Meh. A handful of fired employees saying bad things about their former employer... A bunch of short sellers on Wall Street currently in line to lose BILLIONS after shorting Tesla stock for months only to see the stock shoot up... not surprised at all to see a hatchet job like this.
Nuclear has perpetually over promised and under-delivered. It's projects are routinely overpriced and behind schedule, not to mention that nobody wants it in their back yard. Furthermore, it's simply not necessary. It's entirely possible to run the grid with solar, wind and storage. Throw in hydro and geothermal and things just get easier.
Nuclear is a boondoggle... and that goes double for new unproven technologies. Even if governments were to decided to start a massive build-out of reactors, it would be decades before the first ones came online. What will we do in the meantime? That's far too late to forestall the worst negative effects of climate change.
Next, consider that renewables are already beginning to out-compete fossil fuels straight up on price. In 20-40 years time renewables will be pumping out gigawatts of power at fractions of a cent per watt. Who then is going to buy all that expensive nuclear power? Are we just going to hand ratepayers a bill for all these white elephant plants?
(And finally, why would I want thorium when in 40 years time I'm already being promised fusion reactors!)
Soon even the USA will be forced to put a price on carbon. Once demand begins to dip and fossil fuel prices start to fall, governments will start to increase the carbon pricing to prevent retaking of market share.
I'm sure a ton of people are going to laugh at me saying this, but I suspect those will be the same people who only a year or two ago laughed when the 'nut jobs' claimed renewables were soon going to out-compete fossil fuels at base-load generation on price. We may not be there quite yet everywhere, but by this point, it's clearly only a matter of time.
Additionally Lion batteries made today can be almost totally recycled with constituents recovered. As production increases, greater and greater amounts of discarded batteries will make for both a rich source of raw materials and an economic case to recover those materials.
Correct. Using H2 as a battery is terribly inefficient and dangerous. Pumped hydo is currently the most efficient, however, simply using BATTERIES is a far superior mechanism to store energy.
Hydrogen always looks like it's going to fill a need, then improvements in other areas (hello batteries) keep surpassing it. Hydrogen is saddled with inefficiencies that pure electrics just don't have. The energy lost through the generation, transportation, handling and storage of H2 is substantial. The technical challenges of handling the stuff are a nightmare on the large scale.
Finally, for niche applications: why would we go to all the work of generating/storing/handling H2 when, given the choice we could just use the energy to begin to synthesize hydrocarbon fuel from atmospheric carbon (hello biofuels) and use existing technology to utilize the stuff?
By 2040 manned aircraft may be a relic of history. Considering the rate of solar/battery improvement Unmanned drones may work fine with electricity. More likely, man made synthetic fuels will be available by then which will cover most of your list.
See, here's where your argument goes off the rails: Tesla owns the superchargers and is supplying the power. NOT YOU... Therefor, they are within their rights to limit usage on THEIR equipment.
When you go to the gym, you don't get to set up camp on the treadmill
When you go to the convenience store you don't get to leave your car out front and go on vacation
When you stop in a parkade, you don't get to leave your car past the time you've paid for.
Instead of imagining, you should try googling. Already lamppost solutions are in use in Europe for those without garages in downtown areas.
http://www.independent.co.uk/e...
As for apartments, why would you assume that they will only install a handfull of charge ports? If the demand is there it will happen. Eventually laws will be passed to compel complexes to do just that.
As for running wiring to a garage: The point was that it's a one time expense. New homes will start to come pre-wired. Because it's designed into the house and done at the time of construction, this will reduce the cost to the consumer. Same thing with older homes. One time expense.
Yup. Hydrogen is dead everywhere but Japan. Battery electric is here now. Where is the investment going to come from to build the infrastructure to distribute the Hydrogen, let alone generate it? Whereas the money is already being spent to build out the fast chargers for electric cars. As long as your home has a 120v outlet, the infrastructure to charge your car at home already exists.
With Major cities around the world starting to impose dates after which internal combustion will be banned, automakers are piling into battery electric because it's now the only proven technology which will comply.
When push comes to shove a good chunk of EV owners could actually get by only charging from a standard 120v outlet. Granted, they would have to keep their cars plugged in whenever they were not driving them and long distance (or even most medium distance) trips would be out of the question but the fact remains that what we have NOW is meeting the bare minimum of workability. Any new infrastructure just makes things that much better.
