Where did I say that it was worse? I WANT to see this. We need to discourage daytime chargers. The studies have shown that we have enough excess power in the daytime to handle just 25% of our total transportation. However, if we charge at nighttime, then we will still have excess energy at nighttime. BUT, our costs will drop.
BTW, the amount of taxes from electric will no doubt be pushed to be more for the miles than is gas cars, but what I find interesting is that the republicans are fighting against raising taxes on gas/diesel. Yet, we desperately need to. In fact, it would do more for pushing electric/NG vehicles than these subsidies.
Electric cars are not about saving the planet. It is about saving you money. The Model S competes against A8 and similar cars. The S is not only cheaper to buy ( even without the incentive ), but it is much cheaper to run and is much quicker, and very likely, much safer.
yes, but, you pay dearly for that 40 minutes savings. With tesla electric in less than 2 years, it will cost nothing to go 1000 miles around the nation. OTOH, your vehicle will cost no less than $200. For that 40 minutes, I get to sleep free in a nice hotel.
So many things wrong there.
1) You may have range anxiety, but most others are losing it quickly.
2) Electric cars do not pull all of the energy out of all of the cells at the same time. Instead, they rotate through them. That is why tesla went with a LARGE number of small cells. So, charging at nights time constantly OR an occaisional 3000 mile trip with lots of super charging will not bother the cells. OTOH, if you are driving coast to coast daily, then electric is NOT the way to go. ICE, or even better yet, serial hybrid is.
3) weather does not bother the tesla that much. the fact is, that these are driven in deserts and in northern areas. Plenty of ppl in Norway, and greenland are saying that they love the car. BTW, your AC on your gas car likely costs more to run than it does on the tesla.
4) there is more rare earth in your car then in the batteries in Tesla, or Leaf. In addition, there is plenty of rare earth around here. Look up molycorp.
5) numerous studies have shown that this one is SO full of crap. Basically, we have more than enough power to run 100% of our cars/trucks, IF less than 25% charge in the daytime.
Now, why electric cars will succeed, is that electric companies will push these because they will lower THEIR costs and make them higher profits.
You would lose badly. Even now, there are batteries going into production that have DOUBLE the density of what is in the Tesla cells. And a new chemistry (lithium-sulfur) will be in production within 2 years, that hold 4x the density, 1/2 the costs and at over 1000 charges still has not gone down in capacity.
In addition, a number of small breakthroughs in ultra-Capacitors are happening. Once the energy density on these equal a li-ion of today, then the game is over. The reason is that you have charges in the million ranges, and you could charge a car faster than you can fill one.
About the only place where a hybrid makes sense, is in large passenger vehicles (suburbans), and commercial vehicles. For these, a serial hybrid is ideal.
Assume somebody does drive 7 hours. The average range of a car is around 300 miles. So, at 60 MPH, that would be 5 hours. And at 75, it is only 4 hours. Do you really think that these ppl are driving 7 hours without re-fueling?
Heck, the audi A8 holds 23 gals, but gets less than 20 MPG. That is a max of 460. Assuming 75 mph, then it will still be 6 hours.
Which needs STRONG discouragement. You want ppl to charge at nighttime, not during the day. So, sometime soon, a state will get smart and INSIST on taxes on chargers during the daytime. Not much. Say,.02/KWH. BUT, that helps to discourage daytime chargers.
Note, that even with electricity at.20/KWH, you are STILL less than gas at $3/gal.
It will NOT be done by Solar. How will you get it at night time? You will not. Instead, they are taking advantage of the space (and marketing) to add solar. The sites will not cost Elon much, if anything, BUT, they WILL use power from the grid.
The reason is that time is coming when taxes WILL be charged for daytime charging, and the sooner, the better. The reason is that you WANT ppl to charge at nighttime. When that happens, then it lowers the electrical costs for EVERYBODY. The reason is that power companies can move away from on-demand systems and put in larger base-load systems. In addition, it spread the costs of the grid over day/night, rather than just worry about 1 hour of time.
Finally, why would I want to pay 15 cents/KWH (say 13 + 2 tax), when I can pay 6 cents/KWH by simply charging at night?
