This is Nick Lyons's Typepad Profile.
Join Typepad and start following Nick Lyons's activity
Join Now!
Already a member? Sign In
Nick Lyons
Recent Activity
Based on my experience driving on icy roads in Alaska, I would want an override function to lock in AWD when needed. I will willingly trade that 4% fuel economy bump for those critical 300ms when I hit the black ice.
Level 3 autonomy (driver must take over at any moment) is a total non-starter, IMHO. Level 4 (complete autonomy on designated routes) is doable, since the driven environment is known and controlled. That's the one I expect we will see implemented over the next decade.
Well, $1,300 CA is about $970 US, so no quite so expensive on this side of the border...
What sd said. Aside from meteor strike, there is no credible way to cause these units to melt down. One of the big benefits of SMRs is that they promise to reduce the financial risk of building a nuclear plant. Less $$ to finance, shorter construction times, incremental plant ramp up, factory mass production, less risk all around. The benefits really kick in with the nth-of-a-kind project, when everything has become cookbook and efficient mass production has kicked in.
Great news. NuScale is the real deal. Small modular reactors will finally get a real-world proof point.
Diablo Canyon NPP is one of the lowest cost electricity producers in CA--operating costs are 3-4 cents/kWhr. Wind and solar are *much* higher, and only competitive because of Renewable Portfolio Standards which require the electric utilities to have increasing percentages of 'renewable' (but not low-carbon) power. Wind and solar are very heavily subsidized on a per-kW basis, unlike nuclear. Closing Diablo Canyon is beyond stupid. The loss of generation will be made up with increased gas generation, as it did with the closure of San Onofre.
So why are we closing Diablo Canyon, which is by far the largest (and most reliable) zero-carbon electricity producer in California?
From the Gevo website: Isobutanol has an octane level of 102, which enables blenders to produce finished fuels with very high octane ratings. That's the most specific reference I could find.
...If you could get most vehicles up to electric stop/start/crawl, you could save a lot of pollution in cities. Bingo.
I drive a 125-mile stretch of US highway 101 (CA) 2x/week. Speed limit for trucks/autos with trailers: 55mph. Observed speed of the many semis that use this route: 65-70mph. I think this is a good idea.
Better to use existing waste streams (municipal, industrial) than convert food crops to fuel crops.
I drove a GM rental with start/stop and it worked fine--hardly noticed it except for the indicator in the dash.
Besides the infrastructure expense of having tractor-swapping stations spread all over the interstates, the Pony Express model requires you to purchase many more tractors for the same amount of hauling than currently required. If the tractors can recharge in 2 hours to be ready for the next truck needing to swap, and the next truck always arrives just in time, then you need at least 2X the number of tractors. Load balancing, slower charging and dead-ending issues would undoubtedly require a higher multiple. I don't see how you avoid big infrastructure/capital expenses with this model.
Harvey: check out Terresttrial Energy in Ontario. They are on track to have modular MSR built much sooner than that.
Believe it when you see it. Raising expectations so aggressively seems totally unnecessary. Why not under-promise and over-deliver? And if they somehow come close to meeting these production goals, is it likely their build quality problems decline as production expands exponentially? This whole thing defies common sense.
Tesla said that the root causes of the parts shortages were its self-described “hubris” in adding “far too much new technology” to the Model X in version 1... Amen to that. I hope they are following the KISS principle for the Model 3, although the panoramic glass roof makes me wonder. A simple analog speedometer in front of the driver would be nice, too.
Non-GAAP can be very misleading, depending on how trustworthy corporate management is. You really need to dive into the details to understand what is actually going on.
The comparison needs to be well-to-wheels. On a natural gas-powered grid, the electric bus is going to be burning gas, just remotely. 4 to 1 might come down to 2 to 1 or lower. On a nuclear- or hydro-powered grid, the e-bus looks like more of a winner, at least from an emissions point of view. A full life cycle costs/emissions comparison would be interesting.
Auto makers should be losing sleep over this: For example, the percentages for 20- to 24-year-olds in 1983, 2008, 2011, and 2014 were 91.8%, 82.0%, 79.7%, and 76.7%, respectively. I taught my younger son to drive at 17, but he lost interest and his permit expired before he took the driving test--no license yet at age 19. He lives in a dorm at university and has no need for a car; more telling, he shows no interest in getting his license.
Low cost, passively safe, green nuclear energy is the future. The only question is whether the USA will lead and innovate in this space, or lag and buy the technology being developed in China, India, the UK, Canada, etc.
This study was carried out by the ICCT, a third party, using user-reported data. I don't think Peugeot is diddling the data.
So what's the deal with the Peugeot small cars, which seem to be the only ones actually complying with the standards?