Couldn't disable a gas powered car? Sure they could. It would be trivial to include an over the air function to tell the onboard computer to turn the car off. As for fuel, I go to gas stations all the time that are 'prepay'. Guess what? The pumps don't work until you pay!
Hydrogen for cars is DEAD. It makes very little sense since it's simply more efficient, easier and cheaper to charge a car directly rather than mess around with all the storage and transport issues H2 presents. If you don't think electrical infrastructure can be sufficient, why in the world would you think that the massive investments needed for hydrogen will ever materialize?
Finally, Superchargers are a niche solution designed to enable LONG DISTANCE travel. Day to day, few drivers will use them as most charging will be done at home overnight and/or at work with a destination charger. This largely negates any 'refill' time advantage gas or H2 may have over batteries since day to day a vast majority of electric cars will never even have to go out of their way to recharge. They simply start full every time you get in them...
Musk was only pointing out how much space would be needed to help the Governors visualize that it's very doable. I don't see anyone actually suggesting that we carve out a 100X100 square of the US and actually do it. It makes far more sense to spread them across the continent, if for no other reason than you reduce the need for power transmission lines and you spread your peak generation times out according to your time zone. Throw in wind and hydro and the problem is licked.
Well put. I wholehearted agree with the sentiment of your statement. However, this wouldn't be Slashdot if I didn't interject with a semi off-topic reply. Throw proper sanitation and nutrition into your big four list of life saving advances and I think we've got our dramatically improved lifespans about accounted for!
Slashdot Mirror
Meh. A handful of fired employees saying bad things about their former employer... A bunch of short sellers on Wall Street currently in line to lose BILLIONS after shorting Tesla stock for months only to see the stock shoot up... not surprised at all to see a hatchet job like this.
I really can't tell if you're trolling or simply being sarcastic.
Nuclear has perpetually over promised and under-delivered. It's projects are routinely overpriced and behind schedule, not to mention that nobody wants it in their back yard. Furthermore, it's simply not necessary. It's entirely possible to run the grid with solar, wind and storage. Throw in hydro and geothermal and things just get easier.
Nuclear is a boondoggle... and that goes double for new unproven technologies. Even if governments were to decided to start a massive build-out of reactors, it would be decades before the first ones came online. What will we do in the meantime? That's far too late to forestall the worst negative effects of climate change.
Next, consider that renewables are already beginning to out-compete fossil fuels straight up on price. In 20-40 years time renewables will be pumping out gigawatts of power at fractions of a cent per watt. Who then is going to buy all that expensive nuclear power? Are we just going to hand ratepayers a bill for all these white elephant plants?
(And finally, why would I want thorium when in 40 years time I'm already being promised fusion reactors!)
Soon even the USA will be forced to put a price on carbon. Once demand begins to dip and fossil fuel prices start to fall, governments will start to increase the carbon pricing to prevent retaking of market share.
I'm sure a ton of people are going to laugh at me saying this, but I suspect those will be the same people who only a year or two ago laughed when the 'nut jobs' claimed renewables were soon going to out-compete fossil fuels at base-load generation on price. We may not be there quite yet everywhere, but by this point, it's clearly only a matter of time.
Additionally Lion batteries made today can be almost totally recycled with constituents recovered. As production increases, greater and greater amounts of discarded batteries will make for both a rich source of raw materials and an economic case to recover those materials.
Correct. Using H2 as a battery is terribly inefficient and dangerous. Pumped hydo is currently the most efficient, however, simply using BATTERIES is a far superior mechanism to store energy.
Hydrogen always looks like it's going to fill a need, then improvements in other areas (hello batteries) keep surpassing it. Hydrogen is saddled with inefficiencies that pure electrics just don't have. The energy lost through the generation, transportation, handling and storage of H2 is substantial. The technical challenges of handling the stuff are a nightmare on the large scale.
Finally, for niche applications: why would we go to all the work of generating/storing/handling H2 when, given the choice we could just use the energy to begin to synthesize hydrocarbon fuel from atmospheric carbon (hello biofuels) and use existing technology to utilize the stuff?
