Electric Cars Require Fewer Jobs to Build

[bitrex]

On 10/7/19 9:37 PM, Rick C wrote:

On Monday, October 7, 2019 at 12:49:47 PM UTC-4, Rob wrote:
bitrex <user@example.net> wrote:
I think it may actually a high intensity array of white LEDs, not a
strobe. People put all sorts of weird crap on the license plates to try
to defeat 'em like IR LEDs or blinking LEDs pointing backwards, and
darkly tinted plate covers, reflective tape, stuff like that. High
intensity visible light flash will defeat any of that low-effort ideas I
believe.

Over here that is an offense that would result in a hefty fine when
you are caught. Maybe that is because most traffic tickets are issued
after cameras have taken pictures some way, and it has been like that
for decades. I believe in the USA for many situations it is required
that you are being stopped by a policeman, but that rarely happens here.

No, traffic cameras are widely used, just not all that pervasively... i.e. not at every intersection. Usually they are used at trouble spots.

The problem I have is that they are often operated by a company on a profit sharing basis with the local jurisdiction. So the company has little incentive to be accurate, rather they have every incentive to issue summons. There is no police officer reviewing anything. More importantly, there is no accuser to question in court. In fact, in many jurisdictions they don't even give you a trial, it's a hearing with a review board. In other words, it's guilty until proven innocent.

You have a "review board" in red light camera traffic court here, such
as it is, they roll the footage for everyone in the court. Judge lets
everyone watch it and when a car blasts thru the intersection without
trying to stop at all, then looks quizzically at the audience and
sardonically says "Well, ladies and gentlemen, did that look like a
stop, to you?"

Light laughter from the audience. Judge looks back at defendant. Case
closed. please pay by cash or charge within 30 days.

 

[Rick C]

On Monday, October 7, 2019 at 10:01:18 PM UTC-4, bitrex wrote:

On 10/7/19 9:37 PM, Rick C wrote:
On Monday, October 7, 2019 at 12:49:47 PM UTC-4, Rob wrote:
bitrex <user@example.net> wrote:
I think it may actually a high intensity array of white LEDs, not a
strobe. People put all sorts of weird crap on the license plates to try
to defeat 'em like IR LEDs or blinking LEDs pointing backwards, and
darkly tinted plate covers, reflective tape, stuff like that. High
intensity visible light flash will defeat any of that low-effort ideas I
believe.

Over here that is an offense that would result in a hefty fine when
you are caught. Maybe that is because most traffic tickets are issued
after cameras have taken pictures some way, and it has been like that
for decades. I believe in the USA for many situations it is required
that you are being stopped by a policeman, but that rarely happens here.

No, traffic cameras are widely used, just not all that pervasively... i..e. not at every intersection. Usually they are used at trouble spots.

The problem I have is that they are often operated by a company on a profit sharing basis with the local jurisdiction. So the company has little incentive to be accurate, rather they have every incentive to issue summons.. There is no police officer reviewing anything. More importantly, there is no accuser to question in court. In fact, in many jurisdictions they don't even give you a trial, it's a hearing with a review board.

You don't get a trial because civil infractions, taken individually,
aren't crimes

Sorry, don't understand. Traffic tickets get a trial when issued by a cop. How is this different?

In other words, it's guilty until proven innocent.


Welcome to tort law HTH

--

Rick C.

-+-+- Get 2,000 miles of free Supercharging
-+-+- Tesla referral code - https://ts.la/richard11209

 

[bitrex]

On 10/7/19 10:14 PM, bitrex wrote:

On 10/7/19 9:37 PM, Rick C wrote:
On Monday, October 7, 2019 at 12:49:47 PM UTC-4, Rob wrote:
bitrex <user@example.net> wrote:
I think it may actually a high intensity array of white LEDs, not a
strobe. People put all sorts of weird crap on the license plates to try
to defeat 'em like IR LEDs or blinking LEDs pointing backwards, and
darkly tinted plate covers, reflective tape, stuff like that. High
intensity visible light flash will defeat any of that low-effort
ideas I
believe.

