Beta
×

Welcome to the Slashdot Beta site -- learn more here. Use the link in the footer or click here to return to the Classic version of Slashdot.

Thank you!

Before you choose to head back to the Classic look of the site, we'd appreciate it if you share your thoughts on the Beta; your feedback is what drives our ongoing development.

Beta is different and we value you taking the time to try it out. Please take a look at the changes we've made in Beta and  learn more about it. Thanks for reading, and for making the site better!

Comments

top

Is the Tesla Model 3 Actually Going To Cost $50,000?

macpacheco Re:Maybe 40k (391 comments)

U233 is the least desirable nuclear bomb material.
Besides I'm FAR MORE concerned about Coal proliferation.
There is a lot of non sensical arguments perpetrated by the NRC in their thirst for as much regulatory revenue as possible.
You do know that the NRC charges by the hour (like US$ 250/hr) for their regulatory work, without any predictability in that process ?
I don't see any problems with a two fluid LFTR in countries that already have nuclear weapons or have substantial plutonium stockpiles or that have the facilities to make plutonium if they so desire. Finally new nuclear weapon design is focused on U235 as nuclear fuel, which is actually cheaper and more convenient to use for nuclear weapon design due to its very high half live. U235 has 700 million half life, while U233 / Pu239 has half lives under 100k years.
There was a time when Uranium enrichment was expensive and complex job, today it's much easier to enrich than to produce plutonium or U233.
Let LFTR design flourish.
Then we can restrict countries without nuclear weapons / plutonium stockpiles for only deploying the simplified DMSR (single fluid, has enough U238 in the core to require any U233 to be enriched in order to make nuclear weapons). Massive coal deployment is taking place in countries that already have nuclear weapons (USA, China, India).

6 hours ago
top

Is the Tesla Model 3 Actually Going To Cost $50,000?

macpacheco Re:Maybe 40k (391 comments)

GW scaling isn't important. Its better to have lots of sub 500MWe reactors than 2 conventional full sized 1300-1500MWe.
Allows better maintenance planning.

6 hours ago
top

Dealership Commentator: Tesla's Going To Win In Every State

macpacheco Re:Short answer - No. (155 comments)

Not only you're wrong in the amount, but also you ignore the FACT that every company making ZEVs can sell those credits if they make only ZEVs.
And the credit is per ZEV, not a percentage of the ZEV price.
So Tesla is the company least benefited from the ZEV credit. Nissan making cheap ZEV gets a much better return on their investment.
And that takes us to the most important FACT about Tesla.
Tesla is a for profit company, but as far as for profit companies go, Tesla cares a whole lot about customer satisfaction than average.
But it probably doesn't matter, for me "Anonymous Coward" = paid anti Tesla shill in this case. If you had any balls you would show yourself up.

yesterday
top

Is the Tesla Model 3 Actually Going To Cost $50,000?

macpacheco Re:Maybe 40k (391 comments)

