Viewing a single comment thread. View all comments

Alan_Smithee_ t1_itk5far wrote

If it’s that slow, then we don’t really want it running on fossil fuels, do we?

−6

ArandomDane t1_itkb1cp wrote

For energy consumption (whether green or fossil or somewhere in-between), speed doesn't matter. Energy consumption is dependent on work done not how fast it is done.

8

strcrssd t1_itkynev wrote

To some degree. Speed is inversely proportional to energy consumption due to air resistance. Slower is much more efficient.

−9

ChineseEntrepreneur t1_itl3334 wrote

This is the perfect Aktually comment. Something that's technically true but isn't a real consideration given the context.

10

pzerr t1_itlh191 wrote

To a certain degree. The engine resistance internally will be far greater at some point then the work at the wheels. The overall efficiency at slow speeds will be far worse.

Ie. A car traveling at 1kph while idling will only make 200km before the tank is empty. (20 hours). There always is a sweet spot. In farm equipment, tractor speeds are far lower and thus air resistance is negligible when compared to the work they do.

2

domesticatedprimate t1_itkwdwq wrote

Also, who said anything about fossil fuels?

4

Alan_Smithee_ t1_itl5yid wrote

I did. We don’t want to trade one Environmental issue for another.

0