There is no chance of Tesla dropping the plan. They need to hoist bay to do maintenance. Right now, it takes them 2-3 hours to change a pak, which will in about 8-10 years start needing changes.
Mars should ONLY be done as a one-way trip, or a minimum of 10 years.
The fact is, that life likely is there. The last thing that we want to happen is for it to be transported back to earth.
And believe me, there are PLENTY of ppl that are willing to move to Mars and pioneer there.
But, the bet is on.
That is not quite accurate.
First, the inflatables have NOT be subjected to several years of cold/weather extremes. And there is nothing in the our environmental set-ups that test it. In addition, you do NOT want the inflatable in a hanger. Set it up at the Amundsen–Scott base during the summer and let it stay there year around. Ideally, we would also have a small nuclear generator that would provide power to it, but, via nebulus treaties, they may not be allowed. However, a small nuke is exactly what is needed at the base. It can provide not just power, but heat, all of which will be needed on mars as well.
In addition, no other nation has set up an inflatable at the south pole. NONE.
Now as to supply chain, it is far more important, to test the supply chain to Mars, then to the moon. However, the fact is, that both the moon and mars will occur at the same time. Why? Because private space is pushing this, and multiple nations are backing it due to low costs.
But your argument that the moon is needed is absolutely false. Even on the supply chain, better to have several years of supplies there, as well as multiple robotics in place working on things, PRIOR to sending a single. And NONE of the conditions on the moon equates to what is on mars. I mean NONE. ,br>
But, as I said, the moon will happen around 2020 (barring neo-cons interfering or pushing their god forsaken SLS), and Mars will be around 2025.
The problem is China/West. China has been cracking the west for over a decade (though I blame W for forcing the gov to be on Windows). Things are heating up now, esp. with Snowden's BS.
Actually, a 'cannon' (railgun) would work for sending up water, fuel, etc. Simply 'drop' onto a 'catching mitt'. Of course, if you miss, then it either slams into something that was not expected, OR it comes back to earth.
What is is like at Antartica? COLD. Runs from -89C to -5C. Lots of high speed winds with cold temps with snow/ice that eats at material. Days that are 24 hours long. Seasons. Sun is missing in the winter. Shortage of water (though it can be picked up locally). Shortage of resources. If they really want to do well, they should bury down into the snow.
And what is it like on Mars? COLD. The mean on Mars runs from -87C to -5C. Lots of high speed winds, with cold temps with dust in it, that eats at material. Days that are ~24 hours long. seasons are similar, though 2x as long. Sun is missing in the winter. Shortage of water (though it can be picked up in various amounts). Plenty of local resources. If they want to do well, they should bury down into the frozen ground.
If this can survive at the Antarctica, then it can not survive mars. Something that works on the moon, MAY or MAY NOT work on mars. The ONLY thing that the moon has for testing purpose is life support, and that is available on the ISS.
OTOH, The moon is the worst place for testing. Little to no wind. No atmosphere. Lots of micrometeorites (mars has some, not many). Temperature extremes (mars does not get hot). Radiation galore (far far more than mars gets). In fact, mars surface gets less radiation than does the ISS (which is partially protected by our magnetosphere). The Radiation hitting the moon surface is 4-8x what the Martian surface will get. So, if BA units check out in Antartica for 2 years or longer, AND can check out for several years as a space station, then it is fully tested for Mars.
About the only advantage for the moon is testing a lander. Nothing else. All else should be tested here on earth or at the ISS.
Steven Palazzo, MS, Chairman
Ralph M. Hall (R-Texas)
Dana Rohrabacher (R-California)
Frank D. Lucas (R-Oklahoma)
Michael McCaul (R-Texas)
Mo Brooks (R-Alabama)
Larry Bucshon (R-Indiana)
Steve Stockman (R-Texas)
Bill Posey (R-Florida)
David Schweikert (R-Arizona)
Jim Bridenstine (R-Oklahoma)
Chris Stewart (R-Utah)
Democrat Members
Donna F. Edwards, MD, Ranking Member
Suzanne Bonamici (D-Oregon)
Dan Maffei (D-New York)
Joe Kennedy III (D-Massachusetts)
Derek Kilmer (D-Washington)
Ami Bera (D-California)
Marc Veasey (D-Texas)
Julia Brownley (D-California)
Frederica Wilson (D-Florida)
The ONLY one on this group who is NOT trash is Rohrabacher. The rest are seekers of pork.
