I'm sorry, are they also going after the gender affirming shapewear that cis women and cis men wear?

Even if we just had some extra, not even super high efficiency, natural gas plants that sat idle 95% of the year, that'd be fine with me.

See, and here I was thinking clippy. Course, that might just be a generational thing

People are already kinda pissed when they only get to see a PA instead of an MD.

Ikr, I read it and was very confused that Stephen Miller wrote it... And then I realized he meant that it was somehow a bad thing

Something like 50% efficiency for diesel. Things like methane and hydrogen are much less practical for vehicles

You have to factor in the efficiency of converting electricity to diesel

Converting energy to fuel and then burning it results in some 80% efficiency losses. There's a lot of room for alternative architectures.

Once electrification of transport crushes the demand for gasoline and diesel, the other sectors will collapse

The whole petroleum industry is a house of cards. The only reason natural gas is so cheap is that it's a byproduct of fracking. The only reason bunker fuel is so cheap is it's an otherwise unusable byproduct of refining.

I'm not well versed enough in nuclear and we still don't know what a viable fusion design looks like, but being 50 miles off shore offers huge advantages. Who knows, maybe the first application of space based power will be beaming to container ships

Is Branson really high up on that list, or just any reaction to him was fair already

I'm confused, your issue is with the number it's engines to replace? We have to replace all the engines out here regardless of whether we electrify because all engines have a finite life time

Right now even SMRs are a few billion, but primarily because they are new. If produced in large numbers, the costs can go way down. There are also creative solutions too, like nuclear tugs that supply power to several ships in a train out at deep sea.

They might be made cheaply, but they spend about 100k/day on fuel. Over 10 years that's in the hundreds of millions of dollars range.

So now you're demanding a better BEV have thousands of miles of range before it can be useful? I'm not sure what you are getting at here

I can go out today and buy an electric car that has more range than my gas car. What further radical improvement are you demanding?

Because they've been completely impractical for the vast majority of that history.

I really think as we go down the electrification path, we'll find in most cases fuels and combustion engines are just more trouble and cost than they are worth.

There's a specific law about preventing people from being and to worship, that's why they concentrate on everyone leaving. They would have a very tough selective prosecution hill to climb before they could even get to trial though.

Maybe if fusion ends up being affordable one day. I can imagine a world where nuclear powered mega ships remain in the open ocean and exchange cargo with smaller battery powered ships 50 or 100 miles from port. It doesn't sound feasible though.

"hard" and "probably forever" are very different things. As electrification takes hold, the cost of distribution of fuels for remaining sectors is going to go up, especially for more remote areas. At the same time, solar and battery is going to continue to come down.

Shipping, trucking, farming and construction are great opportunities for electrification. Open ocean ships are another matter, but again, compared to the total number of vehicles, they are a very small percentage.

Very strong disagree there. A huge number might, but an overall small percentage, primarily aircraft.

I'm very excited about a future where we can use such fuels as long term energy storage. So long as we're pulling out of the ground it of course doesn't make sense to make the stuff while we are still pulling it up out of the ground.

I mean, honestly, a few thousand commercial operations being under construction would seem like a normal thing. That number might actually be really low. What matters is how it compares to 1 year ago.

I'm not sure how it could be any other way. The amount of carbon they sink when you grow them is the carbon you get back when you burn them..... But they require energy to transport and refine...so....

Maybe they should add a rule allowing congresspeople to inspect detention centers at will,I think that would go a long way. Hold on, I'm being told something....

"be a timekeeping superhero, enter your time daily"

And the agents who executed him in the street know. What the hell is this, "well I guess truth is unknowable' bullshit sidestepping.