|
Arglebargle III posted:Of Tesla, SpaceX and Solar City only SpaceX makes a profit. Yeah but that doesn't mean SpaceX is funding them. SolarCity certainly wasn't funded by SpaceX and neither was Tesla. SolarCity/Tesla is spending a lot of money on capital expenditures and has a larger revenue base than SpaceX has, so it really doesn't make sense to attribute any of their success to the funding of SpaceX. Trabisnikof fucked around with this message at 07:23 on Sep 30, 2017 |
#
?
Sep 30, 2017 07:21
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 15, 2024 11:30 |
|
|
Not taking credit for this (I sent a message to a member of their board soon after the hurricane), but this is good news. Tesla is shipping hundreds of Powerwall batteries to Puerto Rico Some of them are already on the commonwealth, along with company employees to install them. Tesla is sending hundreds of its Powerwall battery systems to storm-ravaged Puerto Rico. The commonwealth has been almost entirely without power since after Hurricane Maria made landfall on September 20th and tore up its energy infrastructure. Once the storm passed, Tesla started sending hundreds of its standalone power banks, and some have already arrived while more are en route. Powerwalls, first unveiled in 2015, are large batteries designed to store power gathered by solar panels. Tesla sent its own employees to help install units, and is reportedly working with local organizations to find the best locations for the power banks. These could potentially be worked into whatever energy network can be constructed, but there's no timeline for how long it will take to revive the commonwealth's power network. As New Scientist points out, since the entire grid went down, it must be restarted from scratch in a labor-intensive process known as a 'black start'. Meanwhile, a majority of the 3.4 million Puerto Ricans can't refrigerate food, run air conditioning to stave off the Caribbean heat or pump potable water. https://www.engadget.com/2017/09/29/tesla-ship-hundreds-powerwall-batteries-puerto-rico/
|
|
#
?
Sep 30, 2017 07:28
|
|
|
anybody who's in a position to ditch their job and move into a sustainable industry, and doesn't, is culpable in the deaths of millions
|
|
#
?
Sep 30, 2017 09:22
|
|
|
the old ceremony posted:anybody who's in a position to ditch their job and move into a sustainable industry, and doesn't, is culpable in the deaths of millions this but unironically & also death penalty for mass murder, so we must kill (almost) all humans QED homo sapienailures  Nocturtle posted:Musk's infatuation with a manned Mars mission can be cast as fiddling while Rome (the earth) burns. It's an expensive vanity project that diverts resources from addressing the serious problems here on earth. However exactly the same can be said about my entire energy-intensive field so who am I to judge? I think there's a discussion to be had as to whether it's ethical to pursue certain lines of scientific research given their high carbon footprint and low likelihood of producing useful applications in the next 100 years (if ever). It's not like climate refugees 50 years from now are going to appreciate the effort spent measuring various parameters of the standard model to the nth decimal place. If governments actually cared more about saving the planet they'd just raise taxes a bit or do deficit spending to save the planet. Instead, most of the saved money probably just wouldn't get spent in the first place and only a small amount would be spread out across all sorts of budget items. Research and sustainability budgets are so small they're basically marginal spending, you'd have to e.g. shut down the entire US military to free up enough money that other budgets might actually increase meaningfully. suck my woke dick fucked around with this message at 10:59 on Sep 30, 2017 |
|
#
?
Sep 30, 2017 10:55
|
|
I CANNOT EJACULATE WITHOUT SEEING NATIVE AMERICANS BRUTALISED!
|
y'know dozens of people over hundreds of pages of this thread have called me various terms like doomer and negative and unreasonable etc etc but even I can respect that musk is actually getting poo poo done. checking boxes on the must-be-done list. sure, mars is dumb, but if we get solar roofs and batteries and break the back of personal-car-identity-ownership for it then that motherfucker can die on pluto for all i care. and if in the process of figuring out how to build a space colony he accidentally winds up solving for "sustainable human civilization with little to no environmental impact" then wont that be nice
|
|
#
?
Sep 30, 2017 17:33
|
|
|
Imagine being a kid in the future when crops are failing and millions of people are dying because of climate change, knowing that you're hosed because mom and dad put more faith in Tomi Lahren than actual scientists.
|
|
#
?
Sep 30, 2017 18:27
|
|
|
Elon Musk is probably a net positive in the fight against climate change.
|
|
#
?
Sep 30, 2017 18:30
|
|
|
RobotDogPolice posted:Imagine being a kid in the future when crops are failing and millions of people are dying because of climate change, knowing that you're hosed because mom and dad put more faith in Tomi Lahren than actual scientists. lol a 25 year old with a communications degree from the illustrious UNLV helps shape the discourse in this country. at least she's purdy.
|
|
#
?
