REAL-WORLD TEST HAS TESLA SEMI SILENCING CRITICS

T. A. Gardner said:
Clearly you do not understand the limitations of battery technology. You cannot get around the physics and chemistry of batteries.
Click to expand...

CLEARLY you do not understand ANYTHING about technology Terry as again you are speaking to TODAY's technology and locking it in time.

Clearly says Terry the Internet will never advance too mainstream world wide as Copper wires and Dial up are to slow and costly. .. says Terry at the initial roll out of the internet, assuming the technology "limitations" of the current will not be fixed by innovation.


Clearly says Terry, ICE vehicle, nor any automobile, will ever become truly mainstream as we do not have roads nor gas stations to fill them.. says Terry at the initial roll out of the automobile, assuming the "limitations" of that current period will never be improved upon.


Terry you are hopelessly stuck on stupid as each and every one of your technology complaints ALWAYS assumes the same thing. That is no future improvement in the technology beyond where it is today.


10 Most Advanced Battery Technologies That Will Power the Future
Click to expand...

We DO NOT know what the physics of these future batteries will be limited to, as they are still in development Terry.
 
QP! said:
CLEARLY you do not understand ANYTHING about technology Terry as again you are speaking to TODAY's technology and locking it in time.

Clearly says Terry the Internet will never advance too mainstream world wide as Copper wires and Dial up are to slow and costly. .. says Terry at the initial roll out of the internet, assuming the technology "limitations" of the current will not be fixed by innovation.


Clearly says Terry, ICE vehicle, nor any automobile, will ever become truly mainstream as we do not have roads nor gas stations to fill them.. says Terry at the initial roll out of the automobile, assuming the "limitations" of that current period will never be improved upon.
Terry you are hopelessly stuck on stupid as each and every one of your technology complaints ALWAYS assumes the same thing. That is no future improvement in the technology beyond where it is today.
We DO NOT know what the physics of these future batteries will be limited to, as they are still in development Terry.
Click to expand...

So, genius, explain in simple terms how battery chemistry works.
 
T. A. Gardner said:
So, genius, explain in simple terms how battery chemistry works.
Click to expand...

Terry. i say this seriously but you need to stop.

This question is so painfully stupid.

How could anyone explain how fibre optics would work for Internet traffic before it was developed and tested if you asked them that question decades prior when only copper wires were used? There could be some guesses but science REQUIRES it completion and testing.

How could anyone say how the first smart phone would work decades before the first one was developed, the technology was miniaturized and made more efficient?


Todays smart phones having more processing power than the earliest IBM super computers.

Yes Terry that is true.

And yet Terry is here saying it is impossible. Tell me the physics that would allow so much processing power to be miniaturized into a cell phone.

We cannot help you with this block you have Terry that makes you the most stupid imaginable person when it comes to technology. You simply are stuck on stupid.

Read the article i posted and understand that there is progress in research in battery areas that will entirely change TODAYS landscape of limitations. And then try and get yourself unstuck from that word 'TODAY' that traps you each and every time we discuss any and ALL new technologies.
 
QP! said:
Terry. i say this seriously but you need to stop.

This question is so painfully stupid.

How could anyone explain how fibre optics would work for Internet traffic before it was developed and tested if you asked them that question decades prior when only copper wires were used? There could be some guesses but science REQUIRES it completion and testing.

How could anyone say how the first smart phone would work decades before the first one was developed, the technology was miniaturized and made more efficient?


Todays smart phones having more processing power than the earliest IBM super computers.

Yes Terry that is true.

And yet Terry is here saying it is impossible. Tell me the physics that would allow so much processing power to be miniaturized into a cell phone.

We cannot help you with this block you have Terry that makes you the most stupid imaginable person when it comes to technology. You simply are stuck on stupid.

Read the article i posted and understand that there is progress in research in battery areas that will entirely change TODAYS landscape of limitations. And then try and get yourself unstuck from that word 'TODAY' that traps you each and every time we discuss any and ALL new technologies.
Click to expand...