If a one of them REALLY wanted to go to the mars and/or the moon, they would be allocating money for setting up a base in Antarctica using BA's BA-330 and/or ILC Dover's equipment as well as pushing private space. But, do they? Nope.
In addition, they would kill the SLS and instead push a COTS-SHLV for 2 SHLVs. Do they? Nope.
Not just houston. Mississippi, Alabama, Georgia, California, Utah, and Florida are all hotbeds for pork money. And look at this:
Republican Members
Steven Palazzo, MS, Chairman
Ralph M. Hall (R-Texas)
Dana Rohrabacher (R-California)
Frank D. Lucas (R-Oklahoma)
Michael McCaul (R-Texas)
Mo Brooks (R-Alabama)
Larry Bucshon (R-Indiana)
Steve Stockman (R-Texas)
Bill Posey (R-Florida)
David Schweikert (R-Arizona)
Jim Bridenstine (R-Oklahoma)
Chris Stewart (R-Utah)
Democrat Members
Donna F. Edwards, MD, Ranking Member
Suzanne Bonamici (D-Oregon)
Dan Maffei (D-New York)
Joe Kennedy III (D-Massachusetts)
Derek Kilmer (D-Washington)
Ami Bera (D-California)
Marc Veasey (D-Texas)
Julia Brownley (D-California)
Frederica Wilson (D-Florida)
The ONLY one on this group who is NOT trash is Rohrabacher. The rest are seekers of pork.
If a one of them REALLY wanted to go to the mars and/or the moon, they would be allocating money for setting up a base in Antarctica using BA's BA-330 and/or ILC Dover's equipment. But, do they? Nope.
Actually, we would gain more out of doing a base on Antarctica, then you would on the moon. That does not mean that we can NOT do a base on the moon, but we gain nothing extra.
What a waste of paper. This is designed to provide purpose for the SLS. Yet, they have ZERO intention of going to the moon, OR mars. The ONLY way that we can do that is if we lower the costs of launch. Yet, the SLS will have a cost similar to the shuttle. In fact, probably higher, since it will have FEWER launches/year than what the shuttle had on average.
THis is just the GD neo-cons wasting more money and pushing NASA to be their GD jobs bill. If they had ANY interest in going to the moon/mars for real, they would kill the SLS and allow NASA to go forward with Bigelow Aerospace/IDC, SpaceX, SNC's Dream Chasers, Multiple tugs, all of which the neo-cons are trying to gut.
I dislike the dems, but they are nowhere near as corrupt or destructive to America as the neo-cons. Today's neo-cons have more in common with a drug lord or al capone. And then as a group, the dems just do not have a brain: wonderful scarecrow on the way to visit Oz.
OTOH, some of us might have worked on this and know that it is not what you and others claim. Sadly, you are operating from a position of ignorance. But the more information that you gain, the less effective this is. After all, it is not what this does. It is the other side knowing what NSA is not allowed to do, that will cause repercussions.
A foreign party is somebody calling from another nation.
A domestic party is somebody from our nation.
Any foreign party that is in America is not spied on UNLESS we have a warrant.
If a foreign number that is associated with terrorist/spy calls here, then NSA will give the local number that it connected to to the FBI to follow up on (NSA has no legal ability to investigate).
There is a difference between agency's vs. lying politicians. It was W's admin that spoke about the weapons, not CIA, NSA, etc.
Who should be speaking about this is not rogers, but somebody from the NSA.
Slashdot Mirror
Where did I say that it was worse? I WANT to see this. We need to discourage daytime chargers. The studies have shown that we have enough excess power in the daytime to handle just 25% of our total transportation. However, if we charge at nighttime, then we will still have excess energy at nighttime. BUT, our costs will drop.
