4 ms·

Today is a big deal. Open sourcing the patents to build fully solar-powered electrical grids around the will be a paradigm shift in the power structures of the

by milesf 11y ago

Today is a big deal. Open sourcing the patents to build fully solar-powered electrical grids around the will be a paradigm shift in the power structures of the world. I expect from today onward there will be a full-scale attack from those who stand to lose because of the reduced dependency on oil. First they ignore you. Then they laugh at you. Then they fight you. <--- WE ARE HERE Then you win.

ridicter 11y ago
As someone who avoided the startuposphere so that I could focus on climate change activism and pricing carbon, seeing Elon Musk implore the world to avoid winning a Darwin Award was so incredibly rewarding and validating. He will most certainly be fought tooth and nail, but he has allies.
BinaryIdiot 11y ago
> I expect from today onward there will be a full-scale attack from those who stand to lose because of the reduced dependency on oil. Maybe. But remember we don't have the technology yet to completely move away from fossil fuels. The biggest issue I know of is making Airplanes electric which so far has not proven really feasible (as far as I can find anyway). This solves a huge chunk of issues but there are still plenty more before we can claim we have the technology to completely transition. I'm excited for the possibility however.
- milesf 11y ago
  Well, not jets, but propeller craft might be within reach: http://www.electronicsweekly.com/news/design/power/siemens-electric-airplane-motor-2015-04/ http://www.electronicsweekly.com/news/design/power/siemens-e...
  - BinaryIdiot 11y ago
    While it's a long way off that's pretty neat! Thanks!
- vonklaus 11y ago
  Elon has been working on an VTOL electric jet. He references his desire to fully develop it often. Obviously, he is extremely busy, but he says he will try and work on it at some point.
- reality_czech 11y ago
  Zepplins can be run with very minimal environmental cost. They are slower, though. Airplanes are extremely energy-hungry and carbon-intensive. Just one intercontinental round trip can put as much carbon per person into the air as a half a year of driving, assuming you have a new-ish car. And yes, this is after dividing the total emissions by the number of passengers.
  - bzbarsky 11y ago
    An intercontinental round trip is in the range of 10-15k miles, right? That's a plausible mileage for 6 months of driving, sure. Would match up with my understanding that fuel use for planes per passenger-mile is about the same as for cars with just a driver. The big difference, of course, it that it takes a lot less time to travel that many miles in a plane. But on a per-passenger-mile basis they're no worse than non-carpooling cars. Admittedly a low bar.
- sandstrom 11y ago
  It's an issue for sure, but at ~5% of global CO2 there are other easier sources to target first. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Environmental_impact_of_aviation https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Environmental_impact_of_aviati...
- mikeash 11y ago
  As I recall, Musk says that if you can double current energy densities, electric airliners become feasible. That could happen in some decades. If that doesn't happen (or if he's underestimating what it takes), then I figure the solution for air travel will be synthetic fuels. Synthetic fuels are not very good right now simply because it takes a lot of energy to make them, but if energy is cheap and abundant because, say, the world is covered in solar panels, it's less of a problem.
seanp2k2 11y ago
Most of the power in the US comes from coal. Solar is 0.4%: http://www.eia.gov/tools/faqs/faq.cfm?id=427&t=3 http://www.eia.gov/tools/faqs/faq.cfm?id=427&t=3 What do you do with the batteries and the toxic materials inside when you're done with them (and how long do they last)? What do you do with all the toxic materials produced during mining, refining, and production of batteries and materials? How do you deal with these same issues as they affect solar panels, which are made of silicon?
- danhak 11y ago
  > Most of the power in the US comes from coal No, that's not true. Most power comes from sources other than coal. Yes, coal is the largest single source but it is < 50% and decreasing every year.
  - mtbcoder 11y ago
    Decreasing perhaps, but it's being offset by natural gas, which is yet another hydrocarbon and comes with its own slew of hazards and problems.
    - danhak 11y ago
      Methane is less harmful than coal by far.
      - JoeAltmaier 11y ago
        That's good, because the next century will likely be fueled by Methane Hydrates from the ocean floor.
- kragen 11y ago
  Are you satirizing some hypothetical ignorant anti-solar activism movement I've never heard of?
- jhayward 11y ago
  1. As already posted, no, coal does not produce most of the electric power. It does dominate other sources though. The problem with your rejoinder is it assumes the past, not the future generation fleet. Musk's goal is to enable renewable generation, eliminating coal. 2. There are no particularly toxic materials in the batteries. Landfills accept discarded lithium batteries as regular waste. While lithium is not currently economical to recycle, by the time the industry is as large as the lead-acid battery market (a very toxic product chain) it will be just as easy to recycle lithium. 3. What toxic materials are you referring to? I'm not aware of anything that stands out, especially compared to coal mining, or tar sands production, etc. Lithium mining in particular is a very similar process to the one that produces table salt from salt flats. The biggest problem is the use of water in areas that are very water-poor, ie the Atacama desert. 4. Silicon is non-toxic and inert. There are some hazards associated with dust particles during production, but those are easily handled by proper manufacturing processes. Perhaps you were thinking of thin-film solar panels, which may use e.g. Cadmium? They're less common and seem unlikely to displace silicon PV in the near future.

by milesf 11y ago

ridicter 11y ago

As someone who avoided the startuposphere so that I could focus on climate change activism and pricing carbon, seeing Elon Musk implore the world to avoid winning a Darwin Award was so incredibly rewarding and validating. He will most certainly be fought tooth and nail, but he has allies.

