HtmlToText
automotive technology nssu tomoyoro menu home disclaimer dmca notice privacy policy terms of use 26 jul 2018 duel of fuel and electric categories: uncategorized the good automobile emphasizes on luxury, comfort, and aesthetics over performance, power, speed and safety. this is true due to the original necessity – transportation and conveyance. however, when we consider getting a car with increased horsepower that may be safe for everyday use and give more mileage – gasoline-powered cars are the most effective choice – both for highways and racetracks. the theory just isn’t merely a wild speculation or desktop projection, it’s really a real world simulation. the uc davis has now launched the “ev project” that allowed the car-users to simulate their commute in the ev (electric vehicle) in comparison to a gas-powered vehicle. the project discovered that, a 50-mile round-trip commute could save a 2014 chevrolet volt owner about $1,000 of annual fuel costs as compared to driving a gasoline-based 2014 ford focus. however, pure electric cars be more expensive than their gas-based counterparts. for instance, a 2018 ford focus is cheaper than $18,000, as the 2018 chevrolet volt sets consumers back in excess of $34,000 along with the all-electric chevrolet bolt will take over $38,000. solving the equation with this hypothetical scenario, it could take the chevy owner a lot more than 17 years to recoup the additional costs of purchasing an electric. in other words, evs usually are not suitable for users who intend to hold on to the automobile for a long period of your energy. evs also be more pricey upfront than gas-based cars. they need supporting charging infrastructure, plug-in accessibility and specialized maintenance workshops, which aren’t adequate yet to fulfill the rising consumer demand. the added issue is spiced up in relation to mileage and range. with a single charge, many of the elite evs like tesla model x, model s, model 3, chevrolet bolt, and 2018 nissan leaf can run only 225 miles with an average in the ideal scenario. this number could possibly get as low as 170 on cold and hot days with heater or ac running full blast. hybrids and gas-based cars are better options with this case. to get full potential in the hybrids, some auto buyers select the plug-in hybrids (phev). a 2018 chevrolet volt, for example, has 53 miles of electric range, and also a conventional gas tank for a longer time trips nearly 420 miles. it applies that evs are environmentally friendly but they aren’t necessarily clean since the electricity is generated somehow. it is similar to using the same fossil fuel – only cleaner. the evs operated with lithium-ion battery, which ought to be mined on the ground. chemically, lithium is really a corrosive alkali metal which disposes hazardous gaseous derivatives when it reaches in contact with moisture, producing increased environment pollution. in application, this can cause the evs to emit hazardous gases and even catch fire when they are stored in a chilly weather or will not be properly maintained. the current electric infrastructure of those technology will not provide provision for reusing the batteries or recalibrating the disposal costs. fuel-based cars can easily be rebuilt, their engines swapped and fuels filtered; however, not so currently having an electric. the technology from the “future transportations” continues to be young and expensive than their gas-based cousins. the evs might be easier to charge, but they be more pricey in the medium-long run. even the most sophisticated ev batteries need replacing eventually and want frequent replacement. for such replacement, tesla model 3 power supply costs $190 per kwh and chevy bolt battery power $205 per kwh. the charging stations are another connection to the ev sustenance. in a euphoric state, consumers can skip the filling stations and ‘fill-up’ their ev either from the charging station on their way to function or with an added solar array soaking in their home. in reality, while gasoline stations can be found every 1 mile over a regular highway, ev battery charging stations may not be found out that often. people surviving in apartments or condos could find it difficult to get the charging plug-ins. at a heavy cost, the plug-ins have become available only within the most advanced countries, such since the us and western europe. not to mention, this is a deal breaker for several new buyers and provides headache to auto owners inside the developing countries. the perennial debate gains much traction over automobile safety issue. in theory, evs are less combustible than gas cars. however, once caught on flame, evs take time and effort to put out. in october 2017, a tesla model s caught fire after it crashed in to a concrete barrier on ahlberg expressway in austria. the incident took 35 firefighters to extinguish the blaze. recently, on march 23, 2018, a tesla model x rammed headfirst into an unshielded median on highway 101 in california and caught racing. the blaze shut the highway for 5 hours which became a nightmare with the firefighters to set out. the ev motors are certainly not responsible for such disastrous accidents. the potent villains will be the lithium-ion batteries that may fuel hotter fires and release intense heat and therefore are harder to extinguish. the battery fires further generate numerous toxic fumes, smoke and gas that pose greater danger for daily commute as well as the environment. at present, simply a handful personnel through the ev makers develop the expertise in tackling such electrical emissions and hazards. the state firefighters and general commuters aren’t always aware about this ‘technological knowhow’ since the evs are not shipped with a detailed manual of ‘101 of putting out your ev fire’! the