It doesn't need to share anything but speed, speed changes, and monitor relative position and spacing to be useful. I would welcome a technology that kept all the cars in the passing lane going an appropriate speed and eliminated left lane laggards who cause traffic to bunch up which inevitably leads to frustrated drivers and constantly changing speeds.
If everyone went as fast and the fastest person wanted to, and could opt out of the lane if they wanted to slow down, driving would be much more pleasing, efficient, and safe. Traffic congestion would be minimized as well. I can only imagine a stream of appropriately spaced cars cruising past slower traffic on the left, then getting over to let overtakers pass by. Unfortunately due to what must be poor driver education and/or those who just don't give a flip, the only way that will happen is technology.,
Gas stations figured it out, get more pumps so nobody has to wait. Maybe if there was a profit motive?
As a side note, and quite irrelevant, I wonder how silly the name 'supercharger' will sound in the not distant future when all chargers are equal or better.
As I said, most people ignore the land acquisition costs as you seem to. Its not just about the material cost.
And we don't need to much build a lot more overland AC, we already have a bunch of that, we are way ahead of China in that regard. We have an extensive national grid infrastructure.
^There's some truth to this, but a nuclear can load follow quite well, its just that existing designs were never meant to load follow. Large nuclear plants in France have been adjusted to load follow and do so rather quickly. The previous post about taking 'days' is way off mark, btw.
Smaller PWRs designs can certainly load follow with even faster response. Instantaneous or super fast response is really not needed in every generator, some seem to want to make it an eliminating requirement.
As far as Chernobyl similarities, there are significant negative reactivity coefficient differences between designs, those Russian designs were particularly sensitive in that regard, not to mention having safety features intentionally disabled. Existing PWRs are not so sensitive, and new designs have even more robust reactivity management characteristics.
You still have that luxury, but now you have to pay for it if you take longer than 20 minutes. 40 cents per minute won't make a Tesla owner bankrupt, probably.
Somehow I don't think that solves the problem of Tesla owners waiting on the charger to become free.
LOL, you think it takes 10-15 minutes to fill your car with gas. How strong is the tesla reality distortion field.
Due to the existing infrastructure, most never have to wait on a pump to be available either. I think 4 minutes is about normal for my fill ups. I can't recall the last time it took 10, but it would have been after waiting on a pump and including that wait time.
But wouldn't it be better if you could actually do something during that 15 min? one can't even have that luxury after paying $90K for a car? Seems like more chargers is the better solution, let users pay for them too. If it takes 15 min to charge and I'you have to wait 10 or more for the guy in front of me anyhow, you are burning up a big chunk of time.
I never said it wasn't a good technology, just not as simple a solution and as cheap as some make it out to be. China doesn't have the same land cost issues, they can pretty much just take what they want, and even they are nowhere near approaching a high indeterminacy mitigation factor, nor is getting there is sight.
Cloud cover isn't necessarily a problem for solar, as the frequencies blocked by the clouds are not the ones that PV cells are most efficient at collecting. You'll see some decrease, but not as much as you might think. Add to that the fact that PV cells become a lot less efficient if they get too hot and sometimes cloudy days can generate more power than sunny ones: less light hits the cells, but they're more efficient at converting it to electricity.
I really don't understand how people keep peddling this absolutely false information. Whoever told you that is clueless. You'd be wise to question whatever they tell you, and stop repeating it because it makes you look clueless as well. I'm sure you just trusted the wrong source.
The problem with HVDC is that single lines are point to point, not networked, and substation equipment is tremendously expensive. Though the cost of the actual materials for the lines themselves is relatively cheap, the cost of the dream of the many hundreds of HVDC lines required to partially mitigate intermittancy is super high because of land acquisition. That includes purchase, legal battles galore, and the cost of uncertainty from those battles. Its a tremendous cost nobody wants to talk about. Its simple to say just build a shitload of lines.
Or we could consider a clean energy strategy that maximizes use of the investments already made in the existing grid, which is serving us well every day.
Well done, completely misreading (or failing to read) TFA.
TFA discusses recent bids to provide power being cost effective (cheap, in fact) now when comparing the cost of electricity produced (priced per MWh). All your guff about capacity factors is irrelevant when the article discusses actual wholesale prices for electricity.
The article completely confuses cost and price. It was written by an idiot.
No, it mentions what the contract will pay per MWh. It doesn't mention the cost of generation at all. It's possible the company screwed up and will be losing money over the life of the contract.
Exactly. I find it amazing how many here continually confuse price with cost.
Also consider that wind has much higher O&M costs. Comparative lifespan & replacement cost is another key factor. Those are not insignificant differences.
Except where it mentions actual cost per MWHr. ' It started with a contract in January to produce electricity for $64 per megawatt-hour in India; then a deal in August pegging $29.10 per megawatt hour in Chile. '
Read closer. That is "contract price" not cost. Price can be anything.
Slashdot Mirror
The problem with crying racist is that you no longer have the ability to discern between real racists and simple political opponents.
Real racists are the ones who view everything through the lens of race. If you are always looking for it, the mirror is the best place to find it.
I made it sound like you have to walk a mile? Funny how people read things
Why does the title and article call it a "self-driving" beer tap rather than simply "automated"?
Because its just like airplane autopilot. Oh, wait a minute, I forgot where I was at...... BARTENDER!
