Tesla to blanket the US with supercharging stations in 2 years

[Deberg_1990]

http://www.businessinsider.com/tesla-announces-supercharger-expansion-2013-5



Tesla drivers will be able to drive from Los Angeles to New York using the electric car company's Supercharger network by the end of this year, CEO Elon Musk said Wednesday night at the Wall Street Journal's D: All Things Digital Conference.

The network, which currently consists of only nine active stations, seven of which are in California, was already set to increase to 100 stations by 2015.

Instead, Tesla is planning "a dramatic acceleration of the Supercharging network," Musk said at the conference. "It'll be tripled. We'll put the map live tomorrow."

As the network expands, software in the Tesla cars automatically updates, so drivers will be routed to nearby Superchargers when necessary.

That expansion will be a tremendous boon for drivers, as the biggest problem for electric vehicles is the lack of cheap, powerful battery technology. That shortcoming keeps ranges limited, charge times long, and prices high.

Musk acknowledged the power of range anxiety in making potential customers wary of battery-powered electric cars, saying, "when people buy a car they're buying a sense of freedom that they can go wherever they want and not feel fettered."

At Superchargers, Tesla owners can charge their car batteries halfway in 30 minutes, for free. If the network really expands at the rate and density Musk promises, it will be a tremendous advantage for his customers.




Map of where supercharging stations will be located:

http://www.teslamotors.com/supercharger

[Rain Man]

So is Tesla poised to explode onto the market as a major player, or are they poised for a spectacular and highly visible collapse?

And who's the money behind Tesla? How did they get started?

['Hamas' Jenkins]

They'd be smart to build travel plazas around them so that people could stop and eat, walk a dog, etc. Great news, though.

[Rain Man]

Ah. The money is the guy who grew PayPal. Interesting.

[stonedstooge]

How long does it take to recharge one?

[CrazyPhuD]

<iframe width="420" height="315" src="http://www.youtube.com/embed/cGYNuoCigGY" frameborder="0" allowfullscreen></iframe>

[KC native]

Ah. The money is the guy who grew PayPal. Interesting.

Yea, Elon Musk is a rich motherfucker.

[Hydrae]

I saw one a Tesla on the road this morning. Pretty sweet looking but it was kind of weird to see no exhaust pipes on what looked like a sports car. I think it may be the same guy who was driving an electric Fiskar a couple months ago. Same commute coming from the same area, hard to say.

[Rasputin]

And the sign says "Long-haired freaky people need not apply"
So I put my hair up under my hat and I went in to ask him why
He said you look like a fine outstanding young man, I think you'll do
So I took off my hat, I said "Imagine that, huh, me working for you"


Signs, signs, everywhere there's signs
****in' up the scenery, breakin' my mind
Do this, don't do that, can't you read the sign

[Sweet Daddy Hate]

And the sign says "Long-haired freaky people need not apply"
So I put my hair up under my hat and I went in to ask him why
He said you look like a fine outstanding young man, I think you'll do
So I took off my hat, I said "Imagine that, huh, me working for you"


Signs, signs, everywhere there's signs
****in' up the scenery, breakin' my mind
Do this, don't do that, can't you read the sign

LMAO God I hate that band.

[ClevelandBronco]

A charging station had better not look anything remotely like Hitler. That's all I'm saying.

[Dante84]

Smartest thing they could do is to partner with a major gas station chain as the foundation is already built and all they would need to do is to outfit the existing stations with chargers.

[teedubya]

Elon Musk is a badass that I hope to one day meet.

The founder of PayPal, SpaceX and Tesla Motors.

He is a B.A.D.A.S.S.

<iframe width="853" height="480" src="http://www.youtube.com/embed/NKz8fV5p5p4" frameborder="0" allowfullscreen></iframe>

[ghak99]

How long does it take to recharge one?

It appears 30min on a supercharger gets you 200 miles but only 10-15 on regular chargers.

http://www.teslamotors.com/supercharger

[Pitt Gorilla]

Yeah, I came here to make a "signs, signs, everywhere (road) signs" joke, but already done.

[ThaVirus]

Elon Musk is a badass that I hope to one day meet.

The founder of PayPal, SpaceX and Tesla Motors.

He is a B.A.D.A.S.S.

<iframe width="853" height="480" src="http://www.youtube.com/embed/NKz8fV5p5p4" frameborder="0" allowfullscreen></iframe>

Great vid. Great fucking vid.

[teedubya]

Great vid. Great fucking vid.

Check out this one...

