Tesla, Tesla, tesla, junk

originally posted by: robsmith
a reply to: Nunyabizisitwow that is a decent kWh rate.

I wish mine eas that low.

I don’t know a great amount about the molten batteries, though with a lifespan of upto 50 years looks like a good investment.

Takes some effort to move most usage to night & weekend rates, but not difficult for me.

Tougher for families at home all day.

Or folks that prefer sleeping at night.

a reply to: zardust

That’s a really concerning article, I am thinking of people who don’t have town water though have solar panels.

I wonder how many toxic chemicals they are taking in from their water tanks that catch rainwater for drinking.

a reply to: robsmith

Not just China where cheap products are produced all the same, a few places tick that box, and at heart it's down to the companies and corporations wanting as much profit and monies as they can accumulate.

a reply to: robsmith

And that AC electricity...

Mister Edison showed how dangerous it was by electrocuting a dog....

They'll never get idiotic patriotic Americans to use that foreign AC electricity that that Serbian 'Tesla' is on about!

originally posted by: chr0naut
a reply to: robsmith

And that AC electricity...

Mister Edison showed how dangerous it was by electrocuting a dog....

They'll never get idiotic patriotic Americans to use that foreign AC electricity that that Serbian is on about!

What are you even talking about?

U.S. grid has always been AC.

originally posted by: Nunyabizisit

originally posted by: chr0naut
a reply to: robsmith

And that AC electricity...

Mister Edison showed how dangerous it was by electrocuting a dog....

They'll never get idiotic patriotic Americans to use that foreign AC electricity that that Serbian is on about!

What are you even talking about?

U.S. grid has always been AC.

Ohhhh, noes.

"Tesla, Tesla, Tesla"...

originally posted by: chr0naut

originally posted by: Nunyabizisit

originally posted by: chr0naut
a reply to: robsmith

And that AC electricity...

Mister Edison showed how dangerous it was by electrocuting a dog....

They'll never get idiotic patriotic Americans to use that foreign AC electricity that that Serbian is on about!

What are you even talking about?

U.S. grid has always been AC.

Ohhhh, noes.

"Tesla, Tesla, Tesla"...

Again, what are you even talking about?

originally posted by: Nunyabizisit

originally posted by: chr0naut
a reply to: robsmith

And that AC electricity...

Mister Edison showed how dangerous it was by electrocuting a dog....

They'll never get idiotic patriotic Americans to use that foreign AC electricity that that Serbian is on about!

What are you even talking about?

U.S. grid has always been AC.

Ummm...no...no it wasn't...

There were two competing electric power generation technologies...Nicola Tesla's A/C...and Thomas Edison's D/C...

The A/C technology became the standard primarily due to transmission loss rate over distance for the D/C and the many many substations that would have been required for it to work over distance...in a metropolitan setting...
Forget about intra and inter state distances...

So...basically it was an economic cost benefit analysis...among other safety and efficacy issues...







YouSir

originally posted by: YouSir

originally posted by: Nunyabizisit

originally posted by: chr0naut
a reply to: robsmith

And that AC electricity...

Mister Edison showed how dangerous it was by electrocuting a dog....

They'll never get idiotic patriotic Americans to use that foreign AC electricity that that Serbian is on about!

What are you even talking about?

U.S. grid has always been AC.

Ummm...no...no it wasn't...

There were two competing electric power generation technologies...Nicola Tesla's A/C...and Thomas Edison's D/C...

The A/C technology became the standard primarily due to transmission loss rate over distance for the D/C and the many many substations that would have been required for it to work over distance...in a metropolitan setting...
Forget about intra and inter state distances...

So...basically it was an economic cost benefit analysis...among other safety and efficacy issues...

YouSir

Was waiting for some smart a$$ to bring that up.

I guess it's you sir.



Yes, several blocks of NYC once had own dc power.

Generator for each block.

Not a grid.



U.S. grid has always been AC.

As stated.