Over here that is an offense that would result in a hefty fine when
you are caught.  Maybe that is because most traffic tickets are issued
after cameras have taken pictures some way, and it has been like that
for decades.  I believe in the USA for many situations it is required
that you are being stopped by a policeman, but that rarely happens here.

No, traffic cameras are widely used, just not all that pervasively...
i.e. not at every intersection.  Usually they are used at trouble spots.

The problem I have is that they are often operated by a company on a
profit sharing basis with the local jurisdiction.  So the company has
little incentive to be accurate, rather they have every incentive to
issue summons.  There is no police officer reviewing anything.  More
importantly, there is no accuser to question in court.  In fact, in
many jurisdictions they don't even give you a trial, it's a hearing
with a review board.  In other words, it's guilty until proven innocent.


You have a "review board" in red light camera traffic court here

rephrase, it's not a special traffic court. On certain days there tend
to be more traffic offenses there because that's when they schedule 'em,
but there are always a smattering of holdovers from the drunk tank,
shoplifters, and random hoodlums they picked up over the weekend waiting
their turn and available to laugh at your camera footage, too. No
special treatment

 

On Mon, 7 Oct 2019 18:43:53 -0700 (PDT), Phil Allison
<pallison49@gmail.com> wrote:

John Larkin Criminal Asshole puked:

---------------------------------



I'm cheerful and polite and friendly around nice people.


** Nice = only the ones he thinks are the same as him.


Why are you always shrieking and cursing and insulting everyone?


** John, I am not insulting you - I am outing you.

Really? I don't have many secrets.


** Hiding in plain sight needs outing.



For your constant, despicable postings here.


I try to be cheerful and helpful and talk about electronics.


** FFS that is not what Larkin does at all..



You really did not expect to have it all your own way for ever - did you ?

Why not?


** What a fucking narcisistics pig !!!


You didn't answer:


** When did you stop beating your wife and daughter - John ?

I have never struck a female in my life. I've had much nicer uses for
them.

Besides, in a pitched battle The Brat would beat me senseless. She's
an athelete. And she's my boss.



--

John Larkin Highland Technology, Inc

lunatic fringe electronics

 

[bitrex]

On 10/7/19 10:17 PM, Rick C wrote:

On Monday, October 7, 2019 at 10:01:18 PM UTC-4, bitrex wrote:
On 10/7/19 9:37 PM, Rick C wrote:
On Monday, October 7, 2019 at 12:49:47 PM UTC-4, Rob wrote:
bitrex <user@example.net> wrote:
I think it may actually a high intensity array of white LEDs, not a
strobe. People put all sorts of weird crap on the license plates to try
to defeat 'em like IR LEDs or blinking LEDs pointing backwards, and
darkly tinted plate covers, reflective tape, stuff like that. High
intensity visible light flash will defeat any of that low-effort ideas I
believe.

Over here that is an offense that would result in a hefty fine when
you are caught. Maybe that is because most traffic tickets are issued
after cameras have taken pictures some way, and it has been like that
for decades. I believe in the USA for many situations it is required
that you are being stopped by a policeman, but that rarely happens here.

No, traffic cameras are widely used, just not all that pervasively... i.e. not at every intersection. Usually they are used at trouble spots.

The problem I have is that they are often operated by a company on a profit sharing basis with the local jurisdiction. So the company has little incentive to be accurate, rather they have every incentive to issue summons. There is no police officer reviewing anything. More importantly, there is no accuser to question in court. In fact, in many jurisdictions they don't even give you a trial, it's a hearing with a review board.

You don't get a trial because civil infractions, taken individually,
aren't crimes

Sorry, don't understand. Traffic tickets get a trial when issued by a cop. How is this different?

What kind of "trial" are we talking? Around here for civil infractions
like speeding and running red lights you go before a judge and plead
your case to the best of your ability with the 20 seconds you have
available (there are lot of people waiting...) and the judge says "Eh,
no" and you usually leave with nothing but your original ticket and
still a fine to pay. it's that way even if they're issued by a police
officer

 

On Mon, 07 Oct 2019 12:50:08 -0700, John Larkin
<jlarkin@highland_atwork_technology.com> wrote:

On Sun, 6 Oct 2019 14:17:23 -0000 (UTC), John Doe
always.look@message.header> wrote:

An America-bashing Third World troll...