<iframe src="http://player.vimeo.com/video/51873011?title=0&amp;byline=0&amp;portrait=0" width="640" height="360" frameborder="0" webkitAllowFullScreen mozallowfullscreen allowFullScreen></iframe> <p><a href="http://vimeo.com/51873011">The Super Supercapacitor | Brian Golden Davis</a> from <a href="http://vimeo.com/focusf">Focus Forward Films</a> on <a href="http://vimeo.com">Vimeo</a>.</p>

[bevischief]

Good luck with that. I have major pipeline about 3 blocks away...

[Stewie]

It's amazing to me that Tesla has batteries capable of that range, yet GM can't figure out how to go more than 50 miles on a full charge.

[Mr. Laz]

Smartest thing they could do is to partner with a major gas station chain as the foundation is already built and all they would need to do is to outfit the existing stations with chargers.
yep

it will get the oil companies involved and part of the process instead of against it too

[stonedstooge]

It appears 30min on a supercharger gets you 200 miles but only 10-15 on regular chargers.

http://www.teslamotors.com/supercharger

Thanks

[PhillyChiefFan]

Great vid. Great ****ing vid.

I love technology. Elon Musk is a genius.

[EagleRob]

So is Tesla poised to explode onto the market as a major player, or are they poised for a spectacular and highly visible collapse?

And who's the money behind Tesla? How did they get started?

This reminds me of the Iridium satellite constellation. Revolutionary service heavily invested in that would bankrupt the original company and allow a secondary funder to turn a profit by buying the assets at a minimum investment. Iridium had to pay to launch 66 satellites just to reach IOC. They couldn't sell satellite based global phone service to many at $10/min so the Air Force paid something obscene like 7 cents on the dollar and still milks the system a decade later.

[EagleRob]

Can you imagine the inconvenience of being third in line for a "pump" on a sunny Saturday?

[patteeu]

Can you imagine the inconvenience of being third in line for a "pump" on a sunny Saturday?

I can't even imagine the inconvenience of being 1st in line for the "pump". 30 min pitstops to get half a "tank" is not something I'm even remotely interested in.

An electric car for local driving that could be charged over-night could have some appeal, but this network of supercharging stations does nothing for me.

[patteeu]

What they need to do instead, at least until they get the charging time down to 5 minutes or so, is have swapable batteries where you pull in and exchange your rundown battery for a fully charged one.

[mesmith31]

Check out this one...

<iframe src="http://player.vimeo.com/video/51873011?title=0&amp;byline=0&amp;portrait=0" width="640" height="360" frameborder="0" webkitAllowFullScreen mozallowfullscreen allowFullScreen></iframe> <p><a href="http://vimeo.com/51873011">The Super Supercapacitor | Brian Golden Davis</a> from <a href="http://vimeo.com/focusf">Focus Forward Films</a> on <a href="http://vimeo.com">Vimeo</a>.</p>

That was pretty damned cool. Batteries that you could throw in your compost bin when you are done....wow. If we can manage to survive long enough as a species there are some pretty amazing things coming down the pike.

[SPATCH]

Elon Musk is an American hero.

[ClevelandBronco]

Elon Musk is an American hero.

Cool car. As for the man, the government is subsidizing his every move. I don't fault him for working every angle available, but I'm not going to buy into the hero bullshit.

EDIT: Yet. I'll give him the benefit if a "yet."

[scho63]

I've seen at least 20 Teslas in the last 3-4 months around the Northern VA, Southern MD, DC area. They are beautiful cars.

If they can finally make a battery and charger that gives you 150-200 miles range in 5-7 minutes on the charger, then it's game over for gas. :thumb:

I would buy one in a heartbeat

[Fish]

What they need to do instead, at least until they get the charging time down to 5 minutes or so, is have swapable batteries where you pull in and exchange your rundown battery for a fully charged one.

The batteries weigh over 1000lbs, so that would be quite a feat....

[Bob Dole]

I can't even imagine the inconvenience of being 1st in line for the "pump". 30 min pitstops to get half a "tank" is not something I'm even remotely interested in.

An electric car for local driving that could be charged over-night could have some appeal, but this network of supercharging stations does nothing for me.

Maybe you should invest in the restaurant chain that will crop up adjacent to the charging stations...

[notorious]

"Free Recharge" my ass......

[stevieray]

LMAO God I hate that band.

remake

[Just Passin' By]

"Free Recharge" my ass......

ATMS were going to be free, too, because they were going to be saving banks money. People now paying $2 and more for ATM transactions likely had a different version of "free" in mind.

[Donger]

How is the electricity generated?

