F
Flyguy
Guest
On Saturday, May 20, 2023 at 9:16:45â¯AM UTC-7, Anthony William Sloman wrote:
Hint: your units don\'t match up, Bozo.
Hint: your units don\'t match up, Bozo.
Navigation
Install the app
How to install the app on iOS
Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
More options
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an alternative browser.
You should upgrade or use an alternative browser.
A
Anthony William Sloman
Guest
On Tuesday, May 23, 2023 at 9:54:15â¯AM UTC+10, Flyguy wrote:
Actually it\'s yours that don\'t. You equate 369 million gallons of gasoline per day with 4.05 trillion kWhr of electricity generation per year, which is the sort of mistake that undergraduates are not allowed to make twice.
That make the product 4,538 trillion kW.hr - quite a lot large than your 4.05 kWhr per year.
This does seem to be about a factor of one thousand too high - it isn\'t obvious where the error has crept in, but it is clearly wrong. It also neglects the fact that car don\'t burn gasoline all that efficiently - they get about 25% of the energy available in gasoline. Electric cars recover about 85% of the energy used to charge their batteries.
Of course your figure for US electricity generation is out of date
https://www.eia.gov/energyexplained/electricity/electricity-in-the-us-generation-capacity-and-sales.php
gives 4.12 trillion kWh for 2021.
https://usafacts.org/articles/how-much-electricity-would-it-take-to-power-all-cars-if-they-were-electric/
gives the usually recognised figures
\" it would take roughly 800 to 1,900 billion kWh of electricity to power all vehicles if they were EVs.\"
Working out how you\'ve got it wrong is left as an exercise for the reader. I got paid to identifying and correcting undergraduate errors. and they listened to the correction and didn\'t make the same error twice. The effort would be wasted on you.
--
Bill Sloman, Sydney
On Saturday, May 20, 2023 at 9:16:45â¯AM UTC-7, Anthony William Sloman wrote:
On Sunday, May 21, 2023 at 1:23:58â¯AM UTC+10, Flyguy wrote:
On Saturday, May 20, 2023 at 1:32:47â¯AM UTC-7, Anthony William Sloman wrote:
On Saturday, May 20, 2023 at 5:00:29â¯PM UTC+10, Flyguy wrote:
On Friday, May 19, 2023 at 10:57:30â¯PM UTC-7, Anthony William Sloman wrote:
On Saturday, May 20, 2023 at 2:58:38â¯PM UTC+10, Flyguy wrote:
On Friday, May 19, 2023 at 8:00:59â¯AM UTC-7, Fred Bloggs wrote:
For entities for whom time is money, like fleets, and others who just don\'t have convenient access to charging stations, the 5 minute whole battery pack swap is the answer. All the work is done by a robot in 5 minutes. The swap stations slow re-charge the swapped batteries so they don\'t require a major power grid renovation to come online. And the whole swap package comes in a shipping container so it sets up in under a day. Quite a few EV manufacturers are getting onboard making their battery packs compatible with this system.
https://newatlas.com/automotive/ample-2023-next-generation-battery-swap-station/
https://ample.com/
Too bad for the naysayers who ignorantly predicted zeta-dollar rebuild of the national grid to support EVs.
You need to do some simple math. A gallon of gas is equivalent to 33.7 KWH. The US consumes 369 million gallons of gas per day. The total electricity generation capacity of the US is 4.05 trillion KWH per year. Calculate what percentage of the total electrical capacity is required to replace gas. Note: it doesn\'t depend upon how fast or slow you recharge batteries.
Of course Sewage Sweeper hasn\'t bothered to do it. 33.7kWhr times 369x10^6 is 1.246 trillion kWhr, or about 30.5% of 4.05 trillion kWhr, which is a well known number.
From about 1950 to about 2000 US generating capacity increased at about 6% per year. It would have to resume that growth rate for about five years to cope with the complete electrification of gasoline-burning local local transportation.
It\'s not any kind of \"rebuild\" - just a bit more expansion. There will have to be increased capacity in some parts of the network to cope with the transition away from coal and gas fired generating stations to solar and wind farms, which provides even more excuses for climate change denial freaks to get excited.
They are gullible idiots, so they are easy to alarm.
Hey Bozo, you idiot, you MADE A MISTAKE! Can your sorry ass find it (I doubt it!)?
You think I did, but you lack the confidence to identify it. My guess is that it\'s you who got it wrong - you are an idiot, though too much of an idiot to recognise the fact. I did find a typo, which I\'ve corrected, and you are silly enough to get excited about them.
It is VERY elementary, Bozo, and I AM NOT surprised you can\'t figure it out.
Really? But you are still not confident enough to reveal what it is. And still an idiot.
Hint: your units don\'t match up, Bozo.
Actually it\'s yours that don\'t. You equate 369 million gallons of gasoline per day with 4.05 trillion kWhr of electricity generation per year, which is the sort of mistake that undergraduates are not allowed to make twice.
That make the product 4,538 trillion kW.hr - quite a lot large than your 4.05 kWhr per year.
This does seem to be about a factor of one thousand too high - it isn\'t obvious where the error has crept in, but it is clearly wrong. It also neglects the fact that car don\'t burn gasoline all that efficiently - they get about 25% of the energy available in gasoline. Electric cars recover about 85% of the energy used to charge their batteries.
Of course your figure for US electricity generation is out of date
https://www.eia.gov/energyexplained/electricity/electricity-in-the-us-generation-capacity-and-sales.php
gives 4.12 trillion kWh for 2021.
https://usafacts.org/articles/how-much-electricity-would-it-take-to-power-all-cars-if-they-were-electric/
gives the usually recognised figures
\" it would take roughly 800 to 1,900 billion kWh of electricity to power all vehicles if they were EVs.\"
Working out how you\'ve got it wrong is left as an exercise for the reader. I got paid to identifying and correcting undergraduate errors. and they listened to the correction and didn\'t make the same error twice. The effort would be wasted on you.
--
Bill Sloman, Sydney
R
Ricky
Guest
On Tuesday, May 23, 2023 at 1:54:20â¯AM UTC-4, Anthony William Sloman wrote:
First, it is silly to try to calculate the equivalent electrical energy to the energy in gasoline. You have to collect the data for the amount of gasoline used, then go through calculations to convert that, assuming some level of efficiency both in the ICE and the BEV.
It\'s much simpler to just go by the number of miles driven. When you do that, you get a number of a bit less than 1 billion kWh per year for all cars in the US. When considering the idle generating resources at night and you find this idle capacity can easily charge every car in the US.
This assumes no extra use of renewable energy, which is an excellent paring with BEVs. Since BEVs don\'t need to be charged every day, they can be charged from the power available, improving the utility of renewable power.
Today I looked at the BEV charging plan offered by a Maryland utility. It\'s actually pretty lame. I\'m not certain what the savings is, but they might charge your 2 cents per kWh, or maybe that was the savings. They absolutely did not make that clear on their web site. But the worst of it was, they only offer this rate between 11 pm and 6 am. That\'s a fairly narrow definition of \"off peak\" rates. Also, rather than simply factoring this into your bill, they send you a gift card quarterly! That\'s all but sleazy. They know some number of people lose or simply never use these cards.
This is what concerns me about the public utilities setting the schemes for BEV charging. I think we need to be more involved in the matter, rather than letting a government agency mediate in our behalf.
--
Rick C.
--+- Get 1,000 miles of free Supercharging
--+- Tesla referral code - https://ts.la/richard11209
On Tuesday, May 23, 2023 at 9:54:15â¯AM UTC+10, Flyguy wrote:
On Saturday, May 20, 2023 at 9:16:45â¯AM UTC-7, Anthony William Sloman wrote:
On Sunday, May 21, 2023 at 1:23:58â¯AM UTC+10, Flyguy wrote:
On Saturday, May 20, 2023 at 1:32:47â¯AM UTC-7, Anthony William Sloman wrote:
On Saturday, May 20, 2023 at 5:00:29â¯PM UTC+10, Flyguy wrote:
On Friday, May 19, 2023 at 10:57:30â¯PM UTC-7, Anthony William Sloman wrote:
On Saturday, May 20, 2023 at 2:58:38â¯PM UTC+10, Flyguy wrote:
On Friday, May 19, 2023 at 8:00:59â¯AM UTC-7, Fred Bloggs wrote:
For entities for whom time is money, like fleets, and others who just don\'t have convenient access to charging stations, the 5 minute whole battery pack swap is the answer. All the work is done by a robot in 5 minutes. The swap stations slow re-charge the swapped batteries so they don\'t require a major power grid renovation to come online. And the whole swap package comes in a shipping container so it sets up in under a day. Quite a few EV manufacturers are getting onboard making their battery packs compatible with this system.
https://newatlas.com/automotive/ample-2023-next-generation-battery-swap-station/
https://ample.com/
Too bad for the naysayers who ignorantly predicted zeta-dollar rebuild of the national grid to support EVs.
You need to do some simple math. A gallon of gas is equivalent to 33.7 KWH. The US consumes 369 million gallons of gas per day. The total electricity generation capacity of the US is 4.05 trillion KWH per year.. Calculate what percentage of the total electrical capacity is required to replace gas. Note: it doesn\'t depend upon how fast or slow you recharge batteries.
Of course Sewage Sweeper hasn\'t bothered to do it. 33.7kWhr times 369x10^6 is 1.246 trillion kWhr, or about 30.5% of 4.05 trillion kWhr, which is a well known number.
From about 1950 to about 2000 US generating capacity increased at about 6% per year. It would have to resume that growth rate for about five years to cope with the complete electrification of gasoline-burning local local transportation.
It\'s not any kind of \"rebuild\" - just a bit more expansion. There will have to be increased capacity in some parts of the network to cope with the transition away from coal and gas fired generating stations to solar and wind farms, which provides even more excuses for climate change denial freaks to get excited.
They are gullible idiots, so they are easy to alarm.
Hey Bozo, you idiot, you MADE A MISTAKE! Can your sorry ass find it (I doubt it!)?
You think I did, but you lack the confidence to identify it. My guess is that it\'s you who got it wrong - you are an idiot, though too much of an idiot to recognise the fact. I did find a typo, which I\'ve corrected, and you are silly enough to get excited about them.
It is VERY elementary, Bozo, and I AM NOT surprised you can\'t figure it out.
