VW hoping to challenge Tesla...

[ke...@kjwdesigns.com]

On Wednesday, 2 December 2020 at 17:26:18 UTC-8, gnuarm.del...@gmail.com wrote:
....
> Yes, increasing the voltage increases some theoretical power in an imaginary EV charging world. It has no real impact on real batteries that to this day do not tolerate charging rates much better than 1 hour.

But cars with larger batteries (the 2020 Roadster and CyberTruck for example have batteries twice the size of existing Tesla vehicles). To achieve that 1 hour charging time will require higher rates.

> No, you can raise the voltage all you want the battery won\'t take more power than it can handle. I guess it would help charging Tesla semis.

Again, even the Tesla Roadster and Cybertruck have 200kWh batteries - they may be able to take up to about twice the power of existing vehicles while charging. The wiring would then be the limit.

I haven\'t heard of Tesla planning to increase the voltage but with the larger batteries in the Roadster and the CyberTruck the battery will not be the limitation. Battery improvements and the desire to achieve faster charging will also be an incentive to increase voltage.
With 250 kW chargers the battery is still the limitation. Do the math. It\'s not complicated.

I know, I\'ve done the calculations, I\'m referring to newer vehicles or to existing ones with improved batteries. The Porsche Taycan allows charging at up to 270kW into its ~90kWh battery.

Porsche claimed to reduce the wiring weight by 66lbs by using an 800V rather than a 400-volt system, so that\'s another advantage.
That\'s inside the car, not the chargers.

Precisely - the weight of the external chargers is of little importance - the weight of vehicle components is very important. All car manufacturers are very particular about weight - they even have to take into account every nut, screw and washer etc.

Sixty-six pounds reduction (1-2% of vehicle weight) possibly allows less battery, and a lower power motor to provide the same performance and range, or an increase in performance for the same battery/motor; or a reduction in cost.

kw

 

[Rick C]

On Wednesday, December 2, 2020 at 9:44:57 PM UTC-5, ke...@kjwdesigns.com wrote:

On Wednesday, 2 December 2020 at 17:26:18 UTC-8, gnuarm.del...@gmail.com wrote:
...
Yes, increasing the voltage increases some theoretical power in an imaginary EV charging world. It has no real impact on real batteries that to this day do not tolerate charging rates much better than 1 hour.
But cars with larger batteries (the 2020 Roadster and CyberTruck for example have batteries twice the size of existing Tesla vehicles). To achieve that 1 hour charging time will require higher rates.

Yes, but not higher voltages. They have chargers operating at a full 250 kW. My car charges at a max rate of around 140 kW and that is only for a short range of battery state of charge, ~20% - 40%. It falls linearly from there. That\'s why the 250 kW charger does little good for current cars (none for mine). The models 3 and Y will fill out the triangle charging up to wherever that peak is for a few brief minutes before resuming the ramp down.

In the truck or the roadster the 250 kW charger will ramp up to whatever defines the max rate, car or charger and stay at that rate for some time before dropping at the higher end as they all do. So an hour or close to it is entirely practical with the present chargers.

I have a lot of criticisms about Tesla, but failure to think ahead is not one of them.

No, you can raise the voltage all you want the battery won\'t take more power than it can handle. I guess it would help charging Tesla semis.
Again, even the Tesla Roadster and Cybertruck have 200kWh batteries - they may be able to take up to about twice the power of existing vehicles while charging. The wiring would then be the limit.

What wiring??? They have 250 kW charges in the field now. I seem to recall reading of a new station the other day that was some large number of units and all V3, 250 kW.

I haven\'t heard of Tesla planning to increase the voltage but with the larger batteries in the Roadster and the CyberTruck the battery will not be the limitation. Battery improvements and the desire to achieve faster charging will also be an incentive to increase voltage.
With 250 kW chargers the battery is still the limitation. Do the math. It\'s not complicated.
I know, I\'ve done the calculations, I\'m referring to newer vehicles or to existing ones with improved batteries. The Porsche Taycan allows charging at up to 270kW into its ~90kWh battery.

Where do you find such chargers for the Porsche? At the dealer?

Porsche claimed to reduce the wiring weight by 66lbs by using an 800V rather than a 400-volt system, so that\'s another advantage.
That\'s inside the car, not the chargers.
Precisely - the weight of the external chargers is of little importance - the weight of vehicle components is very important. All car manufacturers are very particular about weight - they even have to take into account every nut, screw and washer etc.

What matters in the car is the result. So far not many complain about the results the Tesla cars produce.


> Sixty-six pounds reduction (1-2% of vehicle weight) possibly allows less battery, and a lower power motor to provide the same performance and range, or an increase in performance for the same battery/motor; or a reduction in cost.

