I don't think the seawalls were the ultimate problem.
I think the ultimate problem was the siting of the backup generators. Had they been positioned higher, and continued to operate, the meltdown would have been avoided. They actually put some of the backup generators in a basement. This was an issue that was known about well before the disaster. There was no deadline issue involved in moving the generators to a safer location.
Perhaps it's time to stop blaming the disaster on technical issues and blame greed instead. That's why it is right that some people should go to jail.
Sure 95% of trips but folks have range anxiety anyway because they worry that you never know when you will hit that 5% trip beyond your range.
Your argument (to which I was responding) was that EVs don't have sufficient range for most commuters. You now agree with that they do.
I am not going to argue that something like a Leaf is sufficient as an only car. It clearly won't do long trips and charging is slow. However, Teslas are capable of being a primary/only car and other manufacturers are catching up. The Chevy Bolt costs ~ $35k and that is the average price of all new cars.
But they do wear out. Prius batteries where degrading their range limits in about 5-6 years, if my friend's car was a valid example. He was getting 70% of his initial new range at about 5 years. Yea, it's not a 100% EV, but it's a data point.... Rule of numb is 1200 cycles is the high end and unless you have a less than average commute,
Here in CA (and other CARB states), manufacturers are required to warranty batteries such that your friend would be getting a new one, if your anecdote is true. So, it's an exceptional case. Note also that plug-in hybrids typically use more of their battery capacity in normal driving than pure EVs do -- this is harder on the batteries, so not applicable to pure EVs.
As far as I can tell, Toyota gives an 8 year/100,000 mile warranty on the "hybrid system", which I assume would include the battery. So I think your "anecdote" is actually a lie.
As I pointed out earlier, you are attempting to replace facts with your ignorance: charge cycle count is not a good indicator of battery life. I backed this up with data, while all you bring is the same repeated bullshit.
They have higher maintenance costs per mile,
No, they don't. This is complete bullshit. As I showed, battery life of EVs is likely to be sufficiently long that an equivalent ICE vehicle would be scrapped, so replacement at that time is moot.
I'll stick to my cheap, comfortable and quick to fill up gasoline powered pickup truck thank you
So you don't care about climate change. Perhaps you don't think that climate change is real? All you care about is your own selfish issues. You don't care about driving (Teslas are very fun to drive). Or perhaps you have a financial interest in natural gas usage?
Energy costs for an EV are much lower than those of a gasoline-powered car in most states. Added to the reduced maintenance costs, any added cost of the new vehicle is easily amortized over the life of the vehicle.
If you want to argue further, bring some real data, not bald assertions, anecdotes and bullshit.
when you regen brake,. you ARE putting some small set of cells into a charge cycle. However, it will not even make a dent in the life time.
My point was that number of charge cycles isn't closely related to lifetime of LI cells and that other factors (such as the nature of the charging and time at 100% SoC) are actually more important.
What's a charge cycle on an EV? Every time I let off the gas and the car goes into regenerative braking mode? Or just every time I plug it in? Why the difference?
Clearly Tesla's batteries will normally last very well -- far longer than the expected lifetime of an ICE vehicle. Plus, in CA, I have the assurance of the battery warranty that CA requires for EVs.
And more on your ignorance: while LI batteries may come with a "charge cycle rating", what appears to affect lifetime most is time spent at 100% SoC. Rapid charging at high SoC and temperature all add to capacity loss. Battery chemistry also affects life.
Most EV manufacturers provide a means to regulate charging to something less than 100% -- either manually setting the charge limit, or hiding some battery capacity. In this way, the lifetime of the LI battery can be much greater than 400-1200 cycles.
EV manufacturers also reduce charge speeds at higher SoC and regulate battery temperatures to improve life. In this way, a long life can be expected from many EV batteries.
There is another way in which you are ignorant. You claim that EVs don't have sufficient range for commuting for most drivers, yet, here is a study that shows that EVs can easily meet the requirements of 95% of all trips: https://www.greencarreports.co...
As for life of the batteries, life depends on usage (charge to 100%?), and chemistry. Actual studies on real Tesla batteries show a much longer typical life: https://cleantechnica.com/2018...
I dare say you haven't considered all this and I'd bet you don't own an EV and have any experience with them either. But I'm the ignorant one? Yea right.