Really? But you are still not confident enough to reveal what it is. And still an idiot.
Hint: your units don\'t match up, Bozo.
Actually it\'s yours that don\'t. You equate 369 million gallons of gasoline per day with 4.05 trillion kWhr of electricity generation per year, which is the sort of mistake that undergraduates are not allowed to make twice.
That make the product 4,538 trillion kW.hr - quite a lot large than your 4.05 kWhr per year.
This does seem to be about a factor of one thousand too high - it isn\'t obvious where the error has crept in, but it is clearly wrong. It also neglects the fact that car don\'t burn gasoline all that efficiently - they get about 25% of the energy available in gasoline. Electric cars recover about 85% of the energy used to charge their batteries.
Of course your figure for US electricity generation is out of date
https://www.eia.gov/energyexplained/electricity/electricity-in-the-us-generation-capacity-and-sales.php
gives 4.12 trillion kWh for 2021.
https://usafacts.org/articles/how-much-electricity-would-it-take-to-power-all-cars-if-they-were-electric/
gives the usually recognised figures
\" it would take roughly 800 to 1,900 billion kWh of electricity to power all vehicles if they were EVs.\"
Working out how you\'ve got it wrong is left as an exercise for the reader.. I got paid to identifying and correcting undergraduate errors. and they listened to the correction and didn\'t make the same error twice. The effort would be wasted on you.
First, it is silly to try to calculate the equivalent electrical energy to the energy in gasoline. You have to collect the data for the amount of gasoline used, then go through calculations to convert that, assuming some level of efficiency both in the ICE and the BEV.
It\'s much simpler to just go by the number of miles driven. When you do that, you get a number of a bit less than 1 billion kWh per year for all cars in the US. When considering the idle generating resources at night and you find this idle capacity can easily charge every car in the US.
This assumes no extra use of renewable energy, which is an excellent paring with BEVs. Since BEVs don\'t need to be charged every day, they can be charged from the power available, improving the utility of renewable power.
Today I looked at the BEV charging plan offered by a Maryland utility. It\'s actually pretty lame. I\'m not certain what the savings is, but they might charge your 2 cents per kWh, or maybe that was the savings. They absolutely did not make that clear on their web site. But the worst of it was, they only offer this rate between 11 pm and 6 am. That\'s a fairly narrow definition of \"off peak\" rates. Also, rather than simply factoring this into your bill, they send you a gift card quarterly! That\'s all but sleazy. They know some number of people lose or simply never use these cards.
This is what concerns me about the public utilities setting the schemes for BEV charging. I think we need to be more involved in the matter, rather than letting a government agency mediate in our behalf.
--
Rick C.
--+- Get 1,000 miles of free Supercharging
--+- Tesla referral code - https://ts.la/richard11209
E
Ed Lee
Guest
On Monday, May 22, 2023 at 11:29:13â¯PM UTC-7, Ricky wrote:
1 Trillion, not Billion KWhr
On Tuesday, May 23, 2023 at 1:54:20â¯AM UTC-4, Anthony William Sloman wrote:
On Tuesday, May 23, 2023 at 9:54:15â¯AM UTC+10, Flyguy wrote:
On Saturday, May 20, 2023 at 9:16:45â¯AM UTC-7, Anthony William Sloman wrote:
On Sunday, May 21, 2023 at 1:23:58â¯AM UTC+10, Flyguy wrote:
On Saturday, May 20, 2023 at 1:32:47â¯AM UTC-7, Anthony William Sloman wrote:
On Saturday, May 20, 2023 at 5:00:29â¯PM UTC+10, Flyguy wrote:
On Friday, May 19, 2023 at 10:57:30â¯PM UTC-7, Anthony William Sloman wrote:
On Saturday, May 20, 2023 at 2:58:38â¯PM UTC+10, Flyguy wrote:
On Friday, May 19, 2023 at 8:00:59â¯AM UTC-7, Fred Bloggs wrote:
For entities for whom time is money, like fleets, and others who just don\'t have convenient access to charging stations, the 5 minute whole battery pack swap is the answer. All the work is done by a robot in 5 minutes. The swap stations slow re-charge the swapped batteries so they don\'t require a major power grid renovation to come online. And the whole swap package comes in a shipping container so it sets up in under a day. Quite a few EV manufacturers are getting onboard making their battery packs compatible with this system.
https://newatlas.com/automotive/ample-2023-next-generation-battery-swap-station/
https://ample.com/
Too bad for the naysayers who ignorantly predicted zeta-dollar rebuild of the national grid to support EVs.
You need to do some simple math. A gallon of gas is equivalent to 33.7 KWH. The US consumes 369 million gallons of gas per day. The total electricity generation capacity of the US is 4.05 trillion KWH per year. Calculate what percentage of the total electrical capacity is required to replace gas. Note: it doesn\'t depend upon how fast or slow you recharge batteries.
Of course Sewage Sweeper hasn\'t bothered to do it. 33.7kWhr times 369x10^6 is 1.246 trillion kWhr, or about 30.5% of 4.05 trillion kWhr, which is a well known number.
From about 1950 to about 2000 US generating capacity increased at about 6% per year. It would have to resume that growth rate for about five years to cope with the complete electrification of gasoline-burning local local transportation.
It\'s not any kind of \"rebuild\" - just a bit more expansion. There will have to be increased capacity in some parts of the network to cope with the transition away from coal and gas fired generating stations to solar and wind farms, which provides even more excuses for climate change denial freaks to get excited.
They are gullible idiots, so they are easy to alarm.
Hey Bozo, you idiot, you MADE A MISTAKE! Can your sorry ass find it (I doubt it!)?
You think I did, but you lack the confidence to identify it. My guess is that it\'s you who got it wrong - you are an idiot, though too much of an idiot to recognise the fact. I did find a typo, which I\'ve corrected, and you are silly enough to get excited about them.
It is VERY elementary, Bozo, and I AM NOT surprised you can\'t figure it out.
Really? But you are still not confident enough to reveal what it is.. And still an idiot.
Hint: your units don\'t match up, Bozo.
Actually it\'s yours that don\'t. You equate 369 million gallons of gasoline per day with 4.05 trillion kWhr of electricity generation per year, which is the sort of mistake that undergraduates are not allowed to make twice..
That make the product 4,538 trillion kW.hr - quite a lot large than your 4.05 kWhr per year.
This does seem to be about a factor of one thousand too high - it isn\'t obvious where the error has crept in, but it is clearly wrong. It also neglects the fact that car don\'t burn gasoline all that efficiently - they get about 25% of the energy available in gasoline. Electric cars recover about 85% of the energy used to charge their batteries.
Of course your figure for US electricity generation is out of date
https://www.eia.gov/energyexplained/electricity/electricity-in-the-us-generation-capacity-and-sales.php
gives 4.12 trillion kWh for 2021.
https://usafacts.org/articles/how-much-electricity-would-it-take-to-power-all-cars-if-they-were-electric/
gives the usually recognised figures
\" it would take roughly 800 to 1,900 billion kWh of electricity to power all vehicles if they were EVs.\"
Working out how you\'ve got it wrong is left as an exercise for the reader. I got paid to identifying and correcting undergraduate errors. and they listened to the correction and didn\'t make the same error twice. The effort would be wasted on you.
First, it is silly to try to calculate the equivalent electrical energy to the energy in gasoline. You have to collect the data for the amount of gasoline used, then go through calculations to convert that, assuming some level of efficiency both in the ICE and the BEV.
It\'s much simpler to just go by the number of miles driven. When you do that, you get a number of a bit less than 1 billion kWh per year for all cars in the US. When considering the idle generating resources at night and you find this idle capacity can easily charge every car in the US.
1 Trillion, not Billion KWhr
R
Ricky
Guest
On Tuesday, May 23, 2023 at 10:08:39â¯AM UTC-4, Ed Lee wrote:
Sorry, 250 million cars, averaging 10 kWh per day is 2.5 billion kWh, times 365 days is 912 billion kWh per year. Sorry, I made a mistake. I wrote the number I recalled without doing the math again.
The point is, this is around 1/4 of the total electrical generation output and can be done using idle generating resources at night.
Thank you for spotting my error.
--
Rick C.
--++ Get 1,000 miles of free Supercharging
--++ Tesla referral code - https://ts.la/richard11209
On Monday, May 22, 2023 at 11:29:13â¯PM UTC-7, Ricky wrote:
On Tuesday, May 23, 2023 at 1:54:20â¯AM UTC-4, Anthony William Sloman wrote:
On Tuesday, May 23, 2023 at 9:54:15â¯AM UTC+10, Flyguy wrote:
On Saturday, May 20, 2023 at 9:16:45â¯AM UTC-7, Anthony William Sloman wrote:
On Sunday, May 21, 2023 at 1:23:58â¯AM UTC+10, Flyguy wrote:
On Saturday, May 20, 2023 at 1:32:47â¯AM UTC-7, Anthony William Sloman wrote:
On Saturday, May 20, 2023 at 5:00:29â¯PM UTC+10, Flyguy wrote:
On Friday, May 19, 2023 at 10:57:30â¯PM UTC-7, Anthony William Sloman wrote:
On Saturday, May 20, 2023 at 2:58:38â¯PM UTC+10, Flyguy wrote:
On Friday, May 19, 2023 at 8:00:59â¯AM UTC-7, Fred Bloggs wrote:
For entities for whom time is money, like fleets, and others who just don\'t have convenient access to charging stations, the 5 minute whole battery pack swap is the answer. All the work is done by a robot in 5 minutes. The swap stations slow re-charge the swapped batteries so they don\'t require a major power grid renovation to come online. And the whole swap package comes in a shipping container so it sets up in under a day. Quite a few EV manufacturers are getting onboard making their battery packs compatible with this system.
https://newatlas.com/automotive/ample-2023-next-generation-battery-swap-station/
https://ample.com/
Too bad for the naysayers who ignorantly predicted zeta-dollar rebuild of the national grid to support EVs.
You need to do some simple math. A gallon of gas is equivalent to 33.7 KWH. The US consumes 369 million gallons of gas per day. The total electricity generation capacity of the US is 4.05 trillion KWH per year. Calculate what percentage of the total electrical capacity is required to replace gas. Note: it doesn\'t depend upon how fast or slow you recharge batteries.
