Tomorrow's battery medium

Really, recycling does not seem to work so well for >90% of electronics, or did you mean dumping it in some third world country?

It is not impossible, but the reasons to push it are wrong.

3) I does _force_ people to buy something new again, like in places where diesel cars are - or soon will be forbidden. Same as with new TV standards that only allow for more advertising, now DVB-T2 here from the end of year, so after just a few years of DVB-T throw all your stuff away again, for the second time since analog was replaced by DVB-T. There is more of that climate crap, now gas heaters will be forbidden, anybody who has those (everybody here) will eventually have to BUY again. What your brain does not seem to phantom is you are being had.

I do not care, let them play, current gov here is not doing so bad financially, very business oriented, But spare me the green crap plz.

There have been times I was in the car 3 hours a day to work and back, plus 8 hours work, plus half an hour or so break, and then when home late still had a lot to do, try it with a 'trickety powered car. Mine ran on LPG, then that got more and more expensive, it was CLEAN! So that will happen, as somebody else pointed out, with 'trickety powered cars too, money making, taxes.

I am all for 'trickety cars, but I also know enough about 'trickety not to expect miracles. And hydrogen ? Hindenburg, did you see that movie? Driving with a big LPG tank in the back was always on my mind. Had to fix the regulator once, broken PCB, miracle things are sold like that, Expect disaster. That was the relay circuit that was supposed to close the tank valves when the ignition impulses stopped, too bad it was 2 PCBs vertically soldered against each other without any mechanical support, broken of course. Good thing the relay lost power that way,. But LPG cars have blown up, 'trickety cars have caught fire. Hydrogen? Does that stuff not leak out of the smallest hole? Or was that helium? Anyways, people filling kid's balloons (while smoking) from the car sort of images .. better stop here. Ye Never Know Who Is Reading.

Hold on, do not fall off.

You lost the argument, you twist what I wrote, you live in your own Tesla dreamworld. It is a mental state that also shows from some of your other postings, a lack of reality perception.

primitive.

only

lucky

EEE.

ting

le,

very

lug

ng

rvice

sh-card

using

ar

hink

ght

e I live.

diesel cars are - or soon will be forbidden.

VB-T2 here from the end of year,

he second time since analog was replaced by DVB-T.

will eventually have to BUY again.

ially, very business oriented,

us 8 hours work, plus half an hour or so break,

wered car.

that will happen, as somebody else pointed out,

o expect miracles.

hat,

n the ignition impulses stopped,

mechanical support,

rickety cars have caught fire.

helium?

of images ..

Weird how folk can't see when they're being had. I suspect schools train th em to be naive.

PS The Hindenburg disaster was not caused by hydrogen, it was caused by the untested rocket-fuel based paint. Engineering objected to it on safety gro unds but were overruled. And every major form of transport, which airships were at the time, have suffered disasters & painful losses. Hindenburg had the misfortune of being he first such disaster ever filmed.

The main reason there are so few airships today is that there is no real ni che for them. Fuel efficient but slow & very vulnerable to wind. Ships aren 't so vulnerable. Also they're now required to use helium, which is very ex pensive.

NT

Are you claiming that oceans are mostly less than 4m deep? or that they are not water?

surface of earth 510Gm^2

ice-caps etc = 24Tm^3 (some small fraction of this is floating)

Do the math dumfuq.

Jasen Betts wrote in news:pq5gql$b5h$ snipped-for-privacy@gonzo.alcatraz:

You are aware that ten meters times the surface of the current ocean level is more than the volume a ten meter drop would be. A HUGE difference.

So ten meters MORE than what is already here is what is ludicrous.

Jasen Betts wrote in news:pq5hq6$b5h$ snipped-for-privacy@gonzo.alcatraz:

Too pussified to actually write out the word that is in your brain. Wow. No surprise though. You actually think that you are a more honorable person because you are too pussified to cuss in writing, but think the terms and thoughts are ok to elude to. Yeah... there is nothing wrong with your brain... or your honor. Sure.

fuq?

