No they aren't, at least when you're publishing non-true stuff. Honestly enough, I also value the right of privacy such that publishing a sex tape where multiple felonies were committed to gain it covertly, is also a violation amounting to a certain level of violence.
How about this: You try to not ascribe my philosophy as deliberate evil, and I won't do the same to yours? This comes under two main libertarian points: 1. Informed consumer. You're not supposed to lie. 2. Your right to throw your fist stops at my nose.
As long as what you're doing doesn't hurt others, do as you will. That being said, privacy is a right, and Gawker went too bloody far with Hogan.
Jay Rosen, media critic and a professor of journalism at New York University, said: Trying to kill a publication you don't like by funding lawsuits against them isn't very libertarian, is it?
Huh? It's not? Especially when they turn out to be valid lawsuits, it seems a very libertarian thing to do. If a company is wronging people in a way that lawsuits would succeed against them, but aren't normally pressed because those being wronged don't have the money for lawyers, sure, you can fund them.
Hell, I donate to a couple funds for doing just that.
There was one station in California which was allegedly actually performing swaps on a trial basis.
Interesting. Didn't know it got that far.
It's additional work, but doable. They have to have some way to maintain that system, obviously.
I've seen a tear-down. Step 1 for getting to the coolant? Remove the battery from the car, the access panels are on top. Ergo, you're most of the way to just swapping it.
The problem with 'additional work' is that you quickly reach the point that you might as well just swap the battery.
You'd get a very efficient vehicle that would have fewer issues and probably better performance if you fed it natural gas, gasoline, diesel, fuel oil, or just about anything else liquid and burnable.
So, you agree that corn isn't necessary, it is merely a choice that maximizes profits. Of course the modern mass produced low cost beef industry requires the use of hormones and antibiotics, but hey, to each their own. Here, in flyover country, most cattle still graze and locally produced beef is no more expensive than than the mass marketed stuff. It is also free from most of the ministrations do to the cattle, too.
Remember - hormones, antibiotics, and corn all cost money. This made me think - remember the switch to pushing grass-fed angus? How much do you want to bet that they were making the best of a 'bad' situation? IE rising corn prices made 'grass fed' competitive again?
This sort of thing happened with soap. The biodiesel industry basically created the liquid soap market. Principle ingredient in them is glycerin, which is a byproduct of making biodiesel. Suddenly the cost of glycerin drops through the floor, hey! marketing opportunity!
It does? I was under the impression that you need a pressurized connection for it, not just have a hole in the tank that depends on gravity to keep the fuel in, and the attendant much more complicated pump that can handle the pressures and temperatures involved.
It largely does not exist among consumers willing to consider alternatives to petrol.
I have no actual data, but consider - which would you rather market to, just those without range anxiety issues, or the larger car market?
The cost may not be worth it, but a 400 mile EV may sell to a wider audience than a 200 mile one. I'd argue that a 300 mile one, which is really close to a lot of gasoline cars, not to mention being 4 hours@75mph, is 'darn close'.
Personally, my eye was drawn to the '25km stretch'. Provide service outside of that stretch to spread it out.
Unless you are taking your vacations downtown, charging at home won't cut it.
We're looking at a hypothetical EV future. Charging stations at hotels, motels, restaurants, malls, movie theaters, and such are not out of the question.
Park in a TGIF, Dennie's, or other 'sit down' type restaurant for 45 minutes, come back to a charged car.
Well, to be fair you don't know if they just removed and plopped the battery back in, but the lift was lowered long enough to do a swap.
Besides, given that the cooling system is sealed, you're actually talking about more effort to fake than just swapping. Because you'd need to somehow tap into the cooling lines, as well as run a super-heavy duty cable to do the charging.
Tesla was looking into swap stations because, at the time, California green credits was biased towards them. Or something (legal-mumbo-jumbo). Anyways, the demand never really materialized, so they remain prototypes.
That being said, it's easy to see the confusion - the intention was that the swap stations would be collocated with select super-charging stations. Supercharging free, battery swap for a nominal fee.
Have a 60kWh Tesla with a mostly dead battery and need to go on a long trip? Swap for a fully charged 85kWh and off you go! Note: Actually a rental scheme, you pay for however long you keep the swap battery until you pick up your own (courtesy charged) battery.
Nope. The problem isn't retrofitting (it's a problem, but not as much as you're painting it to be), but a problem with the battery technology: those EV retrofits you saw were using old lead-acid batteries. There's a reason that purpose-built EVs use either NiMH or lithium batteries: the energy density is much higher, so you don't need so much volume for batteries.
LiIon is a lot lighter than lead-acid, but it's only about double the power density over lead-acid by volume. Also, the ranges of those 'early'* EVs mostly sucked, range wise. 25-50 miles.
