The data is from 2016 - and most of the data is NOT from Australia. Explain all the other countries on the graph, then. Especially Germany and Denmark who loudly trumpet their wind power initiative.
I'm not double-counting them. What I'm saying is that you cannot ignore them in the quantification of impact of renewables. It's like only counting the calories in the crust, not the filling, of your pie. Can renewables reliably support power generation without them? No? Then they are necessarily part of the renewable strategy - and have to be included in any cost/benefit analysis.
If you need fossil fuel plants to backup - then any costs associated with that backup when it's run must be included in your analysis. Otherwise you're ignoring actual costs of your system. Can't do that if you want to be consistent and logical. Hippies or not.
Itisan SUV not a hatchback. Even Teslarati proclaims it an SUV. And it's curved roof and door compromise it's role as an SUV. Apparently, based on your statement, because of battery constraints. So better to make it a poor SUV, than come out with something that does 225 miles - but has a usable interior (in terms of square shape). Better to do a BMW X6-style body that is universally derided as useless - poor for a car, and unusable as an SUV.
So CO2 and other pollution spewed out by coal and gas plants to back up solar/wind is not counted? The externalities are dropped? That is silly. It's like saying because you already own a few pairs of shoes, you no longer need to budget for shoes. If coal and gas are integral to the deployment of renewables, then costs related to those coal and gas plants must ALSO be considered in the costs of renewables. Flat out.
They started selling autopilot over 4 years ago - and still haven't come close to delivering. What makes you think they can deliver it at some point in the future? Most companies don't announce vaporware 5+ years in advance...
Where are the numbers wrong? The sources of data are shown, and it's a scatter plot of countries showing cost of electricity against installed solar/wind per person. Data is data - if you don't like it, you don't get to ignore it. Unless you want to be unscientific?
The cost of non-renewable backups are never figured into the renewable plans. It's just assumed they'll be there. So it's an actual, real-life cost that is required to make a solar/wind supply work - and it's ignored because it already exists... The reality is that solar and wind is a cost in addition to the existing fossil (typically gas and coal) energy supply - but it's never really calculated that way.
the 700 bar tank on this page weighs less than 60 kg when fully charged - and it holds more hydrogen than an 80 kWh battery pack. Lighter weight means more efficient in operation AND much less road damage. It's 1/3rd or less the price of gasoline. And you can have your own at-home fueling station since your required inputs are power and water. But you do get the benefit of having instant charging when you're away from home - a few minutes at most. So all the benefits of electric, without the drawbacks (higher cost, higher weight, long recharging times).
Cost? About $800 for an 80 kWh equivalent tank, that seems a lot cheaper than an 80 kWh battery pack. And if we have an abundance of energy from solar and wind, why can't it make hydrogen? Is "wasting" solar power a bad thing?
Hydrogen allows for lighter vehicles (and weight is the biggest impact on road damage - which is a significant cost itself), near-instant refilling, and can utilize the 225,000+ gas stations around the US without the need to build (expensive!) new charging stations.
Funny, I don't know anyone who does not drive, at least 2-3 times a year, at least 350 miles one way. The two people with EVs are always having to plan where to stop for a while to recharge while the rest of us just reach our destination.
"the only time we have requested adjustments is when Spotify has tried to sidestep the same rules that every app other than an Apple app follows."
That extra, bolded part, is what Spotify is complaining about, Apple. You have terms you are hell-bent on forcing on others, but you don't have to play by those rules yourself, do you...
It's like that hour when you stand around at the supercharger with other EV fans, patting yourselves on the back for your choice in vehicle, as you watch normal cars go whizzing by. Except for those normal cars, that "recharge time" only takes 3-4 minutes and can happen just about anywhere on any trip (no special detours or plans needed) due to the ubiquity of that charging network.
Nope. My friend's Mercedes CLA250 typically gets 400+ miles per tank. My wife's 2015 Mustang regularly gets 400 miles per tank. That's 15 gallons, and about 27 MPG. Given the required MPG for modern cars, and a 12-15 gallon tank, a 400 mile range is pretty common.