[Mr. Laz]

hope it works

[Mr. Laz]

How is the electricity generated?
just die

[notorious]

ATMS were going to be free, too, because they were going to be saving banks money. People now paying $2 and more for ATM transactions likely had a different version of "free" in mind.

True, but I was also wondering why a company would give away free energy.


Out of the kindness of their hearts? LMAO

[Donger]

just die

Pardon? I would think that should be a rather pertinent question. The vast majority of the electricity we consume isn't generated by hamster wheels and pixie dust.

[Mr. Laz]

True, but I was also wondering why a company would give away free energy.


Out of the kindness of their hearts? LMAO
well ... i assume that the free recharge would be more than made up for by a ton of people buying Tesla cars.

Then over time, if becomes the norm, the charging would start to cost

[Mr. Laz]

Pardon? I would think that should be a rather pertinent question. The vast majority of the electricity we consume isn't generated by hamster wheels and pixie dust.oh bullshit ... this is just you trying to turn this into another thread about oil. Nothing more.

die in a fire fueled by aids soak wood from an ugly tree

[Donger]

well ... i assume that the free recharge would be more than made up for by a ton of people buying Tesla cars.

Then over time, if becomes the norm, the charging would start to cost

Got to read the fine print, I guess...

How much does it cost to use the Supercharger?

Supercharging is free for the life of Model S, once the Supercharger option is enabled.

[Donger]

oh bullshit ... this is just you trying to turn this into another thread about oil. Nothing more.

die in a fire fueled by aids soak wood from an ugly tree

Not at all. I love electric vehicles. But, I also realize that very few people realize that we don't exactly have a massive surplus of electrical generation in this country.

[Just Passin' By]

True, but I was also wondering why a company would give away free energy.


Out of the kindness of their hearts? LMAO

It's just the bait on the hook.

[Mr. Laz]

Not at all. I love electric vehicles. But, I also realize that very few people realize that we don't exactly have a massive surplus of electrical generation in this country.electricity is a universal form of energy that can be produce a variety of ways. That allows for competition in it's production. Going forward the amount of renewable forms of electricity production will increase which is a good thing. It's allows for a 'ramping up' of the conversion to renewable power transportation, which is probably the only way the country would ever embrace it.

[Mr. Laz]

It's just the bait on the hook.
it is ... but it still gets us headed the right direction so who cares.

[Donger]

electricity is a universal form of energy that can be produce a variety of ways. That allows for competition in it's production. Going forward the amount of renewable forms of electricity production will increase which is a good thing. It's allows for a 'ramping up' of the conversion to renewable power transportation, which is probably the only way the country would ever embrace it.

Yes, I know. Renewable is great, but the ROI sucks (and most likely always will) compared to nuclear and fossil fuel generation. We could blanket every square inch of our country with wind and solar generation, and still not meet demand.

[Donger]

it is ... but it still gets us headed the right direction so who cares.

Right direction?

[lewdog]

Right direction?

Speaking of not right decisions, your mom made the WRONG decision by not aborting you.

[patteeu]

The batteries weigh over 1000lbs, so that would be quite a feat....

As is getting the charging time down to a reasonable time period.

[patteeu]

Maybe you should invest in the restaurant chain that will crop up adjacent to the charging stations...

It might need to be a motel.

[Mr. Laz]

Yes, I know. Renewable is great, but the ROI sucks (and most likely always will) compared to nuclear and fossil fuel generation. We could blanket every square inch of our country with wind and solar generation, and still not meet demand.
oh look ... donger pimping oil.

better yet ... fail into a big vat of oil and die by drowning

[Rausch]

I'm still not a fan of this 1/2 assed company using Tesla's name...

[saphojunkie]

oh look ... donger pimping oil.

better yet ... fail into a big vat of oil and die by drowning

But his sig is a nuclear man! I'm so confused.

[Dayze]

I doubt seriously this will ever happen. There is too much fucking money to be made off combustion engines. A niche probably. But not widespread at all

['Hamas' Jenkins]

Given that photovoltaic production has followed Moore's Law, they should be able to provide the majority of the world's energy needs within fifteen years. Supplement that with nuclear energy, wind energy, and hydrocarbons, and it seems like a wise investment to me.

[notorious]

We need to build a Dyson Sphere or GTFO.

[Just Passin' By]

it is ... but it still gets us headed the right direction so who cares.

First, anyone with a brain should care. Second, claiming that it gets us headed in the right direction is just hopeful thinking as opposed to factual speech.

