Follow Slashdot stories on Twitter

 



Forgot your password?
typodupeerror

Comment Re:Wake me up when we have chargers... (Score 1) 103

I've never heard of anybody being mugged at a charging station, and a quick google search doesn't give me any examples in the news.

There is such a large campaign to disparage electric vehicles that I expect that this has ever happened it would have been trumpeted all over.

On the other hand, a quick google gives me a plethora of news stories about people mugged at gas stations (although there are a lot more stories about the gas stations themselves getting robbed) https://www.google.com/search?...

So, no, you seem to have it opposite.

Comment Re: Two questions (Score 1) 81

It sure simplifies thinking when you take complicated things and summarize them with a quip.

My conclusion here is that you don't really know very much about socialism.

(and, for the record: no, I am not a socialist. But I do pay attention and try to understand things at more than a superficial level.)

Comment Re:Why for only solar power? (Score 1) 58

Did they do similar studies, simulations, or whatever for other energy sources?

Yes, they do similar maps for wind, although it's trickier, since wind can vary widely with local topography.

If so then why no mention of them?

Can't study everything at the same time, the report would be ten thousand pages long and somebody would still say "but why didn't they study X?"

I'm getting the impression that lowering CO2 emissions doesn't rise to the same level of concern that it used to. What I'm seeing as a greater concern is energy costs. Can we run this mapping to optimize for lowest cost? Then maybe put some kind of dollar value to CO2 emissions, or some CO2 value to energy costs, to get a map that is some weighted average of the two?

CO2 emissions decrease equals the solar energy output times the carbon intensity of the power grid at that location (ie, how much CO2 is emitted per kilowatt-hour generated by the utility. Highest for coal, lowest for hydro.)

You could do price, but that can be changed by the regulators. (in particular, changing to time-dependent power cost changes the economics of solar radically. Also changes the economics for coal, gas, and nuclear.)

Comment Re:Other systems still needed (Score 2) 105

Running entirely on chemical based systems best thing. The primary drawback is the response time of the system. Chemical battery discharge alone has a seconds-to-minutes response time.

Minutes is a little pessimistic. When I switch on my flashlight, it doesn't take minutes for response (light appears) to occur.

Capacitors intrinsically have sub-microsecond response time. So make a hybrid system: supercapacitors for the first few seconds, with batteries for the longer period fluctuations.

Comment Re:Interesting (Score 4, Informative) 36

That's correct, Russia says it limits its attacks to military targets. It also says that its attack on Ukraine was self-defense. Neither statement is true.

https://www.hrw.org/news/2025/...
https://operationalsupport.un....
https://www.amnesty.org/en/pet...
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/...
https://www.ohchr.org/en/press...

Comment Re:Great news (Score 1) 100

Further, the zygote produced by this process is related to both parents.

I was replying to a post stating that the same result could be produced by using a donated egg. A child produced by egg donation is not related to the mother who carries it.

Are you some kind of puritan piece of shit, or am I misreading?

You are misreading.

Comment Re: Great news (Score 1) 100

No one is freaking out over this, in particular these mythical Christian anti science right winger straw men your type loves to set up and knock down. It's just boogeyman bullshit.

The Catholic church is freaking out over this, but then, they had already been freaking out over in-vitro fertilization even with two parents.

https://thecatholicherald.com/...

Comment Re:Great news (Score 1) 100

(Part of the mitochondrial DNA is stored in the cell nucleus.)

I'm a little dubious about this, but I noted the unusual phrasing "stored in the cell nucleus."

I suppose it's possible that some mitochondrial DNA somehow gets inside the nuclear envelope, but "stored in the cell nucleus" is not identical as "transmitted in the chromosomal DNA". I'm not sure if we care about where mitochondrial DNA that's not the part that's inherited is located.

Slashdot Top Deals

Build a system that even a fool can use and only a fool will want to use it.

Working...