BTW, the amount of taxes from electric will no doubt be pushed to be more for the miles than is gas cars, but what I find interesting is that the republicans are fighting against raising taxes on gas/diesel. Yet, we desperately need to. In fact, it would do more for pushing electric/NG vehicles than these subsidies.
Electric cars are not about saving the planet. It is about saving you money. The Model S competes against A8 and similar cars. The S is not only cheaper to buy ( even without the incentive ), but it is much cheaper to run and is much quicker, and very likely, much safer.
yes, but, you pay dearly for that 40 minutes savings. With tesla electric in less than 2 years, it will cost nothing to go 1000 miles around the nation. OTOH, your vehicle will cost no less than $200. For that 40 minutes, I get to sleep free in a nice hotel.
So many things wrong there.
1) You may have range anxiety, but most others are losing it quickly.
2) Electric cars do not pull all of the energy out of all of the cells at the same time. Instead, they rotate through them. That is why tesla went with a LARGE number of small cells. So, charging at nights time constantly OR an occaisional 3000 mile trip with lots of super charging will not bother the cells. OTOH, if you are driving coast to coast daily, then electric is NOT the way to go. ICE, or even better yet, serial hybrid is.
3) weather does not bother the tesla that much. the fact is, that these are driven in deserts and in northern areas. Plenty of ppl in Norway, and greenland are saying that they love the car. BTW, your AC on your gas car likely costs more to run than it does on the tesla.
4) there is more rare earth in your car then in the batteries in Tesla, or Leaf. In addition, there is plenty of rare earth around here. Look up molycorp.
5) numerous studies have shown that this one is SO full of crap. Basically, we have more than enough power to run 100% of our cars/trucks, IF less than 25% charge in the daytime.
Now, why electric cars will succeed, is that electric companies will push these because they will lower THEIR costs and make them higher profits.
You would lose badly. Even now, there are batteries going into production that have DOUBLE the density of what is in the Tesla cells. And a new chemistry (lithium-sulfur) will be in production within 2 years, that hold 4x the density, 1/2 the costs and at over 1000 charges still has not gone down in capacity.
In addition, a number of small breakthroughs in ultra-Capacitors are happening. Once the energy density on these equal a li-ion of today, then the game is over. The reason is that you have charges in the million ranges, and you could charge a car faster than you can fill one.
About the only place where a hybrid makes sense, is in large passenger vehicles (suburbans), and commercial vehicles. For these, a serial hybrid is ideal.
Assume somebody does drive 7 hours. The average range of a car is around 300 miles. So, at 60 MPH, that would be 5 hours. And at 75, it is only 4 hours. Do you really think that these ppl are driving 7 hours without re-fueling?
Heck, the audi A8 holds 23 gals, but gets less than 20 MPG. That is a max of 460. Assuming 75 mph, then it will still be 6 hours.
Which needs STRONG discouragement. You want ppl to charge at nighttime, not during the day. So, sometime soon, a state will get smart and INSIST on taxes on chargers during the daytime. Not much. Say, .02/KWH. BUT, that helps to discourage daytime chargers.
.20/KWH, you are STILL less than gas at $3/gal.
Note, that even with electricity at
It will NOT be done by Solar. How will you get it at night time? You will not. Instead, they are taking advantage of the space (and marketing) to add solar. The sites will not cost Elon much, if anything, BUT, they WILL use power from the grid.
All US homes have 240V OR HIGHER at the breaker box. The bigger homes (above 10K') are actually at 480V.
skip the smart meter. Tesla does it now.
In addition, in the USA, you do not tie 2 120's together. It arrives at the house doing 240V and then is split. So, you simply do not split it.
The reason is that time is coming when taxes WILL be charged for daytime charging, and the sooner, the better. The reason is that you WANT ppl to charge at nighttime. When that happens, then it lowers the electrical costs for EVERYBODY. The reason is that power companies can move away from on-demand systems and put in larger base-load systems. In addition, it spread the costs of the grid over day/night, rather than just worry about 1 hour of time.