Of course Sewage Sweeper hasn\'t bothered to do it. 33.7kWhr times 369x10^6 is 1.246 trillion kWhr, or about 30.5% of 4.05 trillion kWhr, which is a well known number.
From about 1950 to about 2000 US generating capacity increased at about 6% per year. It would have to resume that growth rate for about five years to cope with the complete electrification of gasoline-burning local local transportation.
It\'s not any kind of \"rebuild\" - just a bit more expansion. There will have to be increased capacity in some parts of the network to cope with the transition away from coal and gas fired generating stations to solar and wind farms, which provides even more excuses for climate change denial freaks to get excited.
They are gullible idiots, so they are easy to alarm.
Hey Bozo, you idiot, you MADE A MISTAKE! Can your sorry ass find it (I doubt it!)?
You think I did, but you lack the confidence to identify it. My guess is that it\'s you who got it wrong - you are an idiot, though too much of an idiot to recognise the fact. I did find a typo, which I\'ve corrected, and you are silly enough to get excited about them.
It is VERY elementary, Bozo, and I AM NOT surprised you can\'t figure it out.
Really? But you are still not confident enough to reveal what it is. And still an idiot.
Hint: your units don\'t match up, Bozo.
Actually it\'s yours that don\'t. You equate 369 million gallons of gasoline per day with 4.05 trillion kWhr of electricity generation per year, which is the sort of mistake that undergraduates are not allowed to make twice.
That make the product 4,538 trillion kW.hr - quite a lot large than your 4.05 kWhr per year.
This does seem to be about a factor of one thousand too high - it isn\'t obvious where the error has crept in, but it is clearly wrong. It also neglects the fact that car don\'t burn gasoline all that efficiently - they get about 25% of the energy available in gasoline. Electric cars recover about 85% of the energy used to charge their batteries.
Of course your figure for US electricity generation is out of date
https://www.eia.gov/energyexplained/electricity/electricity-in-the-us-generation-capacity-and-sales.php
gives 4.12 trillion kWh for 2021.
https://usafacts.org/articles/how-much-electricity-would-it-take-to-power-all-cars-if-they-were-electric/
gives the usually recognised figures
\" it would take roughly 800 to 1,900 billion kWh of electricity to power all vehicles if they were EVs.\"
Working out how you\'ve got it wrong is left as an exercise for the reader. I got paid to identifying and correcting undergraduate errors. and they listened to the correction and didn\'t make the same error twice. The effort would be wasted on you.
First, it is silly to try to calculate the equivalent electrical energy to the energy in gasoline. You have to collect the data for the amount of gasoline used, then go through calculations to convert that, assuming some level of efficiency both in the ICE and the BEV.
It\'s much simpler to just go by the number of miles driven. When you do that, you get a number of a bit less than 1 billion kWh per year for all cars in the US. When considering the idle generating resources at night and you find this idle capacity can easily charge every car in the US.
1 Trillion, not Billion KWhr
Sorry, 250 million cars, averaging 10 kWh per day is 2.5 billion kWh, times 365 days is 912 billion kWh per year. Sorry, I made a mistake. I wrote the number I recalled without doing the math again.
The point is, this is around 1/4 of the total electrical generation output and can be done using idle generating resources at night.
Thank you for spotting my error.
--
Rick C.
--++ Get 1,000 miles of free Supercharging
--++ Tesla referral code - https://ts.la/richard11209
E
Ed Lee
Guest
On Tuesday, May 23, 2023 at 8:01:40â¯AM UTC-7, Ricky wrote:
Yes, we all make mistakes. We just have to agree on the units. It\'s approx. 1 TK/BM/MB/KT Whr. What\'s important is the batteries to carry them. Currently, the approx. rule of 13: 13 decimal liters, pounds and hamiltons for size, weight and cost.
On Tuesday, May 23, 2023 at 10:08:39â¯AM UTC-4, Ed Lee wrote:
On Monday, May 22, 2023 at 11:29:13â¯PM UTC-7, Ricky wrote:
On Tuesday, May 23, 2023 at 1:54:20â¯AM UTC-4, Anthony William Sloman wrote:
On Tuesday, May 23, 2023 at 9:54:15â¯AM UTC+10, Flyguy wrote:
On Saturday, May 20, 2023 at 9:16:45â¯AM UTC-7, Anthony William Sloman wrote:
On Sunday, May 21, 2023 at 1:23:58â¯AM UTC+10, Flyguy wrote:
On Saturday, May 20, 2023 at 1:32:47â¯AM UTC-7, Anthony William Sloman wrote:
On Saturday, May 20, 2023 at 5:00:29â¯PM UTC+10, Flyguy wrote:
On Friday, May 19, 2023 at 10:57:30â¯PM UTC-7, Anthony William Sloman wrote:
On Saturday, May 20, 2023 at 2:58:38â¯PM UTC+10, Flyguy wrote:
On Friday, May 19, 2023 at 8:00:59â¯AM UTC-7, Fred Bloggs wrote:
For entities for whom time is money, like fleets, and others who just don\'t have convenient access to charging stations, the 5 minute whole battery pack swap is the answer. All the work is done by a robot in 5 minutes. The swap stations slow re-charge the swapped batteries so they don\'t require a major power grid renovation to come online. And the whole swap package comes in a shipping container so it sets up in under a day. Quite a few EV manufacturers are getting onboard making their battery packs compatible with this system.
https://newatlas.com/automotive/ample-2023-next-generation-battery-swap-station/
https://ample.com/
Too bad for the naysayers who ignorantly predicted zeta-dollar rebuild of the national grid to support EVs.
You need to do some simple math. A gallon of gas is equivalent to 33.7 KWH. The US consumes 369 million gallons of gas per day. The total electricity generation capacity of the US is 4.05 trillion KWH per year. Calculate what percentage of the total electrical capacity is required to replace gas. Note: it doesn\'t depend upon how fast or slow you recharge batteries.
Of course Sewage Sweeper hasn\'t bothered to do it. 33.7kWhr times 369x10^6 is 1.246 trillion kWhr, or about 30.5% of 4.05 trillion kWhr, which is a well known number.
From about 1950 to about 2000 US generating capacity increased at about 6% per year. It would have to resume that growth rate for about five years to cope with the complete electrification of gasoline-burning local local transportation.
It\'s not any kind of \"rebuild\" - just a bit more expansion. There will have to be increased capacity in some parts of the network to cope with the transition away from coal and gas fired generating stations to solar and wind farms, which provides even more excuses for climate change denial freaks to get excited.
They are gullible idiots, so they are easy to alarm.
Hey Bozo, you idiot, you MADE A MISTAKE! Can your sorry ass find it (I doubt it!)?
You think I did, but you lack the confidence to identify it.. My guess is that it\'s you who got it wrong - you are an idiot, though too much of an idiot to recognise the fact. I did find a typo, which I\'ve corrected, and you are silly enough to get excited about them.
It is VERY elementary, Bozo, and I AM NOT surprised you can\'t figure it out.
Really? But you are still not confident enough to reveal what it is. And still an idiot.
Hint: your units don\'t match up, Bozo.
Actually it\'s yours that don\'t. You equate 369 million gallons of gasoline per day with 4.05 trillion kWhr of electricity generation per year, which is the sort of mistake that undergraduates are not allowed to make twice.
That make the product 4,538 trillion kW.hr - quite a lot large than your 4.05 kWhr per year.
This does seem to be about a factor of one thousand too high - it isn\'t obvious where the error has crept in, but it is clearly wrong. It also neglects the fact that car don\'t burn gasoline all that efficiently - they get about 25% of the energy available in gasoline. Electric cars recover about 85% of the energy used to charge their batteries.
Of course your figure for US electricity generation is out of date
https://www.eia.gov/energyexplained/electricity/electricity-in-the-us-generation-capacity-and-sales.php
gives 4.12 trillion kWh for 2021.
https://usafacts.org/articles/how-much-electricity-would-it-take-to-power-all-cars-if-they-were-electric/
gives the usually recognised figures
\" it would take roughly 800 to 1,900 billion kWh of electricity to power all vehicles if they were EVs.\"
Working out how you\'ve got it wrong is left as an exercise for the reader. I got paid to identifying and correcting undergraduate errors. and they listened to the correction and didn\'t make the same error twice. The effort would be wasted on you.
First, it is silly to try to calculate the equivalent electrical energy to the energy in gasoline. You have to collect the data for the amount of gasoline used, then go through calculations to convert that, assuming some level of efficiency both in the ICE and the BEV.
It\'s much simpler to just go by the number of miles driven. When you do that, you get a number of a bit less than 1 billion kWh per year for all cars in the US. When considering the idle generating resources at night and you find this idle capacity can easily charge every car in the US.
1 Trillion, not Billion KWhr
Sorry, 250 million cars, averaging 10 kWh per day is 2.5 billion kWh, times 365 days is 912 billion kWh per year. Sorry, I made a mistake. I wrote the number I recalled without doing the math again.
Yes, we all make mistakes. We just have to agree on the units. It\'s approx. 1 TK/BM/MB/KT Whr. What\'s important is the batteries to carry them. Currently, the approx. rule of 13: 13 decimal liters, pounds and hamiltons for size, weight and cost.
E
Ed Lee
Guest
On Tuesday, May 23, 2023 at 9:16:27â¯AM UTC-7, Ed Lee wrote:
per KWhr of energy.On Tuesday, May 23, 2023 at 8:01:40â¯AM UTC-7, Ricky wrote:
On Tuesday, May 23, 2023 at 10:08:39â¯AM UTC-4, Ed Lee wrote:
On Monday, May 22, 2023 at 11:29:13â¯PM UTC-7, Ricky wrote:
On Tuesday, May 23, 2023 at 1:54:20â¯AM UTC-4, Anthony William Sloman wrote:
On Tuesday, May 23, 2023 at 9:54:15â¯AM UTC+10, Flyguy wrote:
On Saturday, May 20, 2023 at 9:16:45â¯AM UTC-7, Anthony William Sloman wrote:
On Sunday, May 21, 2023 at 1:23:58â¯AM UTC+10, Flyguy wrote:
On Saturday, May 20, 2023 at 1:32:47â¯AM UTC-7, Anthony William Sloman wrote:
On Saturday, May 20, 2023 at 5:00:29â¯PM UTC+10, Flyguy wrote:
On Friday, May 19, 2023 at 10:57:30â¯PM UTC-7, Anthony William Sloman wrote:
On Saturday, May 20, 2023 at 2:58:38â¯PM UTC+10, Flyguy wrote:
On Friday, May 19, 2023 at 8:00:59â¯AM UTC-7, Fred Bloggs wrote:
For entities for whom time is money, like fleets, and others who just don\'t have convenient access to charging stations, the 5 minute whole battery pack swap is the answer. All the work is done by a robot in 5 minutes. The swap stations slow re-charge the swapped batteries so they don\'t require a major power grid renovation to come online. And the whole swap package comes in a shipping container so it sets up in under a day. Quite a few EV manufacturers are getting onboard making their battery packs compatible with this system.
https://newatlas.com/automotive/ample-2023-next-generation-battery-swap-station/
https://ample.com/
Too bad for the naysayers who ignorantly predicted zeta-dollar rebuild of the national grid to support EVs.