[Donger]

oh look ... donger pimping oil.

better yet ... fail into a big vat of oil and die by drowning

Errr, I'm not pimping oil. Most of our electrical generation is created by burning coal and NG. And nuclear.

[LiveSteam]

I'm still not a fan of this 1/2 assed company using Tesla's name...

I myself find it SHOCKING!

[Donger]

Speaking of not right decisions, your mom made the WRONG decision by not aborting you.

That's not very nice. And rather unwarranted.

[Deberg_1990]

I'm still not a fan of this 1/2 assed company using Tesla's name...

You must have hated that 80s band then.

[Mr. Laz]

First, anyone with a brain should care. Second, claiming that it gets us headed in the right direction is just hopeful thinking as opposed to factual speech.
U.S. use 25% of the world's oil
75% of the oil we import is used for transportation

U.S. stops importing oil then the price of oil will likely take a nose dive. That means less money for countries that fund terrorism. OPEC can go fuck themselves.

so ........ yea, getting cars off oil/gas(heading that way) is the right direction. imo.

[Fire Me Boy!]

I'm holding out for a Mr. Fusion.

[Cornstock]

Elon Musk is an American hero.

Best part is he's originally from South Africa. Living the American dream.

[AustinChief]

Given that photovoltaic production has followed Moore's Law, they should be able to provide the majority of the world's energy needs within fifteen years. Supplement that with nuclear energy, wind energy, and hydrocarbons, and it seems like a wise investment to me.

Unfortunately that's not true, as much as I wish it was. PV cells have theoretical efficiency limits. It would take massive magical leaps in tech that no one has any clue about at this point for us to reach even 80%. That is just in THEORY... in real world production terms you will be lucky to see production of cells that can hit 60% in our lifetime. Of course that is a huge jump from what we have right now on the market.

So let's play with the numbers a bit... I'll give you a TRULY 50% efficient panel (which is completely made up and not likely to hit the market in any significant quantity for 20 years). Ok now let's look at how much energy is in sunlight. The best estimate for a sunny day is around 1KW/m2 per hour. So, now let's take into account the number of hours of sunlight per day average for an average American city.. about 5 hours(this varies WILDLY but mostly falls in the 4 to 6 range).

So that leaves us with a whopping 5KW/m2 per day. oops. but we need to cut that in half(50% efficiency) now we get 2.5KW/m2 per day.

Ok now let's go back to the Tesla. The average American drives 15000 miles a year. That comes out to 11 to 12 KW hours per day. So JUST to power your car you need about 5 m2 of solar panel (again, mythical super solar panels). 50 sq ft of panels just to run YOUR car.

I'm all about alternative energy and diversification... but solar is a really shitty source.

['Hamas' Jenkins]

Unfortunately that's not true, as much as I wish it was. PV cells have theoretical efficiency limits. It would take massive magical leaps in tech that no one has any clue about at this point for us to reach even 80%. That is just in THEORY... in real world production terms you will be lucky to see production of cells that can hit 60% in our lifetime. Of course that is a huge jump from what we have right now on the market.

So let's play with the numbers a bit... I'll give you a TRULY 50% efficient panel (which is completely made up and not likely to hit the market in any significant quantity for 20 years). Ok now let's look at how much energy is in sunlight. The best estimate for a sunny day is around 1KW/m2 per hour. So, now let's take into account the number of hours of sunlight per day average for an average American city.. about 5 hours(this varies WILDLY but mostly falls in the 4 to 6 range).

So that leaves us with a whopping 5KW/m2 per day. oops. but we need to cut that in half(50% efficiency) now we get 2.5KW/m2 per day.

Ok now let's go back to the Tesla. The average American drives 15000 miles a year. That comes out to 11 to 12 KW hours per day. So JUST to power your car you need about 5 m2 of solar panel (again, mythical super solar panels). 50 sq ft of panels just to run YOUR car.

I'm all about alternative energy and diversification... but solar is a really shitty source.

How efficient is the average panel right now?

[AustinChief]

How efficient is the average panel right now?

That's hard to say. It can vary by A LOT from panel to panel. But 20% is a good guess for the very very very best shiny new commercial grade panels. And we are talking super high end crazy expensive stuff to get to 20%. Your average home panel is lucky to hit 16%.

['Hamas' Jenkins]

That's hard to say. It can vary by A LOT from panel to panel. But 20% is a good guess for the very very very best shiny new commercial grade panels. And we are talking super high end crazy expensive stuff to get to 20%. Your average home panel is lucky to hit 16%.

