• @scarabic
    link
    English
    3
    edit-2
    19 hours ago

    It even says in the article 40 watts. I’m not going to say this affects literally nothing, but it is not a significant enough amount of power to meaningfully affect the locomotion of a car. It might make more sense in much more scaled up helicopters and planes where fuel economy is a far bigger problem. But thermoelectric has never been a very potent method.

    Also, you’ve got some nerve calling someone a fool for not assuming we will retrofit every motor on earth with this technology. There are a lot of things that would be nice to retrofit the entire installed base of the world with. But that is an enormous barrier that only…. fools ignore.

    • @[email protected]
      link
      fedilink
      English
      0
      edit-2
      17 hours ago

      Fools logic was meaning this type of technology doesn’t have a purpose when it definitely does and that is how your post came off lack of context I guess, it is the internet.

      While it won’t power the locomotion of the car it will help to power accessories even on a 40w basis even more so over trips and somewhat lengthy drives.

      Your post lacked any of your clarifications so it comes off as you simply think this is an ignorant waste of time concept as a whole. Energy recovery is a useful premise.

      But making micro machines to do it, or retrofitting old cars with this wouldnt help much but manufacturing newer more effecient vehicles isn’t a viable strategy like the guy explains above you. There’s other uses besides moving a vehicle, hydro would be one of the biggest. There’s other fields and applications this could be used for having nothing to do with configuration. All I was saying was that this tech has viability.