Looking it up, it seems that a tesla batter is around 14 cubic feet in volume, just very thin. That's a trunk's worth of volume all by itself. But you don't notice it, really, because it's been built to work with the rest of the car.
And I know what pressure tanks look like, I don't need the lecture. I'll repeat what I said earlier: If built from the ground up with that pressure tank in mind, it's impacts on the passengers and cargo space can be minimized.
*Not really 'early' because EVs actually predate gasoline engined cars by a couple years.
30-90% can be done without 'rapid charging' in about an hour, assuming you have the watts available to do it. A properly sized flywheel or other electric connection can do that, just see Tesla's superchargers.
The funny thing is that as long as you keep it to percentages the size of the battery doesn't matter - You can charge a Tesla at 3X the power and it's the same charge pattern as for the Leaf.
Doing it regularly? Only ever charging to 90% will probably make the battery last longer. It's the last 10% that really wears lithium-ion, more so than rapid charging.
One of my forums this is still remembered - the toucan incident. Some user hotlinked a picture of a toucan in a thread. Next thing we know, the entire site is down due to a DMCA complaint.
I still think that there needs to be negative consequences for filing a false/bad DMCA request. If every bad request is met with a counter-suit, I'd imagine that they'd stop. If only because a $10 letter just became a $1000 hassle.
You're parking that car *somewhere*. Put the charging station there. There's already car lots with at least a few EV ports. As those get to the point of being occupied most of the time, they'll expand availability.
You can see something like this with vehicles converted to use CNG back when that was popular. CNG's volumetric energy density is much lower than gasoline, so these vehicles had huge tanks installed in them taking up all the cargo space, making these vehicles absolutely useless for cargo carrying. And CNG isn't nearly as bad as hydrogen.
To be fair, a fair portion of this was due to the refit nature of the conversion. You see the same thing when converting a car to electric - I read a lot about conversions back in the day, and they often ended up filling the trunk with batteries, even after filling the engine compartment with as many batteries as would fit around the motor.
Today, you look at a car designed from the ground up for electric and you generally find that the best design is to have the actual drive system be a sort of skateboard you put the car body on top of. The battery itself ends up being a 2-3" thick plate mounted to the bottom of the car, very much out of the way.
A lot of that has to do with the change in form factor from square lead-acid batteries to cylindrical LiIon, but not all of it. A 'from the ground up' natural gas vehicle would probably find a better spot for it's tank.
Uh.. Just to be accurate, that's a battery swap station, not a supercharger. Basically a lift with a robotic wrench - undo all the bolts holding the battery on, remove the old battery(placing it into a charging port), grab a fully charged one and bolt it back on.
A supercharger still generally needs 30 minutes to an hour.
First, define what your charge scenario is. Is it the extremely rare 0-100%? or something like 30%-90%?
Second, once you've defined your charge scenario - watts, total joules, and such, it's merely a matter of engineering to make a flywheel 'big' enough. Even if it ends up being a stack of flywheels to fit your spot.
Look at where the chargers are now they are all in places like municipal parking lots, large commercial garages etc. You are right people are not going to stay with their car while it charges for hours. They certainly do want to do something else. It won't be the gas station owners that are able to adapt and take advantage though it will be the parking lot / parking garage owners.
Once there's enough EVs out there, what happens when the Dennies installs chargers and the local McDonald's doesn't?
One reason gasoline stations end up being pretty densely installed is that it both requires less time and is actually a hazardous material. You don't want an unattended hose moving the stuff around. Not a problem for electricity.
Your gut feeling requires a lot of changes to happen while the above poster is describing the current situation of a low volume military application which requires higher standards than a high volume civilian application.
That's the thing, going from 'hand crafted' to 'mass produced' often increases safety because you get a much larger body of knowledge, and automated manufacturing has a lower defect rate than hand crafted.
Start putting nuclear reactors in 'all' ships greater than 500 feet and you're talking thousands of reactors to produce. They, like the 16 cylinder engines being produced today, will be very standardized.
So you're OK with apps driving your phone into a low battery condition, as long as they stop doing so once the battery gets low?
No, but I'm willing to trade battery for increased functionality in some cases.
For example, I'd normally like to get my mail on an expedient basis. I'd like to be able to tell it to stop when the phone hits 50%, or even is in a low signal area(meaning that doing so would be more expensive.
Slashdot Mirror
Libel laws are the opposite of libertarian.
No they aren't, at least when you're publishing non-true stuff. Honestly enough, I also value the right of privacy such that publishing a sex tape where multiple felonies were committed to gain it covertly, is also a violation amounting to a certain level of violence.
Hiring mercenaries to attack somebody is explicitly non-libertarian. It is a philosophy of self defense, not offense.
Lovely....
How about this: You try to not ascribe my philosophy as deliberate evil, and I won't do the same to yours?