As to making transuranics on an MSR...
If the fuel is 5% U235+U238 then you'd be somewhat right. Properly designed MSRs waste far less neutrons than LWR / BWR. But still they couldn't be Plutonium breeders.
Except the primary fuel envisioned for an MSR is at least 80% Thorium (for the DMSR which is designed not to be a breeder). For LFTR it could be 100% Thorium + U233 at startup, which would have enough neutron surplus to both fully consume all of its produced transuranics while breeding U233 sustainably.
Th232+neutron -> Pa233 -> 1 month half life -> U233
U233 + neutron (85% chance) -> fission generating 2.3 neutrons
One neutron is used to fission another U233
One neutron is used to breed another Pa233 -> U233
Still has .3 neutrons budget
Proponents of LFTR state that a well designed LFTR should be capable of 1.07 breeding ratio.
If U233 doesn't fission, we get U234 which becomes U235 with another neutron.
In the end, there's 85% fission probability of U233, 80% fission probability of U235, another chance at Np237, then it finally becomes Pu239 with 2/3 chance of fission. So the odds of making Pu240 (Pu239 absorbs a neutron instead of fission) is around 0,2%, while using 5% enriched uranium odds are 33% or 150 times less chances.
Another important characteristic is having no Thorium in the core, instead all Thorium is in a molten salt blanket, as to greatly reduce the odds of Pa233 getting a neutron before decaying into U233 (making U232 and wasting neutrons).
I don't think core fluids would be in direct contact with graphite moderator, but I could be wrong. Of course that would be design dependent. The full blown LFTR proposal is still just simulations.
Water cooled reactors main problem with isobreeding is buildup of Xenon and Krypton inside the fuel, which are neutron poisons (huge cross section). In any MSR design gases bubble up into a capture bottle, so they hardly eat up neutrons, plus even with infrequent reprocessing removing fission products, lots of neutrons are saved. And what water cooled reactors must do to fight Xe135 buildup ? Must be designed with a neutron rich environment with control rods and boron eating up neutrons on purpose (so when Xenon builds up, Xenon can eat up those neutrons instead), and even still, LWR make a lot of Plutonium.

Its not by chance that WAMSR proposed design is a molten salt, spent nuclear fuel burner... If your statement is right, then WAMSR would be impossible. Of course WAMSR design is still pretty much a secret.

3 days ago
top

Is the Tesla Model 3 Actually Going To Cost $50,000?

macpacheco Re:Maybe 40k (391 comments)

Making amonia, hydrogen, methane from high temp nuclear, amazing possibilities, is 550C hot enough ? The ruskies already have at least one commercial reactor in operation capable of producing 550C stream.

Yeah, those pesky illogical wind turbine credits are killing all baseload generation in the USA. If only they would reformulate those credits as a percentage of the actual electricity revenues of wind generators, we could restore a minimum level of economic rationality to the market.
But... I did read a lot on the MSR front. Those reactors promise much simpler architecture. They could cost less than 1/3rd per MW than LWRs even at the 250-500MWe scale, their economics would be totally different, actually competitive with wind even with today's crazy credits, plus MSRs load follow without control rods or boron injections. Huge negative temperature coefficient, so if demand goes up, more heat is extracted from the primary loop, temps go down, reactivity goes up, demand goes down, less heat is extracted from the primary loop, temps go up, reactivity goes down. Was demonstrated ad nauseum in the 60s @ ORNL MSR demonstrator, they could control the reactor power by just changing airflow over the heat exchanger (demonstrator had just a heat exchanger dumping heat on the air).
I also took this online class:
    https://www.coursera.org/cours...
All of those active safety systems on LWR reactors, none are needed. MSRs need no computer based realtime control computers, even human operators aren't critical, its walk away safe.
It sounds too good to be true, but so far the only bad thing that was said about it was alleged corrosion problems, which was denied by the few retired ORNL techs that worked on the project 40 years ago.
The pesky problem is the NRC. Everytime I read something factual about the NRC, it just shows they are the biggest monkey wrench trying to kill nuclear power in the USA. And the radical greens call the NRC in bed with the nuclear industry.

4 days ago
top

Is the Tesla Model 3 Actually Going To Cost $50,000?

macpacheco Re:Maybe 40k (391 comments)

Fast Sodium / LFTR Molten Salt reactors promise both high temps (Fast Sodium around 550C, Molten Salt 700-800C), plus promise at least 50% utilization of mined uranium for Fast Sodium or 98% utilization of Thorium for LFTR, current nuclear reactors use 0,6-0,9% of mined uranium. By increasing utilization of mined uranium / opening Thorium as a high efficiency fuel, the "Uranium shortage argument dies, even without increasing reserves, since we already have enough spent nuclear fuel / depleted uranium to power civilization for a thousand years with 90% efficiency uranium utilization. Compared to this, the argument that high temp reactors could increase efficiency from current 34% for newest water cooled reactors up to 50% is peanuts, but of course, welcomed.