Now you are being a bit silly. 1% reduction of the car weight (is that wet or dry? lol) is only meaningful to a race car driver where they win or lose by inches. I guess the Porsche could be made with an 89 kWh battery.

The problem with that car is range. I seem to recall it doesn\'t go so far on the 90 kWh.

There is no point in focusing on any one detail of a car. A car is a whole and only has meaning when considering all the parts. Tesla has done a great job of considering nearly every aspect of owning an EV. But in some few years nearly everyone will be selling EVs in numbers and nearly everyone will be buying them and charging in their garage on a 6 kW charger.

--

Rick C.

--- Get 1,000 miles of free Supercharging
--- Tesla referral code - https://ts.la/richard11209

 

[bitrex]

On 12/2/2020 9:44 PM, ke...@kjwdesigns.com wrote:

On Wednesday, 2 December 2020 at 17:26:18 UTC-8, gnuarm.del...@gmail.com wrote:
...
Yes, increasing the voltage increases some theoretical power in an imaginary EV charging world. It has no real impact on real batteries that to this day do not tolerate charging rates much better than 1 hour.

But cars with larger batteries (the 2020 Roadster and CyberTruck for example have batteries twice the size of existing Tesla vehicles). To achieve that 1 hour charging time will require higher rates.

No, you can raise the voltage all you want the battery won\'t take more power than it can handle. I guess it would help charging Tesla semis.

Again, even the Tesla Roadster and Cybertruck have 200kWh batteries - they may be able to take up to about twice the power of existing vehicles while charging. The wiring would then be the limit.

I haven\'t heard of Tesla planning to increase the voltage but with the larger batteries in the Roadster and the CyberTruck the battery will not be the limitation. Battery improvements and the desire to achieve faster charging will also be an incentive to increase voltage.
With 250 kW chargers the battery is still the limitation. Do the math. It\'s not complicated.

I know, I\'ve done the calculations, I\'m referring to newer vehicles or to existing ones with improved batteries. The Porsche Taycan allows charging at up to 270kW into its ~90kWh battery.

Porsche claimed to reduce the wiring weight by 66lbs by using an 800V rather than a 400-volt system, so that\'s another advantage.
That\'s inside the car, not the chargers.

Precisely - the weight of the external chargers is of little importance - the weight of vehicle components is very important. All car manufacturers are very particular about weight - they even have to take into account every nut, screw and washer etc.

Sixty-six pounds reduction (1-2% of vehicle weight) possibly allows less battery, and a lower power motor to provide the same performance and range, or an increase in performance for the same battery/motor; or a reduction in cost.

kw

Yeah they took the passenger-side vanity mirror lights out of the second
gen Volt, what a buncha cheapskates!

 

[John Doe]

Dean Hoffman <deanhofman@clod.com> wrote:

VW hired Alexander Hitzinger to develop
a new EV. Is this wishful thinking?

\"Having a small team of highly qualified engineers, who are empowered to
take decisions unencumbered by the corporate bureaucracy of the
Volkswagen empire, should end up producing a better vehicle more quickly.\"

Considering the fact Germany has gone utterly INSANE, destroying its own
nuclear energy production, don\'t expect anything positive to come out of
Germany in the foreseeable future. Its neighbors should be very concerned.
It\'s not the first time Germany has gone INSANE...

Coincidentally... Volkswagen was founded in 1937 under Adolf Hitler (not
implying anything, just trivia).

 

[Gerhard Hoffmann]

Am 03.12.20 um 14:19 schrieb John Doe:

Dean Hoffman <deanhofman@clod.com> wrote:

VW hired Alexander Hitzinger to develop
a new EV. Is this wishful thinking?

\"Having a small team of highly qualified engineers, who are empowered to
take decisions unencumbered by the corporate bureaucracy of the
Volkswagen empire, should end up producing a better vehicle more quickly.\"

Considering the fact Germany has gone utterly INSANE, destroying its own
nuclear energy production, don\'t expect anything positive to come out of
Germany in the foreseeable future.

like the Biontech vaccine that is licensed to Pfizer?


Its neighbors should be very concerned.
> It\'s not the first time Germany has gone INSANE...

Yes, just insist that we spend more for the military.

 

[John Doe]

At the same time... A German man (Albert Einstein) practically invented
nuclear power, the clean abundant efficient energy source INSANE Germany is
destroying.

