Electric Vehicles, Hybrids...Battery tech... Land Air and Sea. Let's See 'em.

Is the internal combustion engine doomed to history

  • Yes

    Votes: 10 25.6%
  • No

    Votes: 21 53.8%
  • Not sure

    Votes: 5 12.8%
  • Don't care

    Votes: 2 5.1%
  • ...er... what was the question again?

    Votes: 1 2.6%

  • Total voters
    39
A friend of mine just drove a Tesla from Toronto to Los Angeles. The car directed him from charging station to charging station all the way. 1 hour charge for a 2 hour drive. I talked to him in route. It sounded like misery to me. I spoke with him yesterday. He’s making a return in a Cadillac Escalade. Big gasoline tank.
Primary EV limitation right now.

Yup - when asked I say that while they are impressive, for many drivers, EVs just aren't ready for prime-time just yet.

Pete
 
I'll stick with my Hybrid for awhile
I was going to trade in my Hyundai hybrid Ionic for a 2023
the 23 is a pure EV I was bummed I love that Ionic I can drive from here to Kanas city on 13 gals of gas and the mileage in town is even better than on the highway
 

Breakthrough in nuclear fusion could mean ‘near-limitless energy’​

Full news tomorrow, read the article before selling your gas powered car.

https://www.theguardian.com/environ...clear-fusion-could-mean-near-limitless-energy

I was reading that article yesterday, still a very long way to go. The first part of the article they exclaim ( very excitedly ) that for the first time the act of fusion produced more power than it took to generate it. Which is a very big deal!

Now for the rest of the story……..Yes the fusion created more energy than the laser that it was shot with to begin the reaction. However, the power that was required to generate the laser was 100 times more than was put out by the fusion reaction. And that burst of power was only a fraction of a second.
F8A1E092-74B5-4EA8-A786-71BC0F0FC7E0.jpeg
 
I was reading that article yesterday, still a very long way to go. The first part of the article they exclaim ( very excitedly ) that for the first time the act of fusion produced more power than it took to generate it. Which is a very big deal!

Now for the rest of the story……..Yes the fusion created more energy than the laser that it was shot with to begin the reaction. However, the power that was required to generate the laser was 100 times more than was put out by the fusion reaction. And that burst of power was only a fraction of a second.
View attachment 231893
Yeah, it all sounded pretty exciting... until I got to the part about still needin' truckloads of energy jus' to run a minivan. :rolleyes:
I get their whole point about the output being more than the laser shot at it... and that's valid, but when it takes 100 times more energy to fire the laser.... well, it just feels like a cheesy magic trick. "Here... pick a card... any card..." ;)
I was really hoping for more. It is a milestone though. Hopefully we'll get there.... maybe.... someday....
 
Trouble in paradise?

Tesla Full Self-Driving data looks awful: We challenge Elon Musk to prove otherwise​


1671054553902.png


The little data that is coming out of Tesla’s Full Self-Driving Beta looks awful, and that’s putting it mildly.

We challenge Elon Musk to prove otherwise by releasing disengagement and driver intervention data.


To be clear, the Tesla Full Self-Driving Beta data in this article is very minimal, and therefore, it could not be fully representative of the actual capacity.

But that’s the point of the article. It’s unfortunately the best data available because Tesla has gone out of its way to not release disengagement data that other companies developing self-driving systems are making available.
A disengagement consists of the system disengaging whether by itself or by the driver in order to either avoid danger or comply with the rules of the road. Miles between disengagement have been useful data to track the progress of self-driving programs.

It’s not a perfect metric to track progress, but it’s one of the only ones we have right now and we should see improvements in it over time with more miles between disengagement or driver intervention.

While Tesla doesn’t release the data, a group of Tesla FSD Beta testers has been self-reporting data for a while now, and Taylor Ogan of Snow Bull Capital has tracked it to see the progress.

According to the data, miles driven per disengagement have gone down by 54% since March, and it currently sits around the same level it was around this time last year:


1671054643587.png



Now that’s based on 72,000 miles of self-reported data compared to over 60 million miles driven on FSD Beta to date.

Therefore, I am completely open to the idea that the bigger dataset shows different results, but there’s no way to know unless Tesla releases that data. It’s not clear why the company is not doing it.

To be clear, I am not asking Tesla to release any sensitive information about the program here, but only data that all other companies developing self-driving programs have willingly shared for years now.

