Ukraine - Russia Conflict

1690723417087.png


1690723493148.png



1690723795828.png
 
Last edited:
Solar panels aren't that much cheap, and the most efficient Panels are Produced in China.
Panels---->Hydrogen generation--->Energy generation.
How Efficient this whole process is going to be?

Reliance is setting up gigafactories, so we can see then.

Let's assume H2 as an ideal gas and apply P*V=n*R*T.
5kg of H2 = 2500 Moles, T = 300k( Ambient temperature of a Car) V=33 litre
Then pressure comes at 186.4 atm... That's Bonkers....Do we have any material hoop stress is going to sustain this amount of pressure?

Toyota Mirai stores hydrogen in 10,000 psi tanks, so that's 680 atm.

Another Conspiracy Theory by Desi John Nash.... :unsure: :unsure:

 
  • Like
Reactions: RASALGHUL
I think nuclear-electric is the way to go. Producing hydrogen involves a lot of energy transfers and waste.


View attachment 29321
View attachment 29322


Hydrogen ICE

View attachment 29323

You choose based on need. Long haul drivers will choose hydrogen for its quick refuelling. Soccer moms will choose electric 'cause they don't drive around as much. The electricity for the latter can come in from hydrogen-powered gas turbines, better than using coal for surge.

Basically, logistics (trains, trucks, shipping, cargo planes, long-distance drivers etc) requires hydrogen while electric is perfect for everyday use.

But hydrogen is gonna get more efficient in time. Capital costs are lower too. Batteries are also dependent on more exotic materials, that's a problem.
 
Russian ships are stuck in the Baltic.


But as the fanfare unfolded in Havana, events in Vilnius that morning and the night before were building a new fence around the Perekop's home ports of St Petersburg and Kaliningrad. Russia's Baltic fleet will still be able to sail in peacetime but it's being strategically bottled up as its home sea becomes a NATO lake.


 
You choose based on need. Long haul drivers will choose hydrogen for its quick refuelling. Soccer moms will choose electric 'cause they don't drive around as much. The electricity for the latter can come in from hydrogen-powered gas turbines, better than using coal for surge.

Basically, logistics (trains, trucks, shipping, cargo planes, long-distance drivers etc) requires hydrogen while electric is perfect for everyday use.

But hydrogen is gonna get more efficient in time. Capital costs are lower too. Batteries are also dependent on more exotic materials, that's a problem.
The range of EVs is now approaching the range of petrol engines. A lorry does not have to worry about weight so much, so they will likely have even larger batteries, and haulage companies would save a fortune on maintenance costs with an electric vehicle.

The electricity used to even produce the hydrogen and get it to a vehicle is more than what an EV uses. EV costs £8 for a full charge, at £10 per kg of hydrogen it's £75 for a full tank for equivalent mileage. Even at £2/kg it would be £15 and that hasn't even nearly been achieved yet. Then you have the extra maintenance costs incurred by transmission components assuming a combustion hydrogen engine. Meanwhile EVs are getting more and more efficient.

Hydrogen might make sense for planes one day, but that's about it.

Recycling can recover nearly all elements from an EV battery:

 
On the morning of July 30, an attempt by Ukrainian UAVs to attack objects in the city of Moscow was thwarted. One of the Ukrainian UAVs was reportedly destroyed in the air by air defense systems over the territory of the Odintsovo district of the Moscow region. Two more drones were suppressed by electronic warfare and, having lost control, crashed on the territory of the Moscow City office building complex.



Doesn't look very thwarted to me.

1690733009145.png

Another of them disappearing Tweets. :D
 
The range of EVs is now approaching the range of petrol engines. A lorry does not have to worry about weight so much, so they will likely have even larger batteries, and haulage companies would save a fortune on maintenance costs with an electric vehicle.

The electricity used to even produce the hydrogen and get it to a vehicle is more than what an EV uses. EV costs £8 for a full charge, at £10 per kg of hydrogen it's £75 for a full tank for equivalent mileage. Even at £2/kg it would be £15 and that hasn't even nearly been achieved yet. Then you have the extra maintenance costs incurred by transmission components assuming a combustion hydrogen engine. Meanwhile EVs are getting more and more efficient.

Hydrogen might make sense for planes one day, but that's about it.

Recycling can recover nearly all elements from an EV battery:


EV is fine for short-haul trucks, not for long-haul. It's 'cause of the faster refuelling rate. Which is why it favours logistics companies that can change drivers on the go. So while the driver rests, the truck keeps moving.

Anyway the main advantage of hydrogen is it trickles down from the power sector. Powerplants will use green hydrogen to make electricity, and both hydrogen and electricity will power vehicles, thereby eliminating coal in powerplants and fossil fuel in vehicles. So the same infrastructure will feed the entire energy industry. And people can pick and choose their mode of transportation.

