First, a portion of infrastructure costs is paid for by means of highway tolls. Second, the state may be losing somewhat on gas taxes but since negative externalities of ICE vehicles still haven't been internalized in any other form than the consumption taxes on gas itself, the fact that vehicles without a significant portion of those externalities are cheaper to operate largely turns the gas tax into a desirable Pigouvian tax. Plus, by the time the number of electric vehicles will be appreciable to the extent of making any significant impact on infrastructure maintenance, chances are that the operation of the then-much-cheaper electric vehicles won't be significantly impacted by adjusting the taxation of the BEV electricity rate to compensate for the losses. Hell, even today, an expensive quality BEV with high battery lifetime and high utilization (company vehicles, taxis etc.) might still win in operating costs even if you subtract the substantial consumption tax from the ICE vehicle's operating costs - the difference in operating costs shrinks to $9k per those 200k miles but it's still significant.
Assuming 36 mpg of "decent car mileage" (kind of standard around here), you'd pay $32000 for those 200k miles. Gasoline price is US$5.8/US gal. right now. Electricity rate for electric vehicles is $0.1/kWh.
How do you figure out that exhaling tobacco smoke into water doesn't create gold? By trying it! You're not a scientist if you don't try stuff! Or a Frenchman if you don't try to eat it. Well, human, actually.
Solar at Hawaii's location [nrel.gov] (96704 zip code) has a capacity factor of about 0.124 (this takes into account night, seasons, movement of the sun, weather, maintenance, etc).
The mileage limit on the lease is more generous than most leases, too -- 20k/year. More than enough for my purposes.
You said you preferred a hydrogen car because you could refill it in five minutes. But a Model 3 will do 90k miles in a year just with nightly charging. So you prefer to quickly refill your car so that you can drive distances you actually don't?
The battery might make sense in restricting the required size of the expensive fuel cell. If you need, say, 150 kW of maximum power (but only briefly), you'd need a 150 kW fuel cell, but maybe only a, say, 40 kW one would do if you could "borrow" 110 kW from the battery for a brief period of time. You're *not* going to need 150 kW of continuous power, obviously. The fuel cell size may only need to match the DC component of power.
People who argue for hydrogen vehicles seem to have little awareness of the network effects and complementarity and substitution involved. You either produce the hydrogen by traditional or clean means. The traditional means make your car not much better than a gasoline more car, but it is still very expensive. The clean means by virtue of complementarity and networks involved simultaneously strongly props up battery powered vehicles. But the battery vehicles still enjoy twice the roundtrip efficiency and diminished cost of infrastructure. So why exactly would hydrogen be the strongly preferred alternative? With sole the exception of range being comparatively high, it loses on all points.
Has "a planet" ever been rigorously defined, anyway? In any meaningful sense? So far it's all had to do with a small sample size of our solar system and customary labels.
I'm not in the US, but from here it seems to me that Trump is pissing off all the right people. If the DC establishment and the media dislike him so much, he must be doing something right.
No, the simplest answer is most likely the correct one here; i.e. that he's just a dumb asshole.
Slashdot Mirror
Or have vehicles communicate with each other. If nothing else, it removes at least a part of the problem. And transceivers cost a few bucks each.
For some of these problems, there could be a simple solution. For example, install machine-readable traffic signage.
And speaking of the lack of pack cooling, it means that Leafs suffer degradation faster than other EVs.
That could be an understatement of the month. Triple the speed of degradation or more is very worrisome.
First, a portion of infrastructure costs is paid for by means of highway tolls. Second, the state may be losing somewhat on gas taxes but since negative externalities of ICE vehicles still haven't been internalized in any other form than the consumption taxes on gas itself, the fact that vehicles without a significant portion of those externalities are cheaper to operate largely turns the gas tax into a desirable Pigouvian tax. Plus, by the time the number of electric vehicles will be appreciable to the extent of making any significant impact on infrastructure maintenance, chances are that the operation of the then-much-cheaper electric vehicles won't be significantly impacted by adjusting the taxation of the BEV electricity rate to compensate for the losses. Hell, even today, an expensive quality BEV with high battery lifetime and high utilization (company vehicles, taxis etc.) might still win in operating costs even if you subtract the substantial consumption tax from the ICE vehicle's operating costs - the difference in operating costs shrinks to $9k per those 200k miles but it's still significant.
