Large Tesla Battery

2oldman wrote:

agesilaus wrote:
But we cannot expect economic good sense from the people who think this is anything but stupid.

Does that mean stupid in the sense of making bigger batteries, or stupid in trying to fight GCC, or just currently stupid economically?

Pretty much all three. Batteries would make sense for a user who Is not connected to the electric grid Perhaps someone in an isolated location who has solar panels but needs night time power.

As for GCC there is zero evidence that this exists, strong proof can be seen from the fact that the warmists refuse to debate scientists who insist on proof with their theories. Also Mann has fought (the warmist leader) for 6 years in courts to prevent his actual data from being published. He just lost in a Canadian court and we will see what can be seen. This despite the the fact that his research was paided for by the public.

The EPA is about to launch a red vs blue team debate. Scientists from each side will be assigned to one or the other teams. A team will post a question for the other team to answer and vice versa. All of this will be public on the net. Once and for all we will see what each side presents as evidence to support their theorys. For some odd reason the warmistas are howling like banshees over this plan.

And yes none of these alternative power sources make any economic sense. If they did they would not require massive government subsidies to keep them going.

Keep on betting on those buggy whips. Prior to Ford, cars were stupid. Fossil fuels will not always be plentiful and affordable.

Ductape wrote:
Keep on betting on those buggy whips. Prior to Ford, cars were stupid. Fossil fuels will not always be plentiful and affordable.

The peak oil story rolled over and died about 10 years or more ago. You should get out more. And if you really were worried about this you'd be supporting nuclear which is the ONLY zero polluting source of base power.

agesilaus wrote:
As for GCC there is zero evidence that this exists,

Yeah. That's what I thought this was about. The anger suggests it.

There is enough wind and enough sun on the Baja California peninsula to power the USA state via a DC transmission line 10 times over.

But I digress.

Doubling or trebling of a home's insulation R value is where it's at.

Think of it this way. A 250 mile range car with a 10 versus 20 gallon gas tank requirement.

There is ALWAYS ALWAYS ALWAYS a minimum 10% energy loss within a battery

NEVER MIND the conversion loss to translate energy into and out from a battery.

Batteries have their place no question. But is a HEMONGOHELLATIOUS battery in Australia going to forward progress? Make the concept more affordable. More comprehensible?

No. It is a publicity stunt.

And sorry. Hydroelectric is the at's cass.

BUT! Insanity defined is no quest to fulfill rapid transit. San Francisco's BART is a perfect example. it is ONE TENTH of what is needed capacity and range wise and parking needs a ONE THOUSAND PERCENT increase. Mass transit rejected. Yes by folks who do not have it. Take a look at what exists not read hypothetical surveys. Existing services are clogged to the point of embarrassment.

There is no need for a large city to have 1000,0000,000,00,0000 cars idling at 3 mph on arterial roads. There is NO NEED to have a 2,000 square foot house to squeeze a Delta T temperature of 20F and consume 1,500 kWh of power monthly doing it.

I think it's quite well understood that GCC does in fact exist, just as it has for billions of years. The bigger argument is whether mankind's activities have significantly contributed to speeding up the current warming cycle.

"During the last 2 billion years the Earth's climate has alternated between a frigid "Ice House", like today's world, and a steaming "Hot House", like the world of the dinosaurs."

"This chart shows how global climate has changed through time."

PALEOMAP Project

a giant mega UPS, connect to a wind farm
its said "to help alleviate" emg power problems

its not there as the only power source, but to help existing power when there are heat waves, and storms, maybe ? keep things from browning out, overloading, burning up ?

only time will tell how well it all works out
this is Not going to replace a power plant that goes down,
but maybe supply power for minutes until another one is routed onto that grid to replace what is missing

Dutch_12078 wrote:
The bigger argument is whether mankind's activities have significantly contributed to speeding up the current warming cycle.

I honestly don't know why it's an argument at all.

Why are people so ready to take on climate science as if it's some kind of vast conspiracy? If it's an agenda you're looking for, it's a whole lot easier to envision one from the gas and oil industry.

water tower for electricity.

All they intend to do is supplement power. That is what I do--but on a much smaller scale.

I love my load support and autoformer. The two combined with a battery bank allow me to run my roof air on a single 15 amp circuit.

I deliberately clamp the circuit to 12 amps (1320 watts @ 110 volts), so as not to blow the shore power breaker. Load support, when the air conditioner is on draws up to 520 watts (observed).

I'm currently drawing 1920 watts running the roof air, fridge (335 watts), fan, and laptop. Voltage is 110 so I'm using 17.45 amps. Duty cycle on the roof air is 50%. When the roof air is off, the batteries recharge.

The other option is a campground which is $35 per night. When I am there the autoformer is essential to prevent low voltage from damaging my RV.