This specific model appears to be a split system that has an external unit to extract the heat from the outside air.
30,994 karma · joined March 23, 2009
And therefore we should invest some time and money now so that it is ready in a few decades.
The switch from an ICE car to an EV (and assuming a standard US amount of driving) probably beats possible diet changes.
You can of course do all of these things.
Their off peak prices have generally been overnight, ideal for truck charging, though they have started having them around noon too like many other nations with growing solar share. Great for a mid shift top-up.
Coal is worse to burn than gasoline, but a car engine throws 80 percent of that away so you have to burn more compared with an efficient EV.
This has all been debated to death for over a decade, MIT has interactive tools to calculate figures, there's really no excuse for not knowing this about a subject you are so passionate about.
Australia used similar tech to make the most of baseload coal overnight since the 1950s.
It's just a good idea, and should be used to get cheaper cleaner power in grids today too.
Grid Battery seemed to mostly survive but not sure if there's as much crossover there as with EVs.
It makes more of both as the Chinese grid gets cleaner.
Similar to the classic anti-recycling contrarian article in the 90s that argued that washing in warm water heated via coal generated electricity caused pollution. But didn't dwell on any ideas to remove coal from the wider electricity system, or introduce heat pumps, because that wasn't "contrarian".
You can cut the gordian knot in the current case by using a tote made of recycled cotton (and/or plastic).
He is after all at this moment talking on Twitter about how he regularly tells people who say they are Jewish that they aren't Jewish and if they don't have DNA tests to prove it he doesn't believe them.
Back to USAID: Musk, a prominent US defence contractor also gave as one of his reasons to cut USAID that it was a front organisation for the American Intellegence community.
So just before a big war he threw a curveball at long running intelligence operations. In his own, public, on-the-record comments. The same man who provides Grok AI to the Pentagon for use on classified info.
He also, when challenged about the deaths, claimed that he hadn't cut any funding for that stuff and that it was all still done by a different department so there was "zero deaths".
Which is a lie, but if you believe his lie, then a) he didn't save any money b) unless you count the stuff that was really the American Intellegence operations.
On the other hand if you don't believe his lie then all the dweebs online defending all the deaths as worth it to cut the deficit are defending a man who doesn't even bother to make that same argument.
Like at one point it spends a whole paragraph on how landfills are better than just spreading trash around randomly.
Is there someone out there seriously arguing that developing nations should just recycle and entirely skip modern landfills?
Are they implicitly arguing that the US has a developing nation level of civic infrastructure?
In the end though the actual paper concludes that, yes, EVs are the main solution here and then suggests making them out of low carbon steel and recycling them to get a little extra benefit.
Probably still far too kind to hydrogen and e-fuels, but they don't seem to push it too hard.
Possibly a rearguard action if they realize BEVs have won and just trying to slow it slightly with nitpicks? Or is that too paranoid.
But it's not a sane world. It's a world where the US doesn't even pretend to stick to the spirit or letter of deals that it makes. And so dealing with the US is pointless whether you are their oldest and closest ally or a nation currently at war with them.
You can't even rely on their own national self interest, you'd need to know exactly which billionaire has the ear of the president for the entire span of your agreement.
I notice several problems with this book title in hindsight.
Part of the magic is that they can absorb or return exactly as much as is required much much faster than any other tech.
Is there a shallow peak during the hours around noon? Or a shallow nadir? Or a few random spikes in demand? Does that change day to day or season to season? Batteries can handle all of that with ease.
Same for delivery after the sun sets. Part of the reason they get rolled out so quickly is that the jagged expensive peak can be matched exactly.
They also do the same on a micro scale to keep the grid locked in sync. Again faster than any rival tech.
The diagram even shows one blip at exactly the point in the day when batteries fast response is most valuable. Bit of a misfire from the usually excellent Ember team.
It roughly matches the shape of the American datacenter issue where an uptick in demand that is small compared with the level of extra demand required for EVs and heat pumps and industrial electrification to decarbonise the economy has apparently caused massive problems.
And also the Australian experience where the grid companies would rather curtail solar than sell it cheaply (often because the same companies profit from evening gas prices).
You are then forced to conclude that there was simply no coherent plan for electrification. Decades of planning time utterly squandered.
Probably spent arguing about whether climate change was real.
Never high enough for self sufficiency without major changes that the people close to the money spigot delayed for decades to line their own pockets.
Another resource curse.
You seem to be suggesting this happened for reasons other than extracting and selling all the oil and gas that was there, while also stalling on any domestic moves to burn less fuel, leading to the obvious imbalance.
Even the oil industry when they show graphs of what they describe as "unrealistic" options which involve massive cuts in taxation are only tiny speed bumps on the way to exhausting the reserves.
Meanwhile a single round of wind turbine auctions will save far more gas than that. And be a "green transition".
You can ventilate a little less when you're generating less pollution in the home.
Some ventilation is still a good idea though.
The are diminishing returns to going full vegan from a greenhouse gas standpoint, beef and cheese are the big ones.
In general individual choices don't matter but helping kick of a cultural trend does. It's the same wierd logic as voting, no individual vote counts but voting matters.
Techies should really be leading the way on installing solar, heat pumps, induction hobs and EVs and in fact often are.
Many of the big estimates of death rates in say 2100 combine the air pollution of continuing to use coal and combustion engines with heat and climate effects.
The good news is that we have cheaper, better, cleaner options for the vast majority of that fuel burn today and they continue to get better, cheaper and cleaner. There's a clear shift in the market, it just takes time to work it's way through.
But if your kid has asthma today then that is probably doing more damage to them than climate change.
Of course, to state the obvious, both problems have the same solution. Stop burning fossil fuels.
They're a large, mostly well-behaved grid load which lets you spread fixed costs over more units of electricity.
The problems start when they are being built by well connected entities that can leverage their power to simply demand that other people pay more to give them a discount.
Very similar to the shopping around factories do. Usually a factory brings jobs and other good stuff, but you don't get the factory unless you do X, Y and Z in competition with all the other possible locations. That can lead to a winners curse where you're effectively subsidizing the factory and losing out overall if you "win" the auction.