4 days ago
top

Is the Tesla Model 3 Actually Going To Cost $50,000?

macpacheco Re:Still pretty affordable (391 comments)

What 100 mile range ? The 85kWh has 265mile range, the 60kWh has 160 mile range. Of course if you want to drive 75mph with AC/heat on, range is reduced, but you can drive slower when you're range critical and drive faster between superchargers / to/from home.
100 mile is LEAF range.

5 days ago
top

Is the Tesla Model 3 Actually Going To Cost $50,000?

macpacheco Re:Still pretty affordable (391 comments)

There is no escape. We once needed every hand available to work in factories. Now factories need less than 1% the people needed to produce similar goods 100 years ago. We can keep inventing more complex goods, but in a decade automation will do it with few people.
We can also keep inventing more weird things for the services sector to do.
Plus with jobs going to China and other low labor cost countries, deindustrialization will destroy capitalism as we know it today.
Unless you are for a world where 50% unemployment is the norm, govt subsidies will only grow.
I wish we could do it with less govt, but savage capitalism is far worse than european style capitalism+social programs.
Weird thing is even my Brazil (a developing country) experienced significant deindustrialization after the rise of China. It's screwing up everybody that isn't paying peanuts to labor.
The real problem is NIMBY barriers to new business investment. Completely unrelated to subsidies policies.
People are too stupid, you get a little rich then you reject wind turbines, nuclear power stations, factories, high voltage electricity powerlines, and before you know it, your area is stuck on a deindustrialization route. Think about it.

5 days ago
top

Is the Tesla Model 3 Actually Going To Cost $50,000?

macpacheco Re:Still pretty affordable (391 comments)

Are you considering that in 2 years the supercharger network will be fully realized and unless you need to drive into Mexico or into Canada wilderness, you will have free electrons for long range driving. 110 superchargers operational in the USA, with another 22 in construction + licensing process plus over another 100 planned for the next 2 years. Superchargers have been popping up quickly. Tesla isn't making TX a priority due to anti Tesla sales hostility, but they will invest on the supercharger coverage in TX, even if mostly for out of state visitors. Right now there are just 5 TX superchargers, but plans for 2015 are 16 superchargers.
Plus the trend is for having EV charging in every hotel in the long run, it's extra revenue for hotel operators are a modest investment (for a high amp 220V outlet with a meter).

5 days ago
top

Is the Tesla Model 3 Actually Going To Cost $50,000?

macpacheco Re:Still pretty affordable (391 comments)

EPA estimated one gallon of gasoline contains 33.7kWh.
CA June 2014 average kWh price = 17 cents
33.7kWh of electricity * .17 = US$ 5.729 for one gallon of gasoline electricity equivalent

let's look at Tesla Model S mpg equivalent numbers:
    60kWh pack = 160 mile range, mpg equiv 152.59 mpg
    85kWh pack = 265 mile range, mpg equiv 138.56 mpg
a non plug in 2015 prius is rated @ 51/48 mpg !
With gas around US$ 4/gallon, you can see that even a Prius costs close to 200% more per mile to fuel with gasoline than a Tesla Model S costs to power with electricity.
If instead of a prius we consider a regular non hybrid car, then we're talking the Tesla being about 5x more efficient in dollars !
And that's disregarding solar panels. If you can invest on those, paying 5 years worth of electricity bills, you can get back at least 15 years worth of electricity back, so it could reduce your long term electricity costs by at least 2/3s.
Electricity can be self generated. Gasoline can't.
Of course, EVs today only make sense for high mileage consumers. If you drive little, you might be better off even buying a regular car.