recent crashes are bringing back the talk on whether evs are safer than diesel and gasoline-powered vehicles with regards to safety. in grayscale, the tesla model x have a perfect score for crash test safety rating. but hands-on experiences and records always prove stronger than rainbow promises and white-washed lab results. with technological breakthrough evs could possibly be the harbinger of transportation revolution from the coming decades. battery packs replacement cost may drop to as low as $73 per kwh after 2030 and also the current range anxiety can be a thing of past. the hybrids and evs may offer greater options and even more convenience towards the demanding consumer end and new commercial setup. but at this point, whenever we consider road safety for tension-free travel, it is much easier to bet around the ‘combustion’ engines above the battery run motors. 0 comment 04 jun 2018 analysis of race car brakes categories: uncategorized race car brakes have some of benefits together with drawbacks. there are various materials which are into making these specialized car parts. in addition, there are many compelling explanation why choosing race car ceramics over standard semi-metallic brakes is sensible. in this case, we are analysing which brakes are better. the ceramic brake discs offer better grip and handling thus making the driving experience enjoyable and dependable. the ceramics also push out more force while stopping. race car brakes perform much better than its standard counterparts and also have reduced stress regarding heat. the brake pads have a very better lifespan and have absolutely more of an excellent performance. because the lifespan is longer, you simply won’t have to worry about brake repairs approximately you normally would using the standard option. the ceramics can also be quieter that will create less dust which prevents gunk accumulating in small spaces. there are some drawbacks when utilizing race car brakes, though. brake repairs will definitely cost a lot more when you use this kind of material. it is harder to manufacture plus the process of installation becomes complicated. sometimes, its not all vehicles are c
Informations Whois
Whois est un protocole qui permet d'accéder aux informations d'enregistrement.Vous pouvez atteindre quand le site Web a été enregistré, quand il va expirer, quelles sont les coordonnées du site avec les informations suivantes. En un mot, il comprend ces informations;
Domain Name: NSSU-TOMOYORO.COM
Registry Domain ID: 1595438783_DOMAIN_COM-VRSN
Registrar WHOIS Server: whois.discount-domain.com
Registrar URL: http://www.onamae.com/
Updated Date: 2017-05-02T05:11:14Z
Creation Date: 2010-05-03T01:17:33Z
Registry Expiry Date: 2018-05-03T01:17:33Z
Registrar: GMO Internet, Inc. dba Onamae.com
Registrar IANA ID: 49
Registrar Abuse Contact Email: abuse@gmo.jp
Registrar Abuse Contact Phone: +81.337709199
Domain Status: ok https://icann.org/epp#ok
Name Server: 01.DNSV.JP
Name Server: 02.DNSV.JP
Name Server: 03.DNSV.JP
Name Server: 04.DNSV.JP
DNSSEC: unsigned
URL of the ICANN Whois Inaccuracy Complaint Form: https://www.icann.org/wicf/
>>> Last update of whois database: 2017-09-10T01:13:39Z <<<
For more information on Whois status codes, please visit https://icann.org/epp
NOTICE: The expiration date displayed in this record is the date the
registrar's sponsorship of the domain name registration in the registry is
currently set to expire. This date does not necessarily reflect the expiration
date of the domain name registrant's agreement with the sponsoring
registrar. Users may consult the sponsoring registrar's Whois database to
view the registrar's reported date of expiration for this registration.
TERMS OF USE: You are not authorized to access or query our Whois
database through the use of electronic processes that are high-volume and
automated except as reasonably necessary to register domain names or
modify existing registrations; the Data in VeriSign Global Registry
Services' ("VeriSign") Whois database is provided by VeriSign for
information purposes only, and to assist persons in obtaining information
about or related to a domain name registration record. VeriSign does not
guarantee its accuracy. By submitting a Whois query, you agree to abide
by the following terms of use: You agree that you may use this Data only
for lawful purposes and that under no circumstances will you use this Data
to: (1) allow, enable, or otherwise support the transmission of mass
unsolicited, commercial advertising or solicitations via e-mail, telephone,
or facsimile; or (2) enable high volume, automated, electronic processes
that apply to VeriSign (or its computer systems). The compilation,
repackaging, dissemination or other use of this Data is expressly
prohibited without the prior written consent of VeriSign. You agree not to
use electronic processes that are automated and high-volume to access or
query the Whois database except as reasonably necessary to register
domain names or modify existing registrations. VeriSign reserves the right
to restrict your access to the Whois database in its sole discretion to ensure
operational stability. VeriSign may restrict or terminate your access to the
Whois database for failure to abide by these terms of use. VeriSign
reserves the right to modify these terms at any time.
The Registry database contains ONLY .COM, .NET, .EDU domains and
Registrars.
REGISTRAR GMO Internet, Inc. dba Onamae.com
SERVERS
SERVER com.whois-servers.net
ARGS domain =nssu-tomoyoro.com
PORT 43
TYPE domain
RegrInfo
DOMAIN
NAME nssu-tomoyoro.com
CHANGED 2017-05-02
CREATED 2010-05-03
STATUS
ok https://icann.org/epp#ok
NSERVER
01.DNSV.JP 157.7.32.53
02.DNSV.JP 157.7.33.53
03.DNSV.JP 157.7.32.35
04.DNSV.JP 157.7.33.35
REGISTERED yes
Go to top
nssu-tomoyoro.com rapport :
Visitez le site