I thought Ford was done with a small EV pickup? [⚠️ ADMIN WARNING: NO POLITICS]

[Snox801]

Except your post is not real(ality).

One "brown out" affecting 1% of the population for 30 minutes in 2006.

One "brown out" affecting 1% of the population for 30 minutes in 2020.

Not good at fact checking are you?

They do say "be prepared" for them, but they rarely RARELY occur.
Less often than tornados, hurricanes, blizzards.


Have fun in your bunker.

Could you post where that came from? I will admit I’m wrong but seemed California would not have even a brown out of it wasn’t based on renewable.
I’m not saying it’s the worst but why? We have nuclear that is clean and makes more power than we can use.

Sponsored

 

[Snox801]

The massive failure of the grid in Texas had nothing to do with renewables, the plants themselves failed as they were not equipped for that weather. Neither was the grid. Since then Texas has gonevery big on wind. They're the largest wind powered state in the United States. The failures of the grid in California have nothing to do with solar or wind power and everything to do with too much regulation, forest fires taking out transmission lines and transmission lines starting fires. You're arguing for hydro, but a lack of hydro is one of the problems they had in California. They didn't have a lack of sun. They also have a lot of people who don't want to spend any money fixing up infrastructure like the grid or building anything near where they live. Renewables make the grid more robust as every rooftop with solar is a power generator and many homes now have battery backup to go with their solar. I know one guy who can run his house for almost 3 days when the power is out just on his batteries. They charge generally during the day, obviously more when it's sunny, and he runs his house off of them overnight regularly. Regularly. This doesn't mean he doesn't pull any power from the grid ever, but think about how much less demand there is on the power plant. Utilities have also started retiring coal and installing battery storage. I forget where it was. I think Indiana they shut down a coal plant like 10 years earlier than planned because it was so much cheaper to put solar up and have battery backup. You can still have power plants If needed, they just use a lot less of whatever they burn to run. Your conserving the resources for the future. That way. They are simply engineering challenges. There is no way that a thousand years from now humans are going to be driving the same kinds of vehicles or generating electricity the same way. They didn't get it right 80 years ago for eternity. This is the same country that went from the Wright brothers to being on the moon in less than 70 years.

Again this man has some sense. I agree that it’s mainly those issues. But the 2020 outages were claimed to be by the governor from the lack of the renewables to meet demand

 

[Snox801]

Except your post is not real(ality).

One "brown out" affecting 1% of the population for 30 minutes in 2006.

One "brown out" affecting 1% of the population for 30 minutes in 2020.

Not good at fact checking are you?

They do say "be prepared" for them, but they rarely RARELY occur.
Less often than tornados, hurricanes, blizzards.


Have fun in your bunker.

Or try this. Seems a quick search shows your “brown outs to be blackouts.”
Try not not to let actual fact get in the way of your green love.
At least gonzo makes very valid points and seems to be more aligned with reality.
So maybe it not my fact checking that’s the issue. A quick fact check of yours took 3 min or less.

https://www.bloomenergy.com/bloom-energy-outage-map/

 

[Gonzo chris]

Again this man has some sense. I agree that it’s mainly those issues. But the 2020 outages were claimed to be by the governor from the lack of the renewables to meet demand

Thanks for the vote of confidence. I'll have to get you in touch with my wife lol.... But yeah he was using it politically if he said that. The outages were due to the transmission lines mostly but I didn't see his whole statement. He might have been neglecting to put the blame there but possibly making the point I was that having a high percentage of individual houses generating some, all or even more power than they need makes the grid more resilient. That's why a lot of farmers and ranchers in Texas are going wind. I haven't spent a lot of time out in there but I imagine it is quite windy. Being able to generate their own power with turbines they own and maintain and storing it on their own property makes them less dependent on the grid and it also, besides being more environmental, goes hand in hand with their likely desire for more "rugged individualism"

 

[Gonzo chris]

No, the sun is based on "fusion" technology. Nuclear is "fission" based.....completely different processes.

If (when) we can harness "fusion" based energy, our world will have one less problem to solve. It's coming along, with some scale already happening. This is true "planet/humanity saving" technology. It's a shame (and telling) government/media choose to mostly ignore the subject.

Thanks for the clarification, I thought I had heard some alone those lines before and was waiting to see if I would be corrected. I confess I did sleep a little bit during physics in high school due to the early hour of the class in the boring monotone voice of my teacher.