You are worse than the retarded putz who thinks he is unique or brainy because he hase spent the last 30 years referring to computers as "computahs". Well... not really... that shit is just plain stupid too.

Uh... the earth's surface is some 70% water, so if a 10 meter rise were to completely cover the earth's surface that would be 42% difference in area a nd a smaller difference in volume since the land is sloped. So unless the oceans had an average depth of less than... the 4 meters previously mention ed... it would seem to be clear who the idiot is.

Rick C.

Amazing what you can find on this new fangled "Internet" thing:

"The most recent estimate of the average ocean depth, calculated in

Some facts about the world oceans Average overall depth: 3800 m Average depth of Atlantic ocean 3926 m Average depth of Pacific ocean 4282 m Average depth of Indian ocean 3963 m If spread over the whole surface of the earth the average depth would be 2440m.

Not sure how the average comes out less than any of the three oceans. The Arctic is a wading pool?

I'm afraid the abject idiot here is you.

The West Antarctic ice sheet and the Greenland ice sheet together contain enough water to raise the global sea level by 10 metres when they slide off into the ocean.

Sea level rose by 120 metres at the end of the last ice so your ideas about the insignificance of "all of the water in the world" are comically wrong.

There's another 53 metres of sea level rise in the East Antarctic ice sheet, but that's unlikely to slide off any time soon (though geologically speaking it's a transient feature)

The picture you paint is of you as a total ignoramus. You've found a link that doesn't support your ideas at all, and have used it to try to prove that I don't know what I'm talking about. Being a potty-mouthed ignoramus is even sillier.

You really don't have a clue about the subject, do you.

Congratulate yourself. You've portrayed yourself as a more fatuous idiot than any satirist would have bothered trying to depict.

It's a pity that DecadentLinuxUserNumeroUno wasn't around at the end of the last ice age, when the sea level was 120 metres lower - of course if he we re he'd be dead by now - and arguing that melting the ice caps that existed then couldn't raise the sea level by 120 metres.

snipped-for-privacy@ieee.org wrote in news:a8481a71-d589-48e0-b50d- snipped-for-privacy@googlegroups.com:

Slide off? You are a true idiot.

The next freeze will never pass. we're done.

As if disagreeing with you makes anybody an idiot.

Why would you think that?

The amount of anthropogenic global warming we've created so far isn't likely to stop another ice age, but if we do manage to make the Arctic Ocean ice free all the year around, it might be difficult get the planet cold enough to trigger another.

In the longer term, continental drift will stop the current cycle of ice ages and interglacials - it's only been running for a couple of million years (which isn't long in geological time) and relies on a rather odd distribution of the continents.

Any form of transport where you carry the energy needed (as distinct from sail ships, electric trams, etc.) means you need to store a lot of energy in a compact space. It doesn't matter what form that energy storage takes - there is always a risk of it being let out rapidly and uncontrolled when something goes wrong. /Any/ car can catch fire - whether it is hydrogen, LPG, batteries, petrol, diesel.

Yes, hydrogen can leak out of small holes - making good hydrogen tanks is not easy. But it has the advantage over things like petrol that leaked fuel dissipates quickly and harmlessly in the air - it is not harmful to people or the environment, and non-flammable in small quantities.

People don't usually fill kids' balloons with hydrogen - mostly due to paranoia about hydrogen and burning airships. But if someone wants to smoke near their kids, and loses their eyebrows as a result, that's fine by me - maybe they will learn that it is the smoking that is bad for their kids, not the balloon or the hydrogen.

Yes. I believe the theory is that static buildups ignited the highly flammable aluminium paint.

Airships can definitely be useful in some niches. But the helium is expensive, and a limited resource that is essential in many areas. I'd like to see more hydrogen used instead of helium, at least in unmanned balloons and airships. Automated hydrogen-filled airships could be a cheap and efficient way to transport goods that don't need high speed delivery.