This suggests the kind of exponential growth akin to Moore's Law:

http://www.economist.com/blogs/graphicdetail/2012/12/daily-chart-19

If I understand you correctly, you're saying that there is a theoretical limit to the efficiency of solar cells.

Now, if they are 20% efficient, does that mean that they are absorbing 20% of the incandescent energy from the sun? If so, how large of a panel would I need for a watt of energy?

[AustinChief]

This suggests the kind of exponential growth akin to Moore's Law:

http://www.economist.com/blogs/graphicdetail/2012/12/daily-chart-19

If I understand you correctly, you're saying that there is a theoretical limit to the efficiency of solar cells.

Now, if they are 20% efficient, does that mean that they are absorbing 20% of the incandescent energy from the sun? If so, how large of a panel would I need for a watt of energy?

Ahh Swanson's law, yes, I see no reason it won't remain true since it deals only in cost and not the tech aspect itself. I am not even looking at that side of things. Even if panels were super cheap they just don't provide much energy for the amount of space required and people don't consider that they have limited lifespans and other maintenance costs... but let's ignore that for now and focus on the tech.

The simple answer is that for 1 KILOWATT of energy per day(you can convert to watt if you want) you need 1 square meter of panel. Average solar energy for most cities is around 5KW per square meter per day. So at 20% efficiency you take 5 X .20 and get 1.

Now here is where it get's interesting.. let's give Teslas to the average two car family and add up their TOTAL HOUSEHOLD electrical energy usage per day. It comes out to around 60KWh per day. So you end up with 60 square meters or around 646 sq ft of solar panels to get to break even.

Learning the realities of solar panels is kinda depressing actually.

[Gadzooks]

<iframe width="420" height="315" src="http://www.youtube.com/embed/l2q_-xN2N54" frameborder="0" allowfullscreen></iframe>

['Hamas' Jenkins]

Ahh Swanson's law, yes, I see no reason it won't remain true since it deals only in cost and not the tech aspect itself. I am not even looking at that side of things. Even if panels were super cheap they just don't provide much energy for the amount of space required and people don't consider that they have limited lifespans and other maintenance costs... but let's ignore that for now and focus on the tech.

The simple answer is that for 1 KILOWATT of energy per day(you can convert to watt if you want) you need 1 square meter of panel. Average solar energy for most cities is around 5KW per square meter per day. So at 20% efficiency you take 5 X .20 and get 1.

Now here is where it get's interesting.. let's give Teslas to the average two car family and add up their TOTAL HOUSEHOLD electrical energy usage per day. It comes out to around 60KWh per day. So you end up with 60 square meters or around 646 sq ft of solar panels to get to break even.

Learning the realities of solar panels is kinda depressing actually.

30x20 of solar panels isn't that depressing. That would fit just fine on most roofs, wouldn't it?

[mesmith31]

<iframe width="560" height="315" src="http://www.youtube.com/embed/Ep4L18zOEYI" frameborder="0" allowfullscreen></iframe>

[aturnis]

I wouldn't call 100 charging stations across the entirety of the US "blanketing". Two per state, really there will be entire states with no charging stations. This is whack.

['Hamas' Jenkins]

I wouldn't call 100 charging stations across the entirety of the US "blanketing". Two per state, really there will be entire states with no charging stations. This is whack.

If the cars prove popular those stations will grow like broadband and cellular coverage.

[AustinChief]

30x20 of solar panels isn't that depressing. That would fit just fine on most roofs, wouldn't it?

Given that there is no shade and the roof is entirely slanted toward the sun... maybe. Don't get me wrong, I'm not against solar energy... but everything we are discussing doesn't take into account the install costs, the maintenance, the lifespan, etc etc

<iframe width="560" height="315" src="http://www.youtube.com/embed/Ep4L18zOEYI" frameborder="0" allowfullscreen></iframe>

Now here you have a project that understands the scope of coverage required to get the kind of power needed. It's completely impractical on many levels but it shows the massive square footage you are talking about when you look at our power requirements.

The biggest issue is a simple one... we just waste too damn much energy. That isn't likely to change much. Which is why I am a huge proponent of funding fusion research. As "impractical" as it sounds, it is actually one of the most realistic measures we can take towards safe, clean renewable energy that would exceed demand such that it would drive down costs and could theoretically bring a boatload of manufacturing back to the US. As we move more and more toward automation, energy and transport costs not labor will be the deciding factor on where a factory gets built.

[SPATCH]

I wouldn't call 100 charging stations across the entirety of the US "blanketing". Two per state, really there will be entire states with no charging stations. This is whack.