For example a city bus on hydrogen can keep running 24/7 with multiple crews, whereas an EV bus has to stop to recharge, forcing the operator to buy 2 buses for 24/7 operation, or maybe 1 for every 3 buses. Trucks and trains work the same way.

EV trucks with the same range as hydrogen trucks will be heavier too, so less cargo. Battery replacement cost is much higher.

In any case, hydrogen is behind on the development curve, so it gives you a skewed view today. It's something we will know for sure only in the future. With that said, hydrogen may not play a significant role in the UK or the EU, but it's critical to India.
 
EV is fine for short-haul trucks, not for long-haul. It's 'cause of the faster refuelling rate. Which is why it favours logistics companies that can change drivers on the go. So while the driver rests, the truck keeps moving.

Anyway the main advantage of hydrogen is it trickles down from the power sector. Powerplants will use green hydrogen to make electricity, and both hydrogen and electricity will power vehicles, thereby eliminating coal in powerplants and fossil fuel in vehicles. So the same infrastructure will feed the entire energy industry. And people can pick and choose their mode of transportation.

For example a city bus on hydrogen can keep running 24/7 with multiple crews, whereas an EV bus has to stop to recharge, forcing the operator to buy 2 buses for 24/7 operation, or maybe 1 for every 3 buses. Trucks and trains work the same way.

EV trucks with the same range as hydrogen trucks will be heavier too, so less cargo. Battery replacement cost is much higher.

In any case, hydrogen is behind on the development curve, so it gives you a skewed view today. It's something we will know for sure only in the future. With that said, hydrogen may not play a significant role in the UK or the EU, but it's critical to India.
An EV lorry could conceivably drive for a trucker's maximum legal hours before rest. A whole day. Mostly they don't change drivers, they sleep in the cab.

Hydrogen uses more electricity overall which increases prices for home use. You use twice as much electricity producing hydrogen than you get out of it in energy. Then you have the risks of transporting a volatile chemical.

There's usually a pause at either end of a journey when drivers change, you can use fast recharge then and contactless recharging in bus lanes. Charging is also getting faster.

The weight doesn't necessarily get in the way of cargo and I'm yet to see any real weight advantage with hydrogen fuel cells anyway. Failing transmissions and ICE servicing will be more expensive than battery replacement every 10-15 years.

EV will continue developing and remain ahead.
 
Last edited:
Russia has seized a Swedish CV90 armored personnel carrier of the Ukrainian army. Footage from the first captured CV-90 BMP of Swedish production in Ukraine has been published. As reported, the armored vehicle was hit by a shot from a grenade launcher, its commander was killed, after which it was abandoned by the Ukrainian crew. The Russian military captured the Swedish CV9040C BMP for the first time, perhaps the car was captured as a result of the battle that we previously talked about. The CV9040 BMP is armed with a 40 mm Bofors L70 cannon and a 7.62 mm machine gun . What will happen next with the CV9040 armored vehicle is unknown, since this is a new technique and is in service with many countries, it will most likely be sent to Russia for study.






A missile strike on the night of July 31 on military facilities of the Kharkiv region was carried out by the Russian army. One of the strikes was inflicted on a warehouse of Ukraine in the Novobavarsky district of the city. Local authorities and the prosecutor's office confirmed the missile hit. Operational services of Ukraine are working on the spot.



 
He's basically saying Ukraine will turn into a neo-Nazi hellhole.
Ukraine would turn into a neo-Nazi hellhole if Russia was successful in conquering and annexing it, since Russia is a neo-Nazi hellhole.

There's no way to describe Russia as anything else than that. The enforced leader worship, the hyper-militarisation of society complete with brainwashing kids at school, and the rapid, usually violent, quelling of any dissenting voice.

Ukraine will turn into exactly the opposite: a free and prosperous country part of the EU, adhering to the same values of freedom, democracy, the rule of law, and human rights. All the things that Russia hates.

There's a reason why Russian literature excels at depicting depression, grinding despair, and powerlessness against brutal and unjust authorities. Hopelessness is the most defining factor of the "Russkiy Mir".

It's also the clearest proof that Russian and Ukrainian are not "brotherly people", as the Ukrainians have never lost hope. That's why they wanted independence, that's why they fought against corruption in their government, and that's why they're fighting against Russia's invasion.

When you ask Russians what they hope for, they never say they hope for things to be better for themselves. They are only capable of hoping that things will be worse for others, so that the rest of the world can become as miserable as the Russians are. They have ceased thinking they can elevate themselves, and their only ambition is instead to drag other people down to their level.