luk3th3dud3

joined 1 year ago
[–] luk3th3dud3@feddit.de 1 points 7 months ago

My thoughts haha. Downvotes incoming

[–] luk3th3dud3@feddit.de 5 points 11 months ago* (last edited 11 months ago) (1 children)

ficke herum und finde heraus? Oder ist das schon fest verankert?!

[–] luk3th3dud3@feddit.de 4 points 11 months ago

Ich bin spät dran. Aber eine wichtige Info: https://sprichwortrekombinator.de/

[–] luk3th3dud3@feddit.de 1 points 11 months ago

Business hours as in rural California where restaurants close at 7 pm? But you are right, vacation is pretty great here...

[–] luk3th3dud3@feddit.de 5 points 11 months ago

It happens so faaaast

[–] luk3th3dud3@feddit.de 1 points 11 months ago

Looks like this: https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Parthenocissus_tricuspidata

Our family home in Germany is completely covered in it…

 
[–] luk3th3dud3@feddit.de 12 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Du hast recht. Aber vielleicht hat spahn hier recht und man muss einen Zwischenschritt gehen.

[–] luk3th3dud3@feddit.de 9 points 1 year ago

Sure it can. Battery state, temperature and all is controlled by software..

[–] luk3th3dud3@feddit.de 8 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (4 children)

If you are comparing gas to heat pump efficiency, it is more like 85-90% vs 350-500% efficiency.

Because in the gas furnace efficiency they only calculate the efficiency of burning gas but miss to include the auxiliary electricity that is needed to run the system.

In a heat pump system everything (running fans etc.) is included in the efficiency calculation. The efficiency itself is depending on the source of the heat pump. In a really harsh climate a ground / geo thermal source might make sense. But usually the average temperature is higher than you might think.

And for the environmental effect: modern gas power plants run at 50-60% efficiency so with a heat pump you are always burning less gas even if the gas plant is less efficient then the gas furnace.

It would be interesting to know what extreme cold means.

[–] luk3th3dud3@feddit.de 3 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Okay lets see. What I meant is: at its time, the Ariane 5 was a great program. Now is a different time. Now we have got SpaceX (and RocketLab etc.) and at the same time the Ariane 6 is already outdated before it is ever launched. At the same time, the Ariane 6 program has run into major delays, so it is not even clear when the first launch will be – probably 2024.

Reusable rocket technology is where it's at if we as Europeans want to stay relevant in the commercial launch sector.

[–] luk3th3dud3@feddit.de 3 points 1 year ago (3 children)

The Soyuz is not a bad rocket, neither is the Ariane. It is just that technology has advanced quite significantly in the last few years. And rockets are just a (very visible) part of space technology.

[–] luk3th3dud3@feddit.de 1 points 1 year ago

I somewhat agree. The only way forward in most areas would be European projects. But we are lacking competent and agile institutions. They got so big and bloated – that for me it looks like they are not able to reform themselves. So first we need good (european) organizations, then we can pour the money over them..

view more: next ›