Shit, if they run windows on whatever car uses these it could be a real adventure…will it crash when you lose wifi, or just explode randomly? ANYONES GUESS!
The Ford Fukit, new EV for $1000, just sign these waivers and sign up for this power steering subscription. The braking fee will be automatically applied per month based on use. GOOD LUCK!
Honestly, if a product last forever I wouldn’t mind it on a subscription model. The company needs to make money in order to, at the minimum, continue supporting the product.
Then comes the costs of support staff, R&D for future product developments, etc etc.
That price should not include massive yearly bonuses for the top execs.
It’s a battery. You put it in the car, and it powers it. How much support does the manufacturer need to provide that can’t be baked into the initial cost?
gestures around Products as a service in general isn’t needed, but it’s done anyways. Single player games don’t need to be always-online and subscription-based. Same with movies. Same with cars. But in the world we live in, everything is becoming X-as-a-service. In this case, it wouldn’t surprise me a bit if they purposely built in a chip that would disable or otherwise limit the battery unless the purchaser client continued paying the subscription fee.
I take solace in knowing that they can build all the luxury bunkers they want, but they will one day come to realize they are their tombs, protecting them from the world and species they damned, including for any of their muh legacy nepo babies huddled underground with them, for a couple million years.
I’d appreciate if people just like you would stop taking any solace and tolerating this bs. The ONLY reason this shit continues to happen is because too many people do nothing. Then when asked they get defensive and say, “What am I supposed to do?!” followed by “What are you doing?!” Like guys, you’re smart enough to recognize the perils of these industries, read journals and papers, and internalize the evidence, and you can’t fucking do a quick Google search on activism and even lightly contemplate entering yourself into local politics?
I was part of Occupy, and it was mostly the fellow peasants being hurt from this system laughing us off the street. I made phone calls for Bernie’s primaries.
I still vote the least non-progressive out of harm reduction, and will vote for Harris, as I would have for Biden’s corpse, just as I did voting for his corpse the last cycle, and Clinton before when not many showed up. But I no longer have hope. That’s just so I can look myself in the mirror and say I did the right thing in the face of madness.
Good on you if you have hope, rage against the dying of that light. I’ve seen too much to believe that the nobility of the human spirit will prevail.
I was taught a lesson when I was younger that you cannot compare your trauma to that of another. I also learned that it isn’t rage which defines progress, it is determination. Apathy, a loss of hope, quells the spirit and stunts progress. Those not on the Right are especially individualistic. We cater to the spirit of independence, while also celebrating love and community, though always as individuals to individuals. It’s not “I” or “Myself” that makes the change. The shift happens when we step up together and change sets in when there is a united, achievable goal.
In near every recent movement the Left has been a part of with the exception of Bernie, there has been nothing that was clearly defined and clearly achievable. Just a bunch of angry people loosely pointing fingers. FeelTheBern DID work and imagine how things may have been different not if Bernie had been elected, but if we with our strength of spirit continued down a united path. Bernie’s ENTIRE message was never about getting him elected, it was always about us coming together and being active as one.
I’m sad that so many people seem to have forgotten that.
I hear you about the long arm of history, and I might even agree, but not just our society, our species was put on notice we are risking the habitability of our only shared, sole habitat in the medium term a century ago. Now it’s here, it’s accelerating, we are feeling amuse bouche of our reverse terraforming project, scientists are finding new runaway effects their conservative estimates didn’t account for, and still humanity collectively shrugs because we can’t disrupt our global economy short term even to literally have a future for our species. We, the US, are among the leaders in the world in terms of accelerating that destruction.
I likely would have more of an attitude of not for us, for our children if that weren’t the case. But physics doesn’t care that we are the slow learners and selfish fucks. I hold the shame and guilt in my heart for my son’s likely hellish future that I really can do nothing about short of becoming an ecoterrorist which for the record I’m not planning on becoming.
