Twilio's Flex isn't far off this concept. For building simple voice and text message applications, it does quite a lot out of the box. It's their full telephony stack but presented at a much higher level of abstraction.
"The US Geological Survey estimates that onshore northeast Greenland (including ice-covered areas) contains around 31 billion barrels of oil-equivalent in hydrocarbons – similar to the US’s entire volume of proven crude oil reserves."
Also, Idk what that source is but the US has way more barrels than that. Proven reserves mean that’s what’s been proven via drilling, not speculative (which is what the Greenland barrels are). There is a lot more “unproven” oil out there but it doesn’t make for a sensationalist statement that fools readers.
Another 30 second search would show you that their oil is not readily available and is unproven. Otherwise Denmark would already be an even wealthier petrostate like Norway.
> "Denmark would already be an even wealthier petrostate"
Denmark does not (since 2009) control Greenland's minerals, nor take revenues from resource extraction[0,1]; and Greenland's democratic government has in fact totally banned oil exploration[2].
[1] https://english.stm.dk/the-prime-ministers-office/the-unity-... ("Revenues from mineral resource activities in Greenland are to accrue to the Self-Government. Such revenues will have influence on the size of the Danish Government subsidy, cf. section below on the economic arrangement.")
> "Global warming means that retreating ice could uncover potential oil and mineral resources which, if successfully tapped, could dramatically change the fortunes of the semi-autonomous territory of 57,000 people."
> ""The future does not lie in oil. The future belongs to renewable energy, and in that respect we have much more to gain," the Greenland government said in a statement. The government said it "wants to take co-responsibility for combating the global climate crisis."
Let’s be honest with ourselves. If there were hundreds of billions or trillions of dollars of accessible oil underneath Greenland they would start drilling tomorrow.
He’s correct there is oil but there is oil everywhere. Whether it’s feasible to extract it is another thing. Do you really think if they had worthwhile oil reserves that someone wouldn’t have thought to extract it? So I would say Greenland doesn’t have any oil which means they don’t have any worthwhile oil to extract.
Regardless, the US isn’t taking over Greenland for its oil. That is just ridiculous and there would be far easier targets to go after if that was the case.
True. The situation for both off-gassing and plastic recycling is rather bleak.
Sorry for being vague; I was only referring to economically valuable minerals used in electric batteries.
Aqua Metals has previously said they'll be able to reuse battery quality graphite (from batteries) as well (vs releasing it as CO2). But my recent scan of their progress wasn't very encouraging.
Learning more about Redwood Recycling stack is on my to do list.
I'd like more tries to pick out the notes when pecking at the on-screen keyboard. I don't need to hear the pattern again, I need to learn where the note pitches are on the keyboard.
One of the important keys in learning is engagement. If you frustrate the student preventing them from progressing at their own rhythm they will disengage, losing interest in what you are teaching.
Inside scoop: the pub group who owned that pub (still going, owns four in Cambridge and environs) was cofounded by Steve Early, a Cambridge computer scientist who wrote his own POS software, so it was very much a case of "yeah, that sounds like fun, I'll add it". (Until tax and primary rate risk made it not fun, so it was removed.)
For anyone who takes doing their taxes seriously, this is a nightmare. Every pint ordered involves a capital gain (or loss) for the buyer. At a certain point you're doing enough accounting that you might as well be running the bar yourself (or just paying in cash)!
I can't see how half of the icon choices made in the article would pass internal testing, let alone actual user testing.
Maybe stakeholders were calling the shots and everyone was like, "Fine. If you want us to reuse the same icon for different purposes, you're the boss. We are done trying to explain why this is a bad idea."
Before you have that working you'll have 3D printed a containerload of these ;)
Besides the lack of flexibility if you want to make changes. I've used soft tooling for some projects but I was (1) never really happy with the results and (2) ended up breaking the molds quite often resulting in a lot of wasted material and expense. 3D printing is the way to go for projects such as these.