Who hasn't himself worked in decades.

Unemployable.

 

On Mon, 7 Oct 2019 07:17:23 -0700 (PDT), Rick C
<gnuarm.deletethisbit@gmail.com> wrote:

On Sunday, October 6, 2019 at 10:07:51 PM UTC-4, k...@notreal.com wrote:
On Sun, 6 Oct 2019 18:53:45 -0700 (PDT), edward.ming.lee@gmail.com
wrote:

On Sunday, October 6, 2019 at 6:40:36 PM UTC-7, k...@notreal.com wrote:
On Sun, 6 Oct 2019 17:48:17 -0700 (PDT), Michael Terrell
terrell.michael.a@gmail.com> wrote:

On Sunday, October 6, 2019 at 2:05:18 AM UTC-4, edward...@gmail.com wrote:

"Sono Motors suggests its car charge up just over 18 miles on a 24% efficient solar cell. If NovaSolix can get to that 90% number, that’s 67 miles of sunlight driving. The average daily miles driven in the USA is about 40 miles per person."


14,600 miles per year? I generally drive under 3,000 miles per year.

And we drive well over 15,000 miles on each vehicle each year.

So, average of 14,000 per year or 40 miles per day sound right. Actually, i drive more due to limited charging stations and keep making additional trips to keep charge up. With on-board solar charger, i can probably drive less.

It's just under that to and from work. There are also a few 1200mi
trips in there (and one this coming week).

NovaSolix's 40% solar modules on roof and hood is close to a level 1 charger onboard.

Complete nonsense.

Yes, many times you are full of nonsense.

40% is indeed nonsense, moron.

That would provide me with 200 miles of charging a week give or take. It would certainly reduce my charging and potentially make it practical for me to charge at home and not need to use Supercharging at all.

Bullshit.

 

[bitrex]

On 10/7/19 10:25 PM, bitrex wrote:

The problem I have is that they are often operated by a company on a
profit sharing basis with the local jurisdiction.  So the company
has little incentive to be accurate, rather they have every
incentive to issue summons.  There is no police officer reviewing
anything.  More importantly, there is no accuser to question in
court.  In fact, in many jurisdictions they don't even give you a
trial, it's a hearing with a review board.

You don't get a trial because civil infractions, taken individually,
aren't crimes

Sorry, don't understand.  Traffic tickets get a trial when issued by a
cop.  How is this different?

What kind of "trial" are we talking? Around here for civil infractions
like speeding and running red lights you go before a judge and plead
your case to the best of your ability with the 20 seconds you have
available (there are lot of people waiting...) and the judge says "Eh,
no" and you usually leave with nothing but your original ticket and
still a fine to pay. it's that way even if they're issued by a police
officer

I've been in traffic court three or four times in the past decade, only
ever saw a person argue their way out of a speeding ticket...one time.
because he brought several pieces of hard evidence and print outs that
there was missing/obscured sign-age in the area.

Just talking or begging or arguing without some kind of tangible
evidence of a concrete plausible mistake or error on the state or the
officer's part seems to get nowhere.

 

[Bill Sloman]

On Sunday, October 6, 2019 at 7:03:41 AM UTC+11, Rick C wrote:

On Friday, October 4, 2019 at 11:02:40 PM UTC-4, Bill Sloman wrote:
On Friday, October 4, 2019 at 9:16:17 PM UTC+10, Phil Allison wrote:
Bill Sloman wrote:

Moving people over to electric cars is going to be particularly
important for these countries.

** Be much like re-arranging the deck chairs on the proverbial...

EVs need electric energy, masses of the stuff.

So major upgrades to power generation capacity ( like 3 or 4 times now) and matching upgrades to the entire power grid - at huge public expense.

Wrong.

** Nope.

https://slate.com/human-interest/2014/05/electric-vehicles-how-much-energy-would-we-need-to-fuel-them.html

"So the increase in yearly electricity demand would be about 29 percent.."

This article uses a very poor method of estimating the electrical energy needed, by equating kWh per gallon of gas to electrical power saying they "assume" EVs are four times more efficient thermally...