BinaryIdiot 11y ago

> I expect from today onward there will be a full-scale attack from those who stand to lose because of the reduced dependency on oil. Maybe. But remember we don't have the technology yet to completely move away from fossil fuels. The biggest issue I know of is making Airplanes electric which so far has not proven really feasible (as far as I can find anyway). This solves a huge chunk of issues but there are still plenty more before we can claim we have the technology to completely transition. I'm excited for the possibility however.

milesf 11y ago
Well, not jets, but propeller craft might be within reach: http://www.electronicsweekly.com/news/design/power/siemens-electric-airplane-motor-2015-04/ http://www.electronicsweekly.com/news/design/power/siemens-e...
- BinaryIdiot 11y ago
  While it's a long way off that's pretty neat! Thanks!
vonklaus 11y ago
Elon has been working on an VTOL electric jet. He references his desire to fully develop it often. Obviously, he is extremely busy, but he says he will try and work on it at some point.
reality_czech 11y ago
Zepplins can be run with very minimal environmental cost. They are slower, though. Airplanes are extremely energy-hungry and carbon-intensive. Just one intercontinental round trip can put as much carbon per person into the air as a half a year of driving, assuming you have a new-ish car. And yes, this is after dividing the total emissions by the number of passengers.
- bzbarsky 11y ago
  An intercontinental round trip is in the range of 10-15k miles, right? That's a plausible mileage for 6 months of driving, sure. Would match up with my understanding that fuel use for planes per passenger-mile is about the same as for cars with just a driver. The big difference, of course, it that it takes a lot less time to travel that many miles in a plane. But on a per-passenger-mile basis they're no worse than non-carpooling cars. Admittedly a low bar.
sandstrom 11y ago
It's an issue for sure, but at ~5% of global CO2 there are other easier sources to target first. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Environmental_impact_of_aviation https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Environmental_impact_of_aviati...
mikeash 11y ago
As I recall, Musk says that if you can double current energy densities, electric airliners become feasible. That could happen in some decades. If that doesn't happen (or if he's underestimating what it takes), then I figure the solution for air travel will be synthetic fuels. Synthetic fuels are not very good right now simply because it takes a lot of energy to make them, but if energy is cheap and abundant because, say, the world is covered in solar panels, it's less of a problem.

seanp2k2 11y ago

Most of the power in the US comes from coal. Solar is 0.4%: http://www.eia.gov/tools/faqs/faq.cfm?id=427&t=3 http://www.eia.gov/tools/faqs/faq.cfm?id=427&t=3 What do you do with the batteries and the toxic materials inside when you're done with them (and how long do they last)? What do you do with all the toxic materials produced during mining, refining, and production of batteries and materials? How do you deal with these same issues as they affect solar panels, which are made of silicon?

danhak 11y ago
> Most of the power in the US comes from coal No, that's not true. Most power comes from sources other than coal. Yes, coal is the largest single source but it is < 50% and decreasing every year.
- mtbcoder 11y ago
  Decreasing perhaps, but it's being offset by natural gas, which is yet another hydrocarbon and comes with its own slew of hazards and problems.
  - danhak 11y ago
    Methane is less harmful than coal by far.
    - JoeAltmaier 11y ago
      That's good, because the next century will likely be fueled by Methane Hydrates from the ocean floor.
kragen 11y ago
Are you satirizing some hypothetical ignorant anti-solar activism movement I've never heard of?
jhayward 11y ago
1. As already posted, no, coal does not produce most of the electric power. It does dominate other sources though. The problem with your rejoinder is it assumes the past, not the future generation fleet. Musk's goal is to enable renewable generation, eliminating coal. 2. There are no particularly toxic materials in the batteries. Landfills accept discarded lithium batteries as regular waste. While lithium is not currently economical to recycle, by the time the industry is as large as the lead-acid battery market (a very toxic product chain) it will be just as easy to recycle lithium. 3. What toxic materials are you referring to? I'm not aware of anything that stands out, especially compared to coal mining, or tar sands production, etc. Lithium mining in particular is a very similar process to the one that produces table salt from salt flats. The biggest problem is the use of water in areas that are very water-poor, ie the Atacama desert. 4. Silicon is non-toxic and inert. There are some hazards associated with dust particles during production, but those are easily handled by proper manufacturing processes. Perhaps you were thinking of thin-film solar panels, which may use e.g. Cadmium? They're less common and seem unlikely to displace silicon PV in the near future.