←back to thread

190 points erwinmatijsen | 1 comments | | HN request time: 0.001s | source
Show context
arowthway ◴[] No.45113659[source]
This is super cool but the ending is bizarre.

> A comment on the YouTube video below complained, “Not a word about return on investment in the presentation. That means it’ll never pay off” MAGAlomaniacs are everywhere these days.

Given the supposed 50+ year lifespan of such a battery, I find it hard to believe it doesn't turn a profit at some point. And I understand that debunking low-effort accusations is asymmetric warfare. But why cite a random YouTube comment if you have no intention of addressing its claims? A more charitable interpretation is that it's meant to ragebait the readers. But to me, it seems like trying to make people feel ashamed for having doubts, by making a public example of a skeptic.

replies(12): >>45113894 #>>45113901 #>>45114039 #>>45114042 #>>45114328 #>>45114440 #>>45114465 #>>45114591 #>>45114612 #>>45114617 #>>45114754 #>>45115789 #
kragen ◴[] No.45114440[source]
If, say, further insulating your house or building a sand battery will pay for itself in 50 years, it's a bad investment, financially speaking, and probably environmentally speaking as well. You can deploy "the same amount" of resources in something else with a higher ROI, like maybe solar panels with a one-year payback, and get a much bigger benefit. This is an important consideration as long as you are constrained by some kind of resource limitation.

So I think ROI is a first-order consideration.

replies(2): >>45114692 #>>45120241 #
danielfoster ◴[] No.45120241[source]
I agree with you, but one point I see everyone missing is the fact that this is a first-time installation of a new technology that hasn’t scaled. There needs to be a business plan of course. At the same time, no one would expect to see ROI figures for the first build of a concept car.
replies(3): >>45120800 #>>45121107 #>>45121334 #
1. ◴[] No.45121107[source]