 

[Bill Sloman]

On Wednesday, December 2, 2020 at 11:31:56 AM UTC+11, John Larkin wrote:

On Tue, 1 Dec 2020 13:55:51 -0500, bitrex <us...@example.net> wrote:

On 12/1/2020 1:22 PM, Ed Lee wrote:
On Tuesday, December 1, 2020 at 10:15:06 AM UTC-8, bitrex wrote:
On 12/1/2020 12:27 PM, jla...@highlandsniptechnology.com wrote:
On Tue, 1 Dec 2020 09:11:38 -0800 (PST), Brent Locher
blo...@columbus.rr.com> wrote:

On Tuesday, December 1, 2020 at 11:38:16 AM UTC-5, Dean Hoffman wrote:

<snip>

You mean this e-Golf?

https://www.roadandtrack.com/new-cars/a31192023/the-volkswagen-e-golf-is-dead/


Ya, it had about a 100 mile range and was nearly 40 grand for the top trim.

\"and sprint from 0-60 mph in 8.5 seconds.\"

an 8.5 second 0-60 in a car that weighs about 2800 lbs is nothing to
brag about.

Isn\'t wimpy peformance the way to Save The Earth? All that accel and decel and driving over 55 MPH Wastes Resources.

This is standard denialist propaganda. It\'s perfectly true that not using much energy leads to less CO2 being injected into the earth\'s atmosphere, but it\'s a trivial solution.

Serious environmentalists recognise that we need to be able to get our energy in ways that don\'t mess up the environment, and are interested in solutions that deliver the amount of energy that we want. They do exist, but they don\'t make money for the people who pay for the denialist propaganda that John Larkin laps up.

--
Bill Sloman, Sydney

 

[Bill Sloman]

On Wednesday, December 2, 2020 at 11:44:26 AM UTC+11, Cursitor Doom wrote:

On Tue, 1 Dec 2020 10:38:05 -0600, Dean Hoffman <deanh...@clod.com
wrote:
VW hired Alexander Hitzinger to develop
a new EV.
Is this wishful thinking?

\"Having a small team of highly qualified engineers, who are empowered to
take decisions unencumbered by the corporate bureaucracy of the
Volkswagen empire, should end up producing a better vehicle more quickly.\"

From
https://www.reuters.com/article/us-volkswagen-electric-hitzinger-idUSKBN28B555

At least they won\'t need to fake their emissions figures this time around.

They didn\'t need to when they did it, but it was cheaper than doing what they should have done.

That\'s capitalism for you - you do need to regulate free markets to stop them degenerating into criminal conspiracies to rip off the customers (and Adam Smith was well aware of this back in 1776).

https://www.oxfordreference.com/view/10.1093/acref/9780191843730.001.0001/q-oro-ed5-00010204

--
Bill Sloman, Sydney

 

[Bill Sloman]

On Sunday, December 13, 2020 at 11:03:44 AM UTC+11, John Doe wrote:

At the same time... A German man (Albert Einstein) practically invented
nuclear power, the clean abundant efficient energy source INSANE Germany is
destroying.

John Doe is a top-posting troll, so it isn\'t clear what he is reacting to.

Albert Einstein was born in Germany, but in January 1896, with his father\'s approval, Einstein renounced his citizenship in the German Kingdom of Württemberg to avoid military service. He eventually ended up getting it back, but in Antwerp, Belgium on 28 March 1933, he went to the German consulate and surrendered his passport, formally renouncing his German citizenship, and went on to emigrate to the US. He was Jewish, and Hitler\'s Nazi\'s weren\'t fond of him.

He didn\'t invent nuclear power. He did set out the mass-energy equivalence which is fundamental to the process, but he didn\'t have anything to do with the work on uranium fission which lead to nuclear power.

Quite why John Doe thinks that nuclear fission is a \"clean, abundant efficient energy source\" escapes me, but he\'s ill-informed in any number of areas..

Germany isn\'t using it\'s nuclear power plants any more, but that isn\'t \"destroying\" nuclear fission as an energy source - it\'s just recognising that it\'s economics aren\'t as good as were initially imagined. Getting rid of nuclear waste has turned out to be lot more expensive than was originally allowed for.

If there\'s any insanity here, John Doe seems to be supplying it.

--
Bill Sloman, Sydney

 

[Flyguy]

On Monday, December 14, 2020 at 5:44:07 PM UTC-8, Bill Sloman wrote:

On Wednesday, December 2, 2020 at 11:31:56 AM UTC+11, John Larkin wrote:
On Tue, 1 Dec 2020 13:55:51 -0500, bitrex <us...@example.net> wrote:

On 12/1/2020 1:22 PM, Ed Lee wrote:
On Tuesday, December 1, 2020 at 10:15:06 AM UTC-8, bitrex wrote:
On 12/1/2020 12:27 PM, jla...@highlandsniptechnology.com wrote:
On Tue, 1 Dec 2020 09:11:38 -0800 (PST), Brent Locher
blo...@columbus.rr.com> wrote:

On Tuesday, December 1, 2020 at 11:38:16 AM UTC-5, Dean Hoffman wrote:
snip
You mean this e-Golf?

https://www.roadandtrack.com/new-cars/a31192023/the-volkswagen-e-golf-is-dead/


Ya, it had about a 100 mile range and was nearly 40 grand for the top trim.