But the Hindenburg has made people paranoid about hydrogen, and hugely inflated their ideas about the risks. It's a bit like radioactivity and nuclear power in that respect - people go to pieces when they hear there is a radiation leak, even if the levels are equivalent to eating one banana a year.

No, they are not close to being mass market electric cars. A quick googling suggests they are something like 20% of the US market for electric cars. And electric cars are currently only bought by the rich. So you are talking about a car that is an acceptable price (as a complete package, including the requirement of owning a garage and home charger) that appeals to 20% of the richest 5% of the population of the richest state in the USA.

The cheapest, most limited range Teslas are something like 50% more expensive than modest electric cars like the Nissan Leaf.

I entirely agree that for a Tesla, you get many advantages compared to the cheaper BEVs - longer range and faster charging being key points. Tesla's price is not all about luxury or big fancy screens - it costs a lot to have such big batteries, engine power, etc.

Yes, good roads. Does a tourist bus coming the other direction block your interstate for a quarter of an hour while people squeeze past with an inch to spare, with a cliff rock on one side and a cliff drop on the other side? If not, then you have good roads.

Tesla is the company that tops the charts for complaints in this country. I don't mean they top the charts for complaints to car manufacturers - I mean they top the charts for complaints for /any/ company.

Don't get me wrong - I think Tesla have done wonderful things as a company, and their cars are amazing engineering. If nothing else, they have made it clear that you can have a fast, good-looking luxury car that runs on electricity, and that electric cars are not just for the save-the-whales gang. Other electric car manufacturers have a lot to thank them for.

But Tesla owners are often a bit like Apple owners - fanboys who think the products and company can do no wrong and are a world apart from all the inferior cheap copies.

Teslas may be great, and may be leading the way - but it is those inferior cheap copies that are "mass market", and that are important for moving the world to cleaner cars.

(This discussion is getting far too long and time-consuming. It is definitely interesting, and I am enjoying reading your point of view - even when I disagree with some of it. It is also educational to hear the state of progress in your particular area. But I am going to have to cut things short. I'll read all that you have written, but will snip bits and only reply to some of it.)

Most people need to make longer trips on occasion. That means they need a car that can make those longer trips. That means they can't have a BEV (even a Tesla) as their sole car. Until something changes dramatically - such as being able to do 5-minute charges at petrol-station like chargers along the way - that is going to limit the percentage of BEVs on the road.

Open google maps, and have it show Norway. Ask google to show the Tesla Superchargers. Now tell me how I get from the south-west of the country to the north, in a Tesla.

Teslas are fine for long distance when you have a journey with superchargers along the way, at convenient stopping points for meals, and you are happy to stop for the hour or so it takes. Outside of that, they won't work.

Certainly there are plenty of people from whom Teslas - or other electric cars - are great. There are many, many more for whom they are not.

And as I have said before, I will be glad when they are. When we looked at getting a new car (replacing a 20 year old Toyota) we investigated and tested electric cars. They are not yet ready for our needs - the cars are too limited for the price, the charging facilities are too limited where we live, the installation of home charging would be expensive and disruptive, the cars are physically not suitable for family transport. A hybrid was the best compromise for us, and uses much less petrol than the old car. The next time we need a new car, we will look again - maybe a BEV will be suitable by then.

Come back to us when the proportion of road miles travelled throughout the USA is over 10% powered by something other than fossil fuels. Then we can say we are not a very long way off.

You don't see a need for anything but batteries - that must mean car companies like Toyota and Honda are staffed by idiots for wasting money on anything else.

David Brown wrote

Just had a banana. I log radiation 24/7, been doing it for years. Very interesting things happen. I do keep the radium, uranium and tritium in a safe place though. Oh, and the thorium .. welding rods I have. Almost forgot about that.