You need to do some simple math. A gallon of gas is equivalent to 33.7 KWH. The US consumes 369 million gallons of gas per day.. The total electricity generation capacity of the US is 4.05 trillion KWH per year. Calculate what percentage of the total electrical capacity is required to replace gas. Note: it doesn\'t depend upon how fast or slow you recharge batteries.
Of course Sewage Sweeper hasn\'t bothered to do it. 33..7kWhr times 369x10^6 is 1.246 trillion kWhr, or about 30.5% of 4.05 trillion kWhr, which is a well known number.
From about 1950 to about 2000 US generating capacity increased at about 6% per year. It would have to resume that growth rate for about five years to cope with the complete electrification of gasoline-burning local local transportation.
It\'s not any kind of \"rebuild\" - just a bit more expansion. There will have to be increased capacity in some parts of the network to cope with the transition away from coal and gas fired generating stations to solar and wind farms, which provides even more excuses for climate change denial freaks to get excited.
They are gullible idiots, so they are easy to alarm.
Hey Bozo, you idiot, you MADE A MISTAKE! Can your sorry ass find it (I doubt it!)?
You think I did, but you lack the confidence to identify it. My guess is that it\'s you who got it wrong - you are an idiot, though too much of an idiot to recognise the fact. I did find a typo, which I\'ve corrected, and you are silly enough to get excited about them.
It is VERY elementary, Bozo, and I AM NOT surprised you can\'t figure it out.
Really? But you are still not confident enough to reveal what it is. And still an idiot.
Hint: your units don\'t match up, Bozo.
Actually it\'s yours that don\'t. You equate 369 million gallons of gasoline per day with 4.05 trillion kWhr of electricity generation per year, which is the sort of mistake that undergraduates are not allowed to make twice.
That make the product 4,538 trillion kW.hr - quite a lot large than your 4.05 kWhr per year.
This does seem to be about a factor of one thousand too high - it isn\'t obvious where the error has crept in, but it is clearly wrong. It also neglects the fact that car don\'t burn gasoline all that efficiently - they get about 25% of the energy available in gasoline. Electric cars recover about 85% of the energy used to charge their batteries.
Of course your figure for US electricity generation is out of date
https://www.eia.gov/energyexplained/electricity/electricity-in-the-us-generation-capacity-and-sales.php
gives 4.12 trillion kWh for 2021.
https://usafacts.org/articles/how-much-electricity-would-it-take-to-power-all-cars-if-they-were-electric/
gives the usually recognised figures
\" it would take roughly 800 to 1,900 billion kWh of electricity to power all vehicles if they were EVs.\"
Working out how you\'ve got it wrong is left as an exercise for the reader. I got paid to identifying and correcting undergraduate errors. and they listened to the correction and didn\'t make the same error twice. The effort would be wasted on you.
First, it is silly to try to calculate the equivalent electrical energy to the energy in gasoline. You have to collect the data for the amount of gasoline used, then go through calculations to convert that, assuming some level of efficiency both in the ICE and the BEV.
It\'s much simpler to just go by the number of miles driven. When you do that, you get a number of a bit less than 1 billion kWh per year for all cars in the US. When considering the idle generating resources at night and you find this idle capacity can easily charge every car in the US.
1 Trillion, not Billion KWhr
Sorry, 250 million cars, averaging 10 kWh per day is 2.5 billion kWh, times 365 days is 912 billion kWh per year. Sorry, I made a mistake. I wrote the number I recalled without doing the math again.
Yes, we all make mistakes. We just have to agree on the units. It\'s approx. 1 TK/BM/MB/KT Whr. What\'s important is the batteries to carry them. Currently, the approx. rule of 13: 13 decimal liters, pounds and hamiltons for size, weight and cost.
A
Anthony William Sloman
Guest
On Wednesday, May 24, 2023 at 2:20:35â¯AM UTC+10, Ed Lee wrote:
<snip>
> > Yes, we all make mistakes. We just have to agree on the units. It\'s approx. 1 TK/BM/MB/KT Whr. What\'s important is the batteries to carry them. Currently, the approx. rule of 13: 13 decimal liters, pounds and hamiltons for size, weight and cost. per KWhr of energy.
There\'s an internationally accepted unit of energy - the joule. People who worry about national electricity generation prefer to talk about Watt.hours which is a unit equal 3600 joules.
The safest way of denoting energy is in joules. If you want to compare quantitities of energy convert everything to joules and go from there,
Americans do resist internationally standardised units, and it has cost them. The most expensive mistake so far was course correction on the way to Mars which was computed in the wrong units, so the probe crashed into Mars
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mars_Climate_Orbiter
Ed Lee seems to be excessively American. Pounds should be kilograms. Hamiltons seems to be units of baldness. Litres should be cubic metres.
--
Bill Sloman, Sydney
On Tuesday, May 23, 2023 at 9:16:27â¯AM UTC-7, Ed Lee wrote:
On Tuesday, May 23, 2023 at 8:01:40â¯AM UTC-7, Ricky wrote:
On Tuesday, May 23, 2023 at 10:08:39â¯AM UTC-4, Ed Lee wrote:
On Monday, May 22, 2023 at 11:29:13â¯PM UTC-7, Ricky wrote:
On Tuesday, May 23, 2023 at 1:54:20â¯AM UTC-4, Anthony William Sloman wrote:
On Tuesday, May 23, 2023 at 9:54:15â¯AM UTC+10, Flyguy wrote:
On Saturday, May 20, 2023 at 9:16:45â¯AM UTC-7, Anthony William Sloman wrote:
On Sunday, May 21, 2023 at 1:23:58â¯AM UTC+10, Flyguy wrote:
On Saturday, May 20, 2023 at 1:32:47â¯AM UTC-7, Anthony William Sloman wrote:
On Saturday, May 20, 2023 at 5:00:29â¯PM UTC+10, Flyguy wrote:
On Friday, May 19, 2023 at 10:57:30â¯PM UTC-7, Anthony William Sloman wrote:
On Saturday, May 20, 2023 at 2:58:38â¯PM UTC+10, Flyguy wrote:
On Friday, May 19, 2023 at 8:00:59â¯AM UTC-7, Fred Bloggs wrote:
<snip>
> > Yes, we all make mistakes. We just have to agree on the units. It\'s approx. 1 TK/BM/MB/KT Whr. What\'s important is the batteries to carry them. Currently, the approx. rule of 13: 13 decimal liters, pounds and hamiltons for size, weight and cost. per KWhr of energy.
There\'s an internationally accepted unit of energy - the joule. People who worry about national electricity generation prefer to talk about Watt.hours which is a unit equal 3600 joules.
The safest way of denoting energy is in joules. If you want to compare quantitities of energy convert everything to joules and go from there,
Americans do resist internationally standardised units, and it has cost them. The most expensive mistake so far was course correction on the way to Mars which was computed in the wrong units, so the probe crashed into Mars
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mars_Climate_Orbiter
Ed Lee seems to be excessively American. Pounds should be kilograms. Hamiltons seems to be units of baldness. Litres should be cubic metres.
--
Bill Sloman, Sydney
R
Ricky
Guest
On Wednesday, May 24, 2023 at 12:23:46â¯AM UTC-4, Anthony William Sloman wrote:
I believe Litres an the accepted unit of volume in SI. What is still being standardized, is the symbol to use for it. Some use the lower case \'l\', while others use the upper case \'L\'. I believe the general rules would favor the lower case, but in many type faces, it can be mistaken for a 1. The upper case helps to resolve that issue.
--
Rick C.
-+-- Get 1,000 miles of free Supercharging
-+-- Tesla referral code - https://ts.la/richard11209
On Wednesday, May 24, 2023 at 2:20:35â¯AM UTC+10, Ed Lee wrote:
On Tuesday, May 23, 2023 at 9:16:27â¯AM UTC-7, Ed Lee wrote:
On Tuesday, May 23, 2023 at 8:01:40â¯AM UTC-7, Ricky wrote:
On Tuesday, May 23, 2023 at 10:08:39â¯AM UTC-4, Ed Lee wrote:
On Monday, May 22, 2023 at 11:29:13â¯PM UTC-7, Ricky wrote:
On Tuesday, May 23, 2023 at 1:54:20â¯AM UTC-4, Anthony William Sloman wrote:
On Tuesday, May 23, 2023 at 9:54:15â¯AM UTC+10, Flyguy wrote:
On Saturday, May 20, 2023 at 9:16:45â¯AM UTC-7, Anthony William Sloman wrote:
On Sunday, May 21, 2023 at 1:23:58â¯AM UTC+10, Flyguy wrote:
On Saturday, May 20, 2023 at 1:32:47â¯AM UTC-7, Anthony William Sloman wrote:
On Saturday, May 20, 2023 at 5:00:29â¯PM UTC+10, Flyguy wrote:
On Friday, May 19, 2023 at 10:57:30â¯PM UTC-7, Anthony William Sloman wrote:
On Saturday, May 20, 2023 at 2:58:38â¯PM UTC+10, Flyguy wrote:
On Friday, May 19, 2023 at 8:00:59â¯AM UTC-7, Fred Bloggs wrote:
snip
Yes, we all make mistakes. We just have to agree on the units. It\'s approx. 1 TK/BM/MB/KT Whr. What\'s important is the batteries to carry them. Currently, the approx. rule of 13: 13 decimal liters, pounds and hamiltons for size, weight and cost. per KWhr of energy.
There\'s an internationally accepted unit of energy - the joule. People who worry about national electricity generation prefer to talk about Watt.hours which is a unit equal 3600 joules.