\"and sprint from 0-60 mph in 8.5 seconds.\"

an 8.5 second 0-60 in a car that weighs about 2800 lbs is nothing to
brag about.

Isn\'t wimpy peformance the way to Save The Earth? All that accel and decel and driving over 55 MPH Wastes Resources.
This is standard denialist propaganda. It\'s perfectly true that not using much energy leads to less CO2 being injected into the earth\'s atmosphere, but it\'s a trivial solution.

Serious environmentalists recognise that we need to be able to get our energy in ways that don\'t mess up the environment, and are interested in solutions that deliver the amount of energy that we want. They do exist, but they don\'t make money for the people who pay for the denialist propaganda that John Larkin laps up.

--
SL0W MAN, Sydney

Hey SL0W MAN, the way to get reliable energy free of CO2 is nuclear.

 

[Flyguy]

On Monday, December 14, 2020 at 6:55:47 PM UTC-8, Bill Sloman wrote:

On Sunday, December 13, 2020 at 11:03:44 AM UTC+11, John Doe wrote:
At the same time... A German man (Albert Einstein) practically invented
nuclear power, the clean abundant efficient energy source INSANE Germany is
destroying.
John Doe is a top-posting troll, so it isn\'t clear what he is reacting to..

Albert Einstein was born in Germany, but in January 1896, with his father\'s approval, Einstein renounced his citizenship in the German Kingdom of Württemberg to avoid military service. He eventually ended up getting it back, but in Antwerp, Belgium on 28 March 1933, he went to the German consulate and surrendered his passport, formally renouncing his German citizenship, and went on to emigrate to the US. He was Jewish, and Hitler\'s Nazi\'s weren\'t fond of him.

He didn\'t invent nuclear power. He did set out the mass-energy equivalence which is fundamental to the process, but he didn\'t have anything to do with the work on uranium fission which lead to nuclear power.

Quite why John Doe thinks that nuclear fission is a \"clean, abundant efficient energy source\" escapes me, but he\'s ill-informed in any number of areas.

Germany isn\'t using it\'s nuclear power plants any more, but that isn\'t \"destroying\" nuclear fission as an energy source - it\'s just recognising that it\'s economics aren\'t as good as were initially imagined. Getting rid of nuclear waste has turned out to be lot more expensive than was originally allowed for.

If there\'s any insanity here, John Doe seems to be supplying it.

--
SL0W MAN, Sydney

Hey SL0W MAN, Germany isn\'t using their nukes anymore - they ARE using France\'s!

 

[Flyguy]

On Monday, December 14, 2020 at 8:36:52 PM UTC-8, Flyguy wrote:

On Monday, December 14, 2020 at 6:55:47 PM UTC-8, Bill Sloman wrote:
On Sunday, December 13, 2020 at 11:03:44 AM UTC+11, John Doe wrote:
At the same time... A German man (Albert Einstein) practically invented
nuclear power, the clean abundant efficient energy source INSANE Germany is
destroying.
John Doe is a top-posting troll, so it isn\'t clear what he is reacting to.

Albert Einstein was born in Germany, but in January 1896, with his father\'s approval, Einstein renounced his citizenship in the German Kingdom of Württemberg to avoid military service. He eventually ended up getting it back, but in Antwerp, Belgium on 28 March 1933, he went to the German consulate and surrendered his passport, formally renouncing his German citizenship, and went on to emigrate to the US. He was Jewish, and Hitler\'s Nazi\'s weren\'t fond of him.

He didn\'t invent nuclear power. He did set out the mass-energy equivalence which is fundamental to the process, but he didn\'t have anything to do with the work on uranium fission which lead to nuclear power.

Quite why John Doe thinks that nuclear fission is a \"clean, abundant efficient energy source\" escapes me, but he\'s ill-informed in any number of areas.

Germany isn\'t using it\'s nuclear power plants any more, but that isn\'t \"destroying\" nuclear fission as an energy source - it\'s just recognising that it\'s economics aren\'t as good as were initially imagined. Getting rid of nuclear waste has turned out to be lot more expensive than was originally allowed for.