Yes this is whack, guys. I require instant gratification and do not ever think of things in a broad context and most certainly do not think in terms existing outside of my own lifespan. /america

[aturnis]

Yes this is whack, guys. I require instant gratification and do not ever think of things in a broad context and most certainly do not think in terms existing outside of my own lifespan. /america

All I said is they need to scale back the hype when they really aren't doing much. Hell, they won't even have one in every major city. KC probably won't see one.

['Hamas' Jenkins]

Given that there is no shade and the roof is entirely slanted toward the sun... maybe. Don't get me wrong, I'm not against solar energy... but everything we are discussing doesn't take into account the install costs, the maintenance, the lifespan, etc etc



Now here you have a project that understands the scope of coverage required to get the kind of power needed. It's completely impractical on many levels but it shows the massive square footage you are talking about when you look at our power requirements.

The biggest issue is a simple one... we just waste too damn much energy. That isn't likely to change much. Which is why I am a huge proponent of funding fusion research. As "impractical" as it sounds, it is actually one of the most realistic measures we can take towards safe, clean renewable energy that would exceed demand such that it would drive down costs and could theoretically bring a boatload of manufacturing back to the US. As we move more and more toward automation, energy and transport costs not labor will be the deciding factor on where a factory gets built.

What do you think it would take to initiate a self-sustaining and safe fusion reaction?

[SPATCH]

Given that there is no shade and the roof is entirely slanted toward the sun... maybe. Don't get me wrong, I'm not against solar energy... but everything we are discussing doesn't take into account the install costs, the maintenance, the lifespan, etc etc


install costs, maintenance, etc. don't scare me as much as knowingly continuing to increase our dependency on an energy source that is not renewable.

There are challenges facing green technology.. but that's exciting. I hope that advancing renewable energy will be one of the great feats that we accomplish as humans of the early 21st century.

[SPATCH]

All I said is they need to scale back the hype when they really aren't doing much. Hell, they won't even have one in every major city. KC probably won't see one.

You ever hear the phrase, "Rome wasn't built in a day"? Jesus Christ, man.

[AustinChief]

What do you think it would take to initiate a self-sustaining and safe fusion reaction?

The safe part is the easiest part. Unlike fission, a fusion reactor that has a catastrophic failure simple stops. The only "unsafe" part of it is the irradiation of any casing/shielding materials which produce a minimal amount of waste. The "Holy Grail" is to get to aneutronic fusion which eliminates that by creating a reaction whose byproduct can be converted directly to electrical energy. Think of it in terms of creating a mini sun to power solar cells. That isn't accurate but it works well enough as an analogy.

The self-sustaining part is where we have problems. The term for this is "ignition." You have two basic approaches to achieve this. I can go into details if anyone cares but let's just say the US facility working on this uses lasers and the Europeans use magnets. (Wow, that is so oversimplified it sounds stupid) At one point we were ahead of the Europeans on this but massive cutbacks in funding (thanks to both Obama and Congress) have let the Europeans jump ahead. It actually doesn't matter who "wins" the race in this both approaches have significantly advanced the science in recent years.

Ok, let's focus on the Euro project, ITER, since they are currently in the lead. (could change at any point though and I still think NIF has a more solid approach) The Euros aren't messing around. They are building an experimental reactor now and expect it to be operational by the 2030s. IF it works, they expect to produce 10 times the energy that is put into the reaction.

I can go through a litany of engineering issues that both projects are facing but the real issue is funding. We know the science works it's now down to engineering issues which can always be solved with time and money. The problem is that the scale of time and money we are talking about is pretty damn huge, but the payoff is well worth it in my mind.

[aturnis]

What's disappointing is I talked with a rep from Philips the other day, and asked about their innovations in low voltage lighting, specifically their color kinetics line. He told me they were pretty much going to completely scrap low voltage lighting. I was shocked.

The reason, the "industry" prefers line voltage. Meaning, electricians don't want to learn how to install/troubleshoot it, and don't want to lose that scope of work to low voltage techs b/c it likely wouldn't require a license. Total copout.

So they'll continue making LED lights that screw into your existing wiring and have a driver locally that fails long before the LED's will, b/c of all the wasted energy to heat, and continue selling them for $65 a pop.

Screw that. There is no reason I shouldn't be able to run a cat 5/6 to every light location and power my light with a poe or upoe switch, with a central driver hooked up to a simple APC battery backup so I don't lose lights during a power outage. Not to mention full controllability from "smart" devices.

Would make troubleshooting and upgrading much much easier in the future when more high tech systems come out. Such as light harvesting and LiFi tech(internet over light).