The safest way of denoting energy is in joules. If you want to compare quantitities of energy convert everything to joules and go from there,
Americans do resist internationally standardised units, and it has cost them. The most expensive mistake so far was course correction on the way to Mars which was computed in the wrong units, so the probe crashed into Mars
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mars_Climate_Orbiter
Ed Lee seems to be excessively American. Pounds should be kilograms. Hamiltons seems to be units of baldness. Litres should be cubic metres.
I believe Litres an the accepted unit of volume in SI. What is still being standardized, is the symbol to use for it. Some use the lower case \'l\', while others use the upper case \'L\'. I believe the general rules would favor the lower case, but in many type faces, it can be mistaken for a 1. The upper case helps to resolve that issue.
--
Rick C.
-+-- Get 1,000 miles of free Supercharging
-+-- Tesla referral code - https://ts.la/richard11209
E
Ed Lee
Guest
On Tuesday, May 23, 2023 at 9:23:46â¯PM UTC-7, Anthony William Sloman wrote:
Since we are talking about EV batteries, KWhr is more appropriate. Charging is mostly priced in KWhr, not joules.
We are also talking about U.S. electricity capacity; so, American units should be acceptable. I don\'t blame you for never seeing a ten dollar bill.
On Wednesday, May 24, 2023 at 2:20:35â¯AM UTC+10, Ed Lee wrote:
On Tuesday, May 23, 2023 at 9:16:27â¯AM UTC-7, Ed Lee wrote:
On Tuesday, May 23, 2023 at 8:01:40â¯AM UTC-7, Ricky wrote:
On Tuesday, May 23, 2023 at 10:08:39â¯AM UTC-4, Ed Lee wrote:
On Monday, May 22, 2023 at 11:29:13â¯PM UTC-7, Ricky wrote:
On Tuesday, May 23, 2023 at 1:54:20â¯AM UTC-4, Anthony William Sloman wrote:
On Tuesday, May 23, 2023 at 9:54:15â¯AM UTC+10, Flyguy wrote:
On Saturday, May 20, 2023 at 9:16:45â¯AM UTC-7, Anthony William Sloman wrote:
On Sunday, May 21, 2023 at 1:23:58â¯AM UTC+10, Flyguy wrote:
On Saturday, May 20, 2023 at 1:32:47â¯AM UTC-7, Anthony William Sloman wrote:
On Saturday, May 20, 2023 at 5:00:29â¯PM UTC+10, Flyguy wrote:
On Friday, May 19, 2023 at 10:57:30â¯PM UTC-7, Anthony William Sloman wrote:
On Saturday, May 20, 2023 at 2:58:38â¯PM UTC+10, Flyguy wrote:
On Friday, May 19, 2023 at 8:00:59â¯AM UTC-7, Fred Bloggs wrote:
snip
Yes, we all make mistakes. We just have to agree on the units. It\'s approx. 1 TK/BM/MB/KT Whr. What\'s important is the batteries to carry them. Currently, the approx. rule of 13: 13 decimal liters, pounds and hamiltons for size, weight and cost. per KWhr of energy.
There\'s an internationally accepted unit of energy - the joule. People who worry about national electricity generation prefer to talk about Watt.hours which is a unit equal 3600 joules.
The safest way of denoting energy is in joules. If you want to compare quantitities of energy convert everything to joules and go from there,
Since we are talking about EV batteries, KWhr is more appropriate. Charging is mostly priced in KWhr, not joules.
Americans do resist internationally standardised units, and it has cost them. The most expensive mistake so far was course correction on the way to Mars which was computed in the wrong units, so the probe crashed into Mars
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mars_Climate_Orbiter
Ed Lee seems to be excessively American. Pounds should be kilograms. Hamiltons seems to be units of baldness. Litres should be cubic metres.
We are also talking about U.S. electricity capacity; so, American units should be acceptable. I don\'t blame you for never seeing a ten dollar bill.
A
Anthony William Sloman
Guest
On Wednesday, May 24, 2023 at 4:34:06â¯PM UTC+10, Ed Lee wrote:
I\'ve certainly visited the US, and have spent US dollars. It\'s not a question of whether US units are acceptable - it a point about minimising conversions from one unit to another, which is always an opportunity for an error to slip in - or with Sewage Sweeper - for an error to be introduced.
--
Bill Sloman, Sydney
On Tuesday, May 23, 2023 at 9:23:46â¯PM UTC-7, Anthony William Sloman wrote:
On Wednesday, May 24, 2023 at 2:20:35â¯AM UTC+10, Ed Lee wrote:
On Tuesday, May 23, 2023 at 9:16:27â¯AM UTC-7, Ed Lee wrote:
On Tuesday, May 23, 2023 at 8:01:40â¯AM UTC-7, Ricky wrote:
On Tuesday, May 23, 2023 at 10:08:39â¯AM UTC-4, Ed Lee wrote:
On Monday, May 22, 2023 at 11:29:13â¯PM UTC-7, Ricky wrote:
On Tuesday, May 23, 2023 at 1:54:20â¯AM UTC-4, Anthony William Sloman wrote:
On Tuesday, May 23, 2023 at 9:54:15â¯AM UTC+10, Flyguy wrote:
On Saturday, May 20, 2023 at 9:16:45â¯AM UTC-7, Anthony William Sloman wrote:
On Sunday, May 21, 2023 at 1:23:58â¯AM UTC+10, Flyguy wrote:
On Saturday, May 20, 2023 at 1:32:47â¯AM UTC-7, Anthony William Sloman wrote:
On Saturday, May 20, 2023 at 5:00:29â¯PM UTC+10, Flyguy wrote:
On Friday, May 19, 2023 at 10:57:30â¯PM UTC-7, Anthony William Sloman wrote:
On Saturday, May 20, 2023 at 2:58:38â¯PM UTC+10, Flyguy wrote:
On Friday, May 19, 2023 at 8:00:59â¯AM UTC-7, Fred Bloggs wrote:
snip
Yes, we all make mistakes. We just have to agree on the units. It\'s approx. 1 TK/BM/MB/KT Whr. What\'s important is the batteries to carry them.. Currently, the approx. rule of 13: 13 decimal liters, pounds and hamiltons for size, weight and cost. per KWhr of energy.
There\'s an internationally accepted unit of energy - the joule. People who worry about national electricity generation prefer to talk about Watt.hours which is a unit equal 3600 joules.
The safest way of denoting energy is in joules. If you want to compare quantitities of energy convert everything to joules and go from there,
Since we are talking about EV batteries, KWhr is more appropriate. Charging is mostly priced in KWhr, not joules.
Americans do resist internationally standardised units, and it has cost them. The most expensive mistake so far was course correction on the way to Mars which was computed in the wrong units, so the probe crashed into Mars
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mars_Climate_Orbiter
Ed Lee seems to be excessively American. Pounds should be kilograms. Hamiltons seems to be units of baldness. Litres should be cubic metres.
We are also talking about U.S. electricity capacity; so, American units should be acceptable. I don\'t blame you for never seeing a ten dollar bill.
I\'ve certainly visited the US, and have spent US dollars. It\'s not a question of whether US units are acceptable - it a point about minimising conversions from one unit to another, which is always an opportunity for an error to slip in - or with Sewage Sweeper - for an error to be introduced.
--
Bill Sloman, Sydney
A
Anthony William Sloman
Guest
On Wednesday, May 24, 2023 at 3:41:31â¯PM UTC+10, Ricky wrote:
But it is a derived unit. You need to learn about dimensional analysis.
> What is still being standardized, is the symbol to use for it. Some use the lower case \'l\', while others use the upper case \'L\'. I believe the general rules would favor the lower case, but in many type faces, it can be mistaken for a 1. The upper case helps to resolve that issue.
Whereas m^3 is standardised and unambiguous.
\" The litre was also used in several subsequent versions of the metric system and is accepted for use with the SI, although not an SI unitâthe SI unit of volume is the cubic metre (m^3).\"
--
Bil Sloman. Sydney
On Wednesday, May 24, 2023 at 12:23:46â¯AM UTC-4, Anthony William Sloman wrote:
On Wednesday, May 24, 2023 at 2:20:35â¯AM UTC+10, Ed Lee wrote:
On Tuesday, May 23, 2023 at 9:16:27â¯AM UTC-7, Ed Lee wrote:
On Tuesday, May 23, 2023 at 8:01:40â¯AM UTC-7, Ricky wrote:
On Tuesday, May 23, 2023 at 10:08:39â¯AM UTC-4, Ed Lee wrote:
On Monday, May 22, 2023 at 11:29:13â¯PM UTC-7, Ricky wrote:
On Tuesday, May 23, 2023 at 1:54:20â¯AM UTC-4, Anthony William Sloman wrote:
On Tuesday, May 23, 2023 at 9:54:15â¯AM UTC+10, Flyguy wrote:
On Saturday, May 20, 2023 at 9:16:45â¯AM UTC-7, Anthony William Sloman wrote:
On Sunday, May 21, 2023 at 1:23:58â¯AM UTC+10, Flyguy wrote:
On Saturday, May 20, 2023 at 1:32:47â¯AM UTC-7, Anthony William Sloman wrote:
On Saturday, May 20, 2023 at 5:00:29â¯PM UTC+10, Flyguy wrote:
On Friday, May 19, 2023 at 10:57:30â¯PM UTC-7, Anthony William Sloman wrote:
On Saturday, May 20, 2023 at 2:58:38â¯PM UTC+10, Flyguy wrote:
On Friday, May 19, 2023 at 8:00:59â¯AM UTC-7, Fred Bloggs wrote:
snip
Yes, we all make mistakes. We just have to agree on the units. It\'s approx. 1 TK/BM/MB/KT Whr. What\'s important is the batteries to carry them.. Currently, the approx. rule of 13: 13 decimal liters, pounds and hamiltons for size, weight and cost. per KWhr of energy.
There\'s an internationally accepted unit of energy - the joule. People who worry about national electricity generation prefer to talk about Watt.hours which is a unit equal 3600 joules.
The safest way of denoting energy is in joules. If you want to compare quantitities of energy convert everything to joules and go from there,
Americans do resist internationally standardised units, and it has cost them. The most expensive mistake so far was course correction on the way to Mars which was computed in the wrong units, so the probe crashed into Mars
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mars_Climate_Orbiter
Ed Lee seems to be excessively American. Pounds should be kilograms. Hamiltons seems to be units of baldness. Litres should be cubic metres.