ALL battery technology is based on the electrical charges of various atoms. The difference in charge between the two determines the battery cell's voltage which will be between 1 and 3 volts in round numbers. You cannot get more charge out of a battery cell than that difference. The electrolyte in the battery is used as a conductor between the cathode and anode (the two different elements / types of atom used).

Everything else about batteries is simply a means to make that chemistry more efficient. That's it. You won't suddenly see a 6 volt battery cell. That limitation cannot be overcome because there are no atoms with a sufficiently large charge to allow it to happen. All the "new technology" in batteries is about making that 1 to 3 volt charge per cell more efficient via the rules of chemistry and physics.

Battery technology cannot do more than make incremental improvements into a well established technology.

It isn't like switching from copper wire to fiber optics where two entirely different sets of physics are involved (electricity v. light). Miniaturization is simply taking the same extant technology and finding a way to make it smaller. It doesn't change the technology one iota otherwise.

Increasing efficiency is incremental not revolutionary. There is nothing revolutionary about current battery technology and there won't be any time soon in the future.
 
T. A. Gardner said:
ALL battery technology is based on the electrical charges of various atoms. The difference in charge between the two determines the battery cell's voltage which will be between 1 and 3 volts in round numbers. You cannot get more charge out of a battery cell than that difference. The electrolyte in the battery is used as a conductor between the cathode and anode (the two different elements / types of atom used).

Everything else about batteries is simply a means to make that chemistry more efficient. That's it. You won't suddenly see a 6 volt battery cell. That limitation cannot be overcome because there are no atoms with a sufficiently large charge to allow it to happen. All the "new technology" in batteries is about making that 1 to 3 volt charge per cell more efficient via the rules of chemistry and physics.

Battery technology cannot do more than make incremental improvements into a well established technology.

It isn't like switching from copper wire to fiber optics where two entirely different sets of physics are involved (electricity v. light). Miniaturization is simply taking the same extant technology and finding a way to make it smaller. It doesn't change the technology one iota otherwise.

Increasing efficiency is incremental not revolutionary. There is nothing revolutionary about current battery technology and there won't be any time soon in the future.
Click to expand...

Terry stop.

STOP.

No one will read anything you say about science when you the most stupid person possible when it comes to science.

There are top scientist world wide, being given billions upon billions of dollars who believe that major game changing advancements in battery technology are coming and they want to win and monetize that race.


And yet you have Terry standing on the outside saying 'Smart phones are simply never going to be possible... i mean look how big the IBM super computer is'.

STFU TERRY. I say that in the nicest way. You are too stupid to comment on technology.



AGAIN you are speaking to TODAYS technology as if frozen in time.

The Forever Battery That Promises to Change the EV Industry


...there is one major obstacle that prevents EVs from reaching their full potential: the limitations of current battery technology.

...That’s where solid-state batteries come in.

Solid-state batteries are exactly what they sound like. They replace the liquid electrolyte with a solid one. This makes for a more compact, more efficient solid battery that outperforms conventional batteries in terms of energy density and charging speed.

The potential of solid-state batteries is enormous.

With a solid-state battery, our phones could run for days on a single charge … our smartwatches could charge in seconds … and our EVs could travel thousands of miles without stopping.

That’s why some experts call solid-state batteries “forever batteries.” And that’s why these forever batteries are the key technology to accelerate the EV Revolution to the next level.

Forever Battery: The Impossible Just Became Possible
While solid-state batteries have long been a pipe dream, a group of brilliant Stanford professors and scientists partnered with tech leaders to get funding from top-notch venture capitalists. Together, in 2010, they founded QuantumScape (QS) and set out to revolutionize the battery industry.

Thirteen years later, they have achieved the impossible: a solid-state battery that actually works.
Click to expand...

