Where? I find them either retarded or blind enough. Almost everyone these days understands the need for energy, if not entropy. And I don't think we have an imminent Innovation breakthrough in long term future.
Not everyone carries The Feynman Lectures on Physics with them on vacay. If today a country decides to invest in say Electronic Vehicles with the surge in this EV thing to lessen CO2 emissions and energy trends and the subsequent huge enthalpy of reactions, they need to have a few things in mind to complete the programme and they include:
Large government funding to recognise it as a national endeavour
Interests of businesses, researchers and tech for R&D, and even students for a national recognition
Finding spots in the country to house EV units and factories
Global market demand and supply, and maintenance of production and units at par with latest technology
And while most people who talk about energy crisis and levelheaded opinions would end their list here, those who do not believe in this "godly innovation that can change the future" will list down further:
Security of technology and researchers, patents and boosting researche
Establishment of cooling units to compensate for heat produced in intercalation and deintercalation reactions (For example India has only charging stations and no cooling stations which is laughable)
Recognition of excess energy utilised in cooling stations
and other things I might be missing...
Combine these costs and it exceeds the programme budget. The difference between declaring "theory" as "confirmatory empirical evidence " lies in recognising reality as it undermines realistic budget practices and associated environmental concerns.
This is a singular example, feel free to pull in further "empirical evidence", it would eventually boil down to money. That's why I support bitcoin. 😝
Where? I find them either retarded or blind enough. Almost everyone these days understands the need for energy, if not entropy. And I don't think we have an imminent Innovation breakthrough in long term future.
Not everyone carries The Feynman Lectures on Physics with them on vacay.
If today a country decides to invest in say Electronic Vehicles with the surge in this EV thing to lessen CO2 emissions and energy trends and the subsequent huge enthalpy of reactions, they need to have a few things in mind to complete the programme and they include:
And while most people who talk about energy crisis and levelheaded opinions would end their list here, those who do not believe in this "godly innovation that can change the future" will list down further:
and other things I might be missing...
Combine these costs and it exceeds the programme budget. The difference between declaring "theory" as "confirmatory empirical evidence " lies in recognising reality as it undermines realistic budget practices and associated environmental concerns.
This is a singular example, feel free to pull in further "empirical evidence", it would eventually boil down to money. That's why I support bitcoin. 😝