wiyosaya
Posts: 9,759 +9,644
Why stop there??
Long live stone knives and bear-skins!!!
(Sorry, I could not resist.
)Sakuu's 3D printed solid state battery could be a boon for electric vehicles
- Thread starter nanoguy
- Start date
Long live stone knives and bear-skins!!!
(Sorry, I could not resist.
)virtue signaling on ev's and your to the new future pollution, that is hilarious! I bet you don't even know what percentage that wind farm charges. and have you even watched Michael moores movie on wind farm scam? doubt you have.
Sheesh! Where the hell have you been?
You really should read this:
What Michael Moore’s new film gets wrong about renewable energy
Michael Moore’s Planet of the Humans challenges renewable energy’s ability to fight climate change, but it’s riddled with errors and old information.
www.sciencenews.org
They won't. Want to know why? Here in the south, tin foil hats are huge sellers, and it never dawns on them that they can make their own in seconds! /s
I was always behind alternates to fossil fuels, though far from an expert. Pretty much just an enthusiast because of the garbage the oil companies pulled on us for many decades, and then EVs since the first Ford Focus EV in 2011 because it was the first electric that looked like a real car.
You could have, you just didn't.
Fair enough but I do bet,as all gamblers do.
RudyBob
Posts: 1,467 +1,562
You maybe right but at some point folk may realize the rip off "alternative" fuel is. What until the windmill repair bills start rolling in, similar to how nuclear was supposed to be " to cheap to meter"LIke this - https://www.forbes.com/sites/michae...imes-faster-than-lithium-ion/?sh=e3d2bef6d287
I hate to disappoint you, but that is not going to happen.
RudyBob
Posts: 1,467 +1,562
gamerk2
Posts: 964 +971
Problem has been focusing on improving current tech to meet needs. Inventing a new battery chemistry is expensive, especially since most of the patents on promising chemistries have long been sold to oil companies, limiting development.
Then there's the whole issue that initial production is always at a loss, which necessitates a ton of outside funding; not everyone is a Billionaire like Musk was, and even he nearly ran out of cash getting Tesla started up.
If we threw hundreds of billions a year at the problem, we'd be all electric within a few years. But the investment isn't there.
gamerk2
Posts: 964 +971
*sigh* Not true at all. The loss of winter-time production was known and accounted for by Texas, and was picked up by existing power-generating utilities. The grid failed because those utilities (coal, natural gas) we pushed far beyond normal capacity and Texas had absolutely no way to make up the difference since it's grid is insulated. Renewable utilities kept producing at their normal winter-time production levels.
EDIT
Now with links:
Deep in the heart of Texas’ collapsing power grid
Everything in Texas went wrong at once.
arstechnica.com
Texas’ “failsafe” generators failed, risking weeks-long catastrophe
Black start generators—and their backups—failed en masse during deep freeze.
arstechnica.com
Last edited:
gamerk2
Posts: 964 +971
The problem with Fusion so far is the cost of maintaining a stable reaction offsets any cost-savings of the energy produced. The actual "do fusion" part we've managed since the mid-80's; it's reaching that point where you have a stable, self-sustaining reaction that's the killer.
I am very clever RB. My Mom says so all the time.
But back to it, there is nothing wrong with liking old inferior things, but the least you can do is own it brother.
It would be an interesting future article to cover all the world changing battery technologies that have been announced and which, if any, made any difference at all. Maybe touch on the reasons they didn't work and perhaps even mention the downsides of those that did work. It might be a long article - I can think of 2 others I've read about in just the past month (liquid air batteries and iron air batteries).
RudyBob
Posts: 1,467 +1,562
Fossil fuel is not inferior. K Bro?
Smokers are vastly inferior. And they are the only source of energy that hurts us through design. They are the Model A of power generation and should have run their course decades ago.
gamerk2
Posts: 964 +971
More like a century. Remember, that cars originally were primarily battery powered. It was only because the Model T worked out that everyone jumped on the gasoline bandwagon and battery technology stagnated for over half a century.
Sure, statistics and research can always show whatever the one who paid for it wants. The problem is that 70% of the "possible" capacity would imply that people charge their cars at night, in ideal interval when consumption is low.
But if you're living in a project, then you don't have your own garage. You need to use a charger somewhere else. And you certainly won't take your car at 01:00 at night to the charger, and then return by 02:00 home, and sleep for just a few hours before you have to go to work.
The whole system is a mess. And regarding fusion power plants, LOL, I won't even go deeper into that. I'm willing to bet you won't see a working fusion power plant in the next 30 years. I'm old enough to remember when they promised them "in 30 years from now", and that milestone has passed without them showing anything even remotely usable.
And regarding mentioning Germany and renewable energy, rather than reading about it in CO2-propaganda silverlining media, maybe you should read how "ecology" works in practice:
www.spiegel.de
It's always interesting how this "free energy" is so damn expensive, unreliable and inefficient.