Yes, you are the ignorant one. We have not one, but two EVs in my household: a Model 3 and a Leaf.
Electric cars will remain a niche market for now. They are too expensive to make, have huge maintenance costs when you have to replace the batteries every couple of years of daily use and just don't go far enough on a charge to capture the majority of the commuter market.
OK, you just showed how ignorant you are and why people should simply ignore your posts.
EV batteries (apart from early Leafs) last far longer than "a couple of years". In fact, it looks like typical lifetime for Tesla batteries is going to be at least 20 years. Guess what you call the typical ICE vehicle that is 20-years old? "Scrap" and hopefully "recycled".
The solution to long lines at the DMV is not "more clerks". It is to move most of the services to a website so there is less need to go to the DMV in the first place.
Hah, hah. Very funny. Here is CA, the long lines at the DMV are due to Federal "Real-ID" requirements, which do require that you actually interact, face-to-face with a real clerk. You can do most other transactions online. If you don't want a Real-ID compliant driver license, you don't typically need to go in to renew your license.
I have lived under the British (UK) health care system and it Sucks! The reports of wait times for surgery, scans, procedures & treatment are much longer than in the USA.
I have lived in both the USA and the UK and I can report from personal experience that you are wrong.
When my sister was diagnosed with cancer, she got quick, effective treatment under the NHS. No waiting.
At the time of my surgery, Memphis had more MRI machines than the entire country of Canada
That's because the MRIs are largely used for pointless diagnostics that only drive up the cost of medical insurance.
Whenever my wife and I have moved or travelled from the USA to the UK with a medical issue, the UK doctors have remarked on how inappropriate or outdated the treatment we have received in the USA was.
I'll allow that non-urgent care may require more waiting in the UK than the USA, but when you actually get the care, it's likely it will be better than you get in a typical medical facility in the USA.
There is only one way that medical treatment in the USA excels: the cost.
Remember from Finance 101, insurance products are designed to "make you whole" if an unlikely event occurs. Healthcare is a certainty, so paying for it as an insurance product makes no sense. That'd be like having "food insurance" or "housing insurance" to pay for your groceries and rent/mortgage.
There is some level of healthcare that is a near certainty, but what you really need insurance for is those huge bills from exceptional medical issues. Your proposed "solution" does not explain how someone who experiences an unexpected medical issue would pay the bill.
I'll go further and suggest that you have never had such an issue and you are so low on empathy that you can't understand how an unexpected medical issue can affect people.
What is mind boggling is why they were so stubborn to change course and made themselves become increasingly more unpopular as they tried to force the ideas they wanted on everyone who did not want it. Really lost their customer focus and become unreliable suppliers
Because it has worked for Microsoft.
The question is: why do people accept the shit that Microsoft shovels their way?
Yellow jackets. That increase in fuel taxes to fund fighting global warming was too much for the people.
The fuel tax increase did not happen in a vacuum. Macron's government reduced taxes on the wealthy. The contrast between reduced taxes for the wealthy and increased taxes for ordinary people added to the motivation for the yellow jackets.
Yes, efficiency of splitting water has improved, but it is still more expensive than producing hydrogen from fossil fuels.
If you have cheap electricity from any source (such as geothermal), it's still more efficient to use that in a BEV than a FCEV and will always be a lot more efficient than using that electricity to split water and then burning the resulting H2 in an ICE.
It makes zero sense to try to have EVs bear their cost of the infrastructure, while large trucks cause almost all the damage to roads and do not pay anything near the taxes required to balance this.
The disadvantages are in the charge times in long distance travel, which is getting a lot more attention and confusion than it really deserves.
Lots of people don't get that the typical EV driver spends less time charging his/her EV than an ICEV driver spends filling the tank of his vehicle. Overnight charging at home is such a great convenience.
Apparently running on hydrogen is the same conversion as making a vehicle burn natural gas.
In other words, horribly inefficient.
Hydrogen Fuel Cell Electric Vehicles are more efficient, but still less efficient than a BEV -- and the production of the hydrogen requires fossil fuel as its primary input (steam reformation of natural gas, because splitting water is inefficient also), whereas Battery EVs can use electricity generated using renewable energy sources.
Could go the Windows route and deem certain files critical to the system (ie - only trusted publishers are allowed to update the OS files), but then you'd have to have a list of publishers (based on certs) allowed to update the system. I don't think it's an entirely bad idea.
