I’ve come to realize that many a tech company are ran by morons.

Which is basically the same problem with green transportation: A car is usually lightly used, but every once in a while you drive hundreds of miles. That requires a high capacity energy storage mechanism where “efficiency” is not that big of a concern. But that creates the need for hydrogen cars. At best, you can conceive of a plug-in hybrid car where short trips are battery powered. But then you have redundant infrastructure, and it is simpler to just to move everyone to hydrogen.

Hydrogen is guaranteed to win this one. Batteries are just another unsustainable greenwashing idea. People are falling prey to BEV propaganda.

You’re missing the part about time. There is nothing that can be done in time to stop the problem. We’ve already tried everything that could actually work in a short amount of time. Geoengineering is the only thing left.

The rest of your argument is a strawman argument. There’s nothing to defend there.

Then you are simply not aware of the situation. We have “tried everything else.” It has basically failed already. There is no chance we can stop emissions in the timeframe desired. Geoengineering is already the only possibility.

That’s USB4 v2.0, not USB4. It’s not the same thing.

And what are the consequences of failing to deal with climate change? At some point, the option becomes unavoidable.

People need to start accepting the necessity of geoengineering. Net zero by 2050 is a pure fantasy.

UE5 is nowhere near ready if Aveum is anything to go by. Let’s hope UE5 gets way better or it will spell disaster for a lot of companies.

It’s really time to move to 48V instead of 12V. These things are demanding too much power.

Flying cars are literally just helicopters. People need to be aware of what is being proposed here.

Kbin is about 3 months old whereas Lemmy is about 3 years old. Kbin simply wasn’t ready for growth, and still has a few major feature shortfalls. Lack of API access is a big one.

I literally said natural gas…

Because electricity is traditionally sent very short distances. It’s too bad that this is going away. Your renewable energy resource may be thousands of miles away in the future.

PS: It was a pipeline that sent natural gas to your local gas turbine power plant. If electricity losses was always going to be 5%, why did that pipeline exist at all?

A huge number of structures have gas piped in. Not sure what you’re even arguing here.

You’re completing making shit up and none of your arguments are even relevant to the conversation. Fuck off with your Ludditism.

You are still missing the point then. You cannot use that electricity. It is going to be curtailed electricity and is basically lost in the production process.

Taking that unusable electricity making something out of it will drive the cost of hydrogen to basically zero. This is the fundamental reason why solar also became so cheap, despite PVs being “inefficient.” You’re simply taking something free and making something useful out of it.

Like I said from the beginning, you are just repeating the same anti-wind and anti-solar arguments of the past. You can insist that you didn’t actually say that or claim that this is somehow different, but none of that is meaningful. It is just closed-minded nonsense regardless.

How about you actually read my link? I clearly stated that at long-distances, HVAC become inefficient and therefore costly. Your link is not comparing them to pipelines.

You are misdirecting. You are effective saying that green hydrogen can never be as cheap as fossil-fuel based hydrogen, which is an absurd argument and is basically climate doomerism.

What you are fundamentally missing is the fact that this does not require limited resources. It’s all made from stuff that is available everywhere. It is literally just combining wind, sunlight and water together to create a fuel that can nearly directly replace natural gas. These are basically infinite resources with basically infinite supply. The cost floor is zero because of that. It is exactly the same argument as wind or solar.

In fact, you are repeating the exact same anti-PV argument that fossil fuel people made: That the EROI of solar panels is permanently poor, or that efficiency is simply too low. Which in their minds meant it will never be cost effective. But they never noticed the fact that sunlight is an effectively infinite resource with a cost floor of zero. As a result it simply didn’t matter what advantages fossil fuels had. A solar panel can just churn out energy at nearly zero cost, and ultimate that is what happened. Same thing with wind too. And anything that is just an extension of that idea will also have a cost floor of zero. As a result, it is merely a matter of when green hydrogen drops to nearly zero cost. Alternatives will not be able to beat that and therefore they will be displaced by it.

You’re just engaging in more obfuscation. 8x and 11x are pretty close to being 10x cheaper. It is sufficient for physicists or engineers to just say it is 10x as a first-order approximation.

AC suffers from more losses at long distances. It is also quite expensive. Both HVAC and HVDC are more expensive than pipelines: https://www.apga.org.au/sites/default/files/uploaded-content/field_f_content_file/pipelines_vs_powerlines_-_a_summary.pdf

You cannot fudge your way around the facts. If HVAC was really that much cheaper, there would never be HVDC connections in the first place.