High Costs and Errors of German Transition to Renewable Energy
Germany's agressive and reckless expansion of wind and solar power has come with a hefty pricetag for consumers, and the costs often fall disproportionately on the poor. Government advisors are calling for a completely new start.
www.spiegel.de
It's always interesting how this "free energy" is so damn expensive, unreliable and inefficient.
wiyosaya
Posts: 9,759 +9,644
I wouldn't call myself an expert. I do, however, consider myself relatively well-read on the developments in the pipeline.They won't. Want to know why? Here in the south, tin foil hats are huge sellers, and it never dawns on them that they can make their own in seconds! /s
I was always behind alternates to fossil fuels, though far from an expert. Pretty much just an enthusiast because of the garbage the oil companies pulled on us for many decades, and then EVs since the first Ford Focus EV in 2011 because it was the first electric that looked like a real car.
You could have, you just didn't.
That was government research by a national laboratory. Not "sponsored" research by commercial interests in EVs, batteries, clean energy or the environment. As I see it, there is a big difference between research performed by National Laboratories, and research paid for and sponsored by industry and commercial interests.
That is the situation right now. Neither of us has a prophet, or crystal ball for that matter, that can absolutely say what the future will bring. I highly doubt that with the current thrust in the industry toward EVs by all the major and minor auto industry players that infrastructure will remain the same. Infrastructure will have to be developed, and is being developed ATM.
I am old enough to also know. However, this recent research puts even "break-even" within reach. You're entitled to laugh as much as you want, however, science, not laughing, will prevail. That is what science does - research - test - analyze failure points - test again - repeat until success - not just give up because things did not go as hoped.
wiyosaya
Posts: 9,759 +9,644
Mistakes are an opportunity for improvement. If humanity just gave up at an inkling of failure, we all would still be using stone knives and bearskins. It is easy enough to find any number of reports out there that say "too expensive, riddled with problems, doomed to failure." I am willing to bet that at least some of those are sponsored by fossil fuel/political interests that have shown themselves not to care if their "energy source" has proven harmful as long as it still brings in profit/campaign donations. (Even the site you referenced refuses to let viewers look at it without permission to set cookies/display ads.)And regarding mentioning Germany and renewable energy, rather than reading about it in CO2-propaganda silverlining media, maybe you should read how "ecology" works in practice:
High Costs and Errors of German Transition to Renewable Energy
Germany's agressive and reckless expansion of wind and solar power has come with a hefty pricetag for consumers, and the costs often fall disproportionately on the poor. Government advisors are calling for a completely new start.
It's always interesting how this "free energy" is so damn expensive, unreliable and inefficient.
Whether we like higher costs or not, something needs to be done to transition to better energy sources. Perhaps it is more of a failure of the world's economic systems. Everyone wants a free ride; no free-ride model is sustainable.
wiyosaya
Posts: 9,759 +9,644
I don't know about you, but I would not want to continue breathing the products of fossil fuel combustion. OTOH, breathing fuel cell "combustion" products has no such damaging consequences. K Bro?
wiyosaya
Posts: 9,759 +9,644
Since when did Michael Moore become the be all and end all for all things green/innovative/progressive/scientific?
wiyosaya
Posts: 9,759 +9,644
I think this post is filled with mis-information.
At this point, it is impossible to determine what the costs will be. Neither you nor I have any inkling of what might come about. Many scientists across the world are working and collaborating on the problem. They have finally conquered a major portion of the problem. I think it highly likely that the collaboration of scientists will find a solution.
We can all continue to weigh the costs of progress and of stemming environmental degradation until our faces turn blue. While we debate the costs, environmental degradation is not getting any better. The environment supports humanity. If it continues to degrade while we debate how much our survival is going to cost us, perhaps it will get so bad as to not be fixable. Then what will we do? Continue to debate the costs of the survival of humanity?
gamerk2
Posts: 964 +971
Oh, I'm not disagreeing. My personal opinion is its already far too late to solve the problem, and society is going to collapse under the weight of all the climate related problems (loss of resources, mass migration into northern countries, etc.).
Honestly, "blow off the atmosphere with nukes" is fast becoming the least bad option on the table. I think Musk, Bezos, and company have the right idea: get off the planet ASAP.
*sigh* Not true at all. The loss of winter-time production was known and accounted for by Texas, and was picked up by existing power-generating utilities. The grid failed because those utilities (coal, natural gas) we pushed far beyond normal capacity and Texas had absolutely no way to make up the difference since it's grid is insulated. Renewable utilities kept producing at their normal winter-time production levels.
EDIT
Now with links:
Deep in the heart of Texas’ collapsing power grid
Everything in Texas went wrong at once.Texas’ “failsafe” generators failed, risking weeks-long catastrophe
Black start generators—and their backups—failed en masse during deep freeze.
Very true. Renewable energy is simply not capable of being the primary source. It will always be marginal. That's the failure that was 'amply' demonstrated in Texas.
Yep, but I was talking more about electricity generation. If the nut bags of the 70s and on had quit their opposition to Nuclear, we would be breathing much cleaner air. Might even have stalled the EVs?
Similar threads
Latest posts
-
Microsoft VASA tech can create realistic deepfakes using a single photo and one audio track- Squid Surprise replied
-
Amazon denies reports it started a business just to spy on rivals- nitebird replied
-
Nvidia GeForce RTX 3050 6GB Review: Quiet Release, Dodgy Name- captaincranky replied
