Electric Cars Not Yet Viable

[John Doe]

John Larkin <jjlarkin@highlandtechnology.com> wrote:

DecadentLinuxUserNumeroUno@decadence.org wrote:

John Larkin <jjlarkin@highlandtechnology.com> wrote
DecadentLinuxUserNumeroUno@decadence.org wrote:
Rick C <gnuarm.deletethisbit@gmail.com> wrote

If you actually were interested in information rather than BS,
you would read the article with a critical mind.

In the seventies there was not even a single thought about an
electric powered RC helicopter, much less multi-motor quad
copters.

Now, they are talking about mass producing a pilotless whirly
bird taxi srvice.

Folks are already buying up rooftop landing pad space leases.

Electric powered vehicles excel at short trips.

High-end battery-powered drones can stay in the air about 20
minutes, with no payload except a small camera. A weatherproof,
enclosed drone with passengers and luggage isn't going to make
it very far.

Have you seen the units in the news recently? They fly forward
at about 100 knots.

Other countries will advance faster than America will. We are
too regulatory prone.

There are LOTS of ultralight aircraft that require no FAA license.

The personal helicopter idea has been around for ages. I don't
think it's practical, especially using batteries. The hazards are
too many, the cost too high.

Not using batteries, but see YouTube for (Mosquito helicopter). It's
a popular personal helicopter. Autorotation helps reduce the risk.
Also, there are many gas powered paragliders and hang gliders
nowadays (that do not require a license).

 

[Lasse Langwadt Christense]

mandag den 24. juni 2019 kl. 22.28.24 UTC+2 skrev John Larkin:

On Mon, 24 Jun 2019 12:52:23 -0700 (PDT), omnilobe@gmail.com wrote:

A battery exchange station will replace the gas station.
It is faster to remove a battery block and put a fresh
block in than it is to fill a tank with gasoline. It is
safer than a self-driving auto-pilot tesla.

Is anyone doing that?

there was Israeli "Better place" but they went bankrupt

Gasoline has enormous weight advantages over batteries. Half of the
chemical inputs don't need to be loaded into the car, and none of the
used reactants need to be schlepped around.

something like 44MJ/kg vs. 1MJ/kg but electric probably 5 times more efficent that a combustion engine even more in Stop-and-go traffic

 

[Tom Gardner]

On 24/06/19 22:45, trader4@optonline.net wrote:

On Monday, June 24, 2019 at 5:38:33 PM UTC-4, Tom Gardner wrote:
On 24/06/19 20:52, omnilobe@gmail.com wrote:
A battery exchange station will replace the gas station.
It is faster to remove a battery block and put a fresh
block in than it is to fill a tank with gasoline. It is
safer than a self-driving auto-pilot tesla.

And be given a battery with, ahem, variable remaining
capacity, so you don't know its range until after
you have set off.

Do the math. A decent size gas station probably has twenty thousand gallons
of gas in tanks. That could fill a thousand empty cars that can then go
500 miles. An electric has about half that range and a huge ass battery.
Imagine the space to get the equivalent distance, the space to hold
2000 batteries compared to some underground tanks.

Just so; that's a standard characteristic of batteries
vs carbon-hydrogen bonds (or, for that matter, pure hydrogen
fuel).

But my comment was about the concept of exchanging batteries.

 

[John Larkin]

On Mon, 24 Jun 2019 22:36:18 +0100, Tom Gardner
<spamjunk@blueyonder.co.uk> wrote:

On 24/06/19 16:04, John Larkin wrote:
There's an article in today's newspaper about a bunch of people who
ride electric unicycles. Enthusiasts. Same idea.

When I was in HP Labs, a co-worker (who I bumped into
last week!) was learning to ride a unicycle.

Bumped into? Did anyone get hurt?


--

John Larkin Highland Technology, Inc
picosecond timing precision measurement

jlarkin att highlandtechnology dott com
http://www.highlandtechnology.com

 

On Monday, June 24, 2019 at 5:38:33 PM UTC-4, Tom Gardner wrote:

On 24/06/19 20:52, omnilobe@gmail.com wrote:
A battery exchange station will replace the gas station.
It is faster to remove a battery block and put a fresh
block in than it is to fill a tank with gasoline. It is
safer than a self-driving auto-pilot tesla.