Sep 30, 2017 19:08
|
|
|
my kid will be prepared from birth for the future they'll inherit, and custodian of the secrets of farming the desert passed down to me from heaven
|
|
#
?
Sep 30, 2017 23:36
|
|
|
the old ceremony posted:my kid will be prepared from birth for the future they'll inherit, and custodian of the secrets of farming the desert passed down to me from heaven you can't
|
|
#
?
Oct 1, 2017 03:54
|
|
|
Nocturtle posted:Musk's infatuation with a manned Mars mission can be cast as fiddling while Rome (the earth) burns. It's an expensive vanity project that diverts resources from addressing the serious problems here on earth. However exactly the same can be said about my entire energy-intensive field so who am I to judge? I think there's a discussion to be had as to whether it's ethical to pursue certain lines of scientific research given their high carbon footprint and low likelihood of producing useful applications in the next 100 years (if ever). It's not like climate refugees 50 years from now are going to appreciate the effort spent measuring various parameters of the standard model to the nth decimal place. You could use this line of reasoning to discredit pretty much any type of scientific or engineering endeavor, though. I mean you think climate science is a big problem, but guess what: cancer is killing people today. So clearly we should pour 100% of humanity's resources into finding the cure for cancer! The reason we should appreciate Musk's initiatives is that he is looking beyond the immediate and obvious problems and is thinking long-term. You need people like that in society. Slow News Day fucked around with this message at 04:30 on Oct 1, 2017 |
|
#
?
Oct 1, 2017 04:20
|
|
|
Tesla normalizing electric cars and large capacity home batteries might be the biggest things anyone has done to disrupt fossil fuel use in history.
|
|
#
?
Oct 1, 2017 04:30
|
|
|
Stereotype posted:Tesla normalizing electric cars and large capacity home batteries might be the biggest things anyone has done to disrupt fossil fuel use in history. Think back before Tesla. Electric cars were a joke. No range, slow and ugly. Elon was smart enough to grab the AC Propulsion guys and take the T-Zero concept and get the Roadster out. That part was hard enough. The Tesla S is just freaking amazing for a first real effort. Look at this chart.
|
|
#
?
Oct 1, 2017 06:08
|
|
|
VideoGameVet posted:Think back before Tesla. Elon Musk realized the potential of solar electricity when paired with cars and batteries. Unless some rear end in a top hat politician kneecaps it, which I'm sure many will try, he will be the primary producer of, not automobiles, but the fuel they use to move. A small array of panels can already provide enough energy for most people's commutes. Tesla sells the battery to save it till you can plug in your car at night. Solar City (also Musk) sells the panels to capture that energy. He just so happens to make the best electric car, and soon will be mass producing an affordable version. His batteries, with enough adoption, will probably equalize the daily electric grid spikes too, making peaking generators obsolete. Base load nuclear with wind and hydro and solar. No need for non-base load. It's a solid plan to kill fossil fuels. Only a few decades late.
|
|
#
?
Oct 1, 2017 06:34
|
|
|
Don't the batteries require materials we simply won't have enough of to replace even a small amount of everything?
|
|
#
?
Oct 1, 2017 06:50
|
|
|
Argas posted:Don't the batteries require materials we simply won't have enough of to replace even a small amount of everything? This guy had the conclusion of "hell no" https://www.greentechmedia.com/articles/read/is-there-enough-lithium-to-maintain-the-growth-of-the-lithium-ion-battery-m However he then goes on to condede: quote:With known lithium “resources” at 39.5 million tons, we get about 50 years of supply with 100 Gigafactories, which is a bit more comforting, but still not exactly a viable long-term solution. He estimates 100 giga factories have a capacity of 100M batteries per year. So we only need like 3 of those 50 years of supply to put a powerwall in every house in America. 3 more and they all get cars too. Plus this doesn't account for additional resource discovery (he does mention it later) which would push it further. Or batteries that don't require lithium, or less of it. I think we shouldn't worry about the "not enough lithium" problem that might occur in 50 years, and worry about the horrific climate catastrophe that is occurring right now.
|
|
#
?
Oct 1, 2017 07:22
|
|
|
So this thread hasn't plunged into existential dread for a little while. Already, climate change isn't a problem and won't be. Ah.
|
|
#
?
Oct 1, 2017 07:35
|
|
|
Ok? Thanks?
|
|
#
?
Oct 1, 2017 12:45
|
|
|
VideoGameVet posted:Think back before Tesla.
|
|
#
?
Oct 1, 2017 13:59
|
|
|
Telephones posted:So this thread hasn't plunged into existential dread for a little while. Already, climate change isn't a problem and won't be. Ah.
|
|
#
?