This comes under two main libertarian points:
1. Informed consumer. You're not supposed to lie.
2. Your right to throw your fist stops at my nose.
As long as what you're doing doesn't hurt others, do as you will. That being said, privacy is a right, and Gawker went too bloody far with Hogan.
Jay Rosen, media critic and a professor of journalism at New York University, said: Trying to kill a publication you don't like by funding lawsuits against them isn't very libertarian, is it?
Huh? It's not? Especially when they turn out to be valid lawsuits, it seems a very libertarian thing to do. If a company is wronging people in a way that lawsuits would succeed against them, but aren't normally pressed because those being wronged don't have the money for lawyers, sure, you can fund them.
Hell, I donate to a couple funds for doing just that.
There was one station in California which was allegedly actually performing swaps on a trial basis.
Interesting. Didn't know it got that far.
It's additional work, but doable. They have to have some way to maintain that system, obviously.
I've seen a tear-down. Step 1 for getting to the coolant? Remove the battery from the car, the access panels are on top. Ergo, you're most of the way to just swapping it.
The problem with 'additional work' is that you quickly reach the point that you might as well just swap the battery.
You'd get a very efficient vehicle that would have fewer issues and probably better performance if you fed it natural gas, gasoline, diesel, fuel oil, or just about anything else liquid and burnable.
So, you agree that corn isn't necessary, it is merely a choice that maximizes profits. Of course the modern mass produced low cost beef industry requires the use of hormones and antibiotics, but hey, to each their own. Here, in flyover country, most cattle still graze and locally produced beef is no more expensive than than the mass marketed stuff. It is also free from most of the ministrations do to the cattle, too.
Remember - hormones, antibiotics, and corn all cost money. This made me think - remember the switch to pushing grass-fed angus? How much do you want to bet that they were making the best of a 'bad' situation? IE rising corn prices made 'grass fed' competitive again?
This sort of thing happened with soap. The biodiesel industry basically created the liquid soap market. Principle ingredient in them is glycerin, which is a byproduct of making biodiesel. Suddenly the cost of glycerin drops through the floor, hey! marketing opportunity!
hydrogen fills like petrol.
It does? I was under the impression that you need a pressurized connection for it, not just have a hole in the tank that depends on gravity to keep the fuel in, and the attendant much more complicated pump that can handle the pressures and temperatures involved.
It largely does not exist among consumers willing to consider alternatives to petrol.
I have no actual data, but consider - which would you rather market to, just those without range anxiety issues, or the larger car market?
The cost may not be worth it, but a 400 mile EV may sell to a wider audience than a 200 mile one. I'd argue that a 300 mile one, which is really close to a lot of gasoline cars, not to mention being 4 hours@75mph, is 'darn close'.
Personally, my eye was drawn to the '25km stretch'. Provide service outside of that stretch to spread it out.
Unless you are taking your vacations downtown, charging at home won't cut it.
We're looking at a hypothetical EV future. Charging stations at hotels, motels, restaurants, malls, movie theaters, and such are not out of the question.
Park in a TGIF, Dennie's, or other 'sit down' type restaurant for 45 minutes, come back to a charged car.
Okay, do you need specifically a customer car? I did mention that they were never commercially deployed, right?
Video of the battery swap:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?...
Well, to be fair you don't know if they just removed and plopped the battery back in, but the lift was lowered long enough to do a swap.
Besides, given that the cooling system is sealed, you're actually talking about more effort to fake than just swapping. Because you'd need to somehow tap into the cooling lines, as well as run a super-heavy duty cable to do the charging.
Tesla was looking into swap stations because, at the time, California green credits was biased towards them. Or something (legal-mumbo-jumbo). Anyways, the demand never really materialized, so they remain prototypes.
That being said, it's easy to see the confusion - the intention was that the swap stations would be collocated with select super-charging stations. Supercharging free, battery swap for a nominal fee.
Have a 60kWh Tesla with a mostly dead battery and need to go on a long trip? Swap for a fully charged 85kWh and off you go! Note: Actually a rental scheme, you pay for however long you keep the swap battery until you pick up your own (courtesy charged) battery.
Nope. The problem isn't retrofitting (it's a problem, but not as much as you're painting it to be), but a problem with the battery technology: those EV retrofits you saw were using old lead-acid batteries. There's a reason that purpose-built EVs use either NiMH or lithium batteries: the energy density is much higher, so you don't need so much volume for batteries.
LiIon is a lot lighter than lead-acid, but it's only about double the power density over lead-acid by volume. Also, the ranges of those 'early'* EVs mostly sucked, range wise. 25-50 miles.
Looking it up, it seems that a tesla batter is around 14 cubic feet in volume, just very thin. That's a trunk's worth of volume all by itself. But you don't notice it, really, because it's been built to work with the rest of the car.