[aturnis]

You ever hear the phrase, "Rome wasn't built in a day"? Jesus Christ, man.

Jesus Christ man. Get it through your head. All I said was don't call it blanketing. Maybe polka dotting, or pimpling. Maybe even back acne-ing.

[AustinChief]

install costs, maintenance, etc. don't scare me as much as knowingly continuing to increase our dependency on an energy source that is not renewable.

There are challenges facing green technology.. but that's exciting. I hope that advancing renewable energy will be one of the great feats that we accomplish as humans of the early 21st century.

I agree I just look at all the limitations and think we currently have a "middle of the road" approach to things. We are looking past the short term of fossil fuels but are jumping the gun and wasting a ton of money on "solutions" that are half baked and simply CAN'T EVER truly meet our long term needs. Again, this is why I'm a "fusion guy."

[aturnis]

I agree I just look at all the limitations and think we currently have a "middle of the road" approach to things. We are looking past the short term of fossil fuels but are jumping the gun and wasting a ton of money on "solutions" that are half baked and simply CAN'T EVER truly meet our long term needs. Again, this is why I'm a "fusion guy."

You're right in saying that much of the problem is waste. A huge amount of energy can be saved by continuing to make our country more efficient.

Which is why Philips move away from low voltage lighting pisses me off. I'd like to find a good system before I build a house. Doesn't make a lot of sense to try to build energy efficient, and use antiquated lighting systems.

['Hamas' Jenkins]

I'd actually be more interested to know about the engineering challenges facing the reactors.

[HC_Chief]

That Tesla sedan is frigging sweet. I have seen several on the streets here in Cali over the past few days. I would love to have one....too bad they are $100k+

[Just Passin' By]

I agree I just look at all the limitations and think we currently have a "middle of the road" approach to things. We are looking past the short term of fossil fuels but are jumping the gun and wasting a ton of money on "solutions" that are half baked and simply CAN'T EVER truly meet our long term needs. Again, this is why I'm a "fusion guy."

Iter's not even really begun yet, and they're already years behind. Plus, even if ITER works, it's just the experiment and not going to be used as an actual power plant. We probably won't see fusion power in our lifetimes.

[AustinChief]

Iter's not even really begun yet, and they're already years behind. Plus, even if ITER works, it's just the experiment and not going to be used as an actual power plant. We probably won't see fusion power in our lifetimes.

ITER is funded and has been under construction for 3 years now. It's moving along quite nicely right now. Of course there WILL be delays, there are always are. My point is that if we keep redirecting funding to half assed "solutions" it only delays fusion further.

[Just Passin' By]

ITER is funded and has been under construction for 3 years now. It's moving along quite nicely right now. Of course there WILL be delays, there are always are. My point is that if we keep redirecting funding to half assed "solutions" it only delays fusion further.

I don't count the science buildings as part of the reactor, so I don't count that as construction. The contract for building the Tokamak Complex was just signed this March. I should have been more clear in my post, so my apologies for any confusion. As for the project itself, the completion date has already been pushed back to 2022, and that's likely just the beginning. Heck, they just recently got design approval for a reactor component, so we're really talking about a project that's not even past the drawing board stage in some ways.

Also, one of ITER's problems has been cost overruns that have resulted in other projects getting scrapped so that ITER can continue, so I'm not really sure where you're getting the notion of funding being redirected elsewhere.

One example:

ITER has been a thorn in the side of the seven partners—China, the European Union, India, Japan, Korea, Russia, and the United States—because its estimated cost has almost tripled since the final agreement was struck in 2006. This is particularly difficult for the European Union because, as host, it must foot 45% of the bill. When the full extent of the cost overruns became apparent last year, the European Union found that its funding pot for fusion research, which runs to the end of 2013, was short by €1.3 billion. An agreement was made to use unspent funds in the 2010 E.U. budget to pay for the shortfall, but that deal fell victim to the politicking surrounding the E.U.'s 2011 budget.

Now the three statutory bodies of the European Union have agreed to cobble together €360 million from anticipated unspent funds in the still-to-be-decided 2013 budget. Another €840 million will be found by shifting money from 2012 and 2013 budget lines for farm and fishing subsidies, rural development, and environment, into the ones covering research. The remaining €100 million had already been allocated to ITER in the 2012 budget.

http://news.sciencemag.org/scienceinsider/2011/12/europe-finds-13-billion-needed.html

Are you talking about it strictly here in the USA, even though the USA is funding part of ITER?

[AustinChief]

I'd actually be more interested to know about the engineering challenges facing the reactors.

