Seems like they were bitten by repair costs according to the article. Which might be due to them being relatively new, crash repairers being unwilling to work on EVs (battery), EV crashes resulting in more severe body damage due to increased weight, etc. not to mention batteries
Repairs? Rivian on at least their first gen pickups used massive single-body-panels. This shot repair costs to the moon because you had to pay freight to ship massive car-sized body panels and also paint and handle attaching them. Other EVs have done similar bone-headed BUT IT LOOKS COOL bullshit.
The other problem besides body, is there will probably never ever be aftermarket manufacturers for things like batteries, motors, inverters, etc. Because they all require tight integration with the rest of the car's system. And electronics/EVs make it too easy for a manufacturer to custom tailor the electronics per car and per model even on a yearly basis. And the real problem, the design of things like motors on the EV are highly patented and custom. So no different than engines for a ICE. This gives manufacturers the ability to make extreme profit on replacement parts.
Imo they are trying to turn cars into a disposable consumer products.
Sure, they may gain some me minor manufacturing cost drops with those large castings.
As for EV motors I think this is a temporary state of things. We've been making electric motors for 290 years now. EV transition has just started and there's going to be so many OEM suppliers of motors. Motors aren't nearly as large as ice engines. And patents expire.
Also, tight vertical integration in general may be a temporary state of things in EV manufacture in the longer run. The "inefficiencies" of a multi-vendor supply network eventually get outweighed by the usefulness of redundancy and competitive bidding. As patents expire and vertical integration "secret sauce" loses its shine, there will be a growing use for an expanded parts network.
To some extent you even see that in the competition between Tesla/Rivian and Ford/GM today because the old, classic manufacturers have less (but not no) "secret sauce" in vertical integration and more existing parts networks they want to keep friendly/allied/fed/bidding.
Also, yeah, especially EV motors have a lot more possibility/potential than ICE ever did for "off the shelf" whole parts suppliers, because they are smaller, because they are a "relatively simple", well researched technology with a lot of known characteristics/trade-offs that can be simplified into a relatively small list of "SKUs", but also, and maybe most importantly, we're already seeing that so much of their "power train" and "driving feel" is virtual and software/firmware-defined and any "secret sauce" can be applied as such easily to a programmable enough off-the-shelf part.
Similarly with batteries. We have centuries of knowledge in how to standardize battery units and the production of such. Both GM and Ford already see battery plants as eventual external suppliers and their plants are only partially-owned subsidiaries with co-owners in LG and SK Group, respectively.
They do not want you to use the mouse while it is plugged in. They didn’t want the mouse to be seen as a wired device at all. The mouse hasn’t been redesigned since it came out 15 years ago, when wireless mice were somewhat uncommon
I think she was bitten by the weird state of modern academia and I just generally angry. I suppose she is right though - no new physics in recent memory. Some experimental evidence for things like the Higgs, but nothing experimentally verified that replaces or extends the standard model
Australia has a base load problem that causes energy prices to become negative during the day when solar production is at it’s peak. Part of this is that the coal plants cannot readily be switched off during the day, and end up producing energy when it isn’t needed. Because we do not yet have the ability to store the amount of energy we use in the evening, we still need the coal plants at night.
Hence why this is good news to us, this can actually reduce emissions and energy prices at the same time. We can basically rely on renewables during the day if the coal plants can be turned off during peak solar generation. Otherwise we might have relied on natural gas as that can ramp up and down faster.
Keep in mind that this is one operator of some plants that is doing this while shifting to a renewable focus because of exactly the economic reasons outlined in the article. The ability to run plants to zero helps them save money and incidentally reduces emissions while they shift focus to the new energy market.
Australia is in the process of shutting down coal fired plants but increasing energy use has meant that the aging plants need to be run longer while we transition technologies. Many are already shut down, and we do not have a short road to nuclear power plants, so the trajectory is looking renewable heavy along with storage. It is not surprise that new plants do not find investors.
These companies are ultimately accountable to us if we make it happen and the economic incentive is already there for a transition to low or no emission grids. Partial transitions and operational changes like this are a sign that those changes are being taken seriously and that operation of coal plants is already seen as a financial risk, largely due to the increasing purchase of solar and batteries by Australians looking to reduce their energy bill
PPP doesn’t utilise ground stations, and to achieve cm accuracy, you need to utilise phase information and solve the ambiguity problem
1mm accuracy almost certainly relies on ionosphere and troposphere observations at high temporal and spatial frequency. The process of post processing is essentially correct, but there is a point at which the ionosphere solution won’t get better without an increase in density of observations
Isn’t O notation asymptotic and a truncation? Adding an additional O(n) time to a O(n^2) algorithm would result in an O(n^2) algorithm? As far as I understand anyway. But you could make a more descriptive expression for the time based on what you know about the operations for sure
I think guilt and fear might be warranted as people have had a history of willingly being idiots regarding climate change. Best of a bad situation is one thing. Best of a bad situation which you are party to is another
Honestly with targeting and algorithmic curation you might never see any of it unless you are the desired audience. That’s certainly the case for me. Once, I watched some reels of a comedian (who apparently was popular on the right) that I found funny, and then for a few days my feed included this American super macho type content