I would say Toyota is right about some things but it's not what the market wants out of new vehicles today so they have to spin it anyway they can to keep up.
Let me guess, you own an electric, right? I guess you don't realize that, in 1 week of sales, Toyota sells about the same number of cars that Tesla has produced. In its entire life. I think Toyota knows what the market wants - 11+ million vehicle sales a year, and being the number 1 selling brand in the world, says they kind of know what the market wants - today.
"But what about people without garages?!?!" They'll have to wait for battery chargers to become more common.
So, what you're saying is that in the mean time use hybrids and ICE vehicles for a large segment of the population. Which seems like the bet Toyota is making. I don't know why you're arguing against it, then...
Or should they just not have the right to commute, until they can afford an EV and charger? What happens when fuel cell vehicles take over? After all - those combine the best of both worlds - near-instant charging, a ubiquitous infrastructure (nearly every gas station can be easily converted to a fuel cell station), and zero emissions.
I don't think you have access to more than a few dozen of those 120V outlets, between ownership and length of an extension cord. For the gas stations? You probably have access all of them, and at least half of them 24/7.
It seems to me you're the one claiming driving 14 hours isn't possible; the other poster hasn't said at all that EVs are unusable. Rather, you seem to be implying that EVs are the only reasonable solution. Only one side is being dictatorial and condescending - and it's the guy taking long trips in an ICE vehicle.
NOW you see the beauty of a gas (or, as Toyota wants to do, hydrogen) car! You CAN stop multiple times a day to refill, because each refill takes just 3-4 minutes! When your life is dictated by 1+ hour stops to recharge, suddenly longer trips become much more difficult...
Slashdot Mirror
Can you share the name of the utility, since the books are public?
The data is from 2016 - and most of the data is NOT from Australia. Explain all the other countries on the graph, then. Especially Germany and Denmark who loudly trumpet their wind power initiative.
What is your utility?
I'm not double-counting them. What I'm saying is that you cannot ignore them in the quantification of impact of renewables. It's like only counting the calories in the crust, not the filling, of your pie. Can renewables reliably support power generation without them? No? Then they are necessarily part of the renewable strategy - and have to be included in any cost/benefit analysis.
If you need fossil fuel plants to backup - then any costs associated with that backup when it's run must be included in your analysis. Otherwise you're ignoring actual costs of your system. Can't do that if you want to be consistent and logical. Hippies or not.
You win the Intarwebs for the day!
It is an SUV not a hatchback. Even Teslarati proclaims it an SUV. And it's curved roof and door compromise it's role as an SUV. Apparently, based on your statement, because of battery constraints. So better to make it a poor SUV, than come out with something that does 225 miles - but has a usable interior (in terms of square shape). Better to do a BMW X6-style body that is universally derided as useless - poor for a car, and unusable as an SUV.
So CO2 and other pollution spewed out by coal and gas plants to back up solar/wind is not counted? The externalities are dropped? That is silly. It's like saying because you already own a few pairs of shoes, you no longer need to budget for shoes. If coal and gas are integral to the deployment of renewables, then costs related to those coal and gas plants must ALSO be considered in the costs of renewables. Flat out.
This is just a Model 3, inflated like a balloon...
They started selling autopilot over 4 years ago - and still haven't come close to delivering. What makes you think they can deliver it at some point in the future? Most companies don't announce vaporware 5+ years in advance...
Where are the numbers wrong? The sources of data are shown, and it's a scatter plot of countries showing cost of electricity against installed solar/wind per person. Data is data - if you don't like it, you don't get to ignore it. Unless you want to be unscientific?
The cost of non-renewable backups are never figured into the renewable plans. It's just assumed they'll be there. So it's an actual, real-life cost that is required to make a solar/wind supply work - and it's ignored because it already exists... The reality is that solar and wind is a cost in addition to the existing fossil (typically gas and coal) energy supply - but it's never really calculated that way.