It doesn't need to share anything but speed, speed changes, and monitor relative position and spacing to be useful. I would welcome a technology that kept all the cars in the passing lane going an appropriate speed and eliminated left lane laggards who cause traffic to bunch up which inevitably leads to frustrated drivers and constantly changing speeds.
If everyone went as fast and the fastest person wanted to, and could opt out of the lane if they wanted to slow down, driving would be much more pleasing, efficient, and safe. Traffic congestion would be minimized as well. I can only imagine a stream of appropriately spaced cars cruising past slower traffic on the left, then getting over to let overtakers pass by. Unfortunately due to what must be poor driver education and/or those who just don't give a flip, the only way that will happen is technology.,
Gas stations figured it out, get more pumps so nobody has to wait. Maybe if there was a profit motive?
As a side note, and quite irrelevant, I wonder how silly the name 'supercharger' will sound in the not distant future when all chargers are equal or better.
LOL, now I see it, you are ahead of me!
Also, Chinese officials looked inside and realized "Oh, we pretty much make all of these components. Not much we could learn from this, I guess."
Returned with a free firmware update!
Are you serious? because I wasn't.
As I said, most people ignore the land acquisition costs as you seem to. Its not just about the material cost.
And we don't need to much build a lot more overland AC, we already have a bunch of that, we are way ahead of China in that regard. We have an extensive national grid infrastructure.
Nice try.
^There's some truth to this, but a nuclear can load follow quite well, its just that existing designs were never meant to load follow. Large nuclear plants in France have been adjusted to load follow and do so rather quickly. The previous post about taking 'days' is way off mark, btw.
Smaller PWRs designs can certainly load follow with even faster response. Instantaneous or super fast response is really not needed in every generator, some seem to want to make it an eliminating requirement.
As far as Chernobyl similarities, there are significant negative reactivity coefficient differences between designs, those Russian designs were particularly sensitive in that regard, not to mention having safety features intentionally disabled. Existing PWRs are not so sensitive, and new designs have even more robust reactivity management characteristics.
You have a gift of problem solving, It appears at the expense of a sense of humor.
You still have that luxury, but now you have to pay for it if you take longer than 20 minutes. 40 cents per minute won't make a Tesla owner bankrupt, probably.
Somehow I don't think that solves the problem of Tesla owners waiting on the charger to become free.
Phones work while they are charging.
Go to your nearest Apple Genius Bar for further help using your iPhone.
So, then just sit in your car with the phone. What a brilliant solution you have there.
LOL, you think it takes 10-15 minutes to fill your car with gas. How strong is the tesla reality distortion field.
Due to the existing infrastructure, most never have to wait on a pump to be available either. I think 4 minutes is about normal for my fill ups. I can't recall the last time it took 10, but it would have been after waiting on a pump and including that wait time.
So who can afford a Tesla but not a phone?
This is 100% fair.
What if your phone is charging?
^my editing skills are deteriorating. I'm only drinking coffee...I promise.
But wouldn't it be better if you could actually do something during that 15 min? one can't even have that luxury after paying $90K for a car? Seems like more chargers is the better solution, let users pay for them too. If it takes 15 min to charge and I'you have to wait 10 or more for the guy in front of me anyhow, you are burning up a big chunk of time.
I never said it wasn't a good technology, just not as simple a solution and as cheap as some make it out to be. China doesn't have the same land cost issues, they can pretty much just take what they want, and even they are nowhere near approaching a high indeterminacy mitigation factor, nor is getting there is sight.
Cloud cover isn't necessarily a problem for solar, as the frequencies blocked by the clouds are not the ones that PV cells are most efficient at collecting. You'll see some decrease, but not as much as you might think. Add to that the fact that PV cells become a lot less efficient if they get too hot and sometimes cloudy days can generate more power than sunny ones: less light hits the cells, but they're more efficient at converting it to electricity.
I really don't understand how people keep peddling this absolutely false information. Whoever told you that is clueless. You'd be wise to question whatever they tell you, and stop repeating it because it makes you look clueless as well. I'm sure you just trusted the wrong source.
The problem with HVDC is that single lines are point to point, not networked, and substation equipment is tremendously expensive. Though the cost of the actual materials for the lines themselves is relatively cheap, the cost of the dream of the many hundreds of HVDC lines required to partially mitigate intermittancy is super high because of land acquisition. That includes purchase, legal battles galore, and the cost of uncertainty from those battles. Its a tremendous cost nobody wants to talk about. Its simple to say just build a shitload of lines.
Or we could consider a clean energy strategy that maximizes use of the investments already made in the existing grid, which is serving us well every day.
Well done, completely misreading (or failing to read) TFA. TFA discusses recent bids to provide power being cost effective (cheap, in fact) now when comparing the cost of electricity produced (priced per MWh). All your guff about capacity factors is irrelevant when the article discusses actual wholesale prices for electricity.
The article completely confuses cost and price. It was written by an idiot.
No, it mentions what the contract will pay per MWh. It doesn't mention the cost of generation at all. It's possible the company screwed up and will be losing money over the life of the contract.
Exactly. I find it amazing how many here continually confuse price with cost.
Also consider that wind has much higher O&M costs. Comparative lifespan & replacement cost is another key factor. Those are not insignificant differences.
Except where it mentions actual cost per MWHr. ' It started with a contract in January to produce electricity for $64 per megawatt-hour in India; then a deal in August pegging $29.10 per megawatt hour in Chile. '
Read closer. That is "contract price" not cost. Price can be anything.