5 days ago
top

Is the Tesla Model 3 Actually Going To Cost $50,000?

macpacheco Re:Maybe 40k (391 comments)

Until EV + plugin EV market share breaks through 5% this is an insignificant issue regardless.
However its very debatable if EVs should be charged some offset for taxes on petrol not paid, they are avoiding CO2 emissions which saves people's lifes.
Coal is quoted to kill average 200k worlwide, 13k USA yearly. Natural Gas over 10k worldwide. Petrol more than natural gas. Some of that are industrial accidents, but lots of that is air pollution. Reduced air pollution = much lowed demand for health care for those with asthma, bronchitis, alergies, black lung disease, lung cancer.
Refining heavy petrol uses about as much energy to produce a gallon of gasoline than a Tesla / LEAF can use to drive 17-20 miles.
Just taking into consideration total energy spent from oil extraction, refining and transportation, an EV will go at least half of what a gallon of gasoline would power a regular car (without even considering the energy of the oil itself).
Current EVs are just the first generation EVs that actually make some economic sense.
Next gen EVs will provide twice the range at today's acquisition costs or 30% cheaper price @ today's range.
They will still be more expensive to purchase than regular cars, but at that point, the extra cost will pay for itself in 5 years, since EVs are 90% cheaper to maintain, and 75-90% cheaper to power (depending on level of gasoline taxes in each country).
A Tesla in the USA is at least 80% cheaper overall per mile ignoring the acquisition cost than a regular high mpg / lowest maintenance cost car. In Europe it should be 90% cheaper, since gasoline there is over twice per gallon than in the US.
So no, EV price/value proposition will get much better. The EV industry don't need EV haters to buy them. All it takes is 2% of new car purchases being EV to pay for the EV revolution to continue.
EV + plugin EV production is still less than 200k / year in the USA, with around 16 million total yearly sales, or around 1% of sales.

5 days ago
top

Is the Tesla Model 3 Actually Going To Cost $50,000?

macpacheco Re:Maybe 40k (391 comments)

1 - Even if the whole USA grid were powered by combined cycle highest efficiency coal, much less CO2 would be emitted by the coal powerplant to propel a Tesla Model S or a LEAF by a mile than even a hybrid would emit CO2 from gasoline
2 - The average emissions of the USA grid is a little better than natural gas highest efficiency baseload, since about 1/3 of USA electricity production doesn't involve burning anything, and natural gas is taking over coal
3 - The more you charge your EVs / Plugin EVs from 11PM-5AM, the more likely you are to be using nuclear, wind or hydro, since nuclear is USA = 24x7 production @ 100% power, wind is more likely to be producing in the night (forcing even some baseload plants to powerdown temporarily), and hydro typically produces a minimum power level to avoid creating temporary drought conditions downstream of the hydro dam
We could choose to start constructions of more nuclear power plants, which would be a perfect combination with EVs, since EVs help increase minimum grid demand with overnight charging. EVs also help consume wind turbine electricity, which currently is causing a heap of problems in local areas with too much wind production when the wind is blowing.

5 days ago
top

Is The Tesla Model 3 Actually Going To Cost $50,000?

macpacheco $35k in 2012 dollars = ??? 2020 inflation adjusted (2 comments)

Another very simple fact is we can't ignore inflation. 2012 to 2020 inflation should naturally increase $35k to over $40k, perhaps close to $45k
Many of those articles are years old.
Automotive industry experts have been the most wildly off opinions on Tesla. They live inside the Detroit bubble.
I recall the critics saying really bad things about Tesla right before the Model S started shipping, and shown to be utterly wrong.
For me the question not if, but when the next generation Tesla car will come (model X isn't a new generation). And it will be priced to sell hundreds of thousands per yr.

about a week ago
top

Is The Tesla Model 3 Actually Going To Cost $50,000?

macpacheco This price range is absurd (2 comments)

The lowest priced Tesla Model S runs around $80k without subsidies.
Why the hell would a much simpler, lower battery size car cost that much ?
This sounds like an anti Tesla biased opinion.
There will be no Tesla next generation lower cost model if it costs over $50k. It must be even cheaper than that.
Elon has again, again and again proven its critics wrong.
"They won't be able to make the car"
"It will be too expensive"
"Nobody will want to buy the car"
We saw a very clear pattern of they ignore you, they laugh at you, they fight you, you win.
I wouldn't go betting against Elon Musk. History shows the odds are not worth it. Good luck.
Yeah, I'm a Tesla/SpaceX/Elon Musk fan. I'm positively biased, but not based on fantasy, but facts.