By 2040 manned aircraft may be a relic of history. Considering the rate of solar/battery improvement Unmanned drones may work fine with electricity. More likely, man made synthetic fuels will be available by then which will cover most of your list.
Check with your insurance company if you're so worried. https://qz.com/230055/car-insu...
See, here's where your argument goes off the rails: Tesla owns the superchargers and is supplying the power. NOT YOU... Therefor, they are within their rights to limit usage on THEIR equipment.
When you go to the gym, you don't get to set up camp on the treadmill
When you go to the convenience store you don't get to leave your car out front and go on vacation
When you stop in a parkade, you don't get to leave your car past the time you've paid for.
Especially when you've got folks turning their cars into bitcoin mining rigs: https://electrek.co/2017/11/29...
Are you sure about that?
Only in major centers. There are still tons of one gas station towns around once you get off the beaten path...
Instead of imagining, you should try googling. Already lamppost solutions are in use in Europe for those without garages in downtown areas.
http://www.independent.co.uk/e...
As for apartments, why would you assume that they will only install a handfull of charge ports? If the demand is there it will happen. Eventually laws will be passed to compel complexes to do just that.
As for running wiring to a garage: The point was that it's a one time expense. New homes will start to come pre-wired. Because it's designed into the house and done at the time of construction, this will reduce the cost to the consumer. Same thing with older homes. One time expense.
Yup. Hydrogen is dead everywhere but Japan. Battery electric is here now. Where is the investment going to come from to build the infrastructure to distribute the Hydrogen, let alone generate it? Whereas the money is already being spent to build out the fast chargers for electric cars. As long as your home has a 120v outlet, the infrastructure to charge your car at home already exists.
With Major cities around the world starting to impose dates after which internal combustion will be banned, automakers are piling into battery electric because it's now the only proven technology which will comply.
Long term it's probably still in the plan though People were kind of creeped out by the robotic arm so it may take some other form.
I hope you don't carry a cell phone.
About the same level of risk that the gas station you limp into is out of gas and you're stranded miles from home.
When push comes to shove a good chunk of EV owners could actually get by only charging from a standard 120v outlet. Granted, they would have to keep their cars plugged in whenever they were not driving them and long distance (or even most medium distance) trips would be out of the question but the fact remains that what we have NOW is meeting the bare minimum of workability. Any new infrastructure just makes things that much better.
Won't be long before new home builds include a 240v outlet ready to go in the garage for an electric car, if not the charger already installed.
The Volt is a good car. Hybrids though won't likely be very popular once people see the benefits of the full electric.
The policy only applies to cars being sold as of now. If you've already bought a car you're still free to use it as a taxi and charge for free.
Couldn't disable a gas powered car? Sure they could. It would be trivial to include an over the air function to tell the onboard computer to turn the car off. As for fuel, I go to gas stations all the time that are 'prepay'. Guess what? The pumps don't work until you pay!
Hydrogen for cars is DEAD. It makes very little sense since it's simply more efficient, easier and cheaper to charge a car directly rather than mess around with all the storage and transport issues H2 presents. If you don't think electrical infrastructure can be sufficient, why in the world would you think that the massive investments needed for hydrogen will ever materialize?
Finally, Superchargers are a niche solution designed to enable LONG DISTANCE travel. Day to day, few drivers will use them as most charging will be done at home overnight and/or at work with a destination charger. This largely negates any 'refill' time advantage gas or H2 may have over batteries since day to day a vast majority of electric cars will never even have to go out of their way to recharge. They simply start full every time you get in them...
Musk was only pointing out how much space would be needed to help the Governors visualize that it's very doable. I don't see anyone actually suggesting that we carve out a 100X100 square of the US and actually do it. It makes far more sense to spread them across the continent, if for no other reason than you reduce the need for power transmission lines and you spread your peak generation times out according to your time zone. Throw in wind and hydro and the problem is licked.
Going to be comical to see the Intel fanbois spending the next year or so justifying why they bought the slower, more expensive chip. LOL.
Well put. I wholehearted agree with the sentiment of your statement. However, this wouldn't be Slashdot if I didn't interject with a semi off-topic reply. Throw proper sanitation and nutrition into your big four list of life saving advances and I think we've got our dramatically improved lifespans about accounted for!