And be given a battery with, ahem, variable remaining
capacity, so you don't know its range until after
you have set off.

Do the math. A decent size gas station probably has twenty thousand gallons
of gas in tanks. That could fill a thousand empty cars that can then go
500 miles. An electric has about half that range and a huge ass battery.
Imagine the space to get the equivalent distance, the space to hold
2000 batteries compared to some underground tanks.

 

[bitrex]

On 6/24/19 6:06 AM, Bill Sloman wrote:

On Monday, June 24, 2019 at 7:17:27 AM UTC+2, Rick C wrote:
On Monday, June 24, 2019 at 1:02:52 AM UTC-4, John Larkin wrote:
On Mon, 24 Jun 2019 00:41:49 -0000 (UTC), Cursitor Doom
curd@notformail.com> wrote:


And if there is no quantum leap in battery technology, they may never be
viable.


https://www.zerohedge.com/news/2019-06-23/inconvenient-truth-electric-cars

A gasoline pump moves about 10 GPM, which is equivalent to around 20
megawatts electrical. A car can fill up with gasoline in a few
minutes. Mine typically takes a minute or so.

If it takes an hour to fast-charge an electric car, the stall is
occupied for an hour. Or more if the owner doesn't immediately move
the car when it's charged. That's going to take some serious real
estate, and some serious waiting times.

Having more electric cars, even 25%, is going to need some major
logistics.

Why doesn't this guy get that EVs don't need a service station on every corner? Is he really that stupid or just obstinate?

Here, John, in case you are having trouble reading the small print...

EVS DON'T NEED CHARGING STATIONS WHEN PEOPLE CAN CHARGE AT HOME!!!

Did that get through?

Wow!

According to Bill, cars spend 95% of their time sitting. So there is a lot of time available to charge cars.

It's not "according to me". It's according to the people who have spent the time to look at it carefully. I provided links to my sources in the thread you are referring to. It does seem to be a widely accepted figure.

EVs use parking spaces when they charge, existing parking spaces. Gas pumps are made so you can pull through so lots of wasted space. Turn a 16 pump Sheets into an EV charging point and I bet you can get 30 or 40 charging spaces. I think Tesla actually has a station with 40 chargers.

They install nearly all Superchargers in existing parking decks and parking lots. No additional real estate needed! So maybe those gas stations can be blown up and turned into parks! Wouldn't that be awesome?

Not awesome perhaps, but a useful spot of urban improvement.

as far as I can tell JL neither believes that there are environmental
consequences to burning fossil fuels, or that the supply of fossil fuels
is in any way practically limited in other than a theoretical sense.

There's little point I guess to arguing for efficiency concerns with
someone who believes in a religious way that the thermodynamic
efficiency of motorized conveyances is of no practical concern.

 

[John Robertson]

On 2019/06/23 10:48 p.m., DecadentLinuxUserNumeroUno@decadence.org wrote:

John Larkin <jjlarkin@highlandtechnology.com> wrote in
news:qnm0he9eco3tvkoa5qambgeotdd7gf6qvt@4ax.com:

On Mon, 24 Jun 2019 04:34:43 +0000 (UTC),
DecadentLinuxUserNumeroUno@decadence.org wrote:

Rick C <gnuarm.deletethisbit@gmail.com> wrote in
news:686b0b30-c6fa-4a03-b58e-9994002a7bd8@googlegroups.com:

If you actually were interested in information rather than BS,
you would read the article with a critical mind.
...

Other countries will advance faster than America will. We are too
regulatory prone.

I'm sure you are correct - Bhopal, Love Canal, overcrowded ferries
sinking, no food inspections, etc. are a but small price to pay for
progress. Who needs regulations after all?

However Canadians are kind of stupid that way, we think our government
is here to help protect us from unscrupulous people, countries, and
companies.

Nobody's perfect, so any government can go off the rails from time to
time... Keeping a rein on government's excess is what elections are
supposed to do.

John

 

[John Larkin]

On Mon, 24 Jun 2019 22:12:23 -0000 (UTC), John Doe
<always.look@message.header> wrote:

John Larkin <jjlarkin@highlandtechnology.com> wrote:

Winfield Hill <winfieldhill@yahoo.com> wrote:
John Larkin wrote...

