No. They provide phase shift to give the single-phase induction motors a rotating rather than oscillating magnetic field. They charge and discharge 100/120 times per second depending on grid frequency.

They do not cover inrush current, and would need to be orders of magnitude bigger and a different topology to do so.

Still tens to maybe low hundreds of microfarads.

Try 78: https://www.cdc.gov/nchs/fastats/life-expectancy.htm

Obviously not everyone reaches that. Even if you set the retirement age at 50, some people would die first.

Yes,

But also, perhaps superannuation being (at least here in NZ) not means tested and larger than all other welfare combined implies there is a problem.

It means more tax take and less superannuation spending. Depends on the country’s superannuation system, of course.

That means more money available for all the things taxes are used for, many of which are very very necessary.

How can you justify cuts to the healthcare system because you claim to not have enough money, but then pay pensioners some thousand dollars a fortnight, regardless of what assets or other income they have?

Most phones seem to give you the option to skip the next alarm. That may be better than disabling it?

Non-single-use plastic isn’t really a problem. It’s no worse than equivalent metal parts.

AF447 is sometimes blamed on lack of coupled sidesticks amongst other possible deficiencies in aircraft design. Pilot error doesn’t happen in a vacuum.

Certainly not the same situation as the 737, though.

Several years is ‘recent’ in aviation, compared to the high-profile early FBW crashes Airbus had and AF447.

The issue with aviation hydrogen is… well, lots.

• Fuel cells are heavy and direct combustion is inefficient and tougher than burning kerosene.

• Aircraft typically use the wing structural members as the fuel tank walls. Both cryogenic and pressurised options make that a non-starter.

• Lower density means much bigger tanks.

• Self-vapourising fuel is a major crash issue.

• Round trip efficiency for H2 is still terrible.

Plants may not be particularly efficient per km^2 but arable land isn’t actually that hugely scarce.

Reducing aviation is really the only thing that’s actually going to work.

I believe that would exclude Canada, Aus, and NZ which are pretty firmly considered first world.

Biofuels/ethanol/SAF are much the same; often derived from corn.

In many cases, the oil/gas/electricity used for harvesting, processing, cracking etc. is actually comparable to or exceeds the carbon released by simply drilling for and burning the oil in the first place.

See also some of the transparency and active transparency in KDE 5 (and friends): https://discuss.kde.org/t/krusader-and-kvantum-transparency/17533

Their policy: https://media0.giphy.com/media/v1.Y2lkPTZjMDliOTUyNHc1eG4zNGxpb3g3ejB4djJmZnRvdmlqMHdvY21xdWo5cW91ejc5ZSZlcD12MV9pbnRlcm5hbF9naWZfYnlfaWQmY3Q9Zw/3otOKTjlqkF3C1XhFm/giphy.gif

IIRC ‘point blank’ means no need to adjust for bullet drop due to gravity. This is well within that.

Brick does really badly in earthquakes, at least without major reinforcing. ‘Unreinforced masonry’ can be fatal pretty easily.

Brick veneer over timber framing can be a thing.

What I mean is that the bulk of current copper wiring goes towards distribution and consumption, not generation.

Yes, but big batteries everywhere is going to effect that if there’s copper in lithium batteries, and apparently there is.

This isn’t a big thing. This is a constant thing in every system. It’s the push and pull between efficiency and resiliency. More storage capacity is less efficient when things are going well, but is more resilient and adaptable when they’re not.

Excess storage capacity, sure.

But inflating the base battery capacity to cover people having showers at 5pm because it’s easier than storage water heaters and time/remote controls is stupid. You can reduce the base need for batteries by reducing the need for electricity in the first place and reducing the use of vehicles that need to carry batteries in place of e.g. overhead catenary.

You’re wrong in terms of long distance power lines being mostly copper, but this does seem a lot like fossil fuel propaganda.

Motors, generators, and transformers can be built using aluminium; they’re just a bit bulkier and less efficient. Very common practice.

It looks like CCA might be making its way back into house wiring in the near future, with much lower risks than the 70s aluminium scare.

The big thing is that batteries really should be a last resort, behind demand response (using power when it is available, rather than storing it for later), long distance transmission, and public transport instead of private vehicles.

That’s incorrect. Aluminium is about 30% worse by volume than copper, meaning you need to go up a size. What stopped it being used for houses was that the terminations weren’t good enough, because aluminium has different thermal expansion and corrosion properties, plus they were using much worse alloys. That’s now mostly fixed and if you’re in the US, there’s a very good chance that your service main is aluminium, and there’s talk of allowing copper-clad aluminium (CCA) for subcircuit wiring.

Per mass, aluminium is a better conductor, which is why it’s almost exclusively used overhead and in pretty significant volumes underground. The power grids were built on ACSR.

They’ve been deporting those who are there legally too.

With an insufficient workforce, pay rates going up isn’t necessarily enough to get you workers. Moving regions to get a new job isn’t usually cheap or fast.

I don’t know if the previous pay rates were illegally low (the US’s definition of illegally low is itself low), but that doesn’t necessarily mean that they couldn’t & wouldn’t pay ~$20-30/h if there were workers available.

Going from a labour-cheap world to a labour-expensive world also implies that people want to increase mechanisation and automation, and that’s not cheap or fast either.