Cheap, high capacity, and fast: New aluminum battery tech promises it all


There's a classic irony with new technology, that adopters are forced to limit themselves to two of the three things everyone wants: fast, cheap, and good. When the tech is batteries, adoption is even more challenging. Cheap and fast (charging) still matter, but "good" can mean different things, such as light weight, low volume, or long life span, depending on your needs. Still, the same sorts of trade-offs are involved. If you want really fast charging, you'll probably have to give up some capacity.

Those trade-offs keep research into alternate battery chemistries going despite the massive lead lithium has in terms of technology and manufacturing capabilities—there's still the hope that some other chemistry could provide a big drop in price or a big boost in some measure of performance.

Today, a paper is being published that appears to offer a low price combined with a big boost in several of those measures. The aluminum-sulfur batteries it describes offer low-priced raw materials, competitive size, and more capacity per weight than lithium-ion—with the big plus of fully charging cells in far less than a minute. ...
Click to expand...

Superbatteries will transform the performance of EVs


Asked what they most want from an electric car, many motorists would list three things: a long driving range, a short charging time and a price competitive with a similarly equipped vehicle that has an internal-combustion engine. To help with those goals, carmakers have been looking for ways to replace the traditional lithium-ion (Li-ion) batteries that power most modern electric vehicles (evs) with more advanced “solid-state” versions. These new types of superbatteries have long promised faster charging and much greater driving range. Finally, after years of technical problems, efforts to make them are coming to fruition, with the first solid-state Li-ion batteries due to go into production within the next few years.

Toyota, the world’s biggest carmaker, began looking at solid-state batteries in 2012. Over the years it has even intended to show off working prototypes, although little has appeared. The firm recently announced it had made a “technological breakthrough”, however, with plans to start manufacturing a solid-state battery as early as 2027. Toyota claims its new battery will provide an ev with a range of around 1,200km (746 miles), which is about twice that of many existing models, and can be recharged in around ten minutes....
Click to expand...
 
Last edited:
1701887941161-png.1448218
 
Lionfish said:
1701887941161-png.1448218
Click to expand...
^^^ In derp land the above passes as bsmart when it is not.

Yes currently power grids CAN struggle during heat extremes and cold extremes and other such events.

That is, in large part due to climate change

Getting away from gas cars, and improving the grid is part of the process of addressing the bigger issue instead of just kicking it down the road, and increasing our reliance on fossil fuels so the biggest push in the world is not always to set new records for drilling oil, so everyone can applaud the new high levels.
 
QP! said:
^^^ In derp land the above passes as bsmart when it is not.

Yes currently power grids CAN struggle during heat extremes and cold extremes and other such events.

That is, in large part due to climate change

Getting away from gas cars, and improving the grid is part of the process of addressing the bigger issue instead of just kicking it down the road, and increasing our reliance on fossil fuels so the biggest push in the world is not always to set new records for drilling oil, so everyone can applaud the new high levels.
Click to expand...

Derp, derp, dertp!

406780435_10159769395503016_1435999304864916801_n.jpg



Try and be smarter.
 
QP! said:
^^^ In derp land the above passes as bsmart when it is not.

Yes currently power grids CAN struggle during heat extremes and cold extremes and other such events.

That is, in large part due to climate change

Getting away from gas cars, and improving the grid is part of the process of addressing the bigger issue instead of just kicking it down the road, and increasing our reliance on fossil fuels so the biggest push in the world is not always to set new records for drilling oil, so everyone can applaud the new high levels.
Click to expand...

The MAGA morons think all EV owners are going to plug in their EVs every day all the time.

Yeah, the MAGA morons ain't too smart.
Of course, Donald Trump got them to swallow The Big Lie so there's no bottom to their ignorance and gullibility.
 
ptif219 said:
They can't charge as many as they can fuel. As always these green nuts are getting ahead of themselves before they have the infrastructure ready. A million trucks would overload the infrastructure
Click to expand...

Yes they are getting over their ski tips. That usually results in a crash.
 
And Joe Crapitalist craps his panties.