A weatherproof, enclosed drone with passengers and luggage isn't
going to make it very far.

An item like that will be an airplane, not a drone.

It will have the same dronish vertical takeoff/land props, so has
the same energy and reliability issues. And many of the proposed
shuttle things have no pilot, which I might call "drone."

Cape Air is adding a few dozen all-electric planes to its fleet,
for its short-haul passenger routes. They expect to save $400 in
aviation fuel per trip, compared to $10 for the electricity
fillups. With many trips/day the E-planes will pay for
themselves.

I was talking about downtown rooftop to airport shuttles. Electric
winged planes might well make sense for short trips, like SFO to
the Oakland airport maybe. Recharge time will be an issue.

Use spare batteries or spare aircraft.

Spare aircraft doesn't sound economical.

An electric powered sailplane would be cool, to avoid the tow.

Battery weight is the issue. Maybe if you can eject the battery
after reaching a desired altitude.

Not very economical either.


See YouTube for lots of gas powered
>ultralight aircraft, like powered paragliding and powered hang gliding.

Add "crash" and "die" to your search.


--

John Larkin Highland Technology, Inc
picosecond timing precision measurement

jlarkin att highlandtechnology dott com
http://www.highlandtechnology.com

 

[George Herold]

On Monday, June 24, 2019 at 4:28:24 PM UTC-4, John Larkin wrote:

On Mon, 24 Jun 2019 12:52:23 -0700 (PDT), omnilobe@gmail.com wrote:

A battery exchange station will replace the gas station.
It is faster to remove a battery block and put a fresh
block in than it is to fill a tank with gasoline. It is
safer than a self-driving auto-pilot tesla.

Is anyone doing that?

Gasoline has enormous weight advantages over batteries. Half of the
chemical inputs don't need to be loaded into the car, and none of the
used reactants need to be schlepped around.

Gasoline is great, and not going away soon.
Still don't electric vehicles have a place.
It's nice to keep the products of (gasoline)
combustion, out of the cities and crowded town
centers. Win's driving situation seems perfect for
an EV. (I see cash kick backs for EVs as more money for
rich people, and so don't like it. I feel the same about
'free' college and college debt forgiveness.)

George H.

--

John Larkin Highland Technology, Inc
picosecond timing precision measurement

jlarkin att highlandtechnology dott com
http://www.highlandtechnology.com

 

[Tom Gardner]

On 24/06/19 22:53, John Larkin wrote:

On Mon, 24 Jun 2019 22:36:18 +0100, Tom Gardner
spamjunk@blueyonder.co.uk> wrote:

On 24/06/19 16:04, John Larkin wrote:
There's an article in today's newspaper about a bunch of people who
ride electric unicycles. Enthusiasts. Same idea.

When I was in HP Labs, a co-worker (who I bumped into
last week!) was learning to ride a unicycle.

Bumped into? Did anyone get hurt?

Nah. We like each other

 

[bitrex]

On 6/24/19 8:36 PM, George Herold wrote:

On Monday, June 24, 2019 at 4:28:24 PM UTC-4, John Larkin wrote:
On Mon, 24 Jun 2019 12:52:23 -0700 (PDT), omnilobe@gmail.com wrote:

A battery exchange station will replace the gas station.
It is faster to remove a battery block and put a fresh
block in than it is to fill a tank with gasoline. It is
safer than a self-driving auto-pilot tesla.

Is anyone doing that?

Gasoline has enormous weight advantages over batteries. Half of the
chemical inputs don't need to be loaded into the car, and none of the
used reactants need to be schlepped around.

Gasoline is great, and not going away soon.
Still don't electric vehicles have a place.
It's nice to keep the products of (gasoline)
combustion, out of the cities and crowded town
centers. Win's driving situation seems perfect for
an EV. (I see cash kick backs for EVs as more money for
rich people, and so don't like it. I feel the same about
'free' college and college debt forgiveness.)

George H.