And I know what pressure tanks look like, I don't need the lecture. I'll repeat what I said earlier: If built from the ground up with that pressure tank in mind, it's impacts on the passengers and cargo space can be minimized.
*Not really 'early' because EVs actually predate gasoline engined cars by a couple years.
30-90% can be done without 'rapid charging' in about an hour, assuming you have the watts available to do it. A properly sized flywheel or other electric connection can do that, just see Tesla's superchargers.
The funny thing is that as long as you keep it to percentages the size of the battery doesn't matter - You can charge a Tesla at 3X the power and it's the same charge pattern as for the Leaf.
Doing it regularly? Only ever charging to 90% will probably make the battery last longer. It's the last 10% that really wears lithium-ion, more so than rapid charging.
One of my forums this is still remembered - the toucan incident. Some user hotlinked a picture of a toucan in a thread. Next thing we know, the entire site is down due to a DMCA complaint.
Watch out!
http://i.imgur.com/NrY9DqB.jpg...
I still think that there needs to be negative consequences for filing a false/bad DMCA request. If every bad request is met with a counter-suit, I'd imagine that they'd stop. If only because a $10 letter just became a $1000 hassle.
You're parking that car *somewhere*. Put the charging station there. There's already car lots with at least a few EV ports. As those get to the point of being occupied most of the time, they'll expand availability.
Okay, 30 to 100%, you're not doing that in about an hour - due to the way Lithium-Ion works, that last 10% takes an hour by itself.
The other question would be - Tesla, 85kWh, or a Nissan Leaf, 24 kWh?
For a leaf, you can fit a full charge into something the size of a washing machine. You might need two of them for a Tesla.
You can see something like this with vehicles converted to use CNG back when that was popular. CNG's volumetric energy density is much lower than gasoline, so these vehicles had huge tanks installed in them taking up all the cargo space, making these vehicles absolutely useless for cargo carrying. And CNG isn't nearly as bad as hydrogen.
To be fair, a fair portion of this was due to the refit nature of the conversion. You see the same thing when converting a car to electric - I read a lot about conversions back in the day, and they often ended up filling the trunk with batteries, even after filling the engine compartment with as many batteries as would fit around the motor.
Today, you look at a car designed from the ground up for electric and you generally find that the best design is to have the actual drive system be a sort of skateboard you put the car body on top of. The battery itself ends up being a 2-3" thick plate mounted to the bottom of the car, very much out of the way.
A lot of that has to do with the change in form factor from square lead-acid batteries to cylindrical LiIon, but not all of it. A 'from the ground up' natural gas vehicle would probably find a better spot for it's tank.
Yes, but while composite tanks might be easy enough, what about the pipeline?
Composites, in this case, are more expensive and harder to work with than the sheet steel or common plastics you need to contain gasoline.
To get extremely pedantic about it, sweet corn is for direct human consumption.
Feed corn is still fed to humans - but only in highly processed states. Corn meal, corn syrup, and such.
Uh.. Just to be accurate, that's a battery swap station, not a supercharger. Basically a lift with a robotic wrench - undo all the bolts holding the battery on, remove the old battery(placing it into a charging port), grab a fully charged one and bolt it back on.
A supercharger still generally needs 30 minutes to an hour.
First, define what your charge scenario is. Is it the extremely rare 0-100%? or something like 30%-90%?
Second, once you've defined your charge scenario - watts, total joules, and such, it's merely a matter of engineering to make a flywheel 'big' enough. Even if it ends up being a stack of flywheels to fit your spot.
Look at where the chargers are now they are all in places like municipal parking lots, large commercial garages etc. You are right people are not going to stay with their car while it charges for hours. They certainly do want to do something else. It won't be the gas station owners that are able to adapt and take advantage though it will be the parking lot / parking garage owners.
Once there's enough EVs out there, what happens when the Dennies installs chargers and the local McDonald's doesn't?
One reason gasoline stations end up being pretty densely installed is that it both requires less time and is actually a hazardous material. You don't want an unattended hose moving the stuff around. Not a problem for electricity.
Your gut feeling requires a lot of changes to happen while the above poster is describing the current situation of a low volume military application which requires higher standards than a high volume civilian application.
That's the thing, going from 'hand crafted' to 'mass produced' often increases safety because you get a much larger body of knowledge, and automated manufacturing has a lower defect rate than hand crafted.
Start putting nuclear reactors in 'all' ships greater than 500 feet and you're talking thousands of reactors to produce. They, like the 16 cylinder engines being produced today, will be very standardized.
So you're OK with apps driving your phone into a low battery condition, as long as they stop doing so once the battery gets low?
No, but I'm willing to trade battery for increased functionality in some cases.
For example, I'd normally like to get my mail on an expedient basis. I'd like to be able to tell it to stop when the phone hits 50%, or even is in a low signal area(meaning that doing so would be more expensive.