I believe Litres an the accepted unit of volume in SI.
But it is a derived unit. You need to learn about dimensional analysis.
> What is still being standardized, is the symbol to use for it. Some use the lower case \'l\', while others use the upper case \'L\'. I believe the general rules would favor the lower case, but in many type faces, it can be mistaken for a 1. The upper case helps to resolve that issue.
Whereas m^3 is standardised and unambiguous.
\" The litre was also used in several subsequent versions of the metric system and is accepted for use with the SI, although not an SI unitâthe SI unit of volume is the cubic metre (m^3).\"
--
Bil Sloman. Sydney
R
Ricky
Guest
On Wednesday, May 24, 2023 at 7:40:42â¯AM UTC-4, Anthony William Sloman wrote:
And yet, it is an acceptable unit for volume, much more commonly used world wide, than the cubic meter.
But not widely used. \'L\' is unambiguous and is commonly used. Expect \'l\' to enter the realm of the deprecated at some point in the future.
> \" The litre was also used in several subsequent versions of the metric system and is accepted for use with the SI, although not an SI unitâthe SI unit of volume is the cubic metre (m^3).\"
Yes, thank you. \"accepted for use with the SI\"
--
Rick C.
-+-+ Get 1,000 miles of free Supercharging
-+-+ Tesla referral code - https://ts.la/richard11209
On Wednesday, May 24, 2023 at 3:41:31â¯PM UTC+10, Ricky wrote:
On Wednesday, May 24, 2023 at 12:23:46â¯AM UTC-4, Anthony William Sloman wrote:
On Wednesday, May 24, 2023 at 2:20:35â¯AM UTC+10, Ed Lee wrote:
On Tuesday, May 23, 2023 at 9:16:27â¯AM UTC-7, Ed Lee wrote:
On Tuesday, May 23, 2023 at 8:01:40â¯AM UTC-7, Ricky wrote:
On Tuesday, May 23, 2023 at 10:08:39â¯AM UTC-4, Ed Lee wrote:
On Monday, May 22, 2023 at 11:29:13â¯PM UTC-7, Ricky wrote:
On Tuesday, May 23, 2023 at 1:54:20â¯AM UTC-4, Anthony William Sloman wrote:
On Tuesday, May 23, 2023 at 9:54:15â¯AM UTC+10, Flyguy wrote:
On Saturday, May 20, 2023 at 9:16:45â¯AM UTC-7, Anthony William Sloman wrote:
On Sunday, May 21, 2023 at 1:23:58â¯AM UTC+10, Flyguy wrote:
On Saturday, May 20, 2023 at 1:32:47â¯AM UTC-7, Anthony William Sloman wrote:
On Saturday, May 20, 2023 at 5:00:29â¯PM UTC+10, Flyguy wrote:
On Friday, May 19, 2023 at 10:57:30â¯PM UTC-7, Anthony William Sloman wrote:
On Saturday, May 20, 2023 at 2:58:38â¯PM UTC+10, Flyguy wrote:
On Friday, May 19, 2023 at 8:00:59â¯AM UTC-7, Fred Bloggs wrote:
snip
Yes, we all make mistakes. We just have to agree on the units. It\'s approx. 1 TK/BM/MB/KT Whr. What\'s important is the batteries to carry them. Currently, the approx. rule of 13: 13 decimal liters, pounds and hamiltons for size, weight and cost. per KWhr of energy.
There\'s an internationally accepted unit of energy - the joule. People who worry about national electricity generation prefer to talk about Watt..hours which is a unit equal 3600 joules.
The safest way of denoting energy is in joules. If you want to compare quantitities of energy convert everything to joules and go from there,
Americans do resist internationally standardised units, and it has cost them. The most expensive mistake so far was course correction on the way to Mars which was computed in the wrong units, so the probe crashed into Mars
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mars_Climate_Orbiter
Ed Lee seems to be excessively American. Pounds should be kilograms. Hamiltons seems to be units of baldness. Litres should be cubic metres.
I believe Litres an the accepted unit of volume in SI.
But it is a derived unit. You need to learn about dimensional analysis.
And yet, it is an acceptable unit for volume, much more commonly used world wide, than the cubic meter.
What is still being standardized, is the symbol to use for it. Some use the lower case \'l\', while others use the upper case \'L\'. I believe the general rules would favor the lower case, but in many type faces, it can be mistaken for a 1. The upper case helps to resolve that issue.
Whereas m^3 is standardised and unambiguous.
But not widely used. \'L\' is unambiguous and is commonly used. Expect \'l\' to enter the realm of the deprecated at some point in the future.
> \" The litre was also used in several subsequent versions of the metric system and is accepted for use with the SI, although not an SI unitâthe SI unit of volume is the cubic metre (m^3).\"
Yes, thank you. \"accepted for use with the SI\"
--
Rick C.
-+-+ Get 1,000 miles of free Supercharging
-+-+ Tesla referral code - https://ts.la/richard11209
L
Lasse Langwadt Christensen
Guest
onsdag den 24. maj 2023 kl. 06.23.46 UTC+2 skrev Anthony William Sloman:
use dm^3 if it is such a bit issue
On Wednesday, May 24, 2023 at 2:20:35â¯AM UTC+10, Ed Lee wrote:
On Tuesday, May 23, 2023 at 9:16:27â¯AM UTC-7, Ed Lee wrote:
On Tuesday, May 23, 2023 at 8:01:40â¯AM UTC-7, Ricky wrote:
On Tuesday, May 23, 2023 at 10:08:39â¯AM UTC-4, Ed Lee wrote:
On Monday, May 22, 2023 at 11:29:13â¯PM UTC-7, Ricky wrote:
On Tuesday, May 23, 2023 at 1:54:20â¯AM UTC-4, Anthony William Sloman wrote:
On Tuesday, May 23, 2023 at 9:54:15â¯AM UTC+10, Flyguy wrote:
On Saturday, May 20, 2023 at 9:16:45â¯AM UTC-7, Anthony William Sloman wrote:
On Sunday, May 21, 2023 at 1:23:58â¯AM UTC+10, Flyguy wrote:
On Saturday, May 20, 2023 at 1:32:47â¯AM UTC-7, Anthony William Sloman wrote:
On Saturday, May 20, 2023 at 5:00:29â¯PM UTC+10, Flyguy wrote:
On Friday, May 19, 2023 at 10:57:30â¯PM UTC-7, Anthony William Sloman wrote:
On Saturday, May 20, 2023 at 2:58:38â¯PM UTC+10, Flyguy wrote:
On Friday, May 19, 2023 at 8:00:59â¯AM UTC-7, Fred Bloggs wrote:
snip
Yes, we all make mistakes. We just have to agree on the units. It\'s approx. 1 TK/BM/MB/KT Whr. What\'s important is the batteries to carry them. Currently, the approx. rule of 13: 13 decimal liters, pounds and hamiltons for size, weight and cost. per KWhr of energy.
There\'s an internationally accepted unit of energy - the joule. People who worry about national electricity generation prefer to talk about Watt.hours which is a unit equal 3600 joules.
The safest way of denoting energy is in joules. If you want to compare quantitities of energy convert everything to joules and go from there,
Americans do resist internationally standardised units, and it has cost them. The most expensive mistake so far was course correction on the way to Mars which was computed in the wrong units, so the probe crashed into Mars
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mars_Climate_Orbiter
Ed Lee seems to be excessively American. Pounds should be kilograms. Hamiltons seems to be units of baldness. Litres should be cubic metres.
use dm^3 if it is such a bit issue
A
Anthony William Sloman
Guest
On Thursday, May 25, 2023 at 5:29:33â¯AM UTC+10, Ricky wrote:
Fat chance.
You miss the point. When you start comparing ostensibly unrelated activities - like car fuel consumption and the energy produced by the national electricity generation system - you end up doing a lot of unit conversion which gives lots of opportunities to make mistakes. If you get into standard SI units as fast as you can, you mininise the number of unit conversions and the chances to screw up.
Using familiar units is always easier, and perfectly fine if you don\'t need to convert between units, but unit conversion needs to be minimised, and going straight to fundamental SI units lets you minimise that.
--
Bill Sloman, Sydney
On Wednesday, May 24, 2023 at 7:40:42â¯AM UTC-4, Anthony William Sloman wrote:
On Wednesday, May 24, 2023 at 3:41:31â¯PM UTC+10, Ricky wrote:
On Wednesday, May 24, 2023 at 12:23:46â¯AM UTC-4, Anthony William Sloman wrote:
On Wednesday, May 24, 2023 at 2:20:35â¯AM UTC+10, Ed Lee wrote:
On Tuesday, May 23, 2023 at 9:16:27â¯AM UTC-7, Ed Lee wrote:
On Tuesday, May 23, 2023 at 8:01:40â¯AM UTC-7, Ricky wrote:
On Tuesday, May 23, 2023 at 10:08:39â¯AM UTC-4, Ed Lee wrote:
On Monday, May 22, 2023 at 11:29:13â¯PM UTC-7, Ricky wrote:
On Tuesday, May 23, 2023 at 1:54:20â¯AM UTC-4, Anthony William Sloman wrote:
On Tuesday, May 23, 2023 at 9:54:15â¯AM UTC+10, Flyguy wrote:
On Saturday, May 20, 2023 at 9:16:45â¯AM UTC-7, Anthony William Sloman wrote:
On Sunday, May 21, 2023 at 1:23:58â¯AM UTC+10, Flyguy wrote:
On Saturday, May 20, 2023 at 1:32:47â¯AM UTC-7, Anthony William Sloman wrote:
On Saturday, May 20, 2023 at 5:00:29â¯PM UTC+10, Flyguy wrote:
On Friday, May 19, 2023 at 10:57:30â¯PM UTC-7, Anthony William Sloman wrote:
On Saturday, May 20, 2023 at 2:58:38â¯PM UTC+10, Flyguy wrote:
On Friday, May 19, 2023 at 8:00:59â¯AM UTC-7, Fred Bloggs wrote:
snip
Yes, we all make mistakes. We just have to agree on the units. It\'s approx. 1 TK/BM/MB/KT Whr. What\'s important is the batteries to carry them. Currently, the approx. rule of 13: 13 decimal liters, pounds and hamiltons for size, weight and cost. per KWhr of energy.
