This is Ben Frigo-Vaz's Typepad Profile.
Join Typepad and start following Ben Frigo-Vaz's activity
Join Now!
Already a member? Sign In
Ben Frigo-Vaz
Recent Activity
True machines are now doing more and more higher IQ work, assuming there is no show stoppers to stop the growth in machine intelligence its only a matTer of time until machines can do everything people can and more, it only a matter of time until machines are smarter in ever why then us. Hopefully intelligence does not mean will, and that no matter how smart they get they won't have any desires of their own. Once machines can do everything we can, all human employment would become obsolete. But long before that a flaw in the poster's argument will become obvious to all: today and in the now economic growth has not been keeping up with automation: automation means more products per worker but in developed countries demand is not going up fast enough to buy all those products, ergo we need less workers. There fundamental limits of energy, materials and human necessity that puts a ceiling on demand, automation keeps increasing the amounts of products per worker but demand is limited therefor we will or are already hitting a point where we need to cut jobs because of automation. US median income in adjusted dollars has remained relatively stagnant for 50 years, most high paying unionized manufacturing jobs have given way to multiple part-time low wage service sector jobs, buying power has dropped and thus demand for products has dropped, automation does promise to make products cheaper but all this has done is equalize out the reduce income of the common consumer leaving our economy with lack luster growth and growing social inequality. Those that own the capital are making more and more from automation, they take this money and generally speculate with it, resulting in our economy become highly unstable with rapid cyclic fits of growth and recessions. In conclusion the anti-Luddite argument that people will just find other work is bunk, today's situation proves it bunk we don't need to wait until machines are smart then us to worry about automation.
1 reply
Well then why did they take a loan they could not pay-off, were they guaranteed to fail if they had choose to forgo the loan?
I don't see how they are going to get around the specific energy limits of lead acid chemistry. Their is simply not enough space and weight for lead acid EV. They would need to increase performance considerably while NOT increasing price to become competitive with Li-Ion.
Why is this digressing into politics? Is it possible A123 bankruptcy had nothing directly to do with unions, democrats, republican, Mitt Romney, vulture capitalists, etc? A123 seemed to have promising battery tech with excellent lab tested cycling life and safety, what happened? Did they over sale? Get loans they could not pay off? Were they outbid by competitors with less advanced but cheaper battery designs? What to become of their patents and factories?
Sooo what the heck happened? Why did A123 die? Their tech was too bleeding-edge and faulty? They were a bake-and-eat company? ...what happened?
Yeah I'm siding with Harvey and the like, mix markets are the way to go. Anyways back on the topic: Why lithium? Grid storage does not need the light weight or minimized size, only to be cheap, for that would not a Sodium-Sulfur or Vanadium Flow Cell make better economic sense?
Still not as efficient as simply hooking a solar cell to an electrolysis unit, or for that mater neither of those options are as efficient as hooking a solar cell up to a lithium ion battery, hence why hydrogen is a pipe dream that only diverts attention and money for options that are already more energy efficient and in more advance commercial development. The supposedly 20+ years when hydrogen is finally "ready" with volumetrically dense energy storage, cheap fuel cells and efficiency still by the laws of physics lower then many battery chemistries, batteries will have advanced so much as to make any advantage of hydrogen storage completely obsolete. Image metal air batteries using a metal particle paste that not flammable, not explosive, not under pressure or needing and wacky storage system unlike hydrogen. Cheap metals too like Zinc. With energy densities beyond 1000 wh/kg and the ability to mechanical refuel a metal air battery by simply pumping out oxidized paste and pumping in fresh paste and recycle the oxides externally, why bother with a highly volatile gaseous fuel like hydrogen? Long lasting Lithium Sulfur batteries will be commercial by 2020, Lithium-Air batteries have potential energy densities on par with diesel fuel, why focus on hydrogen???
Here is a really advance and technical idea: carpool ...well I guess it gets a little complicated if we use a carpooling website to network groups of 2-6 complete strangers that have similar routes.
Ben Frigo-Vaz is now following The Typepad Team
Oct 2, 2011