Furthermore, you could require that the binaries are delivered in collections called "packages" and have the system require a valid signature and only recognize some signatures. Then you could have a distributed system for providing downloads of the signed packages. As long as the signature is valid, it doesn't matter what the source is.
Oh, wait, every major Linux distribution has done this since almost forever, probably before Windows installers were signed.
Ohio is a union state. Factory comes with UAW baggage and nonsense.
The plant that Tesla took over in Fremont was a former GM/Toyota plan that had been unionized. The UAW building is just across the street, empty now, I think.
Tesla is not able to access capital markets according to the shorts,
The shorts continue to be wrong and they continue to put out negative reports with no regard for truth. They have a huge incentive to lie.
Slashdot Mirror
I don't think the seawalls were the ultimate problem.
I think the ultimate problem was the siting of the backup generators. Had they been positioned higher, and continued to operate, the meltdown would have been avoided. They actually put some of the backup generators in a basement. This was an issue that was known about well before the disaster. There was no deadline issue involved in moving the generators to a safer location.
Perhaps it's time to stop blaming the disaster on technical issues and blame greed instead. That's why it is right that some people should go to jail.
Your argument (to which I was responding) was that EVs don't have sufficient range for most commuters. You now agree with that they do.
I am not going to argue that something like a Leaf is sufficient as an only car. It clearly won't do long trips and charging is slow. However, Teslas are capable of being a primary/only car and other manufacturers are catching up. The Chevy Bolt costs ~ $35k and that is the average price of all new cars.
Here in CA (and other CARB states), manufacturers are required to warranty batteries such that your friend would be getting a new one, if your anecdote is true. So, it's an exceptional case. Note also that plug-in hybrids typically use more of their battery capacity in normal driving than pure EVs do -- this is harder on the batteries, so not applicable to pure EVs.
The typical battery warranty is 8 years/100,000 miles:
https://www.energy.gov/eere/ve...
As far as I can tell, Toyota gives an 8 year/100,000 mile warranty on the "hybrid system", which I assume would include the battery. So I think your "anecdote" is actually a lie.
As I pointed out earlier, you are attempting to replace facts with your ignorance: charge cycle count is not a good indicator of battery life. I backed this up with data, while all you bring is the same repeated bullshit.
No, they don't. This is complete bullshit. As I showed, battery life of EVs is likely to be sufficiently long that an equivalent ICE vehicle would be scrapped, so replacement at that time is moot.
So you don't care about climate change. Perhaps you don't think that climate change is real? All you care about is your own selfish issues. You don't care about driving (Teslas are very fun to drive). Or perhaps you have a financial interest in natural gas usage?
Energy costs for an EV are much lower than those of a gasoline-powered car in most states. Added to the reduced maintenance costs, any added cost of the new vehicle is easily amortized over the life of the vehicle.
If you want to argue further, bring some real data, not bald assertions, anecdotes and bullshit.
My point was that number of charge cycles isn't closely related to lifetime of LI cells and that other factors (such as the nature of the charging and time at 100% SoC) are actually more important.
What's a charge cycle on an EV? Every time I let off the gas and the car goes into regenerative braking mode? Or just every time I plug it in? Why the difference?
Clearly Tesla's batteries will normally last very well -- far longer than the expected lifetime of an ICE vehicle. Plus, in CA, I have the assurance of the battery warranty that CA requires for EVs.
And more on your ignorance: while LI batteries may come with a "charge cycle rating", what appears to affect lifetime most is time spent at 100% SoC. Rapid charging at high SoC and temperature all add to capacity loss. Battery chemistry also affects life.
Most EV manufacturers provide a means to regulate charging to something less than 100% -- either manually setting the charge limit, or hiding some battery capacity. In this way, the lifetime of the LI battery can be much greater than 400-1200 cycles.
EV manufacturers also reduce charge speeds at higher SoC and regulate battery temperatures to improve life. In this way, a long life can be expected from many EV batteries.
There is another way in which you are ignorant. You claim that EVs don't have sufficient range for commuting for most drivers, yet, here is a study that shows that EVs can easily meet the requirements of 95% of all trips:
https://www.greencarreports.co...
As for life of the batteries, life depends on usage (charge to 100%?), and chemistry. Actual studies on real Tesla batteries show a much longer typical life:
https://cleantechnica.com/2018...
