check your phone's operating system. I had to update my Android's OS a couple years ago to get 3 more hours of use from my Phonak rechargeables.

I searched on google about this. In part it told me this;

Does the Android OS Version Affect Battery Life?
The answer is yes, significantly, but primarily for brands like Oticon, ReSound, or Signia rather than Sonova/Phonak devices.
The ASHA/LE Audio Factor: Most hearing aid brands utilize specialized, low-energy Bluetooth protocols like ASHA (Audio Streaming for Hearing Aids) or the newer Bluetooth LE Audio standard. When Google updates Android, they frequently refine the background stability and firmware handling of these low-energy protocols. On older Android versions or unsupported devices, the phone can get stuck in a "polling loop," constantly searching or aggressively pushing data, which drains both the phone and the hearing aid batteries. [1, 2, 3, 4, 5]
Why it matters less for your Sennheiser/Phonak aids: Phonak and Sennheiser bypass standard low-energy protocols for streaming and use Bluetooth Classic. It consumes a baseline high amount of power regardless of the Android version. Your older Android 14 phone isn't the primary culprit for the battery performance on your Sonite Rise aids; the hardware chip platform inside the aids simply demands a higher baseline current

Still, now I'm reconsidering an upgrade to my phone sooner rather than later now, while i'm still within the trial period of these aids.

@Alan_C_J said:

Yes, it's very much 'each to his own' with zinc-air v lithium-ion. Having used both, I've made a choice. I'm not concerned about the IP rating of either. I take them out in the shower, don't go to the gym (although you'd have to work up a hell of a sweat to get wet behind the ears), certainly wouldn't swim wearing them and don't cycle in the rain (my helmet covers my aids anyway).

exactly! Even less reason to be concerned about the IP rating, at least in my case, is taht my old Marvel M-90-13 aids carry the SAME IP68 rating at these new I-90R's (Sonite Rise).

I reckon this bit about rechargeables being better sealed is either misinformation or marketing hype. The only thing exposed in the marvels is the battery contacts inside the 'door'. If that gets wet, just open it up, blow it out, drop a new battery in, and move on with life.

@Um_bongo said:

That’s the point, subjectively they are more convenient for you: but objectively they create more (non-)hazardous waste, use more energy in their total life cycle, have more failure modes, are a result of a disposable/landfill based society: despite their more practical end of life options.

I posted it earlier in this thread I believe...I did the math. In a full year I don't fill up a shot glass with old batteries.

more energy in their life cycle. OK, maybe considering trucking and shipping costs... but I'm not so sure that anything is really added here. Those trucks and amazon drivers are mostly making that same trip regardless if my tiny package of batteries is coming to my house a couple of times per year.

and regarding failure modes...not sure what you mean by that but I'm more concerened with the planned obsolescence failure baked into rechargeables that can't be replaced as their capacity degrades

and again about the landfill. That's hype. Check my earlier math, but that's not even a shot glass full in a year....in the 7 years I've had the marvels, I think that I've generated about 12 cubic inches of old batteries....

and if there was enough motivation, I'm sure that they could be recycled to get the 0.35 grams of zinc and 0.35 grams of steel out of them...maybe even the trace amount of plastics, aluminum, and what not in them too.... but extracting all those tiny things from it would probably take a lot more energy and effort than it's worth..... and create significantly more polution

To help visualize it, 12 cubic inches is roughly equivalent to:

• A standard juice box (6.75 fl oz)
• Two standard billiard balls pushed together
• Three large eggs
• A standard computer mouse

Will rechargeable aids with fixed non-replaceable batteries even last seven years before we have to toss the whole hearing aid and get a new one at a price of multiple thousands of dollars?

@1Bluejay said:

The rechargeables are the only model that's truly water resistant for the very humid place where I live (and go to the gym!);

is that true?

my old M-90-13 zinc air aids carry the same IP68 rating as the new rechargeables....

For every hearing aid wearer in the World.

The drawer is a failure mode for moisture ingress, outright mechanical failure and connection to the battery/inverted insertion: before you consider the environment, swallowed batteries and client dexterity/packaging issues. Just because it doesn’t apply in your subjective situation doesn’t mean it’s not a macro issue to the industry.

Or I can get a rechargeable aid with 5 year battery life and and an IP68 rating - as a supplier, I know where my my money goes.

OH YEAH!!!! I've just about SUNK my 312s wearing them either at the gym (forgot to swap in the rechargeables) or even on a hot humid day being outside doing a chore for 20 min or so. My 312-battery Phonaks have pretty noticeable GAPS on the battery door, and definitely get "quacky" when damp. Luckily, I put them in a pro-style ReDux dryer and that gets them back to normal. WHEW.

My rechargeables will also sometimes get a bit "underwater" sounding at the gym, but I just push through the session! If I removed my aids and went CINDERBLOCK to the gym, the sky could fall and I wouldn't know it till it hit me. I simply gotta HEAR - I even "see" with my aids in. But I'm religious about putting the aids in my ReDux the minute I get home.

Active must mean heavy blue tooth use? My wife gets 14 hours easily and once wore them 24 hours b4 a charge was needed