LinkBack URL
About LinkBacksRead more.Company announces that £2 billion will be spent on automotive and battery development.
Read more.Company announces that £2 billion will be spent on automotive and battery development.
Sounds like a great way to clean up the environment
Jon
glad to hear Dyson doing well
Here's your coat...Originally Posted by Jonj1611
Sounds like a great way to clean up the environment
And if it fails, they'll just have to suck it up. At least there's a vacuum in the market, and they can hoover ... sorry, Dyson up the crumbs left by the big boys.Sounds like a great way to clean up the environment
Hopefully, that's the puns done.
Jonj1611 (27-09-2017)
"At the source" - all you're doing is moving the source from the vehicle to the power station at a markedly reduced efficiency as a result.
Plus I'm really not sure how much "innovation" has gone into their latest products... yes the vacuum cleaner advancements have been pretty cool but this whole fan and hairdryer thing is using well established concepts and then applying a HUGE price tag after spending lots of money doing things like ensuring the resonance of the thing produces a noise that is pleasing to the ear.
Best thing I ever saw done to a Dyson hairdyer? It being put into an equally excessively priced blender on youtube.
They may well be established concepts but nobody had successfully brought them to market before.
One can only hope
Hopefully, that's the puns done.
Jon
The massive solid state battery investment is going to be awesome
"A society grows great when old men plant trees whose shade they know they shall never sit in."
Oooh a Dyson car. So; massively overpriced*, hideous to look at*, not particularly well made*, overly complex*, and a chunk of the money spent on one goes into James Dyson's pocket.
*IMO
No thanks.
A Dyson car, surely its going to suck.....
The way I see it is if they get one bit right then the others will copy it and electric cars will benefit in general.
Its all very well not making a sports car but the first to make a resonable family car with a decent range at a low price will clean up.
I'm quite excited to see what they come up with. I've heard that the heavy / exotic metals required for the batteries in electric cars effectively reduce the environmental benefit of going electric. Hopefully in the next 5-10 years battery technology will improve and become more environmentally friendly.
I'd like to see electric performance motorbikes too!
hexus trust : n(baby):n(lover):n(sky)|>P(Name)>>nopes
Be Careful on the Internet! I ran and tackled a drive by mining attack today. It's not designed to do anything than provide fake texts (say!)
No heavy metals in the traction battery! Lithium is a very ‘light’ alkali metal! In fact it is the first solid (at room temperatures) element coming after helium and hydrogen in the periodic table.
Although not the most common element, it isn’t particularly rare or exotic. However as it is very reactive it is not found in its metallic state in nature.
(\__/)
(='.'=)
(")_(")
Been helped or just 'Like' a post? Use the Thanks button!
My broadband speed - 750 Meganibbles/minute
I understand what he wrote differently - "Rather than filtering emissions at the exhaust pipe, today we have the ability to solve it at the source." He's talking about soot and particulates.
Fossil-fuel cars carry catalytic converters and diesel particulate filters to reduce emissions. Moving that to the power station means you can concentrate efforts there, and as power generation moves over to sustainable sources it becomes less of a problem too. I'm not sure why you think that's less efficient.
Definitely not reduced efficiency, even coal power plants are much more efficient than a car engine, even taking into account power transmission and charging losses. Additionally over the last quarter in the UK over half of power came from low carbon sources (in other words, Nuclear and Renewables, the latter comprising 24% of all power generation). So no, even if fossil fuel power plants were less efficient, this would still be mitigated by the low carbon sources.
"No one ever brought them to market before" - absolutely and this is where I'd argue Dyson's real skill lies. In the marketing. They conned a load of hospitals into putting their hand dryers in on the grounds they were "more hygienic". Research soon proved this not to be the case but the marketing crap still flies. Their hairdryer uses well established concepts to propel air in a slightly different manner, costs a fortune and when independently tested doesn't actually dry any faster or better than a normal hairdryer. I would argue that the reason these ideas haven't been brought to market before is that they're expensive and not an improvement on the existing technology, requiring a massive marketing budget and the "well it's a Dyson so it must be superior" idea to be in everyone's heads.
As I say, their vacuum cleaner division is pretty innovative with some cool stuff but the rest is just reinventing the wheel with no (or little) improvement on existing products at greatly increased cost.
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote