COBOL had the COMPUTE statement for compatibility with the most popular language at the time: COMPUTE and write it like you would in FORTRAN. Can you still compile K&R C in C++? Ignoring a list of warnings longer than the source code, of course. So it's kind of logical for Rust to do something similar.
This. By the 1990s, AM had been reduced to a single chip. With software defined radios, it's a little code that could even, probably, be open-sourced with a little encouragement.
And local/regional sports. That's the most common use for AM in our family cars.
Once upon a time, a radio *was* an option. My parents never ordered one, preferring to carry around a monster portable that could plug into the cigarette lighter socket. Some time in the early 1970s, though, they became standard equipment, mainly because almost all cars were ordered with one anyway (radios had become cheap), and handled both AM and FM (early car radios were usually AM-only).
The "safety" argument mainly comes from the use of low-power highway and other informational radios, mostly AM because that's cheap and uses little power (something that lives in a little trailer or box on the roadside, perhaps with a small solar panel, needs to be cheap and low-power). Plus, as others note, it can serve a wide area so in emergency situations a transmitter can be located well away from the problem area and still work. FM is limited that way, and everything else requires some kind of paid subscription (aha! the real reason!) to get access. And AM for consumer radios is completely implemented in a single chip, usually, using truly ancient process nodes, so the BOM cost per unit really is negligible (unless, apparently, you're a Big Automaker bean-counter).
The claim that EVs are too electrically noisy for AM radios is spurious. 1) many EVs *do* have AM radios (see Bolts, for instance). And 2) if they're that noisy, how do they avoid violating FCC interference regulations? They can't be much worse than an old car with a failing condenser on the distributor.
For music production, Apple has been the main show for nearly ever. There are alternatives, but most of the good stuff is available first for Apple then later, if at all, for Windows. Linux seems to be a tad limited at the high end, though some pretty good work has been done.
I can sort of see the fee (though the amount quoted in the article's example is a little excessive). Cash handling has a cost, and it can be higher than card fees for the merchant.
Most banks don't want to handle cash any more, and charge fees to accept it from businesses. Also from individuals, above a certain amount. Allegedly, that's to cover the cost of counting it (which is all done by machines of course). There's also a cost for physical security (at the bank, and for anybody handling it) and the risk of theft (being anonymous, cash is attractive that way). As treasurer of a nonprofit, I've had that issue, and have sometimes limited the amount deposited in one go after an event to stay under the amount that the bank would charge a fee for (basically, less than their ATMs accept).
Places that handle large amounts of cash (say, a large store), of course, have to have safes on the site and hire armored transport, which is essentially another fee on use of cash. Note: they have to do that for checks, too, unless the checks are converted to electronic transfers, essentially debit card transactions, on the spot (I've seen that done, but so far it's fairly rare for some reason).
Yes, I've seen places that accept debit but not credit cards due to the fees. But most of the time the fees are nearly if not actually the same (again, experience as that treasurer) unless a PIN is used for the debit card (which is preferred, really, because you get near-instant access to the money). Not all payment processors do PINs correctly, though; be careful. And I've had problems using those debit cards issued in the typical class-action settlements or refunds; they're often not accepted outside of the institution or sales network that issued them.
California and EVs in general have developed a strong case of Yogi Berra: "Nobody goes there any more. It's too popular!"
That said, we *do* need many more charging plugs than gas pump nozzles. Throughput of vehicles at gas stations is 3 or more times greater than with EV charging. Gas pump occupancy ranges from 3-10 minutes for a fill. DC charging plug occupancy is probably a minimum of 20 minutes and for most EVs more like 30+ minutes (to as much as an hour) for a 20-80% charge. So in principle you need 2-5 times as many plugs. Of course, many of those plugs might be at home: I used a DC charger about 1/2 dozen times in the 4 years I've been driving one (4 of those on one longish trip); the rest of the time has been at home, usually overnight to get the discount power rates. It's hard to figure the adjustment for that because there just aren't any good data. Still, for any more than local and commute driving, DC charging is necessary and ultimately needs to follow more or less the gas station model.(with some destination and longer-stop installations) to support road trips. Concentrating on *ONLY* the gas station model is a mistake, though, since EVs don't have gas fumes when charging and it can be done anywhere convenient. Basically, we need more, everywhere, and better reliability.
Fake news about "fake news." The story made clear that it was not for the full day, but it *is* for a substantial portion of it (go look at CAISO's web site) and with growing battery storage it's indirectly supplying more of the peak period demand than was possible only a few years ago. I read the story as a hopeful report of progress, not fake news. Your viewpoint ignores the fact that people with working brains are running the grid, not just hallucinating AIs and greedy capitalists.
The other hopeful sign is that California is indeed meeting demand with a declining percentage of fossil and nuclear resources. No, they're not gone yet, and possibly won't be for much longer than the renewables advocates would like, but their overall contribution *is* declining. Without widespread blackouts. In fact, I can't recall a blackout in CA that was reasonably related to use of renewables; all of the big ones have been due to transmission and fossil plant failures.
This is great news, even with the caveats (mid-day, etc.). There's some interesting nuance though.