How did they break the trend of electricity costs increasing with deployed renewables that has struck all other nations?
Shows you how petty Apple really is... They easily spent more than that trying to avoid their legal obligation to pay in the first place...
the 700 bar tank on this page weighs less than 60 kg when fully charged - and it holds more hydrogen than an 80 kWh battery pack. Lighter weight means more efficient in operation AND much less road damage. It's 1/3rd or less the price of gasoline. And you can have your own at-home fueling station since your required inputs are power and water. But you do get the benefit of having instant charging when you're away from home - a few minutes at most. So all the benefits of electric, without the drawbacks (higher cost, higher weight, long recharging times).
Cost? About $800 for an 80 kWh equivalent tank, that seems a lot cheaper than an 80 kWh battery pack. And if we have an abundance of energy from solar and wind, why can't it make hydrogen? Is "wasting" solar power a bad thing?
Hydrogen allows for lighter vehicles (and weight is the biggest impact on road damage - which is a significant cost itself), near-instant refilling, and can utilize the 225,000+ gas stations around the US without the need to build (expensive!) new charging stations.
Funny, I don't know anyone who does not drive, at least 2-3 times a year, at least 350 miles one way. The two people with EVs are always having to plan where to stop for a while to recharge while the rest of us just reach our destination.
"the only time we have requested adjustments is when Spotify has tried to sidestep the same rules that every app other than an Apple app follows."
That extra, bolded part, is what Spotify is complaining about, Apple. You have terms you are hell-bent on forcing on others, but you don't have to play by those rules yourself, do you...
What's a refuel time?
It's like that hour when you stand around at the supercharger with other EV fans, patting yourselves on the back for your choice in vehicle, as you watch normal cars go whizzing by. Except for those normal cars, that "recharge time" only takes 3-4 minutes and can happen just about anywhere on any trip (no special detours or plans needed) due to the ubiquity of that charging network.
Nope. My friend's Mercedes CLA250 typically gets 400+ miles per tank. My wife's 2015 Mustang regularly gets 400 miles per tank. That's 15 gallons, and about 27 MPG. Given the required MPG for modern cars, and a 12-15 gallon tank, a 400 mile range is pretty common.
I would say Toyota is right about some things but it's not what the market wants out of new vehicles today so they have to spin it anyway they can to keep up.
Let me guess, you own an electric, right? I guess you don't realize that, in 1 week of sales, Toyota sells about the same number of cars that Tesla has produced. In its entire life. I think Toyota knows what the market wants - 11+ million vehicle sales a year, and being the number 1 selling brand in the world, says they kind of know what the market wants - today.
So - serious question here. Assuming the refueling infrastructure exists, what's the drawback to a fuel cell vehicle?
"But what about people without garages?!?!" They'll have to wait for battery chargers to become more common.
So, what you're saying is that in the mean time use hybrids and ICE vehicles for a large segment of the population. Which seems like the bet Toyota is making. I don't know why you're arguing against it, then...
Or should they just not have the right to commute, until they can afford an EV and charger? What happens when fuel cell vehicles take over? After all - those combine the best of both worlds - near-instant charging, a ubiquitous infrastructure (nearly every gas station can be easily converted to a fuel cell station), and zero emissions.
I don't think you have access to more than a few dozen of those 120V outlets, between ownership and length of an extension cord. For the gas stations? You probably have access all of them, and at least half of them 24/7.
It seems to me you're the one claiming driving 14 hours isn't possible; the other poster hasn't said at all that EVs are unusable. Rather, you seem to be implying that EVs are the only reasonable solution. Only one side is being dictatorial and condescending - and it's the guy taking long trips in an ICE vehicle.
NOW you see the beauty of a gas (or, as Toyota wants to do, hydrogen) car! You CAN stop multiple times a day to refill, because each refill takes just 3-4 minutes! When your life is dictated by 1+ hour stops to recharge, suddenly longer trips become much more difficult...