Agreed Paul, but these percentages still show how far individual states have already moved toward meeting their own energy demand with renewables.Quote:
Originally Posted by Bushmiller
Cheers
Yvan
Printable View
Agreed Paul, but these percentages still show how far individual states have already moved toward meeting their own energy demand with renewables.Quote:
Originally Posted by Bushmiller
Cheers
Yvan
There are also major safety issues with military nuclear submarines: how do you defend yourself against one?Quote:
Originally Posted by Bushmiller
Let us consider a very unlikely scenario. A hostile nuclear sub surfaces off Pinchgut Island in Sydney Harbour and uses its torpedoes to leisurely take out most of the Australian Navy, all neatly lined up a Garden Island and, for good measure, a cruise ship at Circular Quay. Simultaneously its deck guns and rockets are firing at selected targets around the city. Sitting ducks.
Coincidentally, a squadron of fully armed RAAF F35 Lightnings are flying overhead. Do they attack the sub?
Is it a good idea to blow the bejesus out of a nuclear reactor in the middle of a city of 5 million souls? How far upwind does a nuclear ship have to be before you can neutrallise it?
That is indeed a very unlikely scanario, as you pointed out. There are many ways for a nuclear submarine to attempt the mission you described without either surfacing or coming into Australian Waters. That might be a good plot for a movie.Quote:
Originally Posted by GraemeCook
Hmmm... The sub thing is a little bit off topic, but let's run with it for a brief moment, despite the fact it is starting to be reminiscent of a Geoffrey Robertson hypothetical. Graeme's point, I think, is similar to the dilemma of whether to shoot a man in front of you who has just removed the pin from a hand grenade. Is it going to end well for you? The blast from a nuclear explosion has three rings of devastation. The first is where everything is vapourised, moving away from the blast centre the second ring sees everything annihilated and the last is where the radiation effects total you about a week later!
However, a submarine is not a bomb as such, but exposure of the nuclear core would result in a meltdown and the extensive release of heat and of course the insidious subsequent radiation. A similar situation to the Chernobyl and Fukushima catastrophes, albeit on a slightly smaller scale, although admittedly without the immediate means of containing the contamination: Or would the ocean quench the heat emitted merely (sic) leaving a contaminated sea and beach for quite a long time?
Regards
Paul
Just by chance I heard a repeat of an ABC Radio National broadcast from Monday. Click on the link below and go to Rear Vision programme: The AUKUS subs and the nuclear waste we've never stored:
ABC Search
Quite enlightening! Lots of information presented in a non-dramatic manner. I took a couple of aspects from the programe in particular. Firstly, the subs use high level enrichment fuel (weapons grade). power station enrichment of uranium is 4% to 7%: Weapons grade is greater than 97%. Secondly, no country in the world has yet stored high level nuclear waste long term successfully. Thirdly, (yea, I said a couple :rolleyes:) nobody wants a waste facility in the backyard in Oz so that means putting any such facility in remote regions and the indigenous population says "No!" It seems they are much aggrieved since the British attempted to blow them up at several locations including Maralinga. Fourthly, we have agreed to dispose of our own atomic waste (not much option I suspect). Fifthly, there are costs regarding regulation, safety and other aspects that are not included in the current cost blowout.
Regards
Paul
All the other generators are really hanging out for liddle's closure. I think there is going to be some dollars to be madeQuote:
Originally Posted by GraemeCook
Are they the Subs from "Fantastic Voyage"?Quote:
Originally Posted by woodPixel
CATL unveils battery that may power electric airplanes and 1000km-range EVs - ABC News
I particularly like:
"Battery design has been likened to a gold rush..."
Just about to post this.Quote:
Originally Posted by FenceFurniture
Invest in Lithium? :question::question:
the biggest sentance i took away from that article
Quote:
Unfortunately, the company has not released many other details, including what this battery would cost, how many times it can be recharged, or how much power it can produce (how fast the stored energy can be used).
Yeah. That's what you'd expect from someone who either is full of BS or has a game changing tech on their hands.Quote:
Originally Posted by havabeer69
Something I did get from that article is that there may be room for a couple of different types of battery in a given vehicle. One that is quick to recharge, but low on other qualities, and another for long driving. Perhaps there's even room to remove one battery suite for short commutes and replace it for longer journeys. *At least until the "ultimate" battery is invented, which may be a little while yet.
Another thing that occurred to me wrt to small planes is that 3 : 1 ratio they were talking about for take off : cruising. Surely a ground based battery (of whatever type is appropriate) could be employed to fling the planes into the air in the same way Navy Jets are flung off Aircraft Carriers. (you know, big hook, rubber bands, and scooped take-off pads)
FFQuote:
Originally Posted by FenceFurniture
Might well be possible, but I am not sure how the average passenger would cope. My impression is that most people go into freak out mode with a spot of turbulence. Imagine how they woul go being propelled into the air instead of eased.
