Quote:
Originally Posted by redpoint5
The problem isn't so much one of education, it's of interest. Knowing something is meaningless unless we're motivated to do something about that knowledge. As you point out, people want to watch mindless stuff to occupy their bored and underutilized minds.
Climate change is not an existential threat. Show me someone with compelling data to suggest it is and I'll be open to the idea. I've not heard anyone but environmental extremists suggest humanity is seriously threatened by GW.
I agree that freedom is conditional, which is why I'm not a Libertarian. Their attitude often is something along the lines of "what do you care if I pee on my end of the pool".
The thing is, when everyone is peeing, it takes a united effort (global) to have a meaningful impact in a just way to every person.
From your link:
Disadvantages
Slower charging – Due to the lower efficiency, devices take longer to charge when supplied power is the same amount.
More expensive – Inductive charging also requires drive electronics and coils in both device and charger, increasing the complexity and cost of manufacturing.
Inefficiency – Inductive charging is not as efficient as direct charging. In one application, the phone being charged gets hot. Continued exposure to heat can result in battery damage...the Magne Charge vehicle recharger system employs high-frequency induction to deliver high power at an efficiency of 86% (6.6 kW power delivery from a 7.68 kW power draw).
There is no way inductive charging was nearly 100% efficient, unless we consider something like 75% to be "nearly". The systems built into the road are even less efficient than this.
|
I got sidetracked and didn't look for the article I was thinking of.
And it struck me,that GM never said the charging system was close to 100% efficient,only the paddle-to-port transfer by itself.