of power via a magnetic field passing through the skin avoids the infection risks associated with wires penetrating the skin. Durability – Without the need to constantly plug and unplug the device, there is significantly less wear and tear on the socket of the device and the attaching cable. Increased convenience and aesthetic quality – No need for cables. Automated high power inductive charging of electric vehicles allows for more frequent charging events and consequently an extension of driving range. Inductive charging systems can be operated automatically without dependence on people to plug and unplug. This results in higher reliability. Automatic operation of inductive charging in roads theoretically allows vehicles to run indefinitely. Disadvantages The following disadvantages have been noted for low-power (i.e., less than 100 watts) inductive charging devices, and may not apply to high-power (i.e., greater than 5 kilowatts) electric vehicle inductive charging systems. Slower charging – Due to the lower efficiency, devices take 15 percent longer to charge when supplied power is the same amount. More expensive – Inductive charging also requires drive electronics and coils in both device and charger, increasing the complexity and cost of manufacturing. Inconvenience – When a mobile device is connected to a cable, it can be moved around (albeit in a limited range) and operated while charging. In most implementations of inductive charging, the mobile device must be left on a pad to charge, and thus can't be moved around or easily operated while charging. With some standards, charging can be maintained at a distance, but only with nothing present between the transmitter and receiver. Compatible standards – Not all devices are compatible with different inductive chargers. However, some devices have started to support multiple standards. Inefficiency has other costs besides longer charge times. Inductive chargers produce more waste heat than wired chargers, which may negatively impact battery longevity. An amateur 2020 analysis of energy use conducted with a Pixel 4 found that a wired charge from 0 to 100 percent consumed 14.26 Wh (watt-hours), while a wireless charging stand used 19.8 Wh, an increase of 39%. Using a generic brand wireless charging pad and mis-aligning the phone produced consumption up to 25.62 Wh, or an 80% increase. The analysis noted that while this is not likely to be noticeable to individuals, it has negative implications for greater adoption of smartphone wireless charging. Newer approaches reduce transfer losses through the use