:)
Regards
Paul
On the subject of development, have a look at this:
Gmail
Looks pretty flashy, but it is light on detail again where it counts as opposed to glossy blurb. What does it cost? Doesn't look remotely cheap with solar tracking, high wind safety detection and fold away sophistication. It doesn't explain how it provides power on cloudy days and at night.
Well it doesn't have to be flung with the urgency of a fighter jet off a carrier – that WOULD be a bit much! :DQuote:
Originally Posted by Bushmiller
You just reminded me of a flight I took from Melbourne-Sydney many years ago during (one of) the pilot's strikes. Probably Ansett. The government of the day were using RAAF planes to fill the gap, but also some chartered planes and crews from a US airline (South West?).
I swear the US pilot must have flown from carriers before going into commercial aviation. He stood on the brakes while winding the engines right up, then off the brakes to send us rocketing down the runway - prompting some slightly alarmed faces amongst the generally conservative local flying clientele. The landing gear came up almost as soon as the wheels were off the ground, and then he cranked it into the steepest climb out I've ever experienced. Sitting back in the seat like an astronaut, I wasn't sure whether we were going to Sydney or the moon.....:oo:
Some months later I found myself in an office elevator somewhere in the CBD with the head of the pilots union (in uniform) who had stirred up the strike - I recognised him from TV - who by then was out of a job along with a large number of other pilots (that the airlines wanted to downsize anyway). I couldn't resist saying "That went well, didn't it?" as he got out of the elevator :D
There is some very informed information about this on the Airbus website.Quote:
Originally Posted by FenceFurniture
https://www.airbus.com/en/innovation...lectric-flight
Ther time line, simplified, is basically:
- In 2010, tiny single seater electric with two ducted fan motors on the rear fusilage. It looks like a mini Lear jet.
- Then they converted it to a two seater. It had a top speed of 150 knots and a range of 100 miles at 100 knots.
- Then they took out most of the batteries and put a conventional moter powering a battery charger in the fusilage. This extended the range to 1,000 miles. Apparently 1 kg aviation fuel holds the same energy as 15-20 kgs Li-Ion batteries.
- Plane would take off almost silently on batteries, then they would start the IC motor, less than half the size needed for take off. They only needed 20 minutes of battery power for take off and landing (in case they had to do a go around).
- Planes are very inefficient taxiing on the ground, so they added an electric motor to the front wheel. This may make it to full size airbusses.
- Then, in conjunction with Rolls Royce, they replaced one motor on a BAE146 (like Ansett used to use) with an electric motor. It flew successfully.
- Then, in conjunction with Rolls Royce, they did a feasibility study to convert an Airbus 380, the real big one, to fully electric power. They concluded there was a very limitted maket for A380's with only a 1,000 km range.
- Airbus is now on a watching brief pending the next generation of batteries. Weight is still the big issue.
I dont know, I'd pay a bit more for such an extra :)Quote:
Originally Posted by FenceFurniture
I've certainly had my fair share of spooky landings. One flight into Melbourne during a typhoon had the plane "landing" 45 deg to the runway :) It was pretty spectacular. Much to everyones enjoyment the pilot did describe the up-coming fun :)
FF, I also had the same thoughts as you about 3:1 take offs. Considering they are talking about commercial planes, its seems to me they could use a regular engine for takeoff only, or use a booster battery pack that jettisons.
I saw a thing where they do this "kind" of thing in Rwanda, the batteries plug in in sockets - its really amazing:
Drones Have Transformed Blood Delivery in Rwanda | WIRED
https://youtu.be/jEbRVNxL44c
Fascinating! I doubt you'd sign up for 1-100kph in 0.3 seconds though. The PHEV Ferrari Supercar does it in 2.5 seconds, and that'd be scary enough.Quote:
Originally Posted by woodPixel
We had an extended power cut yesterday well into the evening due to high winds dropping trees onto powerlines. First time I've had the opportunity to try the V2L feature of my Atto 3 EV - plug the supplied lead into the car charging port, run extension lead into house, voila. It can supply up to 2kW @240V, so enough to run TV, a few lamps, fridge, etc. Made me wish I had a way to isolate house supply from the mains to simplify cabling. With a fully charged 60kWh battery in the car, we could easily go a week without mains power.
You can see how close we are to V2G; using the car battery for permanent home storage battery.