The easy way that doesn't require "assumptions" is to look at the miles driven. Most EVs get 4 to 5 mi/kWh, the rest is trivial. I did this once a while back, but here it is again.

"3.22 trillion miles on the nation's roads last year, up 2.8 percent from 3.1 trillion miles in 2015"

3.22 trillion miles divided by 4 mi/kWh = 805 TWh

"In 2018, about 4,178 billion kilowatthours (kWh) (or 4.18 trillion kWh) of electricity were generated at utility-scale electricity generation facilities in the United States."

805 TWh / 4180 TWh = 19%

The only "assumption" is the m/kWh of the EV, I used the number for a Tesla model 3 which is also not a bad number for the Nissan Leaf I believe. This value will improve as batteries and motors and electronics improve.

The mile/kWh assumption is questionable. Quite a lot of the gasoline now being burned is burnt in larger (and heavier) cars than the Tesla 3, and their air resistance and rolling resistance (heat generated by the deformation of the tyres as they go round) means that they need more kWh per mile.

Light commercial vehicles do more miles per year than private cars, and that's probably enough to account for the difference between the Slate's 1111 TWh and your 805 TWh.

It is comforting that your completely independent estimate is only 30% lower than the Slate's figure. t makes Phil estimate of something roughly an order of magnitude higher even less plausible.

The energy used to drive US cars around is about 3O% of the US
generating capacity.

** Meaningless to any of my points.

You claimed " So major upgrades to power generation capacity ( like 3 or 4 times now)" which is clearly different from the Slate's figure.

That's a direct and meaningful contradiction.

Even Slate was a pessimist. But then those are US figures??? Maybe in the third world where Phil lives it's a different issue.

Australia is an advanced industrial country. Life expectancy here is higher than in the US - we are fourth on the international league table and the US is thirty-first.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_life_expectancy

It's also got marginally higher CO2 emissions per head - 16.2 metric tons per head per year - than the US or Canada at 15 and 14.9 tons per head respectively.

In that sense it is depressingly first world.

> It has been made clear that in the UK they have trouble putting a kettle on.

Not in the bits where I lived from 1971 to 1993.

--
Bill Sloman, Sydney

 

[bitrex]

On 10/5/19 11:29 PM, Phil Allison wrote:

edward...@gmail.com wrote:

--------------------------


They probably don't have long enough power cords from home to vehicle.


** Childish.


However, if there is a need, there is a way. Using vehicle roof top
(around 1 sq. meter) and 40% solar efficiency, you can get 40 to 50
miles per 10 hours sun light. Yes, someone is claiming 40% and
possibly higher.


** How utterly absurd.

Solar / EV fanatics have no bounds to the insanities they believe and try to foist on others.

Makes spherical chickens seem quite real ...



.... Phil

Second only to the insanities that people who don't have one believe,
like the idea that the air conditioner will cause your range to drop by
half, because they believe car air conditioners have to draw some absurd
power like 6kW to keep a 150 cubic foot volume cool

 

On Monday, October 7, 2019 at 7:30:43 PM UTC-7, k...@notreal.com wrote:

On Mon, 7 Oct 2019 07:17:23 -0700 (PDT), Rick C
gnuarm.deletethisbit@gmail.com> wrote:

On Sunday, October 6, 2019 at 10:07:51 PM UTC-4, k...@notreal.com wrote:
On Sun, 6 Oct 2019 18:53:45 -0700 (PDT), edward.ming.lee@gmail.com
wrote:

On Sunday, October 6, 2019 at 6:40:36 PM UTC-7, k...@notreal.com wrote:
On Sun, 6 Oct 2019 17:48:17 -0700 (PDT), Michael Terrell
terrell.michael.a@gmail.com> wrote:

On Sunday, October 6, 2019 at 2:05:18 AM UTC-4, edward...@gmail.com wrote:

"Sono Motors suggests its car charge up just over 18 miles on a 24% efficient solar cell. If NovaSolix can get to that 90% number, that’s 67 miles of sunlight driving. The average daily miles driven in the USA is about 40 miles per person."


14,600 miles per year? I generally drive under 3,000 miles per year.