about a week ago
top

Direct Sales OK Baked Into Nevada's $1.3 Billion Incentive Deal With Tesla

macpacheco Re:Why is this legal in the U.S.? (149 comments)

Europe in general does it all over. My Brazil does it. It's rather hard to find a country that doesn't do it.
Sad yes, but hardly a USA specific issue.
The reality is most countries / localities have way too many taxes, which puts them in a position to throw a bone to major new businesses to attract them, so that in time, they start paying the same taxes as others.

about a week ago
top

Direct Sales OK Baked Into Nevada's $1.3 Billion Incentive Deal With Tesla

macpacheco Re:Why is this legal in the U.S.? (149 comments)

Except in the Giga factory announcement the State Govt executive coordinating the deal made the following clarifications:
1 - Tesla is 100% performance bound. They don't get a dime worth of benefits unless they deliver. The norm typically has been to give the benefits in hopes of the company getting them honors its word. This deal is the extreme opposite.
2 - The bill the governor's office is sending to NV legislature isn't Tesla specific.
Of course, I haven't read the documents. I'm just pointing out your utter ignorance for the announced facts.
I'm yet to see Tesla / SpaceX / Elon Musk make what could be called a dirty deal.
While most other deals are of the kind: Give me the benefits and I just might do what I promise.
Its a projected 3% increase in NV GDP @ a US$ 1 of incentives for each US$ 80 of economical benefits.
If you want to criticize in any meaningful way, you'll have to question the numbers instead.

about a week ago
top

If Tesla Can Run Its Gigafactory On 100% Renewables, Why Can't Others?

macpacheco Re:Expense (444 comments)

And I forget the safety factor. Lots of rich Soccer moms love the Tesla. Built like a tank. Don't underestimate a mother love for their kids !

about a week ago
top

If Tesla Can Run Its Gigafactory On 100% Renewables, Why Can't Others?

macpacheco Re:Expense (444 comments)

Humm. The Tesla model S is an actually sustainable product.
It is cheaper than some of its gasoline powered peers.
It's at least 80% cheaper to keep after paid off (90% cheaper maintenance, 90% cheaper electricity vs European gasoline, 75% cheaper USA electricity vs USA gasoline with lower taxes).
If you drive a lot, a Tesla model S can fully pay for itself if you keep it for a decade, with maintenance and gasoline savings alone.
Although a Tesla Model S is out of my pocket, I still love Tesla because its electric cars done right. Looking forward to the Model E.
About Tesla being sold just to environmentalists. You're wrong. Lots of people are buying it for its cost X benefit advantages. As the supercharger network grows large enough the range anxiety issues will be 99% gone. Leaving just the cost which the Giga Factory and the Model E will fix.
If one could buy an EV for US$ 40k in the USA today with 160 mile range, the car would fully pay for itself for any one with a daily 100 mile round trip commute.
The race is on, Tesla Model E or enhanced range LEAF.

about a week ago
top

If Tesla Can Run Its Gigafactory On 100% Renewables, Why Can't Others?

macpacheco Re:Not just Reno (444 comments)

Please enumerate all those new techs Germany is developing as a result of Energiewende ?
Hint: Solar panels are from China. Wind turbines made in Germany are no more efficient than those made elsewhere. Pumped Hydro was invented by the French. HVDC transmission is not a Germany invention either.
You statement just shows you are a blind solar+wind cheerleader who has zero understanding of the economics and the engineering behind it, like the vast majority of your crowd.
Go study up on how the electrical grid works instead of transposing you dreams and hopes into the real life.
Energiewende is just a massively inefficient jobs program. Germany's grid is peak 65GW demand. 20 large conventional nuclear power plants would produce half of Germany peak electricity needs, combined with existing hydro, biomass, pumped hydro, solar and wind might zero out Germany's need for natural gas and coal for electricity. Can be done @ 200 billion euro. Would say bye bye to Putin's natural gas. But the poor brainwashed NIMBY Germany people don't want nuclear. How sad !