Except if you look at the statistics for e.g. Massachusett's cash
kick-backs for electric car sales the majority didn't go to wealthy
drivers buying luxury-class vehicles like the Model S, Model X, and
Jaguar above, it went to drivers like me buying reasonably-priced
"regular cars" like the Chevy Volt, Nissan Leaf, plug-in Prius, and Model 3.

Fully 65-70% of the funds did not go to Tesla Motors, at all, it went to
Chevrolet, Toyota, Honda, Nissan, Ford, and Volkswagen.

And it's similar in other states, MA is actually an abnormality in how
many luxury cars made the stats.

is being able to afford a single new commuter car from Nissan or Ford or
Chevrolet the definition of "rich", now?

 

[John Doe]

John Larkin <jjlarkin@highland_snip_technology.com> wrote:

John Doe <always.look@message.header> wrote:
John Larkin <jjlarkin@highlandtechnology.com> wrote:
Winfield Hill <winfieldhill@yahoo.com> wrote:
John Larkin wrote...

A weatherproof, enclosed drone with passengers and luggage
isn't going to make it very far.

An item like that will be an airplane, not a drone.

It will have the same dronish vertical takeoff/land props, so
has the same energy and reliability issues. And many of the
proposed shuttle things have no pilot, which I might call
"drone."

Cape Air is adding a few dozen all-electric planes to its
fleet, for its short-haul passenger routes. They expect to save
$400 in aviation fuel per trip, compared to $10 for the
electricity fillups. With many trips/day the E-planes will pay
for themselves.

I was talking about downtown rooftop to airport shuttles.
Electric winged planes might well make sense for short trips,
like SFO to the Oakland airport maybe. Recharge time will be an
issue.

Use spare batteries

An electric powered sailplane would be cool, to avoid the tow.

Battery weight is the issue. Maybe if you can eject the battery
after reaching a desired altitude.

Not very economical either.

But of course you would recover the battery. Given current technology,
the battery could cheaply and easily fly itself home (to a waypoint).

See YouTube for lots of gas powered ultralight aircraft, like
powered paragliding and powered hang gliding.

Add "crash" and "die" to your search.

Any recognizable names who have died? Probably mostly user error, as
with everything else. Dell Schanze has been doing acrobatic powered
paragliding for over a decade, jillions of his extreme videos on
YouTube. His EXTREME stunts are done close to the ground, where the
most danger exists. Not a scratch. Altitude is your friend. Carry a
spare parachute.

I saw a paraglider die who should have died. Setting a horrible
example. Acting like a lunatic while taking off. That's how evolution
works.

 

[John Larkin]

On Mon, 24 Jun 2019 22:04:32 -0400, bitrex <user@example.net> wrote:

On 6/24/19 8:36 PM, John Larkin wrote:
On Mon, 24 Jun 2019 22:12:23 -0000 (UTC), John Doe
always.look@message.header> wrote:

John Larkin <jjlarkin@highlandtechnology.com> wrote:

Winfield Hill <winfieldhill@yahoo.com> wrote:
John Larkin wrote...

A weatherproof, enclosed drone with passengers and luggage isn't
going to make it very far.

An item like that will be an airplane, not a drone.

It will have the same dronish vertical takeoff/land props, so has
the same energy and reliability issues. And many of the proposed
shuttle things have no pilot, which I might call "drone."

Cape Air is adding a few dozen all-electric planes to its fleet,
for its short-haul passenger routes. They expect to save $400 in
aviation fuel per trip, compared to $10 for the electricity
fillups. With many trips/day the E-planes will pay for
themselves.

I was talking about downtown rooftop to airport shuttles. Electric
winged planes might well make sense for short trips, like SFO to
the Oakland airport maybe. Recharge time will be an issue.

Use spare batteries or spare aircraft.

Spare aircraft doesn't sound economical.


An electric powered sailplane would be cool, to avoid the tow.

Battery weight is the issue. Maybe if you can eject the battery
after reaching a desired altitude.

Not very economical either.


See YouTube for lots of gas powered
ultralight aircraft, like powered paragliding and powered hang gliding.

Add "crash" and "die" to your search.



remember that for every man who regularly flies a gas-powered ultralight
aircraft there must have been a day where he woke up and said to
themselves "You know...I really should get into flying gas-powered
ultralight aircraft."