But hydrogen? No But actually, in high school we had a teacher who used electrolysis to make hydrogen and oxygen, and then blew bubbles with it in soapy water, and had us ignite the bubbles... Not sure if I ever repeated that experiment myself... Yes, I did, he also make a gun filled with that gas.. steel pipe and sparkplug, it demonstrated Rhumkorff induction coil at the same time, cork, shot a hole in the glass in the back of the auditorium. Wild .

Bike runs on banana among other things... Does the 'adio tiffety help for speed? hehe :-)

No, it is not. It is certainly a big question /when/ gas and oil products will become economically infeasible for power generation, heating, transport, etc., but there is no question about /if/. It is getting more expensive to find new oil, more expensive to build the equipment needed to get it out, more expensive to run the extraction. And in many cases, the newer oil sources are lower quality, meaning more expense and less efficiency. It is getting steadily more expensive to mine coal, and steadily harder to clean up the mess from mining and burning it. On the opposite side, alternatives such as solar power and wind power are getting more efficient and cheaper as scales increase.

What is not clear is for how much longer it will make economic sense to burn fossil fuels for power. It could be a very long time if steadily more good sources are found - it could be short if technological breakthroughs decrease the cost of alternatives. And it could also be very short if we start factoring in the price of the ecological damage to the planet from burning fossil fuel.

Solid state batteries with greater energy and power densities than current Lithium batteries (by a factor of about 2 or 3, I think) and charge times cut by a factor of 10 or 20 - can /you/ think of any secondary uses? I think they will be very popular! But they have disadvantages compared to current battery types, including expense and even worse low-temperature characteristics. That makes them impractical for things like mobile phones.

There is a big middle-ground between these big, busy stations and the "village shop" size.

Tesla did try to make some solar-powered charger stations, but I believe that project failed totally.

The numbers are too speculative to do sensible sums.

In tiny quantities.

The cost of liquid nitrogen vehicles is regularly overrated.

Of course you need a clean electricity supply - that applies to all energy.

Small bites is an important first step towards large bites.

That depends on the country. Island, for example, has very cheap and very clean electricity from geothermal - they are lucky in their geology. Norway has cheap and clean electricity from hydroelectric. Some countries can do well from solar power or wind power. Nuclear power is quite flexible about placement.

In the numbers I saw for Norway, about 25% of the country's energy use is transport - mostly road, mostly fossil fuel. Changing to electricity or indirect electricity (like hydrogen) would mean a significant jump in the electricity generated - but it is entirely feasible.

There is a long way to go, but most countries are moving the right direction (despite some people's plans to prop up the coal industry).

How do wave, wind and solar power produce CO? ? No generation system is

But I agree that the UK is not the sort of place you would consider for mass use of solar panels. It has plenty of wind and waves, however, and there is a lot of hydroelectric power in some parts (Scotland and Wales).

I agree - electricity distribution is a challenge. That is why hydrogen could be a good alternative.

Cost has come down significantly with scale. Intermittent generation is a fundamental issue.

Enjoy life, and let the grandkids clean up the mess? It is long past time to change that attitude.

I don't care what Bill Sloman thinks - the effects of climate change are real, as are rising sea levels. Predictions about the future are never certain - we can be sure that man-made effects are causing big problems, but we can't be sure exactly how bad they will be.

Agreed.

I see no problem in having a variety of solutions that work for different types of usage.

What's special about a home charger? It isn't going to provide fast charging, and it would work just as well in a drive-way as in a garage.

It's a new product. Teething troubles happen.

Existing electric cars aren't "cheap copies" of Teslas, though they may morph into that when their manufacturers work out which Tesla features are worth copying, and find out ways of offering the features more cheaply.

Or they will have to hire a bigger car for longer trips.

That's got a lot easier recently. In Australia GoGet keeps pods of cars spread around the city in regular on-street parking.

If you want one you book it on-line, then go down to the car you have booked and wave your GoGet card over the card-reader (at the bottom of the windscreen). Do your driving, bring it back and pay the bill when it shows up.

Where do you get your statistics?

Home charging ought not to be expensive or disruptive. It doesn't have to be fast - the average car is parked 95% of the time.