Build/Boost

11.3K posts

Build/Boost banner
Build/Boost

Build/Boost

@BuildBoost

I Want You to Build ad astra per aspera We must Reindustrialize DMs open Who am I? @corviddesk

Valles Marineris, Mars Katılım Mayıs 2023
1.7K Takip Edilen2.4K Takipçiler
Sabitlenmiş Tweet
Build/Boost
Build/Boost@BuildBoost·
I WANT YOU TO BUILD
Build/Boost tweet media
English
9
28
211
24.6K
Object Zero
Object Zero@Object_Zero_·
@BuildBoost It’s RF, there are like 3 people who understand it. And from what I can tell, it looks like one of them is in Isreal, one is in Ukraine, and one works at SpaceX.
English
2
0
1
89
Build/Boost
Build/Boost@BuildBoost·
@HB9VQQ Better antennas and more height whenever possible
English
0
0
0
18
TheOperator 🇨🇭
Investing in better antennas is often easier (and cheaper) than investing in Amplifiers... That's why I always run barefoot 100W max. 73
English
4
1
13
728
Build/Boost
Build/Boost@BuildBoost·
@WomanDefiner Nope they'll just blame republicans and double down. Until they Detroit themselves
English
0
0
0
27
Build/Boost
Build/Boost@BuildBoost·
@Robotbeat There's no way this is an accurate representation of whatever question was actually asked
English
1
0
3
35
Build/Boost
Build/Boost@BuildBoost·
@HeyDanitsme It's a useful resource but it rarely works for concentrated high loads. Maintenance gets much more complicated and tends to reduce lifespan of roofs anywhere that gets any rain. Good resource as a supplemental, sure.
English
1
0
0
7
Hey Dan, it's me!
Hey Dan, it's me!@HeyDanitsme·
@BuildBoost In South Australia, we get ~22% of our generation from rooftops. In Western Australia it's ~20%. If we really wanted to, we could meet all electricity demand from rooftops, so no need for land for solar.
English
1
0
0
9
Build/Boost
Build/Boost@BuildBoost·
Well first off you need 4MW of solar panels plus battery storage, assuming youre running ops outside of peak solar availability, so youve already blown the gas turbine budget. Oh and also you need at least 20 acres of land for the solar farm vs < 1/10th acre for the turbine Why indeed would anyone want a turbine
BladeoftheSun@BladeoftheS

That's nice, but a 1MW Gas Turbine costs $3m and needs fuel. 1MW of Solar Panels costs $0.8m and doesn't need fuel. Why would you want something 4x more expensive that also needs fuel?

English
4
1
10
744
eigenrobot
eigenrobot@eigenrobot·
i assume state legislatures are all going to be insanely gerrymandered if theyre not already to the point where basically we wont have competitive elections for state legislatures for a long time to come anyone actually know abt this though
English
48
4
177
7.8K
Build/Boost
Build/Boost@BuildBoost·
@Elliott_EcomMfg For some reason I thought 25% utilization was reasonable but maybe that's just socal or im remembering wrong But yeah its not even close to the turbine lol
English
1
0
0
30
Elliott
Elliott@Elliott_EcomMfg·
@BuildBoost if you want 24hrs you need 5-6x solar and then 4-5x batteries compared to solar hit 1MW continuous. not accounting for cloudy days
English
1
0
0
33
Boer Stearns
Boer Stearns@Fuquet·
@BuildBoost Allowing intermittent energy sources to be rated by max output has done a number on people's brains.
English
1
0
3
27
Ro Khanna
Ro Khanna@RoKhanna·
I stand with @Teamsters. We do not have planes without pilots. We need drivers on trucks for safety, edge cases, and inclement weather. AI should be for the people, not just billionaires. I will continue to fight for legislation to stand up for truck drivers that was vetoed.
Teamsters California@TeamstersCA

Yesterday, the California Department of Motor Vehicles (DMV) made a rushed and reckless decision to change the rules and open the door to 80,000-pound driverless trucks to operate on California roads. bit.ly/4tL3qZc

English
196
61
362
145.2K
Build/Boost
Build/Boost@BuildBoost·
@ianmSC They cared, they were just on the side of the CCC
English
0
0
11
471
Ian Miller
Ian Miller@ianmSC·
I do think it’s funny that we’ve had an extremely obvious, blatant example of a far left government agency in a blue state retaliating against Elon Musk because of his political views, and nobody in the media cared even a little
Sawyer Merritt@SawyerMerritt

The California Coastal Commission has issued a formal apology to @elonmusk and SpaceX, adding that it will not consider political views or speech in future regulatory decisions. • The Commission admits some officials made politically biased and improper statements about SpaceX and Elon Musk • It formally apologizes for those remarks • Agrees it will not consider political views or speech in future regulatory decisions • The Commission will NOT require coastal permits for most launch operations at Vandenberg Full statement: "The Commission agrees that it may not consider irrelevant factors in performing its function and specifically agrees that it will not take into account the perceived political beliefs, political speech, or labor practices of SpaceX or its officers in considering any regulatory action concerning SpaceX. The Commission acknowledges that Commissioners made statements, including during their October 10, 2024, hearing on the Base’s Falcon 9 launch program, that showed political bias against SpaceX and its CEO and were improper. The Commission apologizes for those statements, as set forth in the signed letter attached as Exhibit C." This filing means that SpaceX and the California Coastal Commission have reached a settlement in their federal lawsuit, and it provides long-term regulatory clarity for SpaceX for future Falcon 9 launches.

English
32
474
3.3K
122.1K