Time is no longer a luxury humanity possesses. We needed to take drastic, draconian, lifestyle altering changes decades ago, and we still aren’t willing to entertain such things today, with shattered heat and earliest cat 5 hurricane ever records.
Exactly why “we” is important. People are struggling and it’s difficult to consider the world when your own life is falling apart.
Unfortunately I don’t have a true solution to this beyond the need for a real leader to step up. Well…there is another solution, though I’d rather not speak of it for fear of ending up on a list. It’s also not one I support. Still, I feel strongly that we can find our way.
At the very least I’m not just going to roll over.
Yeah, but humans are not very effective at organising humans to act in their best interests in a coordinated and logical manner. I feel that this will be even more of a challenge post-collapse. Some bunkers may get caulked. Most will get left alone.
This is true but coal mining is just as bad and requires orders of magnitude (mineral fuels) more excavation than all of the other minerals combined. If we can stop mining coal by using renewables the total amount of mining will be a fraction of what it currently is. Plus many of the other minerals can be reused where coal just ends up as carbon in the atmosphere.
This is exactly it. Of course battery production is harmful too, but not only is it less harmful than other sources to extract, you also don’t have to burn batteries to generate the power. With fossil fuels, the extraction is massively more harmful and then the use itself creates even more pollution.
Trees are actually a green, renewable fuel (if humanity used them that way). The carbon dioxide released is that which was sequestered during the tree’s life.
But oil is gathering material that accrued over vast amounts of time, and using that, dumping huge volumes of co2 directly onto the air. There’s no cycle happening there - just pure extraction for our extinction.
Just take a look where most of these rare raw material resources exist and note what attitude these countries have to the environmental cause. Zero, none. Russia, China, Africa www.dw.com/en/…/a-57148375 I bet they won’t mind destroying whole local ecosystem just to get extra bucks Europe needs
You’re missing the big picture. Firstly because they’re reducing the cobalt requirements in batteries which will massively help. Also long-term lithium and cobalt are metals, they are found all over the place. Oil and coal are products that require life and as far as we know Earth is the only planet in the solar system to have organics like that.
But we can mine asteroids for materials to build batteries. Long before that we’ll have automation to mine the materials on Earth does not requiring human labor. Long-Term this is an improvement it isn’t a zero-sum gain at all like you’re making out
I mean, not so very long-term (like, now) there’s also sodium-ion prussian blue batteries. That’s some damned good tech right there, and it’s at the beginning of its development arc - there’s a lot of room for improvement, and it’s already good.
You really sound desperate to reject any possibility that hard work and human ingenuity can solve problems. I assume it’s because you’re scared of feeling you have to actually take life seriously and consider the implications of each choice you make.
I reject the possibility that exploration of workers isn’t going to be a part of this “human ingenuity”. Enjoy your electric cars all you like, but don’t pretend nobody was exploited in the making of it.
They can do that with a lot of them, but not all. You can’t really sell an oil platform when nobody is buying oil anymore. The “stranded assets” is a huge motivator for fossil industries to prolong the switch to renewables as long as possible. Problem is the governments being complicit. They could have made clear paths from when on no new fossil investments were allowed to create a proper phase out.
How are they going to convert their assets in that scenario? The value of oil will just go down from here on out, eventually it’ll reach a point where it starts going back up again because it’ll be such a hard to acquire commodity for the few people that want it.
Eventually we’ll get to a point where the only people who use oil are rich people who can afford to run vintage cars and presumably pay some kind of carbon offset tax.
And even for vintage cars and stuff, I assume we’ll see better eco friendly and bio fuels being created that could be made in smaller batches without needing to use conventional oil as the fuel. Starting to see more and more of this on aviation already, and even some old warbirds have done recent tests on these fuels and run really well.
Yeah the US Airforce tested all their planes even the stealth bomber on a SAF that can be made from sequestered carbon, they said it passed all tests and that it would be a great way to be fuel independent, they’re especially interested as it seems to look possible to fit carbon capture and processing in a small enough package to fit in an aircraft carrier. Even if manned planes aren’t as useful in future conflicts we’ll likely see drones that use jet fuel replace them.