If you look at the ISO's supply page (https://www.caiso.com/TodaysOutlook/Pages/supply.html) you may note that nuclear trundles along on a flat line at about 1500 MW, and natural gas at 1500-1800 MW. Those are steam and combined-cycle plants that are difficult to ramp the output of quickly, and if shut off (such as in an emergency like a blackout) can take days to bring fully back on line. So they keep running. At the time I write this (0935 PDT, 22 May 2024), batteries are sucking 2600 MW and exports just under 200 MW. Renewables are supplying about 20000 MW. So (once in the wires the electrons don't remember what put them there) you could say that the batteries are being charged by the nuke and gas plants as much as by the renewables. Not mentioned in the charts, of course, is pumped storage, but there is some of that in CA too, and it's certainly being used to manage things too.
Over time, those gas and nuke plants will slowly go away, and the fact that they only support 20% or less of the total demand during the day is a hopeful sign. But when looking at today's numbers it's worth keeping their presence in the back of the mind.
Another bit of nuance: CalISO isn't the only balancing authority in the state, though it is of course the biggest. There are a bunch of smaller ones, including many of the municipal and irrigation districts (and groups of them). That "imports" number is not just power sent to or brought in from other states; it is also power sent to/from other balancing authorities. They're all connected to the same grid, and they work together. But from an accounting standpoint the transactions between them are considered imports and exports. So some (when the numbers are small, probably most) of those ISO-reported "imports" are within the state.
The batteries are already saving our bacon. They suck up excess production during the day and reduce the effective ramp rate in the evening making it easier to manage. We need more of them.
BTW many of the interconnection arrangements for rooftop solar, now that net metering is going away, require a battery to be part of the system - a cost issue that will prevent installation of a lot of smaller setups that used to be practical with net metering, but a benefit from a system management standpoint. Also, of course, allowing energy cost arbitrage. When will we get commodity LFP batteries made locally (i.e. not entirely from China), at reasonable prices, to make that safer and more cost-effective?
This. The regulation of air pollutant emissions is generally preempted by the federal government, with carve-outs for California and when EPA assigns certain things to states for enforcement. Regulation of interstate travel is preempted by the feds too, and interstate commerce generally. Plus, there's a big weasel-word: "intentional," which lets a lot be emitted as a byproduct of doing other things (like shooting varmints). So, I'd still lay in a store of popcorn to watch the entertainment if there's any serious attempt at stupid enforcement actions, but overall it's just conservative/conspiracy virtue signaling.
So FedEx will have to move out of Memphis? End air service to Nashville and elsewhere in the state? Ban cars and trucks, or at least those with removed/modified emission controls (which are already illegal under federal law, and arguably it's not "intentional" if the emission controls are there and working), or ban anything bigger than a smallish sedan without a commercial license and plates? As for flyovers, those are federally regulated so the state can't do anything about them. The rest - could be an interesting states rights battle. Under the Clean Air Act, the feds preempt for cars unless a state chooses to follow California's rules. Anyway, broad, sweeping prohibitions that don't make sense is par for the course in that part of the US.
And
There was a large-scale power outage in Folsom CA at the same time as the FB (and related services) outage. Total coincidence, I know, but 10K power customers...10K FB etc users...humans see patterns even if there aren't any.
That said, didn't these FB users who were locked out of their accounts have their passwords written down somewhere, so they could log back in? Or is FB connection required for them to log in to their phone or computer (that would be strange)? I thought only MS Google and Apple did that?
> He even has a very early sort of hybrid: 1916 Owen Magnetic.
Technically, that's not a hybrid. It's electric drive, but with no storage to accept regeneration during braking.
The early adopter EV market, fueled largely by Tesla and by those who can charge at home, among those who are politically inclined, is probably approaching temporary saturation. That's true.
EVs are still too expensive (relative to ICE and perhaps hybrid versions of the same kind of vehicles), range (especially with large loads or when towing) is still an issue, and away-from-home charging infrastructure is too unreliable (if even available - my daughter lives in a large (geographically) county that has one (count 'em) EA DC charging site (4 plugs, at least 1-2 usually not working), 2 (near the Interstate, 20 plugs total) Tesla, and a few perennially listed as "coming soon" in Plugshare) to be attractive for the majority of ICE buyers (who have a number of attractively-priced HEVs available). And that's ignoring the political issues (inland CA is still a Red State, and CA does still produce a lot of oil).
The charger situation is slowly improving along major freeways and in major urban areas, but not quickly enough to make a big dent in the general population of vehicle buyers outside the early adopters. It doesn't help that carmakers are pushing higher-priced models to ensure near- if not actual profitability. The low-priced Bolts were selling well in their last year or 2, but GM wasn't making (enough) money from them so they're gone.
It's less technocrats pushing incorrect (?) solutions, really, than it is classic economics and salesmanship. EVs are in fact popular in CA, and proportionately more are sold there than in most US states. But they still can't cover enough use cases to monopolize the market with present prices and offerings. Add a away-from-home charger system that's still very much Work In Progress, and a reduction in *sales growth* has to be expected for a little while. We still have 10 years before the real quotas hit, so there's time to address more of the limitations.
Where there's a will, there's a relative.