about a week ago
top

If Tesla Can Run Its Gigafactory On 100% Renewables, Why Can't Others?

macpacheco Re:Not just Reno (444 comments)

The coal burning mafia is just as bad as the uneconomical renewables, ran @ trillion euros worth of subsidies over 20 years.
Germany scale subsidies are barely doable for Germany, but not a solution for India, China and many other poorer countries.
Actually doing the Germany solar push closer to the equator would be truly economical. In places where isolation @ peak summer - peak winter is less than 30% difference. But in Germany isolation @ peak summer is 10x more than peak winter = very bad idea.
Germany would do it a lot better with lots of nuclear instead. NEW Nuclear humms 24x7 365 days/yr, with 97-98% uptime (stopping just for scheduled maintenance, that gets scheduled for when its very rainy and hydro is running @ 100+%).
I'm pro nuclear, hydro, geothermal, solar and wind (in that order). Wind is the worst. Nuclear is the only reliable, scalable, low CO2 energy source. Use Hydro and Geothermal when you can. But most countries don't have lots of hydro or geothermal. Solar and wind goes very well in countries with lots of hydro.
Learn actual facts about low CO2 energy sources. Many reputable climatologists have stated there's no solution to climate change without lots of nuclear. Reexamine your NIMBY assumptions. If you are against nuclear you are being pro coal. It's only logical if you face ALL THE INCONVENIENT FACTS !

about two weeks ago

Submissions

top

GPS L2C/L5 pre operational signal available

macpacheco macpacheco writes  |  about 5 months ago

macpacheco (1764378) writes "For ages, high accuracy GPS meant using a mix of civilian and military signals.
In order to obtain high accuracy GPS positioning (better than 2 meters) receiver must know local ionosphere corrections. This requires two GPS signals at a minimum, the difference between both is used to calculate ionospheric corrections which is then applied to either one.
However since GPS doesn't offer two usable civilian signals, a technique known as semi-codeless was devised, that calculates ionosphere corrections by using the two military encrypted signals L1P(Y)+L2P(Y), then applies the iono corrections to the civilian L1 C/A signal, however the military was never to fond of that usage, since it limits what changes they can do with the military signals. Specially changes in power levels.
Since September 26, 2005 GPS satellites capable of broadcasting the L2C (2nd civilian signal) and since May 2010 GPS satellites capable of broadcasting the L5 (3rd civilian signal, usable for aviation) have been launched, however those signals are still not fully usable.
Today those signals were enabled in a pre operational format meaning:
  1 — All messages required for full L2C and L5 utilization are broadcast
  2 — L5 signals are broadcast with an alert flag (not usable), L2C is broadcast without an alert flag
  3 — L2C/L5 almanac and ephemeris will be updated about twice a week, while regular L1 C/A updates happen typically twice a day, so L2C and L5 signals will be less accurate in this phase

However this means there is no technical excuse for GPS equipment manufacturers to finalize their L2C and L5 offerings, since they now have a complete signal to test against, and right after GPS satellites have received an upload they should have similar accuracy as L1 C/A.
This should continue for the next few years, until the new GPS control segment, OCX comes online, OCX block 1 is needed for full L2C capabilities and OCX block 2 is needed for full L5 capabilities.
Notice that it will take at least another 12 GPS launches for L2C to reach a state known as FOC (full operational capability), meaning that are enough satellites with L2C capability for L2C to be usable for standalone positioning and it will take another 19 GPS launches for L5 to reach FOC as well."

Link to Original Source
top

Forbes tries to smear Tesla and gets burned !

macpacheco macpacheco writes  |  about a year ago

macpacheco (1764378) writes "Very interesting to read a clearly Big Oil sponsored article, and then read all comments, not a single comment supporting the writer's stupid, short sighted views.