Yair, you'd be a mug to buy a Tesla house battery, or any other kind of house battery.Quote:
Originally Posted by Mr Brush
Apparently people are already ratting the battery packs out of written off EVs (of all brands) to use as very high capacity house batteries. BYD state that the lithium iron phosphate battery (LiFePO 4 battery) in Atto 3 is designed to be shoehorned into an enclosure for use as a house battery when it has reached end of life for the car (maybe degraded to 80% of original capacity - but that's still 50kWh for home use vs the 14kWh of Tesla wall battery). Trouble is the BYD Blade battery is expected to last for over 1 million km in the car, so I may not be around to see that !! Also, at the current (sic) rate of battery chemistry development, it's pretty safe to say that any existing technology will be obsolete in a few years anyway.
Best get driving then.
Ok, so I have a question about batteries:
A Tesla Powerwall 2 is $14,000 installed, and they are 13.5kWh or 13,500Wh, so about 1$ per Wh.
Mr B's Atto 3 has a 60kWh battery and the whole bloody car only costs $48,000+ (and the + doesn't affect the battery size).
Let's say it costs $20,000 to replace the battery in the car. That's about 33c per Wh to purchase a battery that goes into a difficult shape of a vehicle, not a nice neat rectangular box.
W.T.F?
That's useful Chris. Do I want to give China my money or Elon Musk? That's actually a tough choice. :~
However, it doesn't address 33c/Wh vs $1/Wh. He talks about "if you have enough money you can have 57.9kWh of BYD batteries" but Mr B already has that...AND he can drive them around. :D
Good video - I learned a bit. As the man said, Tesla just stuck car battery technology in a box on the side of your house. There was always a question mark over the fact that the payback period was about the same as the warranty, which didn't inspire confidence. The BYD LFP battery was one of the main reasons I chose Atto 3 car; it's cheaper, safer, and far more forgiving of charging routine (quite happy being charged to 100%, and almost completely discharged, without any damage - not the case for Tesla). Significantly, Tesla are already using BYD LFP batteries in some of their models. This just illustrates the rate of change in battery technologies; I think BYD are going to release the first car with sodium ion battery shortly.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vgVOcOYWNgg
Sad fact is, no matter how fast I drive, I'm sure there will be better batteries available within 2-3 years before I rack up 1 million km......lol. Higher capacity, faster charging rates, lower cost. It's a moveable feast. :D I also think V2G will be a reality in 2-3 years (already exists in the UK), which will REALLY shake up the electricity market. Give me 10kW of solar on the roof plus a 70-80kWh battery in my EV, also connected to the house, and they can stick their grid (and "supply charges") where the sun don't shine.
Nice pun - I hope it was intentional. :2tsup: :DQuote:
Originally Posted by Mr Brush
Err, wouldn't that be completely counter-productive? :DQuote:
Originally Posted by Mr Brush
If that means Vehicle to Garage, like V2H (Vehicle to Home) then that's supposed to be happening here this year, with a bunch of models being released. O'course, it may be delayed...Quote:
Originally Posted by Mr Brush
It's worse than that - I'm told the cost to replace the 60kWh LFP Blade battery in BYD is ~$15000. Which makes Tesla Powerwall look even more of a rip off. Anyone who installs a Tesla Powerwall now is basically buying a much earlier battery technology, which is already out of date, for an exhorbitant price. But....clearly some people don't mind paying through the nose to get a pretty shiny box with a TESLA logo on it :rolleyes:Quote:
Originally Posted by FenceFurniture
I remember the first time I saw a Tesla car at a show many years ago, and asked the obvious question..."Ummmm, why can't I use the car battery to power my house?"
Don't worry, we'll get there. This is bigger than Elon.......
V2G = vehicle to grid, one step further. All the big juicy car batteries form part of a local micro grid for power storage, shared amongst several homes. I can imagine the power utilities fighting this to the death.:oo:Quote:
Originally Posted by FenceFurniture
I was extremely surprised by the price of the BYD ATTO 3.
Just looked it up. Not too bloody shabby at all.
I'm used to big horsepower guzeleine engines, but I've drive a mates Tesla and it was a rocket. 150kw isn't the same as a petrol, they seem to have a flat power curve.... its maximum power from the first rev. A 100M and 250M in / sec would be a far better indicator of "power". (e.g my ancient HSV has 300KW and 600NM of torque, but it cannot be compared)
EVs are the absolute future. V2G is the absolute future.
Im seriously envious of people being able to buy these things.
Quiet, fast, economical, sexy-looking and NO STINK.
I can rapidly see a day where my dinosaur will be taxed out of existence.
There is a $3k rebate on EVs in NSW, which took the price of long range Atto 3 down to about $46000 on the road. I believe EV rebate is now $6k in Qld. Real world range is 350-400km per charge, and I charge exclusively from home solar (better to put the sun juice into the car for free motoring than back into the grid at the crappy feed in tariff we get now). People have recorded 0-100km/h times of around the low 7 seconds for Atto 3 in Sport mode; it does restrict power slightly off the line to prevent wheelspin from the huge instant torque, but once rolling the throttle response is excellent. More than enough performance for an old codger like me :D.