Apparently some people reason "I did something very dangerous, and
nothing bad happened, so I can do even more dangerous things." Like
taking meth, you progress to lethality.

something similar happened with every cabin cruiser boat owner:

https://i.kym-cdn.com/photos/images/newsfeed/000/431/312/67e.jpg

I don't know why anyone would want one of those.


--

John Larkin Highland Technology, Inc

lunatic fringe electronics

 

[bitrex]

On 6/24/19 8:36 PM, John Larkin wrote:

On Mon, 24 Jun 2019 22:12:23 -0000 (UTC), John Doe
always.look@message.header> wrote:

John Larkin <jjlarkin@highlandtechnology.com> wrote:

Winfield Hill <winfieldhill@yahoo.com> wrote:
John Larkin wrote...

A weatherproof, enclosed drone with passengers and luggage isn't
going to make it very far.

An item like that will be an airplane, not a drone.

It will have the same dronish vertical takeoff/land props, so has
the same energy and reliability issues. And many of the proposed
shuttle things have no pilot, which I might call "drone."

Cape Air is adding a few dozen all-electric planes to its fleet,
for its short-haul passenger routes. They expect to save $400 in
aviation fuel per trip, compared to $10 for the electricity
fillups. With many trips/day the E-planes will pay for
themselves.

I was talking about downtown rooftop to airport shuttles. Electric
winged planes might well make sense for short trips, like SFO to
the Oakland airport maybe. Recharge time will be an issue.

Use spare batteries or spare aircraft.

Spare aircraft doesn't sound economical.


An electric powered sailplane would be cool, to avoid the tow.

Battery weight is the issue. Maybe if you can eject the battery
after reaching a desired altitude.

Not very economical either.


See YouTube for lots of gas powered
ultralight aircraft, like powered paragliding and powered hang gliding.

Add "crash" and "die" to your search.

remember that for every man who regularly flies a gas-powered ultralight
aircraft there must have been a day where he woke up and said to
themselves "You know...I really should get into flying gas-powered
ultralight aircraft."

something similar happened with every cabin cruiser boat owner:

<https://i.kym-cdn.com/photos/images/newsfeed/000/431/312/67e.jpg>

 

[bitrex]

On 6/24/19 9:04 PM, John Doe wrote:

John Larkin <jjlarkin@highland_snip_technology.com> wrote:

John Doe <always.look@message.header> wrote:
John Larkin <jjlarkin@highlandtechnology.com> wrote:
Winfield Hill <winfieldhill@yahoo.com> wrote:
John Larkin wrote...

A weatherproof, enclosed drone with passengers and luggage
isn't going to make it very far.

An item like that will be an airplane, not a drone.

It will have the same dronish vertical takeoff/land props, so
has the same energy and reliability issues. And many of the
proposed shuttle things have no pilot, which I might call
"drone."

Cape Air is adding a few dozen all-electric planes to its
fleet, for its short-haul passenger routes. They expect to save
$400 in aviation fuel per trip, compared to $10 for the
electricity fillups. With many trips/day the E-planes will pay
for themselves.

I was talking about downtown rooftop to airport shuttles.
Electric winged planes might well make sense for short trips,
like SFO to the Oakland airport maybe. Recharge time will be an
issue.

Use spare batteries

An electric powered sailplane would be cool, to avoid the tow.

Battery weight is the issue. Maybe if you can eject the battery
after reaching a desired altitude.

Not very economical either.

But of course you would recover the battery. Given current technology,
the battery could cheaply and easily fly itself home (to a waypoint).

See YouTube for lots of gas powered ultralight aircraft, like
powered paragliding and powered hang gliding.

Add "crash" and "die" to your search.

Any recognizable names who have died? Probably mostly user error, as
with everything else. Dell Schanze has been doing acrobatic powered
paragliding for over a decade, jillions of his extreme videos on
YouTube. His EXTREME stunts are done close to the ground, where the
most danger exists. Not a scratch. Altitude is your friend. Carry a
spare parachute.

I saw a paraglider die who should have died. Setting a horrible
example. Acting like a lunatic while taking off. That's how evolution
works.