If there\'s any insanity here, John Doe seems to be supplying it.

--
SL0W MAN, Sydney

Hey SL0W MAN, Germany isn\'t using their nukes anymore - they ARE using France\'s!

BTW, the economics of nuclear are quite good:
https://www.world-nuclear.org/information-library/economic-aspects/economics-of-nuclear-power.aspx
Nukes require a huge capital investment, so are very sensitive to interest rates. Right now rates are very low, so it is a great time to build nukes.

 

[Bill Sloman]

On Tuesday, December 15, 2020 at 3:36:52 PM UTC+11, Flyguy wrote:

On Monday, December 14, 2020 at 6:55:47 PM UTC-8, Bill Sloman wrote:
On Sunday, December 13, 2020 at 11:03:44 AM UTC+11, John Doe wrote:
At the same time... A German man (Albert Einstein) practically invented
nuclear power, the clean abundant efficient energy source INSANE Germany is
destroying.
John Doe is a top-posting troll, so it isn\'t clear what he is reacting to.

Albert Einstein was born in Germany, but in January 1896, with his father\'s approval, Einstein renounced his citizenship in the German Kingdom of Württemberg to avoid military service. He eventually ended up getting it back, but in Antwerp, Belgium on 28 March 1933, he went to the German consulate and surrendered his passport, formally renouncing his German citizenship, and went on to emigrate to the US. He was Jewish, and Hitler\'s Nazi\'s weren\'t fond of him.

He didn\'t invent nuclear power. He did set out the mass-energy equivalence which is fundamental to the process, but he didn\'t have anything to do with the work on uranium fission which lead to nuclear power.

Quite why John Doe thinks that nuclear fission is a \"clean, abundant efficient energy source\" escapes me, but he\'s ill-informed in any number of areas.

Germany isn\'t using it\'s nuclear power plants any more, but that isn\'t \"destroying\" nuclear fission as an energy source - it\'s just recognising that it\'s economics aren\'t as good as were initially imagined. Getting rid of nuclear waste has turned out to be lot more expensive than was originally allowed for.

If there\'s any insanity here, John Doe seems to be supplying it.

Germany isn\'t using their nukes anymore - they ARE using France\'s!

What has that got to do with anything? Europe has been shipping electric power across its borders for decades now.

There\'s even a link from the UK to Norway, though it isn\'t expected to start shifting power until next year.

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

--
Bill Sloman, Sydney

 

[Bill Sloman]

On Tuesday, December 15, 2020 at 3:33:23 PM UTC+11, Flyguy wrote:

On Monday, December 14, 2020 at 5:44:07 PM UTC-8, Bill Sloman wrote:
On Wednesday, December 2, 2020 at 11:31:56 AM UTC+11, John Larkin wrote:
On Tue, 1 Dec 2020 13:55:51 -0500, bitrex <us...@example.net> wrote:

On 12/1/2020 1:22 PM, Ed Lee wrote:
On Tuesday, December 1, 2020 at 10:15:06 AM UTC-8, bitrex wrote:
On 12/1/2020 12:27 PM, jla...@highlandsniptechnology.com wrote:
On Tue, 1 Dec 2020 09:11:38 -0800 (PST), Brent Locher
blo...@columbus.rr.com> wrote:

On Tuesday, December 1, 2020 at 11:38:16 AM UTC-5, Dean Hoffman wrote:
snip

Serious environmentalists recognise that we need to be able to get our energy in ways that don\'t mess up the environment, and are interested in solutions that deliver the amount of energy that we want. They do exist, but they don\'t make money for the people who pay for the denialist propaganda that John Larkin laps up.

The way to get reliable energy free of CO2 is nuclear.

Nuclear power enthusiasts have been telling everybody this for decades now. There are now quite a few cheaper ways of generating electricity without burning fossil carbon and dumping the CO2 produced into the atmosphere, but if you are silly enough to think that nuclear fission is a good way to generate power, you seem to be too silly to learn about the cheaper, safer alternatives which don\'t involve investing millions and then waiting years for any power to be generated.

--
Bill Sloman, Sydney

 

[Bill Sloman]

On Tuesday, December 15, 2020 at 3:56:21 PM UTC+11, Flyguy wrote:

On Monday, December 14, 2020 at 8:36:52 PM UTC-8, Flyguy wrote:
On Monday, December 14, 2020 at 6:55:47 PM UTC-8, Bill Sloman wrote:
On Sunday, December 13, 2020 at 11:03:44 AM UTC+11, John Doe wrote:
At the same time... A German man (Albert Einstein) practically invented
nuclear power, the clean abundant efficient energy source INSANE Germany is
destroying.
John Doe is a top-posting troll, so it isn\'t clear what he is reacting to.

