I do not want to look polemic, but I am not convinced by Mr. Andosca's argument regarding cloth dryers.
I agree that this development could save power and money and I wish every dryer could feature those sensors. But on a practicle point of view, I do not see how a consumer would accept to pay a premium on a dryer for something which is not necessarily of huge interest. And I do not see why a dryer manufacturer would decide to include a new, non-mature device in its machine without a demand from the market. Appart from a governmental decision making mandatory such devices in dryers, I do not think there will ever be a market pull for this technology. This is typical techno-push.
This kind of reasoning applies to a lot of examples regarding energy harvesting!
The clothes dryer costs of the order of $300 - $600. Why would a "premium" of $5 be a problem?
Such consumer IoT devices will have to be sold for the sort of money that many people pay daily for a latte, and there is no reason why that price point cannot be achieved. Unlike the 5 cent RFID tag, there is still a real business in products which cost a few dollars each (with volumes eventually in the hundreds or millions or more).
Dryers already monitor the clothes and switch off when they are dry. I just looked on Sears.com and the cheapest dryer I found has this feature: Auto Dry monitors air temperature with an automatic thermostat and ends the cycle when clothes are properly dried
Replay available now: A handful of emerging network technologies are competing to be the preferred wide-area connection for the Internet of Things. All claim lower costs and power use than cellular but none have wide deployment yet. Listen in as proponents of leading contenders make their case to be the metro or national IoT network of the future. Rick Merritt, EE Times Silicon Valley Bureau Chief, moderators this discussion. Join in and ask his guests questions.