And we drive well over 15,000 miles on each vehicle each year.

So, average of 14,000 per year or 40 miles per day sound right. Actually, i drive more due to limited charging stations and keep making additional trips to keep charge up. With on-board solar charger, i can probably drive less.

It's just under that to and from work. There are also a few 1200mi
trips in there (and one this coming week).

NovaSolix's 40% solar modules on roof and hood is close to a level 1 charger onboard.

Complete nonsense.

Yes, many times you are full of nonsense.

40% is indeed nonsense, moron.

Sun light is half visible, half UV & IR. Photovoltaic cell is limited to only half of the solar energy (probably less than 30%). Carbon nanotube tuning to the visible and IR region can capture upwards of 40%. Several companies demonstrated the potential, some had real prototype. I guess the world is full of "nonsense", moron.

 

[bitrex]

On 10/5/19 11:29 PM, Phil Allison wrote:

edward...@gmail.com wrote:

--------------------------


They probably don't have long enough power cords from home to vehicle.


** Childish.


However, if there is a need, there is a way. Using vehicle roof top
(around 1 sq. meter) and 40% solar efficiency, you can get 40 to 50
miles per 10 hours sun light. Yes, someone is claiming 40% and
possibly higher.


** How utterly absurd.

Solar / EV fanatics have no bounds to the insanities they believe and try to foist on others.

Makes spherical chickens seem quite real ...



.... Phil

That is to say Americans also greatly object to an all electric vehicle
infrastructure.

There are sensible reasons to object to that but they tend to prefer to
object on the grounds of retarded reasons like "it won't work in the snow"

 

[bitrex]

On 10/7/19 9:57 PM, Rick C wrote:

On Monday, October 7, 2019 at 9:32:25 PM UTC-4, John Larkin wrote:
On Mon, 7 Oct 2019 17:55:56 -0700 (PDT), Phil Allison
pallison49@gmail.com> wrote:

John Larkin wrote:

---------------------


The hold over our employees heads is salary, 401K, bonuses, medical
care, interesting work, great people to work with, and free ice cream
sandwiches.


** However, But the boss is a Aspergers nut case and egomanic who micro-manages, insults, stalks and harasses anyone who he sees as different to himself.

Not a bit.

** Larkin is a congentital liar.

I'm cheerful and polite and friendly around nice people.


** Nice = only the ones he thinks are the same as him.


Why are you always shrieking and cursing and insulting everyone?


** John, I am not insulting you - I am outing you.

Really? I don't have many secrets.


For your constant, despicable postings here.

I try to be cheerful and helpful and talk about electronics. That's
the topic, not oh-tut-tut personality stuff. That's what Facebook is
for.


You really did not expect to have it all your own way for ever - did you ?

Why not? It doesn't cost anybody anything.


You didn't answer:

Why are you always insulting and shrieking and cursing?

Are you having fun?

You are bizarre! You say you're not into all the "oh-tut-tut personality stuff", then you accuse Phil of insulting, shrieking and cursing? If you aren't into the drama of the group, why do you keep asking about this?

I keep asking you about this because I find you a truly unusual personality... in the clinical sense. Clearly you have some sort of denial going on. You do things you don't even realize you are doing. Yes, clinical is the right word.

I've heard guys in tech complain that they don't want to work in an
office with women because they cause "too much drama."

....

 

[Bill Sloman]

On Tuesday, October 8, 2019 at 1:29:47 PM UTC+11, k...@notreal.com wrote:

On Mon, 07 Oct 2019 12:50:08 -0700, John Larkin
jlarkin@highland_atwork_technology.com> wrote:

On Sun, 6 Oct 2019 14:17:23 -0000 (UTC), John Doe
always.look@message.header> wrote:

An America-bashing Third World troll...

Who hasn't himself worked in decades.

Unemployable.

As unemployable as most 76-year-olds, unfortunately. I do get very occasional job interviews, but you do have to be the only possible candidate to get hired at my age. I've got specialised skills, but it's been a while since I exercised them for money.

