And yet they suffer from the exact same issues (energy consumption, particles, road wear, etc). What we need to incentivise is small EVs for daily trips, not huge wasteful things like Teslas because their owners have range anxiety for the 2 times a year they do more than 100 km in one trip.
The scale does not need to be the same, but in the end heavy EVs are much worse than lighter ones.
Hell no, new Mercedes-Benz eActros 600 electric lorry has battery that weights 4500 kg. Add that tyres will wear out much sooner and produce more microplastics pollution killing rivers.
I think that if at all, this exemption should last until 2030 at maximum.
The reason is that batteries with densities sufficient to make EVs no heavier than ICEs exist (like https://amprius.com/products/ ) but they need investment for production to be scaled up - the 5GWh plant Amprius is planning will go entirely to niche applications, so it's not enough.
Meanwhile the Chinese are introducing cars with 700kg+ batteries:
The amount of energy needed to get out of earth's gravity well is incredibly high. It would be silly to try to boost a massive object like the ISS out.
Escape velocity energy from an orbit is sqrt(2) times the energy it takes to get to that orbit. But it’s more than ~41% more fuel, since you need more fuel to push the fuel, and more fuel than that to get it to orbit in the first place.
Much cheaper to let the atmosphere drag it down, which is something that is going to happen anyways.
So achieving escape velocity from geosynchronous orbit requires more delta v than from LEO?
I kind of see it, as the surface velocity of a GEO satellite is near zero yet the surface velocity of a LEO bird is measured in the thousands of KPH. However so much more energy was invested in raising the satellite so high up, I have a difficult time imagining that actually more energy is now required to bring it to escape velocity. Is not escape velocity at GEO altitudes lower than escape velocity at LEO?
That would take way to much energy for little benefit. They expect the ISS to burn up in the atmosphere so there wouldn't be a safety issue to people/things on earth.
Could somebody explain to me what a PVC (Personalized Cancer Vaccine) is? Like what is the personalized part in there? Is there really a realistic scenario in which we'll get some regular vaccination and then we'll be cancer free in the future?
Ok, so cancer is essentially a blanket term for describing that you have a group of cells in your body doing uncontrollable runaway mitosis (replicating themselves). But the thing is that it's caused by hundreds of different mutations to your cells in thousands of combinations. So developing a single way to combat all of this is super hard. But if we can identify your particular set of mutations and train your body to attack cells with those, we can get rid of your cancer and prevent it from returning. There are a few strategies for this and it's how some of the most incredible cancer therapies of the last few years work...those are just only applicable to certain very specific mutations.
I don't think that's actually frowned upon. Your reasoning makes sense and many countries should be happy if nomads earn money abroad and spend it in their local businesses, but often the laws are just outdated and still designed around the assumption that people earn money in the country where they work.
Not against that, but there should be an exception for electric vehicles, because these batteries are heavy.