Nope, Central Europe.
Assuming 36 mpg of "decent car mileage" (kind of standard around here), you'd pay $32000 for those 200k miles. Gasoline price is US$5.8/US gal. right now. Electricity rate for electric vehicles is $0.1/kWh.
Your Corolla would cost you $22k extra in gasoline prices over, say, six years of moderately intensive driving in my country.
Considering that it apparently preys on gastropods, there could be some underground culinary resistance determined to save the snails...
How do you figure out that exhaling tobacco smoke into water doesn't create gold? By trying it! You're not a scientist if you don't try stuff! Or a Frenchman if you don't try to eat it. Well, human, actually.
Solar at Hawaii's location [nrel.gov] (96704 zip code) has a capacity factor of about 0.124 (this takes into account night, seasons, movement of the sun, weather, maintenance, etc).
Of course, when you intentionally pick one of the worst places on the island, naturally you get such a mediocre result.
Its called modular software development, perhaps you should look into it?
It's funny how kinds today have rediscovered Modula-2.
But 'Murikans can enrol into the Elf School on Iceland, can't they? (Of course it costs some $$$, but hey...)
The mileage limit on the lease is more generous than most leases, too -- 20k/year. More than enough for my purposes.
You said you preferred a hydrogen car because you could refill it in five minutes. But a Model 3 will do 90k miles in a year just with nightly charging. So you prefer to quickly refill your car so that you can drive distances you actually don't?
Is that the car you can't even buy, and when you lease it, you have a contractual limitation on mileage?
The battery might make sense in restricting the required size of the expensive fuel cell. If you need, say, 150 kW of maximum power (but only briefly), you'd need a 150 kW fuel cell, but maybe only a, say, 40 kW one would do if you could "borrow" 110 kW from the battery for a brief period of time. You're *not* going to need 150 kW of continuous power, obviously. The fuel cell size may only need to match the DC component of power.
Check again, I was responding to the claim that "Obama used an ordinary Blackberry for years", which wasn't something in the article.
People who argue for hydrogen vehicles seem to have little awareness of the network effects and complementarity and substitution involved. You either produce the hydrogen by traditional or clean means. The traditional means make your car not much better than a gasoline more car, but it is still very expensive. The clean means by virtue of complementarity and networks involved simultaneously strongly props up battery powered vehicles. But the battery vehicles still enjoy twice the roundtrip efficiency and diminished cost of infrastructure. So why exactly would hydrogen be the strongly preferred alternative? With sole the exception of range being comparatively high, it loses on all points.
You mean "works pretty well in advertisement materials"...
Since when are Tesla cars cool?
Since they have a coolant loop in the battery?
And if you're a humanitarian, you'll have lots of stuff to eat!
Has "a planet" ever been rigorously defined, anyway? In any meaningful sense? So far it's all had to do with a small sample size of our solar system and customary labels.
His predecessors were no better - and often worse - but they were given a free pass by the media. Obama used an ordinary Blackberry for years
Actually, no, Obama used a specially approved heavily restricted Blackberry. Not "an ordinary Blackberry". So, no, this is something Trump can criticized for just fine.
I'm not in the US, but from here it seems to me that Trump is pissing off all the right people. If the DC establishment and the media dislike him so much, he must be doing something right.
No, the simplest answer is most likely the correct one here; i.e. that he's just a dumb asshole.
But you don't need the EM drive for that. We already have efficient electric thrusters that are perfectly suitable for that job.
The top and bottom side are really dark in some places.
I've seen an observation that this could be a nationalist matter. After all, Pluto was the one planet discovered by a scientist from the New World.