Want to read Slashdot from your mobile device? Point it at m.slashdot.org and keep reading!

 


Forgot your password?
Close
typodupeerror

Comment Re:Must a turbine blade be INSIDE a cargo hold (Score 1) 184

by SouthSeb (#65661034) Attached to: 'If We Want Bigger Wind Turbines, We're Gonna Need Bigger Airplanes'

I agree that's the real question. How do you handle the last miles? I may be a bit pessimistic, but I think building makeshift runways and trying to land a huge airplane on them doesn't seem very realistic to me.

I'm thinking in transport from seaport to seaport and from there by waterways to the final destination. Or maybe, if we're talking about wind farms to last several decades, building capable railroads (if possible and economically viable) just as we do with ore mining regions.

Obviously, I'm not in the position of asserting anything. It's just an opinion on what looks like an odd choice for me.

Comment Re:Wouldn't it be funny (Score 1) 39

Most of Brazil's energy comes from hydroelectric plants, mostly built in forested areas.

Wind power, on the other hand, comes almost entirely from offshore or coastal plants. Solar power comes from industrial/residential panels and (still few) plants being built in remote and arid regions.

Since the Brazilian coastline is immense, building wind and solar plants in forested areas is not economically viable, at least for now.

Comment Re:Well now ... (Score 5, Informative) 52

by SouthSeb (#65653194) Attached to: Amazon Drivers Could Be Wearing AR Glasses With a Built-In Display Next Year

If I understood it correctly from all I've read about it, the glasses aren't meant to assist driving. They (at least reportedly) should help them when carrying packages from the vehicle to the recipients' hands. Amazon is also aiming at replacing the handhelds that drivers currently use with these glasses.

Submission + - Study Shows Which Vehicles Pollute the Least In Every US County (arstechnica.com)

Submitted by Anonymous Coward
An anonymous reader writes: Greenhouse gas reduction is no longer a priority for the US government, but if you're looking for a new vehicle and want to buy something with the lowest life cycle carbon emissions, you're best off looking for a compact with a small battery. That's one of the findings from a group at the University of Michigan of a comprehensive study that calculates the overall cradle-to-grave carbon impact for different types of vehicles, including factors like powertrain options, location (within the country), and use patterns. Even better, they built a tool you can use yourself.

The study, published in Environmental Science and Technology, compares internal combustion engine powertrains with hybrid, 35- and 50-mile range plug-in hybrids, and 200-mile, 300-mile, and 400-mile battery electric powertrains across compact and midsize sedans, small and midsize SUVs, and pickup trucks, using a life cycle assessment model developed by Argonne National Laboratory and data of model year 2025 vehicles from the Environmental Protection Agency. If you expected that a gas-powered pickup truck would have the biggest carbon footprint, you'd be right. With a driving profile of 43 percent city driving and the rest highways (no cargo), a pickup will emit about 486 g CO2e per mile. Compared to that, a compact electric sedan with a 200-mile battery has just 17 percent of the life cycle emissions and is responsible for just 81 g CO2e per mile.

A short-range electric pickup—maybe that Slate that so many are salivating over—is nearly as good, with a footprint that's only 25 percent the size of the gas pickup truck. On the other hand, hybrid powertrains (the kind that don't plug in) only reduce life cycle carbon compared to internal combustion alone by a modest amount—between 11 and 13 percent, depending on the vehicle class. Plug-in hybrids with 35 miles of range can reduce emissions compared to plain combustion by 53–56 percent; with 50-mile batteries the reduction is 56–60 percent, assuming the PHEVs were driven in electric mode for 58 percent and 69 percent of the time, respectively. When it comes to BEVs, the smallest battery pack always has the least environmental impact. BEV powertrains with 400 miles of range have lifecycle emissions that are 67–69 percent lower than an ICE powertrain in the same vehicle. For 300-mile BEVs, this is an 81–83 percent reduction. A 200-mile BEV can be expected to contribute just 25–26 percent as much CO2e as an equivalent gas-burning vehicle would.

That's not because EVs with big batteries are inefficient—far from it—but because making a battery for an EV is a very energy-intensive process. Most emissions from internal combustion engine (92 percent) and hybrid (89 percent) vehicles come from their use on the roads. But this changes once you start adding significant kWh-worth of battery. For PHEVs, the use phase is more like 73–80 percent, and for BEVs, it's just 48-60 percent, depending on the size of the batteries. The researchers also modeled different driving behaviors, including the use cases of someone who uses their vehicle just to commute and run errands; the "occasional road-tripper," most of whose needs are met by a small battery; and a contractor or someone else who has to drive a lot for work, with varying amounts of cargo onboard. As we've known for some time, where you get your energy from affects how clean your EV will be, and switching from gasoline to an EV has more of an impact in Seattle (which relies on hydropower) versus Cincinnati (where the electricity comes from burning coal), for both PHEVs and BEVs.

Comment Re:Tickets (Score 1, Insightful) 158

"For every complex problem, there is a simple solution, and it is wrong." H.L. Mencken

I can immediately think of a serious problem with your solution: it's very common for people to buy tickets in advance but end up not being able to attend the event. Therefore, they have to pass the tickets on to others.

Comment Net migration numbers? (Score 1) 56

by SouthSeb (#65592802) Attached to: New Zealand's Population Exodus Hits 13-Year High as Economy Worsens

New Zealand's net migration, which is the number of those arriving minus those leaving, also fell with foreign nationals moving to the country of 5.3 million nearly halving from 2024.

It would be nice if the article didn't forget to mention what was the net migration number which was - drum roll - a 27,100 gain in 2024 after a peak record of 128,300 gain in 2023. Net migration 2001-2019 average gain was 29,100.

Natives are leaving much more than non-natives. But, yeah, in general that's actually expected.

https://www.stats.govt.nz/news...

Comment Just like the US (Score 1) 35

by SouthSeb (#65589326) Attached to: China-Plus-One Was Just China All Along

Nothing new to see here. China is following other developed countries path, mainly the US one. The US moved manufacturing to other, cheaper countries, transitioned to a "knowledge economy" and became richer than ever. China has great chances to succeed, too. But only time will tell for sure.

Comment Re:Let people make their own decisions. (Score 2) 72

Let people vote for where they want to live with their dollars and personal choices -- no tax dollars should be used to further walkability goals or any other society planning.

Let's for a moment forget all the stupidity you wrote before that last sentence and focus in "their dollars and personal choices - no tax dollars". Exactly what dollars you think are being used to pave the roads you use daily or build infrastructure like electricity, water, communications and every other public service to the rural/suburban area you chose to live as your personal choice? You, sir, a an absolutely idiot.

Slashdot Top Deals

"All we are given is possibilities -- to make ourselves one thing or another." -- Ortega y Gasset

Close