Electric truck stops will need as much power as a small town


Next month, Tesla plans to deliver the first of its electric Semi trucks — able to haul a full 40 ton-load some 500 miles on a single charge. These massive batteries-on-wheels may accelerate the transition to electrified transport, but those responsible for delivering the power are starting to ask: Are we ready for this?

Probably not, according to a sweeping new study of highway charging requirements conducted by utility company National Grid. Researchers found that by 2030, electrifying a typical highway gas station will require as much power as a professional sports stadium — and that’s mostly just for electrified passenger vehicles. As more electric trucks hit the road, the projected power needs for a big truck stop by 2035 will equal that of a small town.
Click to expand...
 
QP! said:
^^^ In derp land the above passes as bsmart when it is not.

Yes currently power grids CAN struggle during heat extremes and cold extremes and other such events.

That is, in large part due to climate change

Getting away from gas cars, and improving the grid is part of the process of addressing the bigger issue instead of just kicking it down the road, and increasing our reliance on fossil fuels so the biggest push in the world is not always to set new records for drilling oil, so everyone can applaud the new high levels.
Click to expand...

But, the Left is wrecking the grid not strengthening it by demanding the use of massive amounts of solar and wind. At the same time, they're tearing down dams (hydroelectric), ending coal use, discouraging natural gas if not outright banning it, and demanding nuclear power plants be shut down...
 
T. A. Gardner said:
But, the Left is wrecking the grid not strengthening it by demanding the use of massive amounts of solar and wind. At the same time, they're tearing down dams (hydroelectric), ending coal use, discouraging natural gas if not outright banning it, and demanding nuclear power plants be shut down...
Click to expand...

The problem you have is that the argument that 'solar and wind and other renewables... wreck the grid' is one of the stupidest BS right derp talking points, you are repeating.
 
T. A. Gardner said:
But, the Left is wrecking the grid not strengthening it by demanding the use of massive amounts of solar and wind. At the same time, they're tearing down dams (hydroelectric), ending coal use, discouraging natural gas if not outright banning it, and demanding nuclear power plants be shut down...
Click to expand...

Bullseye!
 
Lionfish said:
7cs-35oyaw_t3-jpg.1448727
Click to expand...
^^^
Legion trusts the UAE CEO of the one of the world's largest oil corporation over American NASA scientists. Ergo, more proof Legion is anti-American. Sad.

https://www.cnn.com/2023/01/12/world/cop28-uae-sultan-al-jaber-president-climate-intl/index.html
UAE appoints oil company boss as president of the COP28 climate conference, alarming climate groups
The United Arab Emirates has appointed the head of one of the world’s largest oil producers to preside over the UN’s COP28 climate summit, in a move activists warned could undermine this year’s global conference.

Sultan Al Jaber, CEO of the Abu Dhabi National Oil Company, will oversee COP28, which takes place from November 30 in Dubai.
 
T. A. Gardner said:
It's class D not C. It isn't an electrical fire but rather one of burning metal and rare earths that spontaneously combust in the presence of water.
Click to expand...

No. It is a class C fire. An electrical fire. It is not a class D fire at all. You are thinking of Lithium metal batteries, which are not rechargeable. If THOSE burn, THEY are a class D fire. Li-ion batteries do not burn as a class C fire. A single battery is a class A fire. It burns rapidly, like a firework, but water will put it out.

A battery pack in an EV has no fusing. If it starts on fire, other batteries not yet on fire still produce power. The end result is a class C fire (electrical fire).
It will remain a class C fire until the battery pack is fully involved, at which point it reverts to a class A fire.

This is why firemen use water for these cars, and a LOT OF IT. At first the water just shorts out more batteries, expanding the fire. Once all cells are involved, the water starts putting out the fire in earnest.
CO2 is better against class C fires, but firemen aren't interested in saving the car. They are interested in keeping the fire localized to the car.

One of the biggest problems with EV fires is how easily they spread to surrounding objects like other cars, the charging station itself, a home, a ship, etc.
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top