It was time to get rid of my 9 year old ICE car which had 150,000km on the clock, and I figured I would undoubtedly be driving an EV at some time in the next 5 years, so no point in getting another ICE vehicle. Might as well get in now and get used to the experience of living with an EV.
Side note:- I was surprised how hard it was to sell a MANUAL ICE car - the number of people who can drive stick has fallen off a cliff !!
A mate of mine drives big V8s, and I took him for a drive in Atto 3 when I first got it. He insisted on popping the hood to take a look; the expression on his face was priceless. "But......there's nothing in there, nothing to tinker with !"
Quote:
Originally Posted by FenceFurniture
wouldn't it be a TON easier to just have have an umbilical cable that is connected to the mains power which detaches from the plane just as the wheels leave the ground. then you just roll it back up and connect it to the next plane.
Sell it while you canQuote:
Originally Posted by woodPixel
Evsorry, EV. The bum is going to drop out the price REALLY soon.
Clearly you haven't been a passenger with Mr B driving.... :DQuote:
Originally Posted by woodPixel
Nah. They just won't be produced, and the market will dictate the price of petrol (astronomical within 5 years or so I reckon, due to declining demand)Quote:
Originally Posted by woodPixel
Yes, good move. ANd while you may have missed benefits in upcoming rebates, you'll have gotten a better price for the ICE than you will any time from now on.Quote:
Originally Posted by Mr Brush
In my opinion we are right at the turning point/threshold. Anyone buying a new ICE vehicle now is crackers. I was just discussing this with my partner yesterday. She wants another car in about 1-2 years, which will clearly be an EV. I need a newer vehicle any old time but because I do such ridiculously low kms (1000-2500 per year) an ICE car that has been tragically devalued will suit me just fine for a few years. Running costs are not really an issue for me. I spend more on repairs for my 23 yo ute than I do on petrol!
The ICE (internal combustion engine) has a few failings: How to get sufficient air into the motor is one, which is why supercharging and turbo charging have become popular in recent times, but the fundamental hiccup is the power delivery. The ICE has to build up engine revs and maximum power is not delivered until that happens. An electric motor has, for all practical purposes, almost instantaneous maximum power. This is why the EVs are so fast off the mark. Any drag racer will point out that it is more important to develop early speed than a high terminal velocity.
There are countless videos on You Tube of Teslas smashing muscle cars down the ¼mile strip. However, make that a ½mile strip and the result may be a little different. EVs have been upsetting the ICE for years. The Tesla is also helped by having all wheel drive.
Look up the White Zombie on You Tube for an EV doing the same demolition of muscle cars more than ten years ago. It was a street legal Datsun 120 converted to electric. He started with NiCad batteries and then went to Li when they became available.
Regards
Paul
Roaring along in a muscle car, and getting passed by a silent Datsun 120Y, would be enough to make anyone turn to religion :D
As soon as home storage technologies, vehicle to home, vehicle to micro grid, etc. really start to kick in (and we've barely started yet) the smaller number of people left dependent on grid power are each going to have to pay a bigger share of the costs to keep grid distribution networks running.
Our current house (rebuilt just 3 years ago after the bushfires) has all the energy efficiency features we could reasonably incorporate at the time - double-glazed throughout, very well insulated, passive solar design, solar system on roof (although I wish I'd gone for larger), heat pump hot water service, EV charger running off solar. However, even just this short period later, there are a few things I'd do differently if rebuilding now; MUCH more solar generation, induction rather than (bottled) gas cooktop (how quickly gas has gone out of fashion?), house wiring arranged to allow easy isolation from the grid to allow for V2H from EV to name but a few. The rate of change is accelerating very fast.
Induction is incredible.Quote:
Originally Posted by Mr Brush
I read a recent article on the BBC that all the top chefs have (essentially) switched to induction.
Solar, its modular! Whack more on! :)
On change, its occuring FAST now... REAL FAST.
oooooooo... I wouldnt be TOO sure of that!Quote:
Originally Posted by Mr Brush
I've been watching the scene for a few months and the Lightning-Rod crowd are getting sseerriioouuss power and acceleration upgrades out of their EVs after market.
I watched one dude who EV'd an old Beetle and its is so crazy powerful that he had to strengthen the motor housings directly to the transmission and put on a little set of wheelie-bars :) ITS SO COOL!!!
I think there will be a HUGE industry in converting cars to EV.
.... and if we want to see wild, this chap was busted for doing 100 kph on his scooter recently. If some rando can manage do it, every kid is doing it :) .... Canberra man who rode e-scooter at 100kph before trying to flee police sentenced to one month in jail - ABC News
Watch the speed with which he pulls away from the cops. ZZIINNGG.....