This is yoatmon's Typepad Profile.
Join Typepad and start following yoatmon's activity
Join Now!
Already a member? Sign In
yoatmon
Recent Activity
An accomplishment that any arrogant, conceited, presumptuous and repugnant imbecilic moron would be proud of.
@ SJC Regen braking certainly contributes to a considerable reduction of those metals used in brake linings. An even greater effect would be achieved by the usage of ceramic brake linings. The reduction would not be the only positive effect; ceramics endure far higher temperatures, last much longer and are far more reliable and safer than metal additives. Of course, ceramics are also more expensive. The final question is; do you want to die younger and cheaper or older and more expensive?
What do fusion power and H2 philosophy have in common? Well, both devour immense financial assets but have not yet delivered anything usable in terms of practical applications.
@ Davemart The salvation of humanity is certainly not sought in nuclear technology of any kind incl. pebble reactors. The eminent problem of safe nuclear waste storage remains no matter what type of design is employed. Fusion power is a pipe dream or if ever - a far future event. For the time being, we would all be good advised to use available horse sense and make the best of what is available to us without endangering ourselves and future generations.
@ HarveyD H2 is extremely difficult to store without considerable losses. The only viable way is to bind H2 chemically with atmospheric CO2 to synthesize gas (methane) equivalent to NG. This modus is already being processed and exploited; it is not emissions free but emissions neutral. E.g. during the summer months, electric power - produced by a PV-system - could be employed to produce methane which is stored for usage during the winter. A FC, capable to be fuelled directly with methane could reconvert e-power and utilize the waste heat for heating and warm (hot) water. This is the only sensible method that I can conceive for utilisation of FCs. FCs are completely unsuitable for mobility purposes with the exception of hybrid solutions for aircraft and heavy equipment.
WOW! This only 5 decades too late for market launch. Nevertheless, I'm convinced of Gorbachev's statement, "He who comes too late, will be punished by life". And here is proof to that statement: http://emerginggrowth.com/the-future-is-approaching-faster-than-one-can-handle/
I know that I just keep on repeating myself when I state that, with very few exceptions, the complete Hydrogen philosophy is simply a waste of time, effort, money and overall efficiency.
@ sd: 53'= 13.462m; 8,5'= 2.159m or 13.462m * 2.159m = 29m² A current high tech. panel (Panasonic) yields ca. 220 W/m² Total power is ca. 0.22 kW/m²* 29 m²= 6.38 kW/hr * 6 hrs = 38.3 kWh and may suffice for 1 hr of truck driving.
MFRs may not be aware that the potential markets are flooded and fed up with concept cars! It's "high noon" that some of those fairy tales become "flesh and blood".
Solar tiles are absolutely non-competitive with solar cells/modules on efficiency basis. Anyone with enough space to waste on his roof can decide to employ solar tiles.
@ Henrik It was probably your intention to use the term "coffers" and not coffins. Coffins are usually used as a container for a corpse for final disposal underground. Coffers, however, implicate containers for storing large amounts of valuables or money.
@ trees I can't quite follow your philosophy of reasoning. Accepted, that we cannot prevent earthquakes, tsunamis, volcanic eruptions, hurricanes, tornadoes, comets, meteors and asteroids with the subsequent devastation and pollution caused by such occurrences. But that by no means implies that we should take all possible measures to equal those natural events because they are by no means even close to the results of those natural catastrophes. No, it should be our utmost effort to avoid anything to add to those natural events that cannot be avoided. It is no consolation whatsoever to think that the black pest during medieval times, caused by carelessness and negligence of hygienic measures, was by no means as severe and fatal as the asteroid that wiped out 98% of all forms of life 65 million years ago.
The future for nukes is as bright as that for coal; Chernobyl and Fukushima are still shining brightly. Several coal plants in Germany have been shut down permanently; others are in the starting blocks to follow shortly. Those that are still in operation are a helpless pledge from the German government to appease all those coal miners including their raging unions and respective industry. 87% of all mature Germans are well aware of the fact that no way leads past renewables. A faint, really a very faint hope remains that it might be possible to enable fusion power plants in several decades from now to go into operation.
@ mahonj: Absolutely nothing incredible about the EU's behaviour. Several years ago, as soon as the EU started thinking a bit too loud about enhancing the pollution standards, Merkel - without being invited - arrived at their doorstep, raised her fingers in dismay and reprimanded those bad boys for even just thinking about potential actions they intended to take. With sighs of relief, Mercedes, BMW, Audi and VW, applauded their proponent's brave action. With the stagnation of EU's intention the "car kings" adhered to their general policy and things got even worse instead of improving. Thank (god) for Merkel.
In principle, this is the same futile and despairing effort copying Mercedes blowing billions out of the window in R&D for 5 new ICEs. They'd have been far better off investing that money, time and effort in electric drive trains. All these useless innovations appearing nowadays would have been acceptable decades ago. But in the past they had no competition to fear from electrons. Now they're attempting everything possible to extend their useless technology that has no future.
It's no surprise that the Brits ended up at the tail-end of this survey. A majority of them were also "bright" enough to vote for the BREXIT.
These are typical problems that result in a lithium electrode but can be circumvented employing a magnesium electrode in a 3-D architecture.
In most cases a proper solution is a meticulous and enduring process but also simple once it has been achieved. No one, myself included, stated that the goal itself is easy.
The 24M solution is certainly a step forward from the present state of the art regarding form fit and function. However, this solution is still based on Lithium, which - as we are presently experiencing on Samsung's Note 7 - is extremely volatile and dangerous. Magnesium, on the other hand, as a 3-D solid state architecture cell, would offer far more energy density at less weight and an even better price. The earth's crust contains 1.4% Magnesium; far more than Lithium and will never expire.
Modern heat pumps have a COP of approx. 1:3/1:4; i. e. power consumption reduction for heating amounts to 66-75%. The heat pump can also be operated in reverse during the summer to cool the vehicle interior. Why settle for less? Let them keep their plastic derivative.
"Exploring the unrealized potential of lead batteries..." There is no potential to neither explore nor to exploit in a l(d)ead battery.
This report leaves many questions unanswered. 1) Low cost micro-turbine - what is the expected price (approx.)? 2) What is the volume of the additional equipment? 3) What is the weight of the total additional equipment. 4) Is it multi-fuel compatible (which fuels)? 5) What are the maintenance intervals of the turbine? 6) How high is the life expectancy? 7) Can it be used for heating as well? 8) Does it need cooling during operation? et, etc.
I'd have serious safety concerns with a Lithium metal anode. Lithium is an extremely volatile material. I would definitely not enjoy a ride on a potential bomb. Why not make use of a Magnesium metal anode? Magnesium is relatively safe and has two valenz-electrons instead of only one in Lithium. Hence, the energy density of magnesium is double that of lithium and is inherently safer. Also, Magnesium is cheaper than Lithium and far more abundant.
The limiting problem of energy density is inherent to the Lithium chemistry. It is mandatory to lithiate an anode material (generally graphite or other carbon allotropes); too much lithium, even though increasing energy density, also makes such an anode more volatile / dangerous. Magnesium belongs to the same family as Lithium but has larger ions and diffuses more difficult than Lithium. However, larger quantities of Magnesium are less dangerous to handle than Lithium and allow a far higher degree of energy density. To be on the safe side, Magnesium could be alloyed with copper (CMg1) directly, making it safer and still allow for high energy density; the copper conductivity is virtually unaffected. This alloy could be foamed like copper and be processed as a 3-D structure as is the present case. The Prieto approach is certainly unparalleled but the chemistry itself could certainly endure improvement.