In a particularly spectacular display of corporate delusion, John Deere—the world’s largest agricultural machinery maker —told the Copyright Office that farmers don’t own their tractors. Because computer code snakes through the DNA of modern tractors, farmers receive “an implied license for the life of the vehicle to operate the vehicle.”
"He was having technology problems, so he took it to the back alley and destroyed it," a police spokesman said.
He did not realise he was breaking the law when he went "Wild West" on his machine, local media reported.
A judge is due to decide what penalty he will receive.
Link to Original Source
Link to Original Source
I think both ideas have merit. I have no idea what desalination costs but I't wouldn't be cheap given the amount needed. Moving water from where it's plentiful especially if it's in excess, to where it isn't is a good idea if it can be done economically.
Of course political considerations come into play via such groups as the EPA and the Sierra club. We would probably have plenty of water if the EPA didn't prevent it's diversion to preserve the habitat of a stupid fish.
One thing is certain though is that the problem could be solved with enough engineering and a free market in water. Politics prevents the free market from operating so we have shortages. What else is new.
Any skillful trader would also have a stop loss order in place in case the price moves against him. That's the price you pay for being in the market to begin with. Stocks are risky which is why the profit potential is so great. If you don't stay on top of things you lose.
Market manipulation is only legal when the big banks do it.
OK. SO lets say I actually average 35 kwh/day on an annual basis. I generate 70 kwh/day with PV and other passive means. I store about half that. Hopefully I can use less during the night than during the hot days in summer. If I store thermal radiation with a heat sink it will help heat during winter.
All of this is dependent on the local climate but I believe it is doable. All of the comments so far have said it isn't doable, to be off grid, that is. Plainly the collectivists on this forum are more numerous than the individualists but the politics doesn't alter the science. It all numbers and up to the initiative and ingenuity of the engineer.
I am an engineer and I believe in real things. Not your collectivist defeatist paradigm but one of hope with a "can-do" attitude.
If the Egyptians can build a pyramid and the Romans can build roads and aqueducts without an electrical power grid I think I can build an off-grid power system that will satisfy my families needs.
"Always listen to experts. They’ll tell you what can’t be done and why. Then do it!" - Lazarus Long
In what way is my math wrong?
In what way is the idea wrong?
If the storage efficiency is wrong (which it isn't) then I just add more solar panels or reduce my energy consumption.
Before you challenge an engineering concept you need to provide some proof. BTW this system works and many systems are now in use. You haven't shown how this is a bad idea.
Again if it can't be expressed in numbers it is not science.
What I was trying to show is that in order to solve an engineering problem you have to have sound engineering principles. If you're talking about energy you use words like "watt" and numbers like Kilowatt Hours and maybe even joules and other terms that the author is probably unfamiliar with.
For example, If I equip my home with 5,000 watts (peak) solar panels that generate 35 kwh of energy. 15 kwh which I use immediately that leaves 20 kwh excess which I can store. If my storage system is 75% efficient I can then use another 15 kwh at night which will make me capable of being off grid. What's wrong with that?
This seems to be an article more about condemning Tesla's batteries that about energy. In fact the word "watt" appears nowhere. Before you can have a discussion about energy you need to be armed with some facts about actual energy needs and potentials. This is just more anti-Tesla propaganda.
Any sufficiently advanced technology is indistinguishable from magic. - Arthur C. Clarke
The fact that a person feels a phenomenon is beyond his comprehension doesn't alter the reality of the phenomenon. I know people who believe that Einstein's special theory of relativity is flawed. I have heard of others who believe rockets cannot fly in a vacuum because there is nothing for the rocket to push against. Still others insist that, "If men were meant to fly, God would have given them wings."
What was my point? I forgot.
The coil of wire is resistive so there will be heat as long as there is a current according to ohms law and the power formula. E = I x R and P = E x I.
This is a good thing. I'm glad to see that there are engineers who think better than my assumption of just plain induction coils.
I'd like to see some figures on the amount of energy lost when these devices aren't being used. Then to compare them to the energy wasted by wall transformers when they are idle.
Actually the accuracy depends on whether Schroedinger's cat lives.