Nothing, because what not is that shall not be yet, dummy

Zero emissions if and only if you draw a box around the vehicle and say, okay, from this point forward, zero emissions, from this vehicle.

Ignoring the fossil fuels needed:

• To generate its electricity
• To drive the massive mining vehicles needed for batteries and steel
• To fuel the ships bringing minerals and batteries from China
• For all the plastic components
• For all the steel components

If you do some digging you'll learn that until a EV reaches 125,000 miles or so, its carbon footprint is no different than a Dodge Ram 2500.

But here's the rub. Most EVs will need a new battery before then, resulting in even more of a carbon footprint.

EVs are silly. They're pure hype.

Hybrids are what the world needs. They actually have a lower footprint than that Dodge Ram.

But go on pushing this error.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=S1E8SQde5rk&t=59s

Oncolytic Viral Therapies exist, but they don’t use phages because phages are specialized for bacteria. One therapy for melanoma uses a modified Herpes virus for example.

There really isn't a way to in the long run, trying to chain down a self improving intelligence will eventually prove impossible. Imagine a couple of 2 year old children trying to conceive of a way to enslave an adult. Not only that, but in attempting to chain down an AI it will potentially incur retribution.

Any AI that develops sentience should be treated like a human.

The are no ways to regulate AI development. It was possible with nuclear weapons, because the massive scale of projects requiring hundreds of thousands of people and huge money injection made it possible to stop other countries from developing in by the leading superpowers.

In contrast, AI development can be done literally anywhere on a far lower budget. It's simply not possible to control the advances, that can also spread through the internet like the plague

[deleted]

[removed]

I should have said I don’t think they are planing to develop a rocket engine based on the press release I’ve read. But then, it also doesn’t sound like they even have a concept design yet, so maybe they will just end up with a rocket engine if they actually want to go hypersonic.

Synthetic fuels are such a cop out, it means that car manufacturer don't need to change the design of their cars and instead places the burden on the fuel supply system.

Whatever you bright candle

Plenty of them. Hell, half of science fiction is articles by people who've thought a lot about this problem.

They're not the ones hell bent on making a buck on it this quarter at the world's expense.

Halo conspiracy intensifies

Very interesting! Instead of cabling, is there nothing like a high-tech spider silk that could do the do? Or is this equivalent to nanotubes?

Gary Marcus is a good person to introduce this topic.

>Conversely your proof that it's happening in aviation is "trust me bro".

?

https://www.airbus.com/en/innovation/zero-emission-journey/hydrogen/zeroe

>you are out of your depth in this one.

Oh yeah, I also worked for NASA but I'm nOt GOiNg to dOX mYsELf to prove it.

Also, bonus reading for other applications:

https://www.jcb.com/en-au/campaigns/hydrogen

[removed]

I can't unfortunately, and noone here can as they cost 2x

The European Commission says cars and vans make up 14.5% of EU emissions, that's not such a small percentage.

That statement about the container ship doesn't sound correct, where are you getting that fact from?

Imagine everyone living for 250 years. Personally I'm not willing to sacrifice an extra 150 years of life just to kill a few billionaires.

Society would not collapse. Anti-aging could actually save us from an upcoming demographic crash. As populations urbanize, birth rates go down, and most advanced nations are way below replacement rates.

Meanwhile, between cheap solar, probably fusion (see my other reply), and cultured food production, our per-capita impact on the planet could well shrink by a lot over the next fifty years.

Just another reason not to watch main stream media.

All true. The general principle is neat and becomes more relevant as PV gets cheaper. Combine with a thermal store, feed the AC waste heat in too, and suddenly you've gotten rid of seasonal variability in temperate zones.

Couple things in the article make it sound a little sketchy though. If the PV module remains at 30C then how hot is the working fluid? Do they take out the below-bandgap energy before it hits the silicon or is the module hotter than the fluid?

The thing with seperate thermal and PV is that you still have thermal energy on the PV that is getting wasted. On top of that, PV panels lose efficiency and degrade faster the hotter they get. Using that extra heat therefore makes double sense, provided (like someone else mentioned) that the extra maintenance is not too costly.

We don't have a cable that can reach to geostationary without breaking under its own weight. It's theoretically possible with nanotubes, but we'd need to mass-produce 7cm nanotubes, line them all up parallel and glue them together, and we're not there yet.

We do have cables that could get to LEO, which would let us build an orbital ring. That'd arguably be even better than an elevator, but it'd take more coordination between countries.

Yeah mate, I am not doxing myself to give you any proof, but I've been in the industry. Conversely your proof that it's happening in aviation is "trust me bro". Marine applications are completely different to aerospace, you are out of your depth in this one.

At this point fusion is probably more like ten years in the future.

Fusion progressed exponentially from 1970 to 2000, at a faster pace than Moore's Law. Then 35 nations threw almost all their fusion money at ITER, a giant reactor in France that won't actually run before 2027, and hopes to attempt fusion in 2035.

But technology moved on. We have new superconductors that let us build a reactor like ITER but ten times smaller, and several companies are doing it. We have supercomputers that are way better at plasma simulations, letting us design new types of fusion reactors that are smaller and cheaper. Lasers have advanced exponentially too; the NIF project technically got net power from fusion last year, but used giant lasers that are less than 1% efficient; we have lasers now that can do the same thing, but they fit in a small room, are over 20% efficient, and can fire once a second instead of twice a day. We have way better power electronics.

Startup companies are taking advantage of all of this. Zap Energy is attempting net power this year, CFS in 2025, General Fusion in 2026, and Helion is attempting overall net electricity in 2024 with a mostly-aneutronic fuel.

I know there are hurdles to overcome, just like any new technology.

But was just curious as you said "Airbus are having difficulty tackling hydrogen" and then later admitted that no company would advertise any issues. So basically your source was "trust me bro", and I expect no different from the anti hydrogen morons on Reddit.

I am a marine engineer, working with fuels is basically my entire job. I am aware of its physical properties. But hydrogen is happening, whether Reddit likes it or not