 

[Gonzo chris]

https://smartflower.com/
Personally, I think that thing is the dogs dangly bits as the Brits like to say. It's more expensive than rooftop but it generates more yield per panel, is far cooler to look at ,, and it is free-standing so you don't have to put holes in your roof.

 

[Snox801]

I’m just not sure if wind turbines and panels everywhere is a good thing. Turbines have a negative affect on animals where they are placed. And solar panels seem doomed as places like where I live are covered with snow a good part of the year. They also seem to cut down trees, crops and other living things to place “green” energy panels in place.
I’m still over here thinking the best way to go ev is gonna be nuclear. We have come so much farther in safety than back in the 3 mile island days.
Heck look at the difference in everyday safety.
Many more power plants are online and have Great track records. Let’s fire up a few more. Save our lands and have all the clean energy we could want to power our ev’s.

 

[Gonzo chris]

I’m just not sure if wind turbines and panels everywhere is a good thing. Turbines have a negative affect on animals where they are placed. And solar panels seem doomed as places like where I live are covered with snow a good part of the year. They also seem to cut down trees, crops and other living things to place “green” energy panels in place.
I’m still over here thinking the best way to go ev is gonna be nuclear. We have come so much farther in safety than back in the 3 mile island days.
Heck look at the difference in everyday safety.
Many more power plants are online and have Great track records. Let’s fire up a few more. Save our lands and have all the clean energy we could want to power our ev’s.

Nuclear has a place. I think they have also made progress with wind turbines regarding birds that are affected. I think simply different colors can change how they are affected. Most solutions have at least one problem the question is usually is it worse than the existing problem. I would imagine even though it might not be something people see than their day-to-day life fossil fuels, they're extraction, transportation, pollution etc kill far more animals and have a far more detrimental effect on human animals than solar panels. We get snow where I live but only a few times a year anymore. Depending on the angle of the roof I usually see a bit snow slide off within a day or two but it depends where you live. I imagine that solar sunflower could be programmed to rotate the panel to dump the snow. One thing I like about the idea of solar on my house although I don't have it yet is I do like the idea of free electricity once they're paid off. With current incentives rebates etc I think the payoff would be quicker.

 

[The Real Maverick]

I confess I did sleep a little bit during physics in high school due to the early hour of the class in the boring monotone voice of my teacher.

Ya don't say.

 

[Snox801]

Ya don't say.

And yet he’s still more coherent and correct than a lot of your statements.

 

[Gonzo chris]

Ya don't say.

I'll choose to take that as a good-hearted. Jab

 

[Gonzo chris]

No, the sun is based on "fusion" technology. Nuclear is "fission" based.....completely different processes.

If (when) we can harness "fusion" based energy, our world will have one less problem to solve. It's coming along, with some scale already happening. This is true "planet/humanity saving" technology. It's a shame (and telling) government/media choose to mostly ignore the subject.

https://www.energy.gov/science/doe-...eactions power the,of the two original nuclei.
That seems to say that the sun is fusion based but it is nuclear fusion

 

[Gonzo chris]

Ya don't say.

https://www.energy.gov/science/doe-...eactions power the,of the two original nuclei.

 

[dalola]

https://www.energy.gov/science/doe-explainsnuclear-fusion-reactions#:~:text=Nuclear Fusion reactions power the,of the two original nuclei.
That seems to say that the sun is fusion based but it is nuclear fusion

"Nuclear" is kind of the broad term relating to atomic principles.

In the context of current (nuclear) technology in terms of electric generation, everything currently employed at scale is fission-based. Very different process from fusion-based (nuclear), which is still mostly experimental as far as a source for electric generation. (Tho great progress is being made, with some commercial scale happening on the east coast)

Most people think fission when they hear the word nuclear, but the sun is in principle fusion-based, thus the need to clarify the two, even tho yes, they are both "nuclear" in context.

I should have been more specific in explaining this originally. My mistake, thanks for pointing it out.

 

[Gonzo chris]

"Nuclear" is kind of the broad term relating to atomic principles.

In the context of current (nuclear) technology in terms of electric generation, everything currently employed at scale is fission-based. Very different process from fusion-based (nuclear), which is still mostly experimental as far as a source for electric generation. (Tho great progress is being made, with some commercial scale happening on the east coast)

Most people think fission when they hear the word nuclear, but the sun is in principle fusion-based, thus the need to clarify the two, even tho yes, they are both "nuclear" in context.

I should have been more specific in explaining this originally. My mistake, thanks for pointing it out.

I get it , I was referring to the sun. No worries

Sponsored