--
Bill Sloman, Sydney

 

[Rick C]

On Tuesday, October 8, 2019 at 1:12:13 AM UTC-4, bitrex wrote:

On 10/8/19 1:00 AM, Rick C wrote:
On Monday, October 7, 2019 at 10:25:48 PM UTC-4, bitrex wrote:
On 10/7/19 10:17 PM, Rick C wrote:
On Monday, October 7, 2019 at 10:01:18 PM UTC-4, bitrex wrote:
On 10/7/19 9:37 PM, Rick C wrote:
On Monday, October 7, 2019 at 12:49:47 PM UTC-4, Rob wrote:
bitrex <user@example.net> wrote:
I think it may actually a high intensity array of white LEDs, not a
strobe. People put all sorts of weird crap on the license plates to try
to defeat 'em like IR LEDs or blinking LEDs pointing backwards, and
darkly tinted plate covers, reflective tape, stuff like that. High
intensity visible light flash will defeat any of that low-effort ideas I
believe.

Over here that is an offense that would result in a hefty fine when
you are caught. Maybe that is because most traffic tickets are issued
after cameras have taken pictures some way, and it has been like that
for decades. I believe in the USA for many situations it is required
that you are being stopped by a policeman, but that rarely happens here.

No, traffic cameras are widely used, just not all that pervasively.... i.e. not at every intersection. Usually they are used at trouble spots.

The problem I have is that they are often operated by a company on a profit sharing basis with the local jurisdiction. So the company has little incentive to be accurate, rather they have every incentive to issue summons. There is no police officer reviewing anything. More importantly, there is no accuser to question in court. In fact, in many jurisdictions they don't even give you a trial, it's a hearing with a review board.

You don't get a trial because civil infractions, taken individually,
aren't crimes

Sorry, don't understand. Traffic tickets get a trial when issued by a cop. How is this different?

What kind of "trial" are we talking? Around here for civil infractions
like speeding and running red lights you go before a judge and plead
your case to the best of your ability with the 20 seconds you have
available (there are lot of people waiting...) and the judge says "Eh,
no" and you usually leave with nothing but your original ticket and
still a fine to pay. it's that way even if they're issued by a police
officer

Who has to go to court for camera offenses, the driver or the owner?

Do they have good footage of the driver's face?


Who cares, the judge would just say "Your car doesn't seem to have been
reported stolen lately so if someone else was driving your car at the
time feel free to have them re-reimburse you"

lol! That's a great court system you got there. "I don't care if you are guilty or not. You are the one I have in front of me!" Reminds me of Oliver Twist.

It's a civil infraction, not even a misdemeanor, nobody in the WORLD got
time to listen to you present goofy arguments to the court like you are
Perry Mason.

LOL... here it is a bit more important. Loosing you license to drive is not a trivial matter and tickets result in points toward exactly that, loosing your license.

I'm willing to believe you are not accurately representing the matter where you live.

--

Rick C.

-+++- Get 2,000 miles of free Supercharging
-+++- Tesla referral code - https://ts.la/richard11209

 

On Mon, 7 Oct 2019 22:42:34 -0400, bitrex <user@example.net> wrote:

On 10/5/19 11:29 PM, Phil Allison wrote:
edward...@gmail.com wrote:

--------------------------


They probably don't have long enough power cords from home to vehicle.


** Childish.


However, if there is a need, there is a way. Using vehicle roof top
(around 1 sq. meter) and 40% solar efficiency, you can get 40 to 50
miles per 10 hours sun light. Yes, someone is claiming 40% and
possibly higher.


** How utterly absurd.

Solar / EV fanatics have no bounds to the insanities they believe and try to foist on others.

Makes spherical chickens seem quite real ...



.... Phil


Second only to the insanities that people who don't have one believe,
like the idea that the air conditioner will cause your range to drop by
half, because they believe car air conditioners have to draw some absurd
power like 6kW to keep a 150 cubic foot volume cool

Occupant comfort is more problematic in EVs compared to traditional
cars in both cold and hot climate.

In cold climate the initial warming up of the internal space and after
that the mainly conductive leakage through metal parts and windows.
Good isolation and double glazed windows help, but still you have to
warm the fresh air intake.