Forbes needs to first write articles scathing the trillions of dollars the Oil + Coal industry got in subsidies over the last 50yrs before they be allowed to try to criticize the solutions to our pollution problems !"

Link to Original Source
top

USA Election. It's the productivity dummy !

macpacheco macpacheco writes  |  about 2 years ago

macpacheco (1764378) writes "Another critical fact neither the GOP nor the Dems address which is critical to economical recovery:
In 1970, a business needed as many as 10x more employees to accomplish the same administrative tasks (invoicing, payroll, accounting, IT, production planning, inventory), as today.
After the PC revolution, businesses needed less people to do the same, they got fired, but the services sector re-used them for other jobs, many started businesses of their own. However their a limit to how many people large businesses can fire until the economy can't re cycle them. The current economy is getting too productive. B2B and B2C processes are further reducing the number of employees needed to get the job done.
Eventually there will be next to none clerical employees, forklift jobs get automated, robots take over production. How can the economy re accomodate that labor force ? The services sector need customers ! Eventually unemployment will rise. Don't we need to have some limits to automation to ensure that manufacturing actually hires ?
If the whole economy hires 10% of what it did in the pre PC age, how is full employment possible ?
That's a difficult question no sides are willing to answer."
top

Mitt Romney, conservative/moderate or just plain liar ?

macpacheco macpacheco writes  |  about 2 years ago

macpacheco (1764378) writes "After listening to the 47% tape, following the Republican primaries and the first month of all out electoral campaign, I'm puzzled.

Is Romney just a flip flopper, or is he a pathological liar ?
People that tell you what they want you to hear, just because they can get away with it, no matter how untrue, are the worse type of politician and human beings on the planet.

I'm not from the US (I'm from Brazil), if I was a US citizen, I'd be an independent, I would vote for Obama not because I like him, but instead because I think the current generation of Republicans are just 10 times worse !

I do have an agenda, I'm a pragmatic environmentalist, and I'm against all kinds of corporative inefficiency, specially the government type of corporative inefficiency. The Dems have their faults, but the GOP fails to show any way that they actually mean to do the positive side of their agenda."
top

Smaller, cheaper lighter atomic clocks are here

macpacheco macpacheco writes  |  more than 3 years ago

macpacheco (1764378) writes "Atomic clocks for a long time have been a research lab item, used in production environments only in high budget, ultra performance demanding environments. Their high power consumption, 4U size and weight also didn't help.
Chip scale atomic clocks (CSAC) have been a promise for a long time. They're finally here. Typical atomic clocks cost tens of thousands of dollars each, this first generation CSAC costs US$ 1400 in small quantities. 1 cu inch volume (16 cc), 115mW power consumption (down about 1000 fold), and just 35 grams weight, will make them more interesting than current GPS based frequency standard.
They're called frequency standard, because 99% of the time someone needs an atomic clock, it's not to actually track time (day, hour, minutes, seconds, milliseconds), its used instead a replacement for quartz crystal oscillators, mainly transmitting and receiving radio signals, synchronizing telecommunications equipment. This atomic clock claims to be about 10000 times more accurate than typical quartz based oscillators.
This is very exciting, as it will enable better 4g/WiMax/... base stations, better ultra high speed networking equipment, and will help tremendously in GPS augmentation solutions like WAAS, EGNOS, DGPS. Having an atomic clock on a GPS receiver works like an extra GPS satellite."

Link to Original Source

Journals

macpacheco has no journal entries.

Slashdot Login

Need an Account?

Forgot your password?

Submission Text Formatting Tips

We support a small subset of HTML, namely these tags:

  • b
  • i
  • p
  • br
  • a
  • ol
  • ul
  • li
  • dl
  • dt
  • dd
  • em
  • strong
  • tt
  • blockquote
  • div
  • quote
  • ecode

"ecode" can be used for code snippets, for example:

<ecode>    while(1) { do_something(); } </ecode>