The sad part is that your electric bills will continue to go up. Even if electricity was free there are still costs involved in the transmission of it. This is the reasoning behind Tony Seba's GOD Parity idea.
The perfect X logo would be styled like scissors. ✂️ vs 🧵@. Or cutting the strings of the puppets.
The 31% number is "based on extremely limited data," admits the study provider. Then a bunch of journalists play telephone and report that as fact.
For other readers, warmer air is less dense and takes less energy to move out of the way. Heating or cooling a 400 lb battery takes energy. Cooling would be more efficient than heating since most PHEV don't have heat pumps. If the vehicle is plugged in it might maintain a certain amount of temperature control on the battery
Sodium ion batteries are a thing!
Get in here, this car is powered by sodium ion batteries. Technology moves on.
FYI a solar panel in moonlight produces about ONE MILLIONTH the power it does during the day.
I've got a solution for this. Direct solar charging for electric vehicles. But I don't want to move to California.
This phenomenon is known as the duck curve. Solar generation peaks around noon, but demand peaks in the afternoon and evening hours. It got the name because the graph looks like a duck.
One solution is workplace EV chargers. Have the cars suck up energy as it's being generated.
200kw = 240v * 833 amps!! No chance that Airbnb has 1000amp service. Realistic home charging is 11kw max.
Maybe he meant 200kwh. That is only double a typical high capacity battery and could happen over multiple days.
The solar panels can go on the buildings. They need shingles and siding, get double duty out of those wear items. Nobody is complaining about building waste yet.
Also the ocean doesn't look black, but solar panels do.
There is one part of the idea that's interesting. If the solar farm is several time zones west it will totally squash the duck curve.
The area of solar panels needed to power the world is probably not enough to affect the climate. But the manufacturing of them might.
Not exactly. Biofuels just aren't that efficient in their conversion of sunlight to chemical energy. Although I'll take a SAWG that a gasifier will be more efficient than ethanol production. Although it's rumored that the distiller grains leftover from ethanol production result in more weight gain in animals that eat it than the corn itself.
A solar powered car is a much closer development than most people think. If someone drives 40 miles a day, that's the American average, they might need 12kwh or so. Assuming 4 hours of sun that means a 3kw solar array. That's not much bigger than the parking spot it requires. If the amount of energy can be reduced a reasonable amount then the panels can fit on the vehicle itself. Companies lke Aptera and Sono Motors are doing that. And even if the solar doesn't provide all the energy you need, the car will be collecting free energy while it sits parked.
There are lots of other good ideas too. Maybe burn plastic garbage instead of wood. Or a low pressure adsorbed natural gas system that you can fill up from your home NG line. Also, plug-in hybrids are cool. The gas in the tank lasts a really long time when you refill them with coal at home.
*Scientific Wild Ass Guess. Also, I own Sono Motors stock.
Only a dummy would pay a disposal fee. A smart person would sell it to someone building a diy powerwall.
Chevy Volt is the best of both worlds. Drive around town on electric power. Burn gas for long trips.
Chevy Volt is the best of both worlds. Drive around town on electric power. Burn gas for long trips.
If fusion is perfected how could it power transportation? The reactor would generate heat, or perhaps light given the temperatures involved. We could use the energy to produce synthetic fuels. But if it's a carbon based synfuel where do we get the carbon? Extract it from the air? Probably not cost effective compared to getting it from fossil fuels or biomass.
If the vehicles were electric then they could charge directly from a fusion power plant that would likely be designed to generate electricity. So this whole push for electrification might be really useful in a decade or so. I know there's a lot of EV hate on this board, but keep in mind that unsubsidized cost is a reasonable approximation of the resources that go into a good or service. If a technology like solar panels gives a financial return on investment then is it really worse for the planet?
The article says £18,000 for the battery. So $22,000 / 78 kwh = $282/kwh. It's been said that $100/kwh is where EVs become economically viable. That applies to replacement batteries too. That battery pack costs Tesla about half of what they sell it for. Of course, when has any replacement battery been fairly priced?