The data has been used to help gain confidence in these systems – some of which are already deployed commercially in California and Arizona.

Instead, Tesla CEO Elon Musk has repeatedly told people to “try FSD Beta for themselves” in order to gauge its progress. As if anecdotal evidence would be better at tracking progress than hard data on miles per disengagement.

At this point, it’s hard not to be suspicious about the possibility that the reason why Tesla is not releasing the data is that it looks bad for them – especially compared to Waymo and Cruise.

But how else are we going to be able to gain confidence in the system if we can’t see any tangible data pointing to improvements?

This is not coming from a hater or a TSLA short. This is coming from someone who paid good money for Tesla Full Self-Driving Capability package and who is losing faith in the company delivering on its promise.

So, Elon Musk, please release Tesla FSD Beta data and show a path toward delivering on your promises. Otherwise, we have to rely on this data to track progress, and it doesn’t look good.



https://electrek.co/2022/12/14/tesl...ta-awful-challenge-elon-musk-prove-otherwise/
 

Arizona is a natural fit for solar energy. We are home to numerous large scale solar power plants. The newest ones not only generate power during daylight hours but store electricity that was made during the daytime , to be released in the early evening hours during peak demand hours. We also have some free standing electrical storage buildings that are basically just big lithium ion battery facilities, for storing surplus power to be released in the evening hours.
DB5728F0-5B5F-4B83-B964-B02D0E023B4B.jpeg
05828A8A-8F3C-4986-9A96-7A08BF12B6E9.jpeg


Solar panels are everywhere you look around here, schools and commercial buildings place solar panels on the roof tops of covered parking,
61BFC2A5-B849-4A94-83ED-34BDDB540375.jpeg


And it seems that solar panels are on the roof of every other house you see,
F26B8A00-2CCA-411C-9E92-F0F3912A6980.jpeg


I am not sold on the value of solar panels on the roofs of houses.
I see them as having a number of problems.

1. They are promoted as drastically reducing your electric bill and that the surplus electricity your panels produce can be sold to the electric company. While technically that is true, they pay Pennie’s on the dollar for what they would charge. Plus, if you don’t buy enough electricity from the power company that charge you a fee for maintenance of the grid. Most people break even or save a small amount, the payment for the panels equaling the cost of electricity.

2. I was told by a guy that used to be in the solar panel business that they talk people into placing way more panels on your roof than you actually need for your home.

3. Most people do not own the solar panels, they are 30 year leases. This is problematic if you want to sell your home, you have to talk a prospective buyer into assuming your lease, or you have to pay off the panels outright which is very expensive.

4. If you ever need to have a leaky roof re done, you have to pay for the panels to be removed and reinstalled, which is very expensive.

5. They are ugly on your roof and the amount of electrical conduit and circuit boxes and meters they hang in the side of your house is ridiculous. And lastly pigeons will nest under them, so you have to call out a specialty company to install bird netting or wire screen all around the perimeter of the panels.

But other than on household roof tops, I’m a big fan of solar energy.
 
I have a neighbor two houses up the street that put solar panels on her roof about 5 yrs ago. Every time I ask her questions about 'em she changes the subject... refuses to talk about 'em.
I'm starting to understand why. :lmao:
 
Arizona is a natural fit for solar energy. We are home to numerous large scale solar power plants. The newest ones not only generate power during daylight hours but store electricity that was made during the daytime , to be released in the early evening hours during peak demand hours. We also have some free standing electrical storage buildings that are basically just big lithium ion battery facilities, for storing surplus power to be released in the evening hours.
View attachment 231978View attachment 231980

Solar panels are everywhere you look around here, schools and commercial buildings place solar panels on the roof tops of covered parking,
View attachment 231979

And it seems that solar panels are on the roof of every other house you see,
View attachment 231981

I am not sold on the value of solar panels on the roofs of houses.
I see them as having a number of problems.

1. They are promoted as drastically reducing your electric bill and that the surplus electricity your panels produce can be sold to the electric company. While technically that is true, they pay Pennie’s on the dollar for what they would charge. Plus, if you don’t buy enough electricity from the power company that charge you a fee for maintenance of the grid. Most people break even or save a small amount, the payment for the panels equaling the cost of electricity.

2. I was told by a guy that used to be in the solar panel business that they talk people into placing way more panels on your roof than you actually need for your home.