Or how about this one:
https://www.teslarati.com/tesl...
Yes, you are the ignorant one. We have not one, but two EVs in my household: a Model 3 and a Leaf.
OK, you just showed how ignorant you are and why people should simply ignore your posts.
EV batteries (apart from early Leafs) last far longer than "a couple of years". In fact, it looks like typical lifetime for Tesla batteries is going to be at least 20 years. Guess what you call the typical ICE vehicle that is 20-years old? "Scrap" and hopefully "recycled".
Hah, hah. Very funny. Here is CA, the long lines at the DMV are due to Federal "Real-ID" requirements, which do require that you actually interact, face-to-face with a real clerk. You can do most other transactions online. If you don't want a Real-ID compliant driver license, you don't typically need to go in to renew your license.
I have lived in both the USA and the UK and I can report from personal experience that you are wrong.
When my sister was diagnosed with cancer, she got quick, effective treatment under the NHS. No waiting.
That's because the MRIs are largely used for pointless diagnostics that only drive up the cost of medical insurance.
Whenever my wife and I have moved or travelled from the USA to the UK with a medical issue, the UK doctors have remarked on how inappropriate or outdated the treatment we have received in the USA was.
I'll allow that non-urgent care may require more waiting in the UK than the USA, but when you actually get the care, it's likely it will be better than you get in a typical medical facility in the USA.
There is only one way that medical treatment in the USA excels: the cost.
There is some level of healthcare that is a near certainty, but what you really need insurance for is those huge bills from exceptional medical issues. Your proposed "solution" does not explain how someone who experiences an unexpected medical issue would pay the bill.
I'll go further and suggest that you have never had such an issue and you are so low on empathy that you can't understand how an unexpected medical issue can affect people.
Because it has worked for Microsoft.
The question is: why do people accept the shit that Microsoft shovels their way?
Also, the state with a huge budget surplus.
That's like saying that building a pile of wood, then adding gasoline didn't cause a fire and the only thing that caused the fire was lighting it.
Revolutions are never entirely about the final event just before the revolution.
The fuel tax increase did not happen in a vacuum. Macron's government reduced taxes on the wealthy. The contrast between reduced taxes for the wealthy and increased taxes for ordinary people added to the motivation for the yellow jackets.
"about" to 4 decimal places.
Indeed:
https://www.cnbc.com/2018/04/1...
Yes, efficiency of splitting water has improved, but it is still more expensive than producing hydrogen from fossil fuels.
If you have cheap electricity from any source (such as geothermal), it's still more efficient to use that in a BEV than a FCEV and will always be a lot more efficient than using that electricity to split water and then burning the resulting H2 in an ICE.
Iceland's Hydrogen economy seems to have stalled out:
http://www.worldwatch.org/node...
The "Hydrogen economy" is a con promoted by fossil fuel interests.
It makes zero sense to try to have EVs bear their cost of the infrastructure, while large trucks cause almost all the damage to roads and do not pay anything near the taxes required to balance this.
Lots of people don't get that the typical EV driver spends less time charging his/her EV than an ICEV driver spends filling the tank of his vehicle. Overnight charging at home is such a great convenience.
In other words, horribly inefficient.
Hydrogen Fuel Cell Electric Vehicles are more efficient, but still less efficient than a BEV -- and the production of the hydrogen requires fossil fuel as its primary input (steam reformation of natural gas, because splitting water is inefficient also), whereas Battery EVs can use electricity generated using renewable energy sources.
That was a really great deal ..... for AOL shareholders. No so much for anyone else.
Also note that Comcast proposed to serve only 96% of the households. The municipal broadband will reach 100%.
Those 4% would have been screwed under the Comcast proposal.
Furthermore, you could require that the binaries are delivered in collections called "packages" and have the system require a valid signature and only recognize some signatures. Then you could have a distributed system for providing downloads of the signed packages. As long as the signature is valid, it doesn't matter what the source is.
Oh, wait, every major Linux distribution has done this since almost forever, probably before Windows installers were signed.
Or, another question: can I retire there? That will help with the aging population, right?
The plant that Tesla took over in Fremont was a former GM/Toyota plan that had been unionized. The UAW building is just across the street, empty now, I think.
The shorts continue to be wrong and they continue to put out negative reports with no regard for truth. They have a huge incentive to lie.