I'm confused why your value proposition is that you can replace individual cells but your website also says it's recommended to replace all cells at once. Isn't that the same as the current situation where we have to buy a new battery assembly rather than replace the failed cells?
> When an E-bike battery fails, 90% of the time, its just 1 or 2 cells that are dead inside or a single electronic component. But since traditional batteries are spot welded and glued, there is no chance to replace the faulty part and you need to replace the complete battery.The infinite battery is different. It uses a technology that makes it easy and safe to replace any parts, including lithium-ion cells. It doesn't require any specific tools nor knowledge. It takes less than 10 minutes.
> For safety and durability, it is recommended to change all cells at once.
You should definitely replace all cells together - a new cell will have a different capacity and could "charge" an adjacent older cell to rebalance, causing a fire (but a good BMS won't allow that - on the other hand you'll be limited by your weakest cells despite having put some new ones in)
For me the value proposition would be to avoid what happened with my previous ebike: after 3 years I wanted a new battery as the old one was on its last legs, and it wasn't produced anymore. Or what's happening with my current ebike: to avoid the same story with the battery, I am thinking of buying an extra one now while it's still produced, and it's outrageously expensive (550EUR for roughly 500Wh, which is about 7..10x the price of the cells if you are a careful buyer).
(You can fit a new battery to any bike with (sometimes lots of) extra work, but esp. my previous one had a weird solution where it slid into a rail above the rear wheel and it would have been a PITA to reengineer.)
So yeah if their thing works I'd consider a bike using it, on economical grounds mainly.
Exactly! That's precisely why we designed the battery, to let people be in control of their own stuff!
Our batteries have now be running for close to 3 years on shared mobility ebikes, so they are well-tested indeed! If you want more infos, send us an email at contact@gouach.com :)
At 199EUR without the cells, I'm _almost_ tempted to go for it. It's a bit steep but the savings on the cells would already make the whole thing overall viable. If it had the ability to charge from USB-C as a contingency solution, it would be an impulse buy.
Indeed! We've been asked for the USB-C quite a bit so we might do that in a future version, but it increases the BOM price for our shared mobility fleet customers which are quite price sensitive!
Indeed it's 199 eur, but it's high-quality, certified, comes with a waterproof and fireproof casing, connected, with real-time safety alerts, and when you'll eventually need to change the cells, you'll only pay 50 eur to refill your battery!
Compared to that, an equivalent Bosch battery goes for 500 to 700 eur (for the same quality). We're even compatible with Bosch gen 2/3/4 (non-smart)
- you can indeed change the cells! When the industry matures, we might have a "second-life cell cycling" path where old cells are re-tested and matched so you could switch individual cells, but for now, as those "matched cells" aren't widely available we recommend you switch everything to new cells (this would cost an end-user about $50 rather than buying a new battery for $200/$300)
- our battery is also very high quality (passes all certifications, waterproof, fireproof, connected, with safety alerts)
- even if you need to change all the cells sometimes, getting back "pristine cells" rather than "damaged, welded and unwelded cells" will allow for multiple things: putting them in a second-life cycle for eg. energy storage batteries, and even better recycling (since you can get cells out of the casing, the recycling process is even more efficient)
- now the cells are perhaps 1/3rd the cost of a battery, so all things being equal, you'd rather be able to change all cells than throw in the trash the old battery
- we also have seen some batteries fail because of broken electronics, etc, which are just $30 to replace, and our battery makes it extremely simple to do so
Ahh, I get it now. Maybe you can improve the wording around this to make it less suggestive that your value proposition is I can change one cell when it fails. That's not safe. The value prop is I can change for a new set of cells cheaply when I get a failure in my current set.
You're going from when one cell fails, change the entire battery assembly, including any management electronics, case etc
To
When one cell fails, just get a fresh set of cells, at a fraction of the cost of a new battery assembly.
In the future, you also expect working cells to be circulated back into second-life use. Your casing makes this much more likely.
We're a Ruby shop and we have pretty much zero commented code. Ruby's intended to be readable enough not to need them and when we do need them, it's a sure sign we need some refactoring.