3. Most people do not own the solar panels, they are 30 year leases. This is problematic if you want to sell your home, you have to talk a prospective buyer into assuming your lease, or you have to pay off the panels outright which is very expensive.

4. If you ever need to have a leaky roof re done, you have to pay for the panels to be removed and reinstalled, which is very expensive.

5. They are ugly on your roof and the amount of electrical conduit and circuit boxes and meters they hang in the side of your house is ridiculous. And lastly pigeons will nest under them, so you have to call out a specialty company to install bird netting or wire screen all around the perimeter of the panels.

But other than on household roof tops, I’m a big fan of solar energy.
Do you have any idea what percentage of your electric power comes from solar?
 
Do you have any idea what percentage of your electric power comes from solar?

Just so happens I have a handy graph! It’s a little outdated, about 6% ( sadly ). I’d say nuclear and natural gas provide the most. Coal plants have been going away here. Also I would say that solar percentage is up, since they are constantly building more of them.
64C3F4EF-9096-4FDE-955D-CECCD1EC2BC5.png
 
Just so happens I have a handy graph! It’s a little outdated, about 6% ( sadly ). I’d say nuclear and natural gas provide the most. Coal plants have been going away here. Also I would say that solar percentage is up, since they are constantly building more of them.
View attachment 231986
Mississippi is 0.5%. 7% from coal. My lights are burning natural gas. I'm close to at least three refineries, so I have cheap gasoline and it's plentiful. One oil refinery is 30 minutes away. $2.60 per
 
Arizona is a natural fit for solar energy. We are home to numerous large scale solar power plants. The newest ones not only generate power during daylight hours but store electricity that was made during the daytime , to be released in the early evening hours during peak demand hours. We also have some free standing electrical storage buildings that are basically just big lithium ion battery facilities, for storing surplus power to be released in the evening hours.
View attachment 231978View attachment 231980

Solar panels are everywhere you look around here, schools and commercial buildings place solar panels on the roof tops of covered parking,
View attachment 231979

And it seems that solar panels are on the roof of every other house you see,
View attachment 231981

I am not sold on the value of solar panels on the roofs of houses.
I see them as having a number of problems.

1. They are promoted as drastically reducing your electric bill and that the surplus electricity your panels produce can be sold to the electric company. While technically that is true, they pay Pennie’s on the dollar for what they would charge. Plus, if you don’t buy enough electricity from the power company that charge you a fee for maintenance of the grid. Most people break even or save a small amount, the payment for the panels equaling the cost of electricity.

2. I was told by a guy that used to be in the solar panel business that they talk people into placing way more panels on your roof than you actually need for your home.

3. Most people do not own the solar panels, they are 30 year leases. This is problematic if you want to sell your home, you have to talk a prospective buyer into assuming your lease, or you have to pay off the panels outright which is very expensive.

4. If you ever need to have a leaky roof re done, you have to pay for the panels to be removed and reinstalled, which is very expensive.

5. They are ugly on your roof and the amount of electrical conduit and circuit boxes and meters they hang in the side of your house is ridiculous. And lastly pigeons will nest under them, so you have to call out a specialty company to install bird netting or wire screen all around the perimeter of the panels.

But other than on household roof tops, I’m a big fan of solar energy.
I have solar panels and I reckon I use about a third less electricity. I also have a booster for the immersion heater that takes excess power from the roof which reduces my gas bill by 11%. Then there is my hybrid car of which just over 50% of the power comes from the roof.
Part of the key to this is having a battery system as well so that any excess is stored rather than be exported to the grid.
Some still does go there and you are right, what you get paid for it is an insult but still better than a slap in the face with a wet fish.

I own and paid for my system and if I could get the same returns on my other investments I'd be very happy.

I agree with your comment about looks but how much time do you spend looking at your roof.....do you, should try getting out more! :D
Our roof tiles were getting towards the end of their life so we had them replaced and the panels recessed which IMO looks OK.

DSC02915.JPG


So, for what it's worth, solar is a good investment provided you have the funds and don't need to borrow, make best use of the power generated by having a battery, immersion heater that can make use of excess power and (ideally) a hybrid vehicle.
And for those who spend too much time staring at their roof, have the panels inset.
 
A decent video of Helion fusion and progress. I thought it quite interesting.
another
Fusion power generation has some "issues" even after the tech hurdles are "solved"
I've been slightly following ITER and even the French are raising some red flags about operation, radiation.
 
Last edited:
Back
Top