Comment Re:Nice idea, but (Score 1) 81
Over 150 countries, representing over 2/3 of the world's population, are ignoring the US-demanded sanctions against Russia.
and they'll ignore these, too.
Over 150 countries, representing over 2/3 of the world's population, are ignoring the US-demanded sanctions against Russia.
and they'll ignore these, too.
The argument is stupid to begin with, just because there are battery power transportation devices with lead acid batteries doesn't make their weight something you can ignore in most cases. I'd hardly call golf carts an all the time example of lead acid battery use.
I didn't expect an argument, actually-- "LOL" was more the reply I'd have thought appropriate.
We do not. Pedantics aside. Do feel free to name 3 mass production vehicles road legal that use lead acid for primary battery.
You said "EVs". Now you've shifted that to "mass production vehicles road legal".
You just shifted the goal posts. Golf carts are EVs.
Historically, I don't think assassination has ever led to an improvement in government.
In general, I think it leads to a new leader who's just as bad, but more paranoid.
I'm sure the next dictator would welcome that opportunity to die of old age.
There was a period in the Roman empire when emperors lasted about eighteen months or so before being assassinated. There was a story that one prominent Roman had his name suggested as a good choice for emperor, and his response was "I'm not yet so tired of living."
Under the Star Wars program?
No.
The Strategic Defense Initiative ("Star Wars program") didn't actually deploy anything during the Reagan years, but it was very much non-nuclear.
Basically, tests during the '60s showed that nuclear explosions in space would be very damaging to pretty much everything in orbit, and the purpose of SDI was to knock out incoming warheads, not destroy everything in space.
I am in favor of an agreement not to put nuclear weapons in space, but I think that if the US had a way to "put world pressure" on Russia, we have already used it.
The Outer Space Treaty already forbids countries from deploying nuclear weapons space, of course.
And it is so odd that we now have people going on as if Li-ion batteries are the pinnacle of battery technology. They aren't. If we really want energy density, Calcium-ion might be the way to go.
Excellent point.
Also, making an aluminum/air battery is nearly the holy-grail of high specific energy battery tech.
Weight is a primary issue in mobile scenarios. It's why you don't see EVs based on Lead Acid.
You see them all the time. We call them "golf carts".
The problem is that nobody is going to drive such a death trap. Sodium releases 30x the energy as Lithium when it burns.
No it doesn't; less. Check your data. 416 kJ/mol for burning sodium, compared to 596 kJ/mol for lithium.
If it did have more energy, of course, it would be vastly better than lithium on a battery energy per unit weight basis. Unfortunately, it's not.
Sodium does ignite more easily, but that's cancelled out by the fact that really it's the electrolyte that's burning, and the electrolytes used for sodium batteries are harder to ignite.
Australia is the largest lithium producer. And they don't do slavery there.
Accurate. Chile is number two.
However, China is number one in refining lithium from ore (or salt) into usable lithium or lithium carbonate.
On a slightly related note, not sure what makes you assume workers won’t be exploited mining even something as plentiful as sodium. Not like you’re going to get the new American soft man to do manual labor, so that leaves the work to underpaid immigrants who know they’re in country illegally.
Sodium is most easily sourced from salt, so there's no hard rock mining. In any case, salt production is already an order of magnitude higher than lithium production, so diverting a few percent to batteries isn't going to require more mining,
The original link worked for me, but some alternate sources may be of interest:
https://cen.acs.org/business/s...
https://www.businesswire.com/n....
https://www.energy-storage.new...
https://www.environmentenergyl...
OK? You know none of those ICBMs have enough delta-V to reach the sun,
You need to read the mouse-over text.
I have to also assume that they do a Jupiter slingshot to kill the Earth's angular momentum.
China should return samples from the near side first.
They did.
https://www.bbc.com/news/scien...
https://www.nationalgeographic...
Not just clear sky, it needs air free from water vapor.
Not at 2.45 GHz. Clouds and rain fade isn't a huge problem at that low a frequency, it gets to be a problem only at higher frequencies. There's graphs of microwave absorption vs frequency all over the web, but this one shows the different components of absorption: https://ars.els-cdn.com/conten...
Note that the axis is db/km. Here's the data more specifically for the low frequencies, at a humidity of 30 gr/m3 (which corresponds to 100% humidity at 30 degrees C, sea level pressure). 2.45 GHz is way down on the left side, where water absorption is nearly ignorable: https://ars.els-cdn.com/conten...
Because BT frequency is the same that water resonates at.
A common misbelief, but no, water doesn't resonate at 2.45 GHz any more than any other nearby frequency. In general, the shorter the wavelength, the more absorption by water.
(source for the images: https://www.sciencedirect.com/... )
I also used to think that microwave ovens heated water molecules by resonance but this is a common myth
Resonance, no. But dielectric heating in a microwave oven works with polar molecules. The principal one for this application is water.
Right. But there's nothing special about 2.45 GHz; that frequency is no more highly absorbed by water than any other frequency in the neighborhood.
2.45 GHz is used for microwave ovens because it's the industrial, scientific and medical band, and you don't need a license. And it's easy to make high-efficiency magnetrons at that frequency.
What this country needs is a good five dollar plasma weapon.