Oct 1, 2017 14:06
|
|
|
Nocturtle posted:Musk's infatuation with a manned Mars mission can be cast as fiddling while Rome (the earth) burns. It's an expensive vanity project that diverts resources from addressing the serious problems here on earth. However exactly the same can be said about my entire energy-intensive field so who am I to judge? I think there's a discussion to be had as to whether it's ethical to pursue certain lines of scientific research given their high carbon footprint and low likelihood of producing useful applications in the next 100 years (if ever). It's not like climate refugees 50 years from now are going to appreciate the effort spent measuring various parameters of the standard model to the nth decimal place. This is the same things many Citizens of Venus said before their planet got over run by the greenhouse effect. Luckily Venus Musk defied their wishes and sent a man to earth. And to mars, but that didn't work out so well - History of the solar system
|
|
#
?
Oct 1, 2017 14:09
|
|
|
Stereotype posted:I think we shouldn't worry about the "not enough lithium" problem that might occur in 50 years, and worry about the horrific climate catastrophe that is occurring right now. It's my understanding that cobalt is the limiting factor and we'll run up against limits there within a few years, pushing industry to avail itself of unethical and expensive sources like the Congo and the seafloor.
|
|
#
?
Oct 1, 2017 16:38
|
|
|
There is the potential that operations such as Planetary Resources are able to nab a Cobalt rich asteroid and solve that problem, but it's touch and go whether that will happen before the complete collapse of civilization. Personally I view asteroid and lunar mining as the only way forward to save what's left of our environment, I'd rather kill six billion humans than tear up the Congo to build batteries which will be junk after ten years. 
|
|
#
?
Oct 1, 2017 17:35
|
|
|
Rime posted:There is the potential that operations such as Planetary Resources are able to nab a Cobalt rich asteroid and solve that problem, but it's touch and go whether that will happen before the complete collapse of civilization. Personally I view asteroid and lunar mining as the only way forward to save what's left of our environment, I'd rather kill six billion humans than tear up the Congo to build batteries which will be junk after ten years. I feel like that's cheating if we get the resources off the planet.
|
|
#
?
Oct 1, 2017 18:02
|
|
|
Rime posted:There is the potential that operations such as Planetary Resources are able to nab a Cobalt rich asteroid and solve that problem, but it's touch and go whether that will happen before the complete collapse of civilization. Personally I view asteroid and lunar mining as the only way forward to save what's left of our environment, I'd rather kill six billion humans than tear up the Congo to build batteries which will be junk after ten years. Off-world mining, just like extraterrestrial colonization, does nothing to solve our fundamental energy/logistics crises. It's a potential solution to the problem of absolute scarcity on certain resources, yes, but we're an order of magnitude more pressed for time in switching our energy consumption away from fossil fuels (with all the technical, efficiency, and infrastructure costs that entails) and also deal with our water crisis - which is itself fundamentally another energy/distribution type of issue as well. Regarding space colonization, it's a fine enough scientific endeavor and research into self-sustaining environments has applications in resource conservation and dealing with extreme environments present on Earth. Nothing wrong with that. The joke is on those who think it's an answer to overpopulation, resource depletion, or the threat of a planetary catastrophe... in a time frame that matters to humans alive today, anyway.
|
|
#
?
Oct 1, 2017 18:48
|
|
|
Evil_Greven posted:Another funny thing about this chart is the fact that the Tesla is the only U.S. brand on it. MAGA!
|
|
#
?
Oct 1, 2017 19:58
|
|
|
Conspiratiorist posted:It's a potential solution to the problem of absolute scarcity on certain resources, yes, but we're an order of magnitude more pressed for time in switching our energy consumption away from fossil fuels (with all the technical, efficiency, and infrastructure costs that entails) and also deal with our water crisis - which is itself fundamentally another energy/distribution type of issue as well. It's staggering how many of our problems would be solved if we had a source of renewable energy generation and storage that could actually match oil. Why you so good oil
|
|
#
?
Oct 2, 2017 06:25
|
|
|
MiddleOne posted:It's staggering how many of our problems would be solved if we had a source of renewable energy generation and storage that could actually match oil. Because it's made from the remains of the failed cousins of our far far far far far back ancestors.
|
|
#
?
Oct 2, 2017 07:24
|
|
|
Well that and the fact that carbon is the swiss-army knife of chemistry.
|
|
#
?
Oct 2, 2017 09:16
|
|
|
Millions of years of sunlight converted into latent chemical energy.
|
|
#
?
Oct 2, 2017 09:40
|
|
|
i was working with these little guys today  baby she-oaks! when they're fully grown they'll be ten metres tall and a keystone species of the wetlands
|
|
#
?
Oct 4, 2017 08:36
|
|
|
Did you have to file a restraining order against tree beards?
|
|
#
?