In hot climates, after initial cooling down, there are the conductive
heat ingress issues and cooling fresh air intake. The same measures
help to handle conductive heat ingress, but there is still direct
radiative losses. Some anti-IR coating on windows might help keeping
sunlight out, but since such coating also reduces visible light, at
least the coating should be required to be removed from the windscreen
during the night.

Some sun shades will also help, but you can't make it much wider than
the car body. Using sun shades to protect the slanted front and rear
windows is problematic, since it increases drag and hence increases
consumption.

 

[Rick C]

On Monday, October 7, 2019 at 10:34:38 PM UTC-4, Bill Sloman wrote:

On Sunday, October 6, 2019 at 7:03:41 AM UTC+11, Rick C wrote:

It has been made clear that in the UK they have trouble putting a kettle on.

Not in the bits where I lived from 1971 to 1993.

Maybe where you lived they didn't watch football. Every group in which I've discussed EV charging they talk about how during the commercial breaks the tea kettles all come on at once and the grid dips nearly to the point of blacking out.

All I can do is report the facts as provided by the people who live in the UK. Who am I to challenge their facts no matter how implausible they sound?

Clearly the UK and Australia have a woefully inadequate electrical infrastructure and will never be capable of widespread EV adoption.

Someone pointed out to me that it is impossible to build enough EV fast charging to allow trips since the towns in between the major destinations don't have enough capacity to build the required charging facilities. I don't recall the town names, but it looks like Tarcutta is about the only place in the middle to put a charging station between Sydney and Melbourne. Not much of a town.

Yeah, looks like Australia is screwed for at least a hundred years.

--

Rick C.

-++-+ Get 2,000 miles of free Supercharging
-++-+ Tesla referral code - https://ts.la/richard11209

 

[bitrex]

On 10/8/19 1:00 AM, Rick C wrote:

On Monday, October 7, 2019 at 10:25:48 PM UTC-4, bitrex wrote:
On 10/7/19 10:17 PM, Rick C wrote:
On Monday, October 7, 2019 at 10:01:18 PM UTC-4, bitrex wrote:
On 10/7/19 9:37 PM, Rick C wrote:
On Monday, October 7, 2019 at 12:49:47 PM UTC-4, Rob wrote:
bitrex <user@example.net> wrote:
I think it may actually a high intensity array of white LEDs, not a
strobe. People put all sorts of weird crap on the license plates to try
to defeat 'em like IR LEDs or blinking LEDs pointing backwards, and
darkly tinted plate covers, reflective tape, stuff like that. High
intensity visible light flash will defeat any of that low-effort ideas I
believe.

Over here that is an offense that would result in a hefty fine when
you are caught. Maybe that is because most traffic tickets are issued
after cameras have taken pictures some way, and it has been like that
for decades. I believe in the USA for many situations it is required
that you are being stopped by a policeman, but that rarely happens here.

No, traffic cameras are widely used, just not all that pervasively... i.e. not at every intersection. Usually they are used at trouble spots.

The problem I have is that they are often operated by a company on a profit sharing basis with the local jurisdiction. So the company has little incentive to be accurate, rather they have every incentive to issue summons. There is no police officer reviewing anything. More importantly, there is no accuser to question in court. In fact, in many jurisdictions they don't even give you a trial, it's a hearing with a review board.

You don't get a trial because civil infractions, taken individually,
aren't crimes

Sorry, don't understand. Traffic tickets get a trial when issued by a cop. How is this different?

What kind of "trial" are we talking? Around here for civil infractions
like speeding and running red lights you go before a judge and plead
your case to the best of your ability with the 20 seconds you have
available (there are lot of people waiting...) and the judge says "Eh,
no" and you usually leave with nothing but your original ticket and
still a fine to pay. it's that way even if they're issued by a police
officer

Who has to go to court for camera offenses, the driver or the owner?

Do they have good footage of the driver's face?

I've seen so much footage of absolutely terrible drivers who shouldn't
be on the road or who are clearly drunk out of their gourd blast thru
red lights narrowly missing hitting other cars on those replays, just in
the few times I've been in traffic court, that at least in my area I
can't say I get too worked up about them not getting a proper Perry
Mason jury trial vs. just getting billed a hundred bucks automatically
every time they do that.