Albert Einstein was born in Germany, but in January 1896, with his father\'s approval, Einstein renounced his citizenship in the German Kingdom of Württemberg to avoid military service. He eventually ended up getting it back, but in Antwerp, Belgium on 28 March 1933, he went to the German consulate and surrendered his passport, formally renouncing his German citizenship, and went on to emigrate to the US. He was Jewish, and Hitler\'s Nazi\'s weren\'t fond of him.

He didn\'t invent nuclear power. He did set out the mass-energy equivalence which is fundamental to the process, but he didn\'t have anything to do with the work on uranium fission which lead to nuclear power.

Quite why John Doe thinks that nuclear fission is a \"clean, abundant efficient energy source\" escapes me, but he\'s ill-informed in any number of areas.

Germany isn\'t using it\'s nuclear power plants any more, but that isn\'t \"destroying\" nuclear fission as an energy source - it\'s just recognising that it\'s economics aren\'t as good as were initially imagined. Getting rid of nuclear waste has turned out to be lot more expensive than was originally allowed for.

If there\'s any insanity here, John Doe seems to be supplying it.

Germany isn\'t using their nukes anymore - they ARE using France\'s!

So what.

BTW, the economics of nuclear are quite good:
https://www.world-nuclear.org/information-library/economic-aspects/economics-of-nuclear-power.aspx

The World Nuclear Association website would say that. Other sources are less positive.

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

The crucial bit of information is that photovoltaic solar has got a great deal cheaper in recent years. The Chinese invested a lot of money in making high-yield solar cells in huge volumes a few years ago, and none of the Australian power generating companies are prepared to invest in anything else. It isn\'t dispatchable power, available on demand so they are busy buying short term storage to keep the lights on overnight. The Australian government is planning on to spending a couple of billion dollars on on the Snowy Mountains Hydroelectric Scheme to allow to be used as a pumped storage facility - water pumps to push water back up hill, and extra turbines and generators to return the stored energy to the grid - but that going to take a while to come on line. Grid scale batteries cam be had more quickly.

> Nukes require a huge capital investment, so are very sensitive to interest rates. Right now rates are very low, so it is a great time to build nukes..

So borrow loads of money when interest rates are unusually low, wait a couple of years while the money gets spent on building the plant, and then find that interest rates have gone up again.

Just the kind of plan that Flyguy could be relied to come up with.

--
Bill Sloman, Sydney

 

[Bill Sloman]

On Tuesday, December 15, 2020 at 3:56:21 PM UTC+11, Flyguy wrote:

On Monday, December 14, 2020 at 8:36:52 PM UTC-8, Flyguy wrote:
On Monday, December 14, 2020 at 6:55:47 PM UTC-8, Bill Sloman wrote:
On Sunday, December 13, 2020 at 11:03:44 AM UTC+11, John Doe wrote:
At the same time... A German man (Albert Einstein) practically invented
nuclear power, the clean abundant efficient energy source INSANE Germany is destroying.

John Doe is a top-posting troll, so it isn\'t clear what he is reacting to.

Albert Einstein was born in Germany, but in January 1896, with his father\'s approval, Einstein renounced his citizenship in the German Kingdom of Württemberg to avoid military service. He eventually ended up getting it back, but in Antwerp, Belgium on 28 March 1933, he went to the German consulate and surrendered his passport, formally renouncing his German citizenship, and went on to emigrate to the US. He was Jewish, and Hitler\'s Nazi\'s weren\'t fond of him.

He didn\'t invent nuclear power. He did set out the mass-energy equivalence which is fundamental to the process, but he didn\'t have anything to do with the work on uranium fission which lead to nuclear power.

Quite why John Doe thinks that nuclear fission is a \"clean, abundant efficient energy source\" escapes me, but he\'s ill-informed in any number of areas.

Germany isn\'t using it\'s nuclear power plants any more, but that isn\'t \"destroying\" nuclear fission as an energy source - it\'s just recognising that it\'s economics aren\'t as good as were initially imagined. Getting rid of nuclear waste has turned out to be lot more expensive than was originally allowed for.

If there\'s any insanity here, John Doe seems to be supplying it.

Germany isn\'t using their nukes anymore - they ARE using France\'s!

So what.

BTW, the economics of nuclear are quite good:
https://www.world-nuclear.org/information-library/economic-aspects/economics-of-nuclear-power.aspx

The World Nuclear Association website would say that. Other sources are less positive.

