Remember; the "S" in "IoT" stands for "Security!"
Remember; the "S" in "IoT" stands for "Security!"
Just like the liability of all those oil spills devastating the environment have destroyed the oil companies, right?
I'm sure BP will be filing for bankruptcy any day now after paying out $50-some-odd billion for cleanup, fines and lawsuits. Aaaaaany day now...
Except you can't scale solar production up or down to handle fluctuations in demand.
You can scale it down, absolutely.
Or produce solar at night.
You don't need nearly as much power at night, and if they go with solar thermal you get quite a bit of storage "for free."
Or control the weather.
It's Arizona. They basically have two types of weather; Sunny and Night.
My math says 1250 A @ 480V to fully charge 100kWh pack in 10 minutes
722 Amps since, at 480V, it's probably going to be three phase.
However, in the scenario you're suggesting, it would be more prudent to do battery swapping.
All electric vehicles need to make The Jetsons car sound.
Coal accounts for 33% of U.S. electricity production, vs 0.6% for solar.
Just as an FYI; about five years ago, Coal accounted for over 40%.
They spelled "incorrect" wrong.
To be fair, someone's personal information is arguably truth, and having it released publicly to a forum of people who might be inclined to harass said person would be very inconvenient for that person.
So "inconvenient truths" is, technically, a correct description...
The point being that unless one counts labor in nearly identical ways any talk of 'jobs created' is meaningless.
Right... and that's why gas stations are totally irrelevant, because that's inappropriately expanding the scope of the definition. If you're going to talk about jobs pertaining to a particular endeavor, you should keep your definition as narrow and relevant as possible to avoid the kind of bullshit you're digging up. If you're not careful you end up including the farmer who grows the wheat that the baker makes into bread so the guy at the deli can make the sandwich for the guy who drives the bus that transports the guy to work at the waterfront where he moors the oil tankers that supply the oil to the power plant. Fucking ridiculous.
It's fair to include things like shipping of solar panels, just as it would be fair to include things like shipping materials to construct any other type of power plant (Note: It's not actually been established, AFAIK, that the jobs numbers *actually* includes such things). Once you get into tertiary or higher abstractions of jobs it becomes meaningless.
Except a trucker delivering a load of solar panels is, in fact, relevant to the solar power industry. You can't produce electricity until the solar panels are installed, and to install them you need to transport them from the factory to the installation site. Therefore, the process of delivery is directly relevant.
A gas station is not even remotely relevant to electricity generation. None of the materials, processes or services a gas station provides are directly necessary for the generation of power; at best it's a tertiary contributor.
Gas stations produce electricity?
The people who didn't vote decided that a Trump administration would be in their best interest.
Not even Kellyanne Conway could claim that with a straight face.
People who didn't vote decided that NONE of the options presented were in their best interest. Abstaining from voting is absolutely not the same as voting for the eventual winner.
Not true. A helicopter can't be moving horizontally when it lands. A flying car with wheels could potentially be moving at 70+ MPH horizontally when it lands.
1) Under what situation would such a maneuver be necessary, or even advantageous, and
2) Given the relative difficulty if making a "flying car" in the first place, it seems the last thing you'd want to do is add more weight and complexity with a second drivetrain (Indeed this has so far been a major failing in flying car concepts), and
3) Landing at 70+MPH is anything but safe, which is why it's typically only done on access-controlled runways under the supervision of air traffic controllers and ground crews.
Flying cars to not address and real problem. People are fixated on them for the same reason they're fixated on "hover boards" and personal jet packs - it's a cool fantasy concept that's been romanticized in film and TV, but has absolutely zero practicality or advantage outside of fiction.
You want a personal flying vehicle? They're called "ultralight aircraft" and you don't even need a license to fly them in most cases.
Just about anyplace you could safely land a "flying car" you could also land a helicopter.
And that's assuming you actually have to land. If it's enough of an emergency you'd probably be winching the patient up and down while in flight.
Solution in search of a problem.
We have those already. They're called "helicopters" and they are already in service as airborne ambulances at many metropolitan hospitals.
It's a mature and proven technology, with plenty of well trained operators, service/support infrastructure in place, regulatory and safety mechanisms established and well enforced.
"Flying cars" are a solution in desperate need of a problem.
Wikileaks does not wish to dox anyone. They wish to create a database of influence.
So all those rape victims and mental health patients they doxxed last August were all influential politicos?
"If I do not want others to quote me, I do not speak." -- Phil Wayne