“initial” could very well be the key word here. Same goes with any new technology, including the relatively outdated Chevy Bolt design (which was pretty expensive at launch and is now a dime a dozen)
The weight matters too. EVs are notoriously heavy.
This is a regular argument against EVs but its a weak argument in the real world application in the USA at least.
The most popular EV by sales in the USA is the Tesla Model Y with a curb weight of about 4200 lbs.
The most popular vehicle in the USA is (and has been for quite awhile) the Ford F150 Pickup which a curb weight of 4400lbs.
Yes, many of those F150 trucks are used in commercial or heavy duty applications legitimately, However, many are not. The F150 outsold the Tesla model Y by more than 50%. Why is the argument of curb weight only leveled against EVs, the recent addition to the roads, and not giant pickup trucks and SUVs that regularly weigh much more?
Personally I like small, lightweight cars because they’re fun to drive and somewhat efficient. Obviously the f150 doesn’t light my fire in that regard, but the model Y isn’t exactly a nimble little thing either. Between weight and annoying tech (screens and driver assist mostly), I’m honestly not interested in modern cars at all
Solid state batteries are more energy dense, meaning that if all you want is 300 miles of range on a charge (perfectly fine with it’s faster charging), then you can have less battery for the same range. Now how much lighter I’m not sure, but it’s in the right direction!
Am I the only one who thinks this is complete overkill? 49/52 weeks a year, I never use more than 15% of my battery on any given day. I don’t need 600 miles of range, heck, 400 with a nine minute charge would be incredible. Basically drive 4-5 hours then stop for a bathroom break or bite to eat then keep going.
Am I the only one who thinks this is complete overkill?
You might be the only one that thinks this is overkill.
49/52 weeks a year, I never use more than 15% of my battery on any given day. I don’t need 600 miles of range
Then this doesn’t sound like you fit the use case, which is fine of course, but there are many that do.
Delivery drivers that may have to go to far places without consistent EV charging
Winter battery penalty. That 600 miles may be 400ish in extreme cold which many people on the planet live in for at least part of the year.
Heavy loads vehicles. The 600 mile number is used for the basis of comparison to today’s passenger sedan EVs. When putting these in heavy trucks, that 600 mile number may be cut down to 300 or even 200 miles, which opened up new avenues for EV heavy goods deliveries.
600 miles of range is amazing, plus you have to realize that it doesn’t always keep that 600 mile range. Also most people don’t charge their battery to a 100%, for longevity they only charge up to 80% for the health of the battery
That’s the main thing holding EVs back in general, in my opinion. That, and the price of EVs. Batteries will get better with time, chargers will get faster. But if there aren’t enough fast chargers all over the place like petrol stations, then the adoption of EVs will be too slow for prices to drop significantly until ICE vehicles aren’t supposed to be produced anymore.
Also, I hope the electronics industry really gets their shit together in terms of recycling and sustainability.
Because carrying a 2-ton metal box around you for every single trip you want to do is the least efficient possible way of doing so. Walk places, ride bikes, take trains, minimize car trips and promote carsharing for the occasional trips where cars are actually necessary.
56% of humans live in cities, and this is increasing over time. It’s cool that you’re the exception who lives kilometers away from the nearest store (poor planning in your village though), but the reality is that by proper city-planning and good public transit investment, most people wouldn’t even need to have cars at all.
I don’t live in a city, I live outside of one- they don’t block off the land around here and say you can’t live on it. I’m not interested in living in a city- I have a couple of acres, gardens, old oak trees towering all around giving me shade, I’m near a lake where I can go boating, I have space for my camper and garden tools. I’ve lived in apartments and townhouses, and when you live right next to work, then yeah, walking across the street to your job is great, but if you want something more than 1000sqft for your family and dog- you find yourself outside a city.