I got nailed by a red light cam one time in my life, there were a number
of people in court the last time that had like six in a single month!
Goddamn!

 

[bitrex]

On 10/8/19 1:00 AM, Rick C wrote:

On Monday, October 7, 2019 at 10:25:48 PM UTC-4, bitrex wrote:
On 10/7/19 10:17 PM, Rick C wrote:
On Monday, October 7, 2019 at 10:01:18 PM UTC-4, bitrex wrote:
On 10/7/19 9:37 PM, Rick C wrote:
On Monday, October 7, 2019 at 12:49:47 PM UTC-4, Rob wrote:
bitrex <user@example.net> wrote:
I think it may actually a high intensity array of white LEDs, not a
strobe. People put all sorts of weird crap on the license plates to try
to defeat 'em like IR LEDs or blinking LEDs pointing backwards, and
darkly tinted plate covers, reflective tape, stuff like that. High
intensity visible light flash will defeat any of that low-effort ideas I
believe.

Over here that is an offense that would result in a hefty fine when
you are caught. Maybe that is because most traffic tickets are issued
after cameras have taken pictures some way, and it has been like that
for decades. I believe in the USA for many situations it is required
that you are being stopped by a policeman, but that rarely happens here.

No, traffic cameras are widely used, just not all that pervasively... i.e. not at every intersection. Usually they are used at trouble spots.

The problem I have is that they are often operated by a company on a profit sharing basis with the local jurisdiction. So the company has little incentive to be accurate, rather they have every incentive to issue summons. There is no police officer reviewing anything. More importantly, there is no accuser to question in court. In fact, in many jurisdictions they don't even give you a trial, it's a hearing with a review board.

You don't get a trial because civil infractions, taken individually,
aren't crimes

Sorry, don't understand. Traffic tickets get a trial when issued by a cop. How is this different?

What kind of "trial" are we talking? Around here for civil infractions
like speeding and running red lights you go before a judge and plead
your case to the best of your ability with the 20 seconds you have
available (there are lot of people waiting...) and the judge says "Eh,
no" and you usually leave with nothing but your original ticket and
still a fine to pay. it's that way even if they're issued by a police
officer

Who has to go to court for camera offenses, the driver or the owner?

Do they have good footage of the driver's face?

Who cares, the judge would just say "Your car doesn't seem to have been
reported stolen lately so if someone else was driving your car at the
time feel free to have them re-reimburse you"

It's a civil infraction, not even a misdemeanor, nobody in the WORLD got
time to listen to you present goofy arguments to the court like you are
Perry Mason.

 

[Rick C]

On Monday, October 7, 2019 at 10:33:27 PM UTC-4, bitrex wrote:

On 10/7/19 10:25 PM, bitrex wrote:

The problem I have is that they are often operated by a company on a
profit sharing basis with the local jurisdiction.  So the company
has little incentive to be accurate, rather they have every
incentive to issue summons.  There is no police officer reviewing
anything.  More importantly, there is no accuser to question in
court.  In fact, in many jurisdictions they don't even give you a
trial, it's a hearing with a review board.

You don't get a trial because civil infractions, taken individually,
aren't crimes

Sorry, don't understand.  Traffic tickets get a trial when issued by a
cop.  How is this different?

What kind of "trial" are we talking? Around here for civil infractions
like speeding and running red lights you go before a judge and plead
your case to the best of your ability with the 20 seconds you have
available (there are lot of people waiting...) and the judge says "Eh,
no" and you usually leave with nothing but your original ticket and
still a fine to pay. it's that way even if they're issued by a police
officer


I've been in traffic court three or four times in the past decade, only
ever saw a person argue their way out of a speeding ticket...one time.
because he brought several pieces of hard evidence and print outs that
there was missing/obscured sign-age in the area.

Just talking or begging or arguing without some kind of tangible
evidence of a concrete plausible mistake or error on the state or the
officer's part seems to get nowhere.

Exactly, guilty until proven innocent.

--

Rick C.

-++-- Get 2,000 miles of free Supercharging
-++-- Tesla referral code - https://ts.la/richard11209