I really can't speak to ITER as much as I can NIF. With NIF you have a hohlraum, which is basically a little metal cylinder that holds the fuel you plan to fuse.

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/2/29/Nif_hohlraum.jpg/150px-Nif_hohlraum.jpg

NIF has 192 lasers that they fire simultaneously at the hohlraum which are supposed to create the necessary heat and pressure to cause ignition. The problem so far has been that the compression hasn't been even... and it has to be. There are two ways to address the issue. 1)you mess with the hohlraum 2)you mess with the lasers. There are quite a few who think it's simply a question of increasing the laser output which is of course easier said than done.

They were making gains on these fronts when Congress and Obama decided to redirect their resources and scale back the project. They are still moving forward but at a much slower rate.

The most frustrating thing about NIF is that everyone agrees that it SHOULD work right now. They have met the requirements that everything we know to create the computer models say we need to meet. As with anything like this it may never work, BUT they are so close "in theory" that they could try one thing and get ignition tomorrow. Of course they get fewer and fewer chances to try different things with less and less funding.

Ok that was a very simplified version of the main issues they face at NIF. NIF is a mix of engineering issues (increasing the laser power, hohlraum shape, size, material, etc) and the fundamental physics issue of why it doesn't work now when the models say it should.

It;s important to remember that NIF is BRAND NEW and already people are giving up on it. The facility was supposed to achieve ignition in September of 2012. They are only what, 8 months behind?

Fun fact for those who have seen the new Star Trek movie... the warp core in the movie... that's NIF! (well parts of it at least)

http://blogs.scientificamerican.com/overthinking-it/files/2013/05/Preamplifier_at_the_National_Ignition_Facility.jpg

[AustinChief]

I don't count the science buildings as part of the reactor, so I don't count that as construction. The contract for building the Tokamak Complex was just signed this March. I should have been more clear in my post, so my apologies for any confusion. As for the project itself, the completion date has already been pushed back to 2022, and that's likely just the beginning. Heck, they just recently got design approval for a reactor component, so we're really talking about a project that's not even past the drawing board stage in some ways.

Also, one of ITER's problems has been cost overruns that have resulted in other projects getting scrapped so that ITER can continue, so I'm not really sure where you're getting the notion of funding being redirected elsewhere.

One example:



http://news.sciencemag.org/scienceinsider/2011/12/europe-finds-13-billion-needed.html

Are you talking about it strictly here in the USA, even though the USA is funding part of ITER?

Yes I was speaking to NIF funding specifically. NIF is already underfunded and facing huge cuts.

I'm aware we fund ITER as well, which I support wholeheartedly.

As for the project details, yes it has been pushed back and I'm certain more delays will occur, it's a massive undertaking. BUT this is the kind of massive undertaking I support funding for instead of wasted subsidies to manufacture tech that needs more research to be viable. (solar) Don't get me wrong, I think we need to diversify for sure. I'm all about research money being spread around, I just think MANUFACTURING subsidies are a massive waste. Short sighted bullshit political cronyistic waste. (and don't anyone try to use this thread to assign blame to a specific group here, everyone on both sides of the aisle is guilty of this bullshit and has been for years)

[AustinChief]

https://www.llnl.gov/news/newsreleases/2013/May/images/27649_starTrekBig.jpg

Another pic from NIF.

(as far as I know that is not standard attire nor does NIF have photon torpedoes... as far as I know...)

[Just Passin' By]

Yes I was speaking to NIF funding specifically. NIF is already underfunded and facing huge cuts.

I'm aware we fund ITER as well, which I support wholeheartedly.

Fair enough, and thanks for the clarification. As one who opposes all subsidies, I'm not coming from the same starting point you are, so I just didn't want confusion in case we had a point of disagreement.

As for the project details, yes it has been pushed back and I'm certain more delays will occur, it's a massive undertaking. BUT this is the kind of massive undertaking I support funding for instead of wasted subsidies to manufacture tech that needs more research to be viable. (solar) Don't get me wrong, I think we need to diversify for sure. I'm all about research money being spread around, I just think MANUFACTURING subsidies are a massive waste. Short sighted bullshit political cronyistic waste. (and don't anyone try to use this thread to assign blame to a specific group here, everyone on both sides of the aisle is guilty of this bullshit and has been for years)

I hear what you're saying, and solar may never be the answer. Solar has been a bust for some 50+ years. Between regional limitations, efficiency problems and other issues, I don't just automatically buy into the notion that we're heading in the right direction there (something I was noting to Laz, I believe).