Finally, why would I want to pay 15 cents/KWH (say 13 + 2 tax), when I can pay 6 cents/KWH by simply charging at night?
There is no chance of Tesla dropping the plan. They need to hoist bay to do maintenance. Right now, it takes them 2-3 hours to change a pak, which will in about 8-10 years start needing changes.
Mars should ONLY be done as a one-way trip, or a minimum of 10 years.
The fact is, that life likely is there. The last thing that we want to happen is for it to be transported back to earth.
And believe me, there are PLENTY of ppl that are willing to move to Mars and pioneer there.
But, the bet is on.
That is not quite accurate.
First, the inflatables have NOT be subjected to several years of cold/weather extremes. And there is nothing in the our environmental set-ups that test it. In addition, you do NOT want the inflatable in a hanger. Set it up at the Amundsen–Scott base during the summer and let it stay there year around. Ideally, we would also have a small nuclear generator that would provide power to it, but, via nebulus treaties, they may not be allowed. However, a small nuke is exactly what is needed at the base. It can provide not just power, but heat, all of which will be needed on mars as well.
In addition, no other nation has set up an inflatable at the south pole. NONE.
Now as to supply chain, it is far more important, to test the supply chain to Mars, then to the moon. However, the fact is, that both the moon and mars will occur at the same time. Why? Because private space is pushing this, and multiple nations are backing it due to low costs.
But your argument that the moon is needed is absolutely false. Even on the supply chain, better to have several years of supplies there, as well as multiple robotics in place working on things, PRIOR to sending a single. And NONE of the conditions on the moon equates to what is on mars. I mean NONE.
,br> But, as I said, the moon will happen around 2020 (barring neo-cons interfering or pushing their god forsaken SLS), and Mars will be around 2025.
The problem is China/West. China has been cracking the west for over a decade (though I blame W for forcing the gov to be on Windows). Things are heating up now, esp. with Snowden's BS.
Actually, a 'cannon' (railgun) would work for sending up water, fuel, etc. Simply 'drop' onto a 'catching mitt'. Of course, if you miss, then it either slams into something that was not expected, OR it comes back to earth.
What is is like at Antartica? COLD. Runs from -89C to -5C. Lots of high speed winds with cold temps with snow/ice that eats at material. Days that are 24 hours long. Seasons. Sun is missing in the winter. Shortage of water (though it can be picked up locally). Shortage of resources. If they really want to do well, they should bury down into the snow.
And what is it like on Mars? COLD. The mean on Mars runs from -87C to -5C. Lots of high speed winds, with cold temps with dust in it, that eats at material. Days that are ~24 hours long. seasons are similar, though 2x as long. Sun is missing in the winter. Shortage of water (though it can be picked up in various amounts). Plenty of local resources. If they want to do well, they should bury down into the frozen ground.
If this can survive at the Antarctica, then it can not survive mars. Something that works on the moon, MAY or MAY NOT work on mars. The ONLY thing that the moon has for testing purpose is life support, and that is available on the ISS.
OTOH, The moon is the worst place for testing. Little to no wind. No atmosphere. Lots of micrometeorites (mars has some, not many). Temperature extremes (mars does not get hot). Radiation galore (far far more than mars gets). In fact, mars surface gets less radiation than does the ISS (which is partially protected by our magnetosphere). The Radiation hitting the moon surface is 4-8x what the Martian surface will get. So, if BA units check out in Antartica for 2 years or longer, AND can check out for several years as a space station, then it is fully tested for Mars.
About the only advantage for the moon is testing a lander. Nothing else. All else should be tested here on earth or at the ISS.
