[ExI] seemingly big advance in electrical energy storage

Adrian Tymes atymes at gmail.com
Sat Jan 7 20:09:27 UTC 2012

On Sat, Jan 7, 2012 at 11:03 AM, Jeff Davis <jrd1415 at gmail.com> wrote:
> [I throw in the last because significant weight reduction results in a
> cascade of efficiencies in the EV context: smaller "battery pack"
> allows smaller frame, suspension, and motor, which allows still
> smaller "battery pack" which allows still smaller frame, suspension,
> and motor.  Iterate.]

Or, y'know, don't iterate.  Just pick a configuration it enables that
previously wasn't possible.

Not to diminish this - it's great if it's real and can be commercialized.
But generally, "X for Y lets you get away with smaller Z, which means
you need less Y, which means you can do even smaller Z" is
deceptive - first and foremost to the person thinking it.  It is
technically correct, but the returns diminish rapidly.  Furthermore,
in practice, more things tend to be added to take advantage of the
newly freed up capacity.

But if you want to truly appreciate what it frees up, don't pretend
you can keep iterating.  Rather, look at the numbers to see what is
now possible, that wasn't.

More information about the extropy-chat mailing list