DC doesn't do distances very well.

a reply to: andy06shake

Your arguments make absolutely zero sense. Coal power plants are dirty however, they are cleaner than when we started and established already. To replace them with nuclear plants would take over 20 years. And your claims they are clean is ridiculous as they produce materials that are in our lifetimes and for many generations deadly to any and all, that is not clean. Once they are decommissioned they become tombs of death forever, the land never to be used again without severe consequences.

Oil and gas are cleaner however they too take a toll, the extraction, transportation of both create danger as well as seriously dangerous left over chemicals that pose a danger. They are not clean energy.

People amaze me in thinking electric cars are the answer to the evil gas combustion engine. Do they even know where electricity comes from ? The above mentioned coal, oil, and gas power plants. The batteries take millions of various resources to be mined, again leaving behind dangerous chemicals used during extraction and acres and acres of land rendered useless due to the extraction process.

The batteries have a relatively short lifespan and much like spent nuclear material must be disposed of somehow. Landfills will be toxic ground forever as they are piled higher and higher. Regular accidents involving electric cars can burn for weeks releasing toxic fumes as they burn and spilling toxic chemicals.

Solar technologies could be an answer but until technology catches up, really not the alternative. Coal is abundant, requires no refining as it's ready to use straight from the ground. Modern scrubber technology has rendered it much cleaner than the above other fossil fuels.

Your arguments are ignorant, they create more problems for future generations than we even know

originally posted by: andy06shake
a reply to: robsmith

You get that the coal burning power stations release more carbon dioxide than oil or gas, so it's a big problem when it comes to climate change.

They also produce toxic elements like mercury and arsenic which are highly toxic and add to the air pollution.

Truth is nuclear power generation is your cleanest and safest option as long as you don't build them where they can be flooded like on the coast or along flood plains.

As to the Tesla batteries, plenty of other nations have charging stations and factories, its going to be and is a growth industry, and thats just how the future cookie appears to be crumbling.

Carbon Capture Technology

Capture

a reply to: andy06shake

There are meltdown free nuclear options, it just isn't part of the scam that is green energy subsidization.
www.forbes.com...

a reply to: zardust

Well the major environmental concern related to nuclear reactors is the creation of radioactive wastes.

Such as Uranium mill tailings and spent reactor fuel plus other associated radioactive products that come in to being somewhere along the line.

I've not got an electric vehicle zardust so i cannot really comment as to there capacity nor how they run, quiet would be my bet.

I'm not sure about child labour cost nor raping the Earth nether but they are apt to squeeze some aspects of such in there for good measure.

a reply to: Reality2021

No mate what's ignorant is to assume our problems will be the futures, you see they will make there own with or without our contributions.

As to my arguments, well there not just mine now are they.

And fact of the matter, to meet our future energy demands, if fusion does not become a thing and tenable prospect any time soon, nuclear power is the only manner of power generation we have that we will meet those demands, clean or otherwise.

Burning Coal is a dirty stupid antiquated way to produce electricity imho, and anyone who cannot get there nut around that simple fact is pretty ""ignorant"" by my estimation. x

a reply to: TritonTaranis

Once you capture it you still have problems transporting it, and storing it for centuries or millennia.

Same ballpark as nuclear waste if somewhat less hazardous i suppose.

But its a prospect indeed.

I heard somewhere they have a method of making damonds out of the atmospheric carbon dioxide. Can’t get much more inert than that.

Found it. Scientific America

a reply to: beyondknowledge

Suppose "diamonds" are indeed inert biologically and chemically.

They are also an electrical insulator with the highest thermal conductivity of any bulk material at room temperature.

Be great if we could turn our waste carbon dioxide in to diamond in abundance and do some really interesting stuff rather than just store the gas.

originally posted by: Nunyabizisit
Nothing will stop brainwashed leftists and their global warming crusade.

You should try answering without throwing politics into the mix. Not everything has to be about "owning the libs," you know. There are other things happening in life.

originally posted by: robsmith
a reply to: Nunyabizisitoahtee they are really pushing the envelope, though, will they take responsibility should one of their brand new batteries self ignite and kills the family in the house just for a profit.

Or are they giving away zero liability to prosecution for those clowns as well?

a reply to: robsmith

The Gubment doesn't care, they want control over our lives.