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

The crucial bit of information is that photovoltaic solar has got a great deal cheaper in recent years. The Chinese invested a lot of money in making high-yield solar cells in huge volumes a few years ago, and none of the Australian power generating companies are now prepared to invest in anything else. It isn\'t dispatchable power, available on demand, so they are busy buying short term storage to keep the lights on overnight. The Australian government is planning to spend a couple of billion dollars on on the Snowy Mountains Hydroelectric Scheme to allow to be used as a pumped storage facility - water pumps to push water back up hill, and extra turbines and generators to return the stored energy to the grid - but that going to take a while to come on line. Grid scale batteries can be had more quickly.

> Nukes require a huge capital investment, so are very sensitive to interest rates. Right now rates are very low, so it is a great time to build nukes..

So borrow loads of money when interest rates are unusually low, wait a couple of years while the money gets spent on building the plant, and then find that interest rates have gone up again.

Just the kind of plan that Flyguy could be relied to come up with.

--
Bill Sloman, Sydney

 

[John Doe]

The least electronics oriented, most active troll in this group...

--
Bill Sloman <bill.sloman@ieee.org> wrote:

X-Received: by 2002:a0c:c211:: with SMTP id l17mr36108374qvh.53.1608027628975; Tue, 15 Dec 2020 02:20:28 -0800 (PST)
X-Received: by 2002:a05:622a:301:: with SMTP id q1mr35110690qtw.237.1608027628786; Tue, 15 Dec 2020 02:20:28 -0800 (PST)
Path: eternal-september.org!reader02.eternal-september.org!news.gegeweb.eu!gegeweb.org!usenet-fr.net!proxad.net!feeder1-2.proxad.net!209.85.160.216.MISMATCH!news-out.google.com!nntp.google.com!postnews.google.com!google-groups.googlegroups.com!not-for-mail
Newsgroups: sci.electronics.design
Date: Tue, 15 Dec 2020 02:20:28 -0800 (PST)
In-Reply-To: <f2c13fea-c776-48a0-b403-ff98a111a20en@googlegroups.com
Complaints-To: groups-abuse@google.com
Injection-Info: google-groups.googlegroups.com; posting-host=202.53.36.8; posting-account=SJ46pgoAAABuUDuHc5uDiXN30ATE-zi-
NNTP-Posting-Host: 202.53.36.8
References: <rq5rhd$190q$1@gioia.aioe.org> <rqaolo$kgt$1@dont-email.me> <rqapfl$v86$1@solani.org> <rqb64v$nk2$1@dont-email.me> <rr3loo$2j5$1@dont-email.me> <b8788d4b-769d-473b-b7f3-47aebf41735fn@googlegroups.com> <f2c13fea-c776-48a0-b403-ff98a111a20en@googlegroups.com
User-Agent: G2/1.0
MIME-Version: 1.0
Message-ID: <bd328d95-06f9-49c9-8df9-997165986301n@googlegroups.com
Subject: Re: VW hoping to challenge Tesla
From: Bill Sloman <bill.sloman@ieee.org
Injection-Date: Tue, 15 Dec 2020 10:20:28 +0000
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=\"UTF-8\"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Xref: reader02.eternal-september.org sci.electronics.design:616115

On Tuesday, December 15, 2020 at 3:36:52 PM UTC+11, Flyguy wrote:
On Monday, December 14, 2020 at 6:55:47 PM UTC-8, Bill Sloman wrote:
On Sunday, December 13, 2020 at 11:03:44 AM UTC+11, John Doe wrote:
At the same time... A German man (Albert Einstein) practically invent
ed
nuclear power, the clean abundant efficient energy source INSANE Germ
any is
destroying.
John Doe is a top-posting troll, so it isn\'t clear what he is reacting
to.

Albert Einstein was born in Germany, but in January 1896, with his fath
er\'s approval, Einstein renounced his citizenship in the German Kingdom of WǬrttemberg to avoid military service. He eventually ended up getting it back, but in Antwerp, Belgium on 28 March 1933, he went to the German consulate and surrendered his passport, formally renouncing his German citizenship, and went on to emigrate to the US. He was Jewish, and Hitler\'s Nazi\'s weren\'t fond of him.

He didn\'t invent nuclear power. He did set out the mass-energy equivale
nce which is fundamental to the process, but he didn\'t have anything to do with the work on uranium fission which lead to nuclear power.

Quite why John Doe thinks that nuclear fission is a \"clean, abundant ef
ficient energy source\" escapes me, but he\'s ill-informed in any number of areas.

Germany isn\'t using it\'s nuclear power plants any more, but that isn\'t
\"destroying\" nuclear fission as an energy source - it\'s just recognising that it\'s economics aren\'t as good as were initially imagined. Getting rid of nuclear waste has turned out to be lot more expensive than was originally allowed for.