Oct 4, 2017 13:01
|
|
|
An interesting development in solar fuels. Copper catalyst yields high efficiency CO2-to-fuels conversion Critical role of nanoparticle transformation discovered Scientists have developed a new electrocatalyst that can directly convert carbon dioxide into multicarbon fuels and alcohols using record-low inputs of energy. The work is the latest in a round of studies tackling the challenge of a creating a clean chemical manufacturing system that can put carbon dioxide to good use. https://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2017/09/170918151710.htm
|
|
#
?
Oct 4, 2017 21:05
|
|
|
Rime posted:There is the potential that operations such as Planetary Resources are able to nab a Cobalt rich asteroid and solve that problem, but it's touch and go whether that will happen before the complete collapse of civilization. Personally I view asteroid and lunar mining as the only way forward to save what's left of our environment, I'd rather kill six billion humans than tear up the Congo to build batteries which will be junk after ten years. Why would the cobalt and lithium be junk after 10 years?
|
|
#
?
Oct 4, 2017 21:09
|
|
|
karthun posted:Why would the cobalt and lithium be junk after 10 years? Tesla claims they are able to recycle the materials. This is from 2011: https://www.tesla.com/blog/teslas-closed-loop-battery-recycling-program 95% of the stuff I read about "batteries/solar/wind bad" is probably coming from oil-biz funded shills.
|
|
#
?
Oct 4, 2017 21:28
|
|
|
yeah a lot of fearmongering about battery resource scarcity doesn't at all address that, while the product lifetimes may be fairly short, it isn't because the elements within the battery are depleated. Recycling batteries in bulk is clearly a huge goal for Tesla and from what I've heard they don't seem to be running into any show stopping hurdles.
|
|
#
?
Oct 4, 2017 21:34
|
|
|
From what little I read about it at one point, the main stopping block seem to be that it was cheaper to throw away the lithium then recycle it
|
|
#
?
Oct 5, 2017 01:48
|
|
|
I have posted repeatedly in here that recycling batteries amounts to vaporizing them in blast furnaces and recovering very little of the material. Most of your other recycling programs are bullshit to make you feel good, btw. Plastics recycling in particular is a massive hoax, very few blends are reusable for manufacturing.
|
|
#
?
Oct 5, 2017 04:51
|
|
|
Rime posted:Most of your other recycling programs are bullshit to make you feel good, btw. Plastics recycling in particular is a massive hoax, very few blends are reusable for manufacturing. That entirely depends on if you care more about energy inputs or material inputs. Plastic recycling can be effective from an energy perspective, as in plastics made from the recycled plastic can use less energy to make than plastics from raw inputs. Glass recycling is often very borderline and metal recycling is pretty much always worth it. Paper recycling is worth it usually just to keep it out of the landfill. Trabisnikof fucked around with this message at 05:00 on Oct 5, 2017 |
|
#
?
Oct 5, 2017 04:57
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 15, 2024 11:30 |
|
|
Rime posted:I have posted repeatedly in here that recycling batteries amounts to vaporizing them in blast furnaces and recovering very little of the material. Here is an explanation of Umicore’s recycling process for Tesla batteries: The Umicore battery recycling technology is able to save at least 70 percent on CO2 emissions at the recovery and refining of these valuable metals. It does this by creating “products” and “byproducts,” rather than following a mechanical separation process. “Product” is comprised of an alloy that’s refined into cobalt, nickel and other metals. Traditionally, cobalt is used as a metallic powder to harden tools, or a pigment for ceramics. Umicore has developed a process whereby the cobalt (the highest value material in our batteries) is used to make up LCO (lithium cobalt oxide) that can be resold to battery manufacturers. The “byproduct” produced together with the alloy fraction is an environment-friendly slag where the lithium contained in EV batteries ends up. This “byproduct” containing lithium is valorized in different applications, one being construction material. Nearly 5 percent of the global man-made CO2 emissions worldwide are produced by cement manufacturing. Replacing the raw materials with secondary raw materials, and avoiding thermal processing, significantly reduces the CO2 emission and non-renewable resources consumption. With the “byproduct,” the construction industry is able to use this secondary raw material as a more environmentally-conscious alternative. The only other emissions from the recycling process are CO2, water vapor, and dust. The dust makes up about 1 percent of the total output, and goes to protected landfill. In an effort to reuse every possible part of the process, the Umicore facility even sells the electricity created from an on-site combined natural gas generation plant to the copper mine next door, which uses the heat in its smelters. So, lithium battery packs not only save thousands of gallons of gasoline/diesel over the life of the vehicle, it is less toxic than the lead-acid batteries that are in regular cars. Then, at this moment, much of it is being recycled, with the ultimate goal of 100% reusability of Tesla batteries.
|
|
#
?
Oct 5, 2017 05:44
|
|