On the flip though, I can work from home so I drive a lot less than many, and our groceries are delivered so there are efficiencies gained by a single vehicle delivering to multiple homes instead of each making a trip.
And furthermore, I have enough space to put in a large solar array which I’m currently looking into. If I ever get an electric car, I’ll be able to charge completely off grid with green power. All of that is tougher crammed in a high density urban environment where you’re at the mercy of infrastructure out of your control.
Please tell us how environmentally friendly bringing infrastructure like internet, roads, electricity, water or garbage disposal to low-population density areas is, and how resource-efficient single family houses are. Go off living your happiest life, mate, just don’t preach about the sustainability of it when your eco-footprint is twice that of a city dweller.
As advice: for solar panels to charge an EV, you’re gonna need a fuckton of them. An EV battery is easily 50kWh, which means a 10kW solar installation producing full energy for 5 hours (assuming perfect efficiency on conversion). So be ready to buy a lot of panels.
Well I’m on well water, and I live near Amazon data centers so power was already close by at large scale. I have a septic system, so there’s no sewage lines. Internet is fiber, also already here because of Amazon and it runs on common telco lines that have been there 100 years and uses almost no power for transmission. As for solar, whole home solar arrays are common in my area, I could probably fit 30-50 panels on the sun side.
I’m not arguing that it’s more sustainable, just that endless population growth crammed into mega cities isn’t a great solution either- I think smaller communities with some measure of independence is probably more sustainable than city sized archologies with people crammed in coffins- that’s no way to live. With fewer people the slices of pie can be bigger. Cities use an unbelievable amount of concrete for infrastructure which is a huge pollutant and a finite resource due to the limited supply of special sand required.
There’s no easy solution- I’m just saying for many, it’s not as simple as just taking a bike. I feel like reducing heavy industry and global population and making Chinese trash products illegal would have a far greater impact on global sustainability, as those things use orders of magnitude more energy and resources than every country dweller’s cars combined. And don’t get me started on energy hungry crypto and AI farms- they use more power than the bottom 10 countries combined.
Industry has done a great PR campaign making people feel guilty and personally responsible while generating billions of tons of plastic bottles, bags, and packages which are 90% not recyclable regardless of the blue bins. Small changes at industrial scale would have far greater impact- like switching back to glass bottles or waste fiber bags. Not to say we shouldn’t each do our part, but we as individuals carry an unfair share of the blame for problems largely created by unregulated profit driven enterprises.
Well I’m on well water, and I live near Amazon data centers so power was already close by at large scale. I have a septic system, so there’s no sewage lines. Internet is fiber, also already here because of Amazon and it runs on common telco lines that have been there 100 years and uses almost no power for transmission. As for solar, whole home solar arrays are common in my area, I could probably fit 30-50 panels on the sun side.
I’m not arguing that it’s more sustainable, just that endless population growth crammed into mega cities isn’t a great solution either- I think smaller communities with some measure of independence is probably more sustainable than city sized archologies with people crammed in coffins- that’s no way to live. With fewer people the slices of pie can be bigger. Cities use an unbelievable amount of concrete for infrastructure which is a huge pollutant and a finite resource due to the limited supply of special sand required.
There’s no easy solution- I’m just saying for many, it’s not as simple as just taking a bike. I feel like reducing heavy industry and global population and making Chinese trash products illegal would have a far greater impact on global sustainability, as those things use orders of magnitude more energy and resources than every country dweller’s cars combined. And don’t get me started on energy hungry crypto and AI farms- they use more power than the bottom 10 countries combined.
Industry has done a great PR campaign making people feel guilty and personally responsible while generating billions of tons of plastic bottles, bags, and packages which are 90% not recyclable regardless of the blue bins. Small changes at industrial scale would have far greater impact- like switching back to glass bottles or waste fiber bags. Not to say we shouldn’t each do our part, but we as individuals carry an unfair share of the blame for problems largely created by unregulated profit driven enterprises.
