Correct. But in the future, it would make sense for Mongolia to export wind and solar electricity to China.
They've also got a lot of land and better solar irradiation levels than most of mainland China.
News on China's scientific and technological development.
- Thread starter Quickie
- Start date
Correct. But in the future, it would make sense for Mongolia to export wind and solar electricity to China.
They've also got a lot of land and better solar irradiation levels than most of mainland China.
I recall that State Grid is obligated to buy all the power generated by solar or wind, even if they haven't been connected to the grid yet.
So State Grid might as well build transmission lines to those solar plants and wind farms in Xinjiang.
But If you had to price in the cost of transmission lines, you wouldn't source electricity all the way from Xinjiang.
Inner Mongolia and Outer Mongolia are much closer.
This was done to encourage the growth of the renewable energy industry, but we're now at the point where solar and wind are don't need subsidies.
So I expect they'll change policy soon.
Synthesis of TNTNB represents new energy peak for organic explosives
by Bob Yirka , Phys.org
Synthesis of TNTNB.(A) Unsuccessful nitration from TATB to TNTNB using various nitration systems. (B) Synthesis of TNTNB using the proposed acylation-activation-nitration strategy. Credit: Science Advances (2022). DOI: 10.1126/sciadv.abn3176
A team of researchers from the Beijing Institute of Technology and the China Academy of Engineering Physics has developed a way to synthesize 1,3,5-trinitro-2,4,6-trinitroaminobenzene (TNTNB), marking a new energy peak for organic explosives. In their paper published in the journal Science Advances, the group describes how they synthesized the powerful explosive and outline its heat detonation levels.
TNT is a well-known and highly formed from a toluene by substituting its nitro rings with three . In this new effort, the researchers in China developed an even more powerful organic explosive by combining an oxidizer and a into a molecular entity. Such an entity, the researchers note, can generate an enormous amount of energy in a short period of time as part of a self-redox reaction. They note that like HNB, another highly explosive compound, TNTNB, has six nitro groups—but it also has three high-energy N-N bonds. Testing has shown that TNTNB produces and releases more heat during detonation than TNT and most other explosives. Its reaction speed has also been measured at 9510 m/s, which makes its detonation velocity faster than HNB. The researchers also note that its sensitivity to friction, shock or electrostatic charge is in the same range as diazodinitrophenol and lead azide, and that it remains stable when exposed to acid, water and air bases due to its three nitroamino groups.
The researchers synthesized the new compound from trinitro-triaminobenzene, which was first created as far back as 1888. Since that time, it has been considered a synthetic dead end for use as an explosive because it has such strong hydrogen bonds that cannot be substituted for nitro groups. With this new effort, the researchers overcame this problem by using acylation to activate the amino groups—that allowed them to attach the nitro groups. More specifically, the team used an acylation-activation-nitration method to synthesize the new compound. They suggest that like other similar explosives, TNTNB could play an important role in mining and engineering applications, pyrotechnics, and of course in a wide variety of military weapons systems.
Does this mean bigger energy density and explosive power but similar or smaller weight? This could improve the destructive power of loitering ammunitions and drones, maybe also allowing further miniaturization.
It looks like the best thing out there. From the original paper:
What I'm most interested in is its cost of manufacture and storage, and how well it performs as a propellant in NEPE-like mixtures in solid rocket motors.
Reading further, it appears this compound is too sensitive to be used as a secondary explosive in its present form. It could probably be mixed with stabilizers, but that would compromise its performance. The more interesting breakthrough is the acetylation-nitration technique which could be used to develop new compounds.
AssassinsMace
Lieutenant General
Too bad everything costs money and it cost the West more to do anything than for China. That's why people like Schmidt lobbying for the tech sector because they need the government to get in involved because they don't have or want to spend their own money to do it. "What ever it takes" for the US government...
The West understands the value of technology. Ever since Christopher Columbus landed in the Caribbean and started massacring the Natives, technology has been the West's means of dominating the rest. This has been the basis of Western imperialism for over 500 years.
During history, especially in the 19th and 20th centuries, many other countries tried to "modernize" themselves and they succeeded to varying degrees. The biggest examples include the Soviet Union and Japan, but pretty much every country tried to modernize at one point. They managed to achieve success in specific technologies, but they all failed to equal the West in the end. Why?
Because while they managed to catch up via technology transfer, they failed to set up the long run institutions which would enable them to generate more science and technology output than the West indigenously, and/or they lacked the scale to do so. The West has always generated more new technology in its indigenous ecosystem than everyone else, when you look comprehensively across all fields. Even so, the West is fanatical about retaining this advantage because they know it is at the source of their power over others. The West also knows it doesn't have the numbers, since they are no more than 10% of the world's population, so they use various strategies like immigration, alliances and globalization to harvest the rest of the world.
Last edited:
I don't know how many people on this forum live in America, but I do. Eric Schmidt is completely right in what he says. He is a truly a smart man. Too bad for him that America is currently run by a bunch of really stupid and corrupted politicians. For every Eric Schmidt that advocates sensible policies, there is a whole bunch of trump acolytes advocating really stupid policies. It would be very hard for America to adopt certain consistent policies on ai, clean energy and EV when the policy makers are busy taking orders from donors that want something else.
AssassinsMace
Lieutenant General
I just don't live in the US. I was born in the US and I know my rights like free speech. What's the point of valuing those things if people don't get to exercise them? Isn't that why the US is so great that they get to wage illegal wars and committing war crimes like using the false pretense of WMDs to invade Iraq while Russia can't? It's called being a liar in believing those things if anyone has a problem with it.
Yeah there's nothing wrong with what Schmidt is doing. It's just disingenuous. China does not affect how much money the US government spends on science and technology. That's controlled by US greed. China is the easiest blame to avoid looking at everything ease like how tech companies just want the US government to hand them money. The reason why people like Schmidt have to use dog whistles like China is because Americans don't trust US corporations with that money.