All of these ppl are going for pork. Look at this:
Republican Members
Steven Palazzo, MS, Chairman
Ralph M. Hall (R-Texas)
Dana Rohrabacher (R-California)
Frank D. Lucas (R-Oklahoma)
Michael McCaul (R-Texas)
Mo Brooks (R-Alabama)
Larry Bucshon (R-Indiana)
Steve Stockman (R-Texas)
Bill Posey (R-Florida)
David Schweikert (R-Arizona)
Jim Bridenstine (R-Oklahoma)
Chris Stewart (R-Utah)
Democrat Members
Donna F. Edwards, MD, Ranking Member
Suzanne Bonamici (D-Oregon)
Dan Maffei (D-New York)
Joe Kennedy III (D-Massachusetts)
Derek Kilmer (D-Washington)
Ami Bera (D-California)
Marc Veasey (D-Texas)
Julia Brownley (D-California)
Frederica Wilson (D-Florida)
The ONLY one on this group who is NOT trash is Rohrabacher. The rest are seekers of pork.
If a one of them REALLY wanted to go to the mars and/or the moon, they would be allocating money for setting up a base in Antarctica using BA's BA-330 and/or ILC Dover's equipment as well as pushing private space. But, do they? Nope.
In addition, they would kill the SLS and instead push a COTS-SHLV for 2 SHLVs. Do they? Nope.
Not just houston. Mississippi, Alabama, Georgia, California, Utah, and Florida are all hotbeds for pork money. And look at this:
Republican Members
Steven Palazzo, MS, Chairman
Ralph M. Hall (R-Texas)
Dana Rohrabacher (R-California)
Frank D. Lucas (R-Oklahoma)
Michael McCaul (R-Texas)
Mo Brooks (R-Alabama)
Larry Bucshon (R-Indiana)
Steve Stockman (R-Texas)
Bill Posey (R-Florida)
David Schweikert (R-Arizona)
Jim Bridenstine (R-Oklahoma)
Chris Stewart (R-Utah)
Democrat Members
Donna F. Edwards, MD, Ranking Member
Suzanne Bonamici (D-Oregon)
Dan Maffei (D-New York)
Joe Kennedy III (D-Massachusetts)
Derek Kilmer (D-Washington)
Ami Bera (D-California)
Marc Veasey (D-Texas)
Julia Brownley (D-California)
Frederica Wilson (D-Florida)
The ONLY one on this group who is NOT trash is Rohrabacher. The rest are seekers of pork.
If a one of them REALLY wanted to go to the mars and/or the moon, they would be allocating money for setting up a base in Antarctica using BA's BA-330 and/or ILC Dover's equipment. But, do they? Nope.
Actually, we would gain more out of doing a base on Antarctica, then you would on the moon. That does not mean that we can NOT do a base on the moon, but we gain nothing extra.
What a waste of paper. This is designed to provide purpose for the SLS. Yet, they have ZERO intention of going to the moon, OR mars. The ONLY way that we can do that is if we lower the costs of launch. Yet, the SLS will have a cost similar to the shuttle. In fact, probably higher, since it will have FEWER launches/year than what the shuttle had on average.
THis is just the GD neo-cons wasting more money and pushing NASA to be their GD jobs bill. If they had ANY interest in going to the moon/mars for real, they would kill the SLS and allow NASA to go forward with Bigelow Aerospace/IDC, SpaceX, SNC's Dream Chasers, Multiple tugs, all of which the neo-cons are trying to gut.
I dislike the dems, but they are nowhere near as corrupt or destructive to America as the neo-cons. Today's neo-cons have more in common with a drug lord or al capone. And then as a group, the dems just do not have a brain: wonderful scarecrow on the way to visit Oz.
OTOH, some of us might have worked on this and know that it is not what you and others claim. Sadly, you are operating from a position of ignorance. But the more information that you gain, the less effective this is. After all, it is not what this does. It is the other side knowing what NSA is not allowed to do, that will cause repercussions.
Exactly HOW does ECHELON work?
A foreign party is somebody calling from another nation.
A domestic party is somebody from our nation.
Any foreign party that is in America is not spied on UNLESS we have a warrant.
If a foreign number that is associated with terrorist/spy calls here, then NSA will give the local number that it connected to to the FBI to follow up on (NSA has no legal ability to investigate).
Pretty simple and straight forward.
There is a difference between agency's vs. lying politicians. It was W's admin that spoke about the weapons, not CIA, NSA, etc.
Who should be speaking about this is not rogers, but somebody from the NSA.