There\'s an internationally accepted unit of energy - the joule. People who worry about national electricity generation prefer to talk about Watt.hours which is a unit equal 3600 joules.
The safest way of denoting energy is in joules. If you want to compare quantitities of energy convert everything to joules and go from there,
Americans do resist internationally standardised units, and it has cost them. The most expensive mistake so far was course correction on the way to Mars which was computed in the wrong units, so the probe crashed into Mars
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mars_Climate_Orbiter
Ed Lee seems to be excessively American. Pounds should be kilograms.. Hamiltons seems to be units of baldness. Litres should be cubic metres.
I believe Litres an the accepted unit of volume in SI.
But it is a derived unit. You need to learn about dimensional analysis.
And yet, it is an acceptable unit for volume, much more commonly used world wide, than the cubic meter.
What is still being standardized, is the symbol to use for it. Some use the lower case \'l\', while others use the upper case \'L\'. I believe the general rules would favor the lower case, but in many type faces, it can be mistaken for a 1. The upper case helps to resolve that issue.
Whereas m^3 is standardised and unambiguous.
But not widely used. \'L\' is unambiguous and is commonly used. Expect \'l\' to enter the realm of the deprecated at some point in the future.
Fat chance.
\" The litre was also used in several subsequent versions of the metric system and is accepted for use with the SI, although not an SI unitâthe SI unit of volume is the cubic metre (m^3).\"
Yes, thank you. \"accepted for use with the SI\"
You miss the point. When you start comparing ostensibly unrelated activities - like car fuel consumption and the energy produced by the national electricity generation system - you end up doing a lot of unit conversion which gives lots of opportunities to make mistakes. If you get into standard SI units as fast as you can, you mininise the number of unit conversions and the chances to screw up.
Using familiar units is always easier, and perfectly fine if you don\'t need to convert between units, but unit conversion needs to be minimised, and going straight to fundamental SI units lets you minimise that.
--
Bill Sloman, Sydney
E
Ed Lee
Guest
On Wednesday, May 24, 2023 at 8:29:10â¯PM UTC-7, Anthony William Sloman wrote:
If you are preaching to the choir, you use language they understand. The scientific community are well aware of meters and grams, but common folks are more familiar with foot and pounds in the US. Unless you want to force 300M people to be scientists, it\'s better to talk in local units.
Since we are talking about impacts of 1T kWhr batteries to the US electric grid, we better talk about building and disposing 13T pounds of batteries using 13T Hamiltons.
On Thursday, May 25, 2023 at 5:29:33â¯AM UTC+10, Ricky wrote:
On Wednesday, May 24, 2023 at 7:40:42â¯AM UTC-4, Anthony William Sloman wrote:
On Wednesday, May 24, 2023 at 3:41:31â¯PM UTC+10, Ricky wrote:
On Wednesday, May 24, 2023 at 12:23:46â¯AM UTC-4, Anthony William Sloman wrote:
On Wednesday, May 24, 2023 at 2:20:35â¯AM UTC+10, Ed Lee wrote:
On Tuesday, May 23, 2023 at 9:16:27â¯AM UTC-7, Ed Lee wrote:
On Tuesday, May 23, 2023 at 8:01:40â¯AM UTC-7, Ricky wrote:
On Tuesday, May 23, 2023 at 10:08:39â¯AM UTC-4, Ed Lee wrote:
On Monday, May 22, 2023 at 11:29:13â¯PM UTC-7, Ricky wrote:
On Tuesday, May 23, 2023 at 1:54:20â¯AM UTC-4, Anthony William Sloman wrote:
On Tuesday, May 23, 2023 at 9:54:15â¯AM UTC+10, Flyguy wrote:
On Saturday, May 20, 2023 at 9:16:45â¯AM UTC-7, Anthony William Sloman wrote:
On Sunday, May 21, 2023 at 1:23:58â¯AM UTC+10, Flyguy wrote:
On Saturday, May 20, 2023 at 1:32:47â¯AM UTC-7, Anthony William Sloman wrote:
On Saturday, May 20, 2023 at 5:00:29â¯PM UTC+10, Flyguy wrote:
On Friday, May 19, 2023 at 10:57:30â¯PM UTC-7, Anthony William Sloman wrote:
On Saturday, May 20, 2023 at 2:58:38â¯PM UTC+10, Flyguy wrote:
On Friday, May 19, 2023 at 8:00:59â¯AM UTC-7, Fred Bloggs wrote:
snip
Yes, we all make mistakes. We just have to agree on the units.. It\'s approx. 1 TK/BM/MB/KT Whr. What\'s important is the batteries to carry them. Currently, the approx. rule of 13: 13 decimal liters, pounds and hamiltons for size, weight and cost. per KWhr of energy.
There\'s an internationally accepted unit of energy - the joule. People who worry about national electricity generation prefer to talk about Watt.hours which is a unit equal 3600 joules.
The safest way of denoting energy is in joules. If you want to compare quantitities of energy convert everything to joules and go from there,
Americans do resist internationally standardised units, and it has cost them. The most expensive mistake so far was course correction on the way to Mars which was computed in the wrong units, so the probe crashed into Mars
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mars_Climate_Orbiter
Ed Lee seems to be excessively American. Pounds should be kilograms. Hamiltons seems to be units of baldness. Litres should be cubic metres.
I believe Litres an the accepted unit of volume in SI.
But it is a derived unit. You need to learn about dimensional analysis.
And yet, it is an acceptable unit for volume, much more commonly used world wide, than the cubic meter.
What is still being standardized, is the symbol to use for it. Some use the lower case \'l\', while others use the upper case \'L\'. I believe the general rules would favor the lower case, but in many type faces, it can be mistaken for a 1. The upper case helps to resolve that issue.
Whereas m^3 is standardised and unambiguous.
But not widely used. \'L\' is unambiguous and is commonly used. Expect \'l\' to enter the realm of the deprecated at some point in the future.
Fat chance.
\" The litre was also used in several subsequent versions of the metric system and is accepted for use with the SI, although not an SI unitâthe SI unit of volume is the cubic metre (m^3).\"
Yes, thank you. \"accepted for use with the SI\"
You miss the point. When you start comparing ostensibly unrelated activities - like car fuel consumption and the energy produced by the national electricity generation system - you end up doing a lot of unit conversion which gives lots of opportunities to make mistakes. If you get into standard SI units as fast as you can, you mininise the number of unit conversions and the chances to screw up.
Using familiar units is always easier, and perfectly fine if you don\'t need to convert between units, but unit conversion needs to be minimised, and going straight to fundamental SI units lets you minimise that.
If you are preaching to the choir, you use language they understand. The scientific community are well aware of meters and grams, but common folks are more familiar with foot and pounds in the US. Unless you want to force 300M people to be scientists, it\'s better to talk in local units.
Since we are talking about impacts of 1T kWhr batteries to the US electric grid, we better talk about building and disposing 13T pounds of batteries using 13T Hamiltons.
R
Ricky
Guest
On Wednesday, May 24, 2023 at 11:29:10â¯PM UTC-4, Anthony William Sloman wrote:
I\'m very familiar with the concepts. That is why liters is a good unit to use, it is used commonly, often without any conversions required. For example, in Puerto Rico they sell gas in liters. People calculate mileage in miles per liter. See how nice that is?
--
Rick C.
-++- Get 1,000 miles of free Supercharging
-++- Tesla referral code - https://ts.la/richard11209
On Thursday, May 25, 2023 at 5:29:33â¯AM UTC+10, Ricky wrote:
On Wednesday, May 24, 2023 at 7:40:42â¯AM UTC-4, Anthony William Sloman wrote:
On Wednesday, May 24, 2023 at 3:41:31â¯PM UTC+10, Ricky wrote:
On Wednesday, May 24, 2023 at 12:23:46â¯AM UTC-4, Anthony William Sloman wrote:
On Wednesday, May 24, 2023 at 2:20:35â¯AM UTC+10, Ed Lee wrote:
On Tuesday, May 23, 2023 at 9:16:27â¯AM UTC-7, Ed Lee wrote:
On Tuesday, May 23, 2023 at 8:01:40â¯AM UTC-7, Ricky wrote:
On Tuesday, May 23, 2023 at 10:08:39â¯AM UTC-4, Ed Lee wrote:
On Monday, May 22, 2023 at 11:29:13â¯PM UTC-7, Ricky wrote:
On Tuesday, May 23, 2023 at 1:54:20â¯AM UTC-4, Anthony William Sloman wrote:
On Tuesday, May 23, 2023 at 9:54:15â¯AM UTC+10, Flyguy wrote:
On Saturday, May 20, 2023 at 9:16:45â¯AM UTC-7, Anthony William Sloman wrote:
On Sunday, May 21, 2023 at 1:23:58â¯AM UTC+10, Flyguy wrote:
On Saturday, May 20, 2023 at 1:32:47â¯AM UTC-7, Anthony William Sloman wrote:
On Saturday, May 20, 2023 at 5:00:29â¯PM UTC+10, Flyguy wrote:
On Friday, May 19, 2023 at 10:57:30â¯PM UTC-7, Anthony William Sloman wrote:
On Saturday, May 20, 2023 at 2:58:38â¯PM UTC+10, Flyguy wrote:
On Friday, May 19, 2023 at 8:00:59â¯AM UTC-7, Fred Bloggs wrote:
snip
Yes, we all make mistakes. We just have to agree on the units.. It\'s approx. 1 TK/BM/MB/KT Whr. What\'s important is the batteries to carry them. Currently, the approx. rule of 13: 13 decimal liters, pounds and hamiltons for size, weight and cost. per KWhr of energy.
There\'s an internationally accepted unit of energy - the joule. People who worry about national electricity generation prefer to talk about Watt.hours which is a unit equal 3600 joules.
The safest way of denoting energy is in joules. If you want to compare quantitities of energy convert everything to joules and go from there,
Americans do resist internationally standardised units, and it has cost them. The most expensive mistake so far was course correction on the way to Mars which was computed in the wrong units, so the probe crashed into Mars
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mars_Climate_Orbiter
Ed Lee seems to be excessively American. Pounds should be kilograms. Hamiltons seems to be units of baldness. Litres should be cubic metres.
