News for hackers. Stuff that matters.
Re:How not to build a ship: the USS Ford by CaveTech on Wednesday June 07, 2017 @06:40PM (#14510410)
> The new EMALS stores an enormous electrical charge -- enough to power 12,000 homes for three seconds

It's hard to not love how prevasive arbitrary metrics are in modern day sports and reporting.

Re:How not to build a ship: the USS Ford by LeifCarrotson on Wednesday June 07, 2017 @07:20PM (#14510652)
The wiki says it's 484 megajoules, delivered in 3 seconds. That is equivalent to 134 mega-watthours,

For a potentially more useful arbitrary metric, that's a bit less than two Model S batteries. Except it delivers all the energy in seconds, and charges in 45 seconds, and isn't limited to a few hundred charge cycles. It's a kinetic flywheel storage system, but I wonder if it would be built today using a giant lithium-ion pack (many Tesla PowerWalls, basically) or a supercap array.

Re:How not to build a ship: the USS Ford by maxerickson on Wednesday June 07, 2017 @07:37PM (#14510738)
134 kilowatt-hours.

1 megawatt-hour is 3600 megajoules.

Re:How not to build a ship: the USS Ford by LeifCarrotson on Thursday June 08, 2017 @10:38AM (#14514463)
Thank you for the correction.

It seems like this sort of energy could be very feasible with supercaps, lithium-ion, or lead acid, at that level.

Re:How not to build a ship: the USS Ford by maxerickson on Thursday June 08, 2017 @12:09PM (#14515147)
Like you said in your other comment, the energy is a couple Tesla batteries. It's the power and cycling requirements that are hard.
Re:How not to build a ship: the USS Ford by NikolaeVarius on Wednesday June 07, 2017 @08:47PM (#14511055)
Doubt it. A large purpose of this kind of system is to make it non explosive,
Re:How not to build a ship: the USS Ford by Robotbeat on Wednesday June 07, 2017 @09:14PM (#14511167)
Flywheels fail by basically exploding.
Re:How not to build a ship: the USS Ford by ghshephard on Wednesday June 07, 2017 @07:00PM (#14510532)
I don't think this is that arbitrary - presumably the charge is delivered over 3 seconds, and the question is, how much power did that represent - 12,000 homes is a pretty good way of mentally visualizing how much power is being delivered.
Re:How not to build a ship: the USS Ford by llukas on Wednesday June 07, 2017 @07:04PM (#14510556)
If only we could have arbitrary units that everybody would understand without ambiguity? Like kWh/MWh or Joules... no?
Re:How not to build a ship: the USS Ford by irrational on Wednesday June 07, 2017 @07:09PM (#14510590)
I guess it depends on what you mean by "everybody would understand". Most people I know would get glazed eyes if I used terms like those. How many people really have context for understanding what those terms mean? Most people can understand what meter is since there are so many items laying around that are approximately 1 meter long.
Re:How not to build a ship: the USS Ford by llukas on Wednesday June 07, 2017 @07:31PM (#14510712)
You conveniently ignored part "without ambiguity".

I don't think it is much to expect that one would be able to connect a electricity bill where one pays for monthly energy usage stated in kwh to article where energy is also stated in kwh.

Re:How not to build a ship: the USS Ford by uw_rob on Wednesday June 07, 2017 @08:03PM (#14510871)
I think it is too much. I pay my hydrobill and I still have no idea how to visualize a hwh. However saying 12000 homes for 3 seconds makes sense for me. It is roughly the same power that a large neighbourhood would use.

Also, what does the ambiguity matter in this situation? This isn't a technical paper.

Re:How not to build a ship: the USS Ford by ams6110 on Wednesday June 07, 2017 @07:49PM (#14510800)
I'd wager few people look at the kilowatt hours on their electric bill. They look at the dollars. I know that my monthly electric bill is about $100. I would have no idea how many kilowatt hours without looking.
Re:How not to build a ship: the USS Ford by irrational on Thursday June 08, 2017 @12:07PM (#14515134)
Hah! I've never looked at the amount of kwh I've used on my bill. All that matters is the amount of money I owe.
Re:How not to build a ship: the USS Ford by ghshephard on Wednesday June 07, 2017 @07:25PM (#14510678)
I work in the energy metering industry, but 12,000 homes over 3 seconds is still a more meaningful measurement of power for me than 72 kWh (or whatever the value they were trying to capture was). It really is a lot of power to send in 3 seconds.
Re:How not to build a ship: the USS Ford by llukas on Wednesday June 07, 2017 @07:33PM (#14510716)
I am European and I don't have a clue how much energy US home uses. Is it one in Alaska, Hawaii or maybe New Jersey?
Re:How not to build a ship: the USS Ford by ryandrake on Wednesday June 07, 2017 @07:54PM (#14510821)
Let alone: Is it a sprawling mansion or a one person apartment?
Re:How not to build a ship: the USS Ford by dghughes on Wednesday June 07, 2017 @08:06PM (#14510891)
My go-to number is 1,234 J it's equivalent to a major league baseball player hitting a ball as hard as he can.
Re:How not to build a ship: the USS Ford by yongjik on Wednesday June 07, 2017 @06:48PM (#14510459)
In other words, enough to power half a home for 20 hours. :/
Re:How not to build a ship: the USS Ford by WillPostForFood on Wednesday June 07, 2017 @06:56PM (#14510510)
The time used isn't completely arbitrary, the system launch time is ~3 seconds.
Re:How not to build a ship: the USS Ford by B1FF_PSUVM on Wednesday June 07, 2017 @06:49PM (#14510467)
Also lovely how carefully they avoided the pedestrian 'one home for ten hours', or the overwrought '36,000 homes for one second'.

Goldilocks and Aristotle on board.

Re:How not to build a ship: the USS Ford by ghshephard on Wednesday June 07, 2017 @07:00PM (#14510533)
It's because the charge is delivered over 3 seconds, that they used 3 seconds.