Yeah also men generally make better paragliders and computer programmers
than women because <some explanation about hunter gatherers 40,000 years
ago>.

eVoluTion faCTS

these are scientific FACTS, bro.

 

[John Larkin]

On Mon, 24 Jun 2019 18:41:48 -0400, bitrex <user@example.net> wrote:

On 6/24/19 5:59 PM, Lasse Langwadt Christensen wrote:
mandag den 24. juni 2019 kl. 22.28.24 UTC+2 skrev John Larkin:
On Mon, 24 Jun 2019 12:52:23 -0700 (PDT), omnilobe@gmail.com wrote:

A battery exchange station will replace the gas station.
It is faster to remove a battery block and put a fresh
block in than it is to fill a tank with gasoline. It is
safer than a self-driving auto-pilot tesla.

Is anyone doing that?

there was Israeli "Better place" but they went bankrupt


Gasoline has enormous weight advantages over batteries. Half of the
chemical inputs don't need to be loaded into the car, and none of the
used reactants need to be schlepped around.


something like 44MJ/kg vs. 1MJ/kg but electric probably 5 times more efficent that a combustion engine even more in Stop-and-go traffic


as far as I can tell JL neither believes that there are environmental
consequences to burning fossil fuels, or that the supply of fossil fuels
is in any way practically limited in other than a theoretical sense.

CO2 is greening the Earth. We have been in danger of running out over
the last hundred million years. The plants would all die if we don't
feed them.

Good thing we keep finding more oil and gas.


--

John Larkin Highland Technology, Inc

lunatic fringe electronics

 

[bitrex]

On 6/24/19 10:51 PM, John Larkin wrote:

On Mon, 24 Jun 2019 18:41:48 -0400, bitrex <user@example.net> wrote:

On 6/24/19 5:59 PM, Lasse Langwadt Christensen wrote:
mandag den 24. juni 2019 kl. 22.28.24 UTC+2 skrev John Larkin:
On Mon, 24 Jun 2019 12:52:23 -0700 (PDT), omnilobe@gmail.com wrote:

A battery exchange station will replace the gas station.
It is faster to remove a battery block and put a fresh
block in than it is to fill a tank with gasoline. It is
safer than a self-driving auto-pilot tesla.

Is anyone doing that?

there was Israeli "Better place" but they went bankrupt


Gasoline has enormous weight advantages over batteries. Half of the
chemical inputs don't need to be loaded into the car, and none of the
used reactants need to be schlepped around.


something like 44MJ/kg vs. 1MJ/kg but electric probably 5 times more efficent that a combustion engine even more in Stop-and-go traffic


as far as I can tell JL neither believes that there are environmental
consequences to burning fossil fuels, or that the supply of fossil fuels
is in any way practically limited in other than a theoretical sense.

CO2 is greening the Earth. We have been in danger of running out over
the last hundred million years. The plants would all die if we don't
feed them.
????????????????

nearly modern vascular green plants have existed on land for the better
part of 400 million years and flowering for 200 what exactly do you
think they require humans for

Good thing we keep finding more oil and gas.

In fact most petroleum company executives and scientists/engineers can
read and understand global warming/climate change science papers just
fine and likely don't at all dis-believe what they say, it's just they
don't see any pragmatic solution to it or don't particularly find the
information relevant to their duties as petroleum company executives.

They're not climate change skeptics they're simply unconcerned in the
way you seem to be. Perhaps many are also solipsists and believe that
events predicted to occur when they are likely not around have no
existential meaning. perhaps they are deeply religious and believe God
or Christ provides an escape route for humanity. a Christian myself I
believe there is fat chance of that.

 

On Tue, 25 Jun 2019 03:21:13 -0400, bitrex <user@example.net> wrote:

as far as I can tell JL neither believes that there are environmental
consequences to burning fossil fuels, or that the supply of fossil fuels
is in any way practically limited in other than a theoretical sense.

CO2 is greening the Earth. We have been in danger of running out over
the last hundred million years. The plants would all die if we don't
feed them.

As long as there are also sufficient more water and nutrients, the
higher CO2 level will increase plant growth.

Oh, do you suppose fresh water supplies _increase_ with increasing human
population and average temperatures?

With higher temperatures, the evaporation from sea and land will
increase, adding H2O into the atmosphere. To maintain humidity levels
below saturation, this will also increase total rainfall.

The rain might not fall in the same places as previously, but the
total rainfall is proportional to evaporation.

 

[bitrex]

On 6/25/19 3:09 AM, upsidedown@downunder.com wrote:

On Mon, 24 Jun 2019 19:51:50 -0700, John Larkin
jjlarkin@highlandtechnology.com> wrote:

On Mon, 24 Jun 2019 18:41:48 -0400, bitrex <user@example.net> wrote:

On 6/24/19 5:59 PM, Lasse Langwadt Christensen wrote:
mandag den 24. juni 2019 kl. 22.28.24 UTC+2 skrev John Larkin:
On Mon, 24 Jun 2019 12:52:23 -0700 (PDT), omnilobe@gmail.com wrote:

A battery exchange station will replace the gas station.
It is faster to remove a battery block and put a fresh
block in than it is to fill a tank with gasoline. It is
safer than a self-driving auto-pilot tesla.

Is anyone doing that?

there was Israeli "Better place" but they went bankrupt


Gasoline has enormous weight advantages over batteries. Half of the
chemical inputs don't need to be loaded into the car, and none of the
used reactants need to be schlepped around.


something like 44MJ/kg vs. 1MJ/kg but electric probably 5 times more efficent that a combustion engine even more in Stop-and-go traffic


as far as I can tell JL neither believes that there are environmental
consequences to burning fossil fuels, or that the supply of fossil fuels
is in any way practically limited in other than a theoretical sense.

CO2 is greening the Earth. We have been in danger of running out over
the last hundred million years. The plants would all die if we don't
feed them.

As long as there are also sufficient more water and nutrients, the
higher CO2 level will increase plant growth.

Oh, do you suppose fresh water supplies _increase_ with increasing human
population and average temperatures?

In greenhouses extra CO2 are something added to more than 1000 ppm
producing extra growth.

OTOH, in a relatively air tight greenhouse without CO2 added ( just
with outside 400 ppm,) after a sunny day the plant photosynthesis will
consume the CO2 down to about 200 ppm. Thus the plants do not feel
very well in the afternoon. During the night air leakage will restore
the CO2 levels back to 400 ppm.


Good thing we keep finding more oil and gas.

 

On Mon, 24 Jun 2019 19:51:50 -0700, John Larkin
<jjlarkin@highlandtechnology.com> wrote:

On Mon, 24 Jun 2019 18:41:48 -0400, bitrex <user@example.net> wrote:

On 6/24/19 5:59 PM, Lasse Langwadt Christensen wrote:
mandag den 24. juni 2019 kl. 22.28.24 UTC+2 skrev John Larkin:
On Mon, 24 Jun 2019 12:52:23 -0700 (PDT), omnilobe@gmail.com wrote:

A battery exchange station will replace the gas station.
It is faster to remove a battery block and put a fresh
block in than it is to fill a tank with gasoline. It is
safer than a self-driving auto-pilot tesla.

Is anyone doing that?

there was Israeli "Better place" but they went bankrupt


Gasoline has enormous weight advantages over batteries. Half of the
chemical inputs don't need to be loaded into the car, and none of the
used reactants need to be schlepped around.


something like 44MJ/kg vs. 1MJ/kg but electric probably 5 times more efficent that a combustion engine even more in Stop-and-go traffic


as far as I can tell JL neither believes that there are environmental
consequences to burning fossil fuels, or that the supply of fossil fuels
is in any way practically limited in other than a theoretical sense.

CO2 is greening the Earth. We have been in danger of running out over
the last hundred million years. The plants would all die if we don't
feed them.

As long as there are also sufficient more water and nutrients, the
higher CO2 level will increase plant growth.

In greenhouses extra CO2 are something added to more than 1000 ppm
producing extra growth.

OTOH, in a relatively air tight greenhouse without CO2 added ( just
with outside 400 ppm,) after a sunny day the plant photosynthesis will
consume the CO2 down to about 200 ppm. Thus the plants do not feel
very well in the afternoon. During the night air leakage will restore
the CO2 levels back to 400 ppm.

Good thing we keep finding more oil and gas.