I believe Litres an the accepted unit of volume in SI.
But it is a derived unit. You need to learn about dimensional analysis.
And yet, it is an acceptable unit for volume, much more commonly used world wide, than the cubic meter.
What is still being standardized, is the symbol to use for it. Some use the lower case \'l\', while others use the upper case \'L\'. I believe the general rules would favor the lower case, but in many type faces, it can be mistaken for a 1. The upper case helps to resolve that issue.
Whereas m^3 is standardised and unambiguous.
But not widely used. \'L\' is unambiguous and is commonly used. Expect \'l\' to enter the realm of the deprecated at some point in the future.
Fat chance.
\" The litre was also used in several subsequent versions of the metric system and is accepted for use with the SI, although not an SI unitâthe SI unit of volume is the cubic metre (m^3).\"
Yes, thank you. \"accepted for use with the SI\"
You miss the point. When you start comparing ostensibly unrelated activities - like car fuel consumption and the energy produced by the national electricity generation system - you end up doing a lot of unit conversion which gives lots of opportunities to make mistakes. If you get into standard SI units as fast as you can, you mininise the number of unit conversions and the chances to screw up.
Using familiar units is always easier, and perfectly fine if you don\'t need to convert between units, but unit conversion needs to be minimised, and going straight to fundamental SI units lets you minimise that.
I\'m very familiar with the concepts. That is why liters is a good unit to use, it is used commonly, often without any conversions required. For example, in Puerto Rico they sell gas in liters. People calculate mileage in miles per liter. See how nice that is?
--
Rick C.
-++- Get 1,000 miles of free Supercharging
-++- Tesla referral code - https://ts.la/richard11209
R
Ricky
Guest
On Wednesday, May 24, 2023 at 11:40:57â¯PM UTC-4, Ed Lee wrote:
Some of the weird SI stuff is when people don\'t ditch the kilos in a ratio. I don\'t recall the unit I just saw today. I don\'t recall the details, but it was something like km/kg. Why would they not write that as m/g?
The medical profession is horrible about this. They use mg for a thousandth of a gram, but mcg for microgram. Of course, this causes errors. But the errors are only a factor of 1000x, so they don\'t always result in a death..
--
Rick C.
-+++ Get 1,000 miles of free Supercharging
-+++ Tesla referral code - https://ts.la/richard11209
On Wednesday, May 24, 2023 at 8:29:10â¯PM UTC-7, Anthony William Sloman wrote:
On Thursday, May 25, 2023 at 5:29:33â¯AM UTC+10, Ricky wrote:
On Wednesday, May 24, 2023 at 7:40:42â¯AM UTC-4, Anthony William Sloman wrote:
On Wednesday, May 24, 2023 at 3:41:31â¯PM UTC+10, Ricky wrote:
On Wednesday, May 24, 2023 at 12:23:46â¯AM UTC-4, Anthony William Sloman wrote:
On Wednesday, May 24, 2023 at 2:20:35â¯AM UTC+10, Ed Lee wrote:
On Tuesday, May 23, 2023 at 9:16:27â¯AM UTC-7, Ed Lee wrote:
On Tuesday, May 23, 2023 at 8:01:40â¯AM UTC-7, Ricky wrote:
On Tuesday, May 23, 2023 at 10:08:39â¯AM UTC-4, Ed Lee wrote:
On Monday, May 22, 2023 at 11:29:13â¯PM UTC-7, Ricky wrote:
On Tuesday, May 23, 2023 at 1:54:20â¯AM UTC-4, Anthony William Sloman wrote:
On Tuesday, May 23, 2023 at 9:54:15â¯AM UTC+10, Flyguy wrote:
On Saturday, May 20, 2023 at 9:16:45â¯AM UTC-7, Anthony William Sloman wrote:
On Sunday, May 21, 2023 at 1:23:58â¯AM UTC+10, Flyguy wrote:
On Saturday, May 20, 2023 at 1:32:47â¯AM UTC-7, Anthony William Sloman wrote:
On Saturday, May 20, 2023 at 5:00:29â¯PM UTC+10, Flyguy wrote:
On Friday, May 19, 2023 at 10:57:30â¯PM UTC-7, Anthony William Sloman wrote:
On Saturday, May 20, 2023 at 2:58:38â¯PM UTC+10, Flyguy wrote:
On Friday, May 19, 2023 at 8:00:59â¯AM UTC-7, Fred Bloggs wrote:
snip
Yes, we all make mistakes. We just have to agree on the units. It\'s approx. 1 TK/BM/MB/KT Whr. What\'s important is the batteries to carry them. Currently, the approx. rule of 13: 13 decimal liters, pounds and hamiltons for size, weight and cost. per KWhr of energy.
There\'s an internationally accepted unit of energy - the joule. People who worry about national electricity generation prefer to talk about Watt.hours which is a unit equal 3600 joules.
The safest way of denoting energy is in joules. If you want to compare quantitities of energy convert everything to joules and go from there,
Americans do resist internationally standardised units, and it has cost them. The most expensive mistake so far was course correction on the way to Mars which was computed in the wrong units, so the probe crashed into Mars
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mars_Climate_Orbiter
Ed Lee seems to be excessively American. Pounds should be kilograms. Hamiltons seems to be units of baldness. Litres should be cubic metres.
I believe Litres an the accepted unit of volume in SI.
But it is a derived unit. You need to learn about dimensional analysis.
And yet, it is an acceptable unit for volume, much more commonly used world wide, than the cubic meter.
What is still being standardized, is the symbol to use for it. Some use the lower case \'l\', while others use the upper case \'L\'. I believe the general rules would favor the lower case, but in many type faces, it can be mistaken for a 1. The upper case helps to resolve that issue.
Whereas m^3 is standardised and unambiguous.
But not widely used. \'L\' is unambiguous and is commonly used. Expect \'l\' to enter the realm of the deprecated at some point in the future.
Fat chance.
\" The litre was also used in several subsequent versions of the metric system and is accepted for use with the SI, although not an SI unitâthe SI unit of volume is the cubic metre (m^3).\"
Yes, thank you. \"accepted for use with the SI\"
You miss the point. When you start comparing ostensibly unrelated activities - like car fuel consumption and the energy produced by the national electricity generation system - you end up doing a lot of unit conversion which gives lots of opportunities to make mistakes. If you get into standard SI units as fast as you can, you mininise the number of unit conversions and the chances to screw up.
Using familiar units is always easier, and perfectly fine if you don\'t need to convert between units, but unit conversion needs to be minimised, and going straight to fundamental SI units lets you minimise that.
If you are preaching to the choir, you use language they understand. The scientific community are well aware of meters and grams, but common folks are more familiar with foot and pounds in the US. Unless you want to force 300M people to be scientists, it\'s better to talk in local units.
Since we are talking about impacts of 1T kWhr batteries to the US electric grid, we better talk about building and disposing 13T pounds of batteries using 13T Hamiltons.
Some of the weird SI stuff is when people don\'t ditch the kilos in a ratio. I don\'t recall the unit I just saw today. I don\'t recall the details, but it was something like km/kg. Why would they not write that as m/g?
The medical profession is horrible about this. They use mg for a thousandth of a gram, but mcg for microgram. Of course, this causes errors. But the errors are only a factor of 1000x, so they don\'t always result in a death..
--
Rick C.
-+++ Get 1,000 miles of free Supercharging
-+++ Tesla referral code - https://ts.la/richard11209
A
Anthony William Sloman
Guest
On Thursday, May 25, 2023 at 5:12:15â¯PM UTC+10, Ricky wrote:
<snip>
> The medical profession is horrible about this. They use mg for a thousandth of a gram, but mcg for microgram. Of course, this causes errors. But the errors are only a factor of 1000x, so they don\'t always result in a death.
That is odd. The recognised abbreviation of microgram is ug. It should be the Greek \"μ\" but works.
--
Bill Sloman, Sydney
On Wednesday, May 24, 2023 at 11:40:57â¯PM UTC-4, Ed Lee wrote:
On Wednesday, May 24, 2023 at 8:29:10â¯PM UTC-7, Anthony William Sloman wrote:
On Thursday, May 25, 2023 at 5:29:33â¯AM UTC+10, Ricky wrote:
On Wednesday, May 24, 2023 at 7:40:42â¯AM UTC-4, Anthony William Sloman wrote:
On Wednesday, May 24, 2023 at 3:41:31â¯PM UTC+10, Ricky wrote:
On Wednesday, May 24, 2023 at 12:23:46â¯AM UTC-4, Anthony William Sloman wrote:
On Wednesday, May 24, 2023 at 2:20:35â¯AM UTC+10, Ed Lee wrote:
On Tuesday, May 23, 2023 at 9:16:27â¯AM UTC-7, Ed Lee wrote:
On Tuesday, May 23, 2023 at 8:01:40â¯AM UTC-7, Ricky wrote:
On Tuesday, May 23, 2023 at 10:08:39â¯AM UTC-4, Ed Lee wrote:
On Monday, May 22, 2023 at 11:29:13â¯PM UTC-7, Ricky wrote:
On Tuesday, May 23, 2023 at 1:54:20â¯AM UTC-4, Anthony William Sloman wrote:
On Tuesday, May 23, 2023 at 9:54:15â¯AM UTC+10, Flyguy wrote:
On Saturday, May 20, 2023 at 9:16:45â¯AM UTC-7, Anthony William Sloman wrote:
On Sunday, May 21, 2023 at 1:23:58â¯AM UTC+10, Flyguy wrote:
On Saturday, May 20, 2023 at 1:32:47â¯AM UTC-7, Anthony William Sloman wrote:
On Saturday, May 20, 2023 at 5:00:29â¯PM UTC+10, Flyguy wrote:
On Friday, May 19, 2023 at 10:57:30â¯PM UTC-7, Anthony William Sloman wrote:
On Saturday, May 20, 2023 at 2:58:38â¯PM UTC+10, Flyguy wrote:
On Friday, May 19, 2023 at 8:00:59â¯AM UTC-7, Fred Bloggs wrote:
<snip>
> The medical profession is horrible about this. They use mg for a thousandth of a gram, but mcg for microgram. Of course, this causes errors. But the errors are only a factor of 1000x, so they don\'t always result in a death.
That is odd. The recognised abbreviation of microgram is ug. It should be the Greek \"μ\" but works.
--
Bill Sloman, Sydney