• 0 Posts
  • 98 Comments
Joined 8 months ago
cake
Cake day: August 18th, 2024

help-circle
  • For low travel areas slower charging and batteries make a lot more sense as the investment in ultra fast charging is not viable and I don’t see that changing

    I think regulatory inertia Is always going to be a problem but if we are regularly adding charging stations it will get faster as power companies have an incentive to build them and you get staff trained up on them

    Gas stations can still have single point failures for example if their underground tank gets contaminated or damaged and they don’t have a back up and electric doesn’t need to have single point failures you can run them in parallel with breakers able to isolate portions of the system and have redundant transformers

    EV works best if most people charge at home/work and people only charge in public if they don’t have the ability to do it at home or they are on a long drive. So you don’t need to meet the same cars per hour as gas stations.

    I don’t see a world where fast charging is as cheap as slower charging just due to increased losses and more expensive equipment so I believe having 10 500kw chargers would be a better investment than 6 1MW chargers even though technically the MW chargers have a larger throughput they are more expensive to produce/run and have more issues if for example 8 people arrive at once



  • It doesn’t need to be, high voltage transmission lines can run 1000s of MW then you can use a transformer to step the voltage to what you need and then use a rectifier bridge to convert to DC.

    The problem I see is the effect of trying to turn on and off 1MW power from a grid could cause problems so the battery could work a bit as an expansion tank to smooth out grid power, so that you always charge it at 100KW and if you need to increase supply you can slowly increase your power draw without shocking the grid.

    At the end of the day I personally think 1MW charging is overkill and a 10 minute charge time is a perfectly reasonable goal


  • BussyCat@lemmy.worldtomemes@lemmy.worldVery warm
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    2
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    1 day ago

    The argument the person was saying is that we already have big bombs that do catastrophic damage, the R&D is how do you make those bombs more targeted so they have less collateral damage.

    Now whether that will actually lead to less deaths or will just cause the bombs to be used in places they otherwise wouldn’t be used with the same amount of collateral damage is unknown.

    But it brings up a bit of a utilitarian dilemma of “is it ethical to work on weapons if it leads to an overall reduction of collateral damage to civilians”

    It doesn’t have a necessarily correct answer



  • The person who processes it is on leave. Shouldn’t people be able to take time off work and not have to think about work while they have time off?

    Ideally that department would have an extra employee so the HR rep can go on leave without affecting others. The negative is literally just getting paid not to work which isn’t really a negative and from the taxpayer perspective it’s cheaper to pay a person for a few days that they aren’t working than to have a position that remains underutilized the majority of the time.



  • Nobody is being forced to do work… do you know what life was like as a slave and are just being incredibly tone deaf or do you not understand what slave labor actually is.

    When you have an oversight position you have to ensure there are no conflicts of interest the simplest method is to say you can’t work for another company while employed in that oversight position. The federal government tries to be even more accommodating and says you can even work at another company as long as you clear it with an ethics office. You are required to sign an employment contract where you agree to those terms if you want the original position.

    In order to be free from that contract you need to process a form. It’s really not the most ridiculous thing to ask from people in charge of oversight to have just the slightest anti corruption protections that cause the minor inconvenience of getting paid money to not work…

    This also wouldn’t even be a problem if the HR department was properly staffed instead of being recklessly cut as now they can’t handle a single employee taking leave which they are 100% entitled to




  • Until the resignation is processed they are an employee hence the paycheck. It’s an anti corruption regulation otherwise a person could get a job at a pharma company and on their last day at the fda try and push a bunch of approvals through. That type of corruption is reserved for members of congress, president, Supreme Court, and of course the special government employee







  • https://www.bbc.com/news/articles/cly22wdedqeo

    When asked about the Tates at the White House on Thursday, President Trump said: “I know nothing about that.”

    But the brothers have been the subject of recent high-level discussions between the US and Romania.

    Romanian officials say US counterparts brought up the brothers’ case with the Romanian government earlier this month, a story first reported by the Financial Times.

    And Trump special envoy Richard Grenell [raised the issue again at a security conference in Munich.

    Hurezeanu said the Tates were mentioned during that conversation, but denied being pressured to release the pair.