If there\'s any insanity here, John Doe seems to be supplying it.

Germany isn\'t using their nukes anymore - they ARE using France\'s!

What has that got to do with anything? Europe has been shipping electric power across its borders for decades now.

There\'s even a link from the UK to Norway, though it isn\'t expected to start shifting power until next year.

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

--
Bill Sloman, Sydney

 

[John Doe]

The least electronics oriented, most active troll in this group...

--
Bill Sloman <bill.sloman@ieee.org> wrote:

X-Received: by 2002:a37:8ec7:: with SMTP id q190mr37480478qkd.258.1608028104824; Tue, 15 Dec 2020 02:28:24 -0800 (PST)
X-Received: by 2002:a05:622a:cf:: with SMTP id p15mr35211941qtw.168.1608028104626; Tue, 15 Dec 2020 02:28:24 -0800 (PST)
Path: eternal-september.org!reader02.eternal-september.org!news.gegeweb.eu!gegeweb.org!usenet-fr.net!proxad.net!feeder1-2.proxad.net!209.85.160.216.MISMATCH!news-out.google.com!nntp.google.com!postnews.google.com!google-groups.googlegroups.com!not-for-mail
Newsgroups: sci.electronics.design
Date: Tue, 15 Dec 2020 02:28:24 -0800 (PST)
In-Reply-To: <2025b818-5df8-469f-89d6-4f83556a5489n@googlegroups.com
Complaints-To: groups-abuse@google.com
Injection-Info: google-groups.googlegroups.com; posting-host=202.53.36.8; posting-account=SJ46pgoAAABuUDuHc5uDiXN30ATE-zi-
NNTP-Posting-Host: 202.53.36.8
References: <rq5rhd$190q$1@gioia.aioe.org> <ec62a522-6406-40dc-995b-d88ebfd084fen@googlegroups.com> <5vucsf91d61imsdj60jtlgovvehc2eb0fd@4ax.com> <BKvxH.47138$OP2.11437@fx18.iad> <762e0a7d-30cc-4478-8c97-bb1faa01cac7n@googlegroups.com> <XkwxH.217441$dN1.34848@fx42.iad> <evndsf9i6jq5u2sb3r5vlp38cc1hhmm3qe@4ax.com> <cbe92877-e4c7-481f-9f65-5ae2043addd8n@googlegroups.com> <2025b818-5df8-469f-89d6-4f83556a5489n@googlegroups.com
User-Agent: G2/1.0
MIME-Version: 1.0
Message-ID: <f16d849f-0db8-4aa7-91cb-c6297af1873bn@googlegroups.com
Subject: Re: VW hoping to challenge Tesla
From: Bill Sloman <bill.sloman@ieee.org
Injection-Date: Tue, 15 Dec 2020 10:28:24 +0000
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=\"UTF-8\"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Xref: reader02.eternal-september.org sci.electronics.design:616116

On Tuesday, December 15, 2020 at 3:33:23 PM UTC+11, Flyguy wrote:
On Monday, December 14, 2020 at 5:44:07 PM UTC-8, Bill Sloman wrote:
On Wednesday, December 2, 2020 at 11:31:56 AM UTC+11, John Larkin wrote
:
On Tue, 1 Dec 2020 13:55:51 -0500, bitrex <us...@example.net> wrote:


On 12/1/2020 1:22 PM, Ed Lee wrote:
On Tuesday, December 1, 2020 at 10:15:06 AM UTC-8, bitrex wrote:

On 12/1/2020 12:27 PM, jla...@highlandsniptechnology.com wrote:

On Tue, 1 Dec 2020 09:11:38 -0800 (PST), Brent Locher
blo...@columbus.rr.com> wrote:

On Tuesday, December 1, 2020 at 11:38:16 AM UTC-5, Dean Hoffman
wrote:
snip

Serious environmentalists recognise that we need to be able to get our
energy in ways that don\'t mess up the environment, and are interested in solutions that deliver the amount of energy that we want. They do exist, but they don\'t make money for the people who pay for the denialist propaganda that John Larkin laps up.

The way to get reliable energy free of CO2 is nuclear.

Nuclear power enthusiasts have been telling everybody this for decades now. There are now quite a few cheaper ways of generating electricity without burning fossil carbon and dumping the CO2 produced into the atmosphere, but if you are silly enough to think that nuclear fission is a good way to generate power, you seem to be too silly to learn about the cheaper, safer alternatives which don\'t involve investing millions and then waiting years for any power to be generated.

--
Bill Sloman, Sydney