I’ve been saying electric cars are never going to catch in until they can keep up with gas on affordability and how far you can go. This is how you compete with gas!
We literally can’t all switch to electric right now so that’s not a problem 😉 but yeah, if I do try to imagine it, I imagine a world where most people charge their cars at home or at work, so the only problem to solve is upping the charging capacity along certain long distance tourist routes. But we can build lots of lovely high speed rail to help decongest those routes 😋
Keep in mind gas stations wouldn’t have the same day-to-day demand that they do now. Most people will charge overnight, and the long-haul charge points or tourist destinations would be where things clog up.
95% of charging would be done at home, since I get tons of energy from the sun. I have a feeling many other people would be doing the same. Highway stations are a different story though.
Most people on long-term road trips time their stops with meals anyway. If this became a reality, and charging infrastructure got directly built in to parking spaces at rest stops, then they can probably tolerate a 15 minute wait ti charge while they eat lunch.
That’s such a capitalist way of thinking. “The daycare down the street is never going to compete with ABC Baby Slaughter as long as their rates are higher!”
I swear I read about how some companies have managed to come up with some break through to charge or increase battery capacity every few months, yet these are never make it to market.
i thought they’re already at “triple cold² fusion++” ;-)
yet these are never make it to market.
my personal favorite (but not a battery) were two different fake news about fans without any moving parts, one with electricity, conductors and shapes only, the other using ultrasonic somehow, how cool were these lies !!!
“RSD5 is the culmination of six years of research by Dan Schlitz and Vishal Singhal of Thorrn Micro Technologies”
“Six years of research”, such a cool “product” and now that linked thorrn domain is for sale, how bad!! the world will never profit from their super “cool” invention !!!
“today” other bladeless fans (based on ultrasonic freqs) were anounced: linustechtips.com/…/1471374-not-a-big-fan-new-sol…(“Frore is expecting to start shipping units in Q1 of next year.” which was news from 2022) but did you hear about that cool product beeing shipped yet? i would have, i’m somehow sure, but somehow i didn’t. maybe the “units” they wanted to ship were just something else *lol That article also says: “Frore Systems hasn’t announced any actual computers featuring its Airjet solid-state coolers. But the company is already in partnership with the likes of Intel […]” no actual result, but already partners like intel (intel, how does’nt that already fit !!)
The same nonexisting effect (fan without moving parts), abused (at least) twice. (i’ll just ignore those “bladeless fans” here that officially just have hidden “propellers”) but military says “twice” is already a scheme…
why should it be different for batteries?
if they produce batteries THAT good, they would never sell them but make them available only for rent, to maximise their(!) ROI (and not yours). so i guess it’s yafn - yet another fake news. i might still be wrong however, but i also like to be on the safe side of predictions ;-)
a theory: the richies offsprings startups desperately need other lies than their parents and grandparents who already used up nearly all language-allowed possible lies (as well as nonverbal lies, just watch tv for a while to see it in action) to distract people, companies and govs to ‘invest’ in them instead of i.e. in the future or in the nation, thus new nonexistant technologies is what the richies offspring found best to be their lies about.
But: Battery capacity, charging and discharging speed, price has dramatically moved in the last 20 years.
So while it’s easy to disregard revolutions, evolution has most definitely occurred. And many of them are fuelled by what gets hailed as a revolution and then, quietly, sneaks into the current production processes and makes it to market.
And just think, all of it is some kind of thing we found in the ground, punched slapped and burned the shit out of to varying degrees, and made it DO THINGS!
SCIENCE things!
With so many various teams involved with every step of the project, from planning to construction to operation, I wonder if any one person truly understands all of how each piece works to do the things they do.
You cannot convince me science and technology aren’t just magic by any other name.
You bring up the question of whether it’s the rocks that think or the math that thinks using the rocks… What are we when we think? (meaty bags of mostly water propped up on calcium sticks that makes it’s own lightning to think?)
interestingengineering.com
Oldest