I've often thought an authenticated proof of donation to a global charity could be a solution to these types of problems, scaled in price to the senders locale.
Not refundable, but at least a donation to UNICEF allows the receiver to impose a submission cost without the implication they are doing so out of greed.
One way to approach the engineering question of how to make solar cars for the mass market is to push the car body design to be extremely efficient. Aptera's three wheel, two seat, design seems more likely to deliver the type of daily range extension that will make solar cars a contender in the market.
I would not imagine range is the issue for a two seater, 3 wheel car. That sounds like it would be used for short trips and would lack the luggage space I want on a long trip. Also, I'm not interested in driving a tiny car on high speed trunk roads.
The aerodynamics and lightweight of the Aptera means it can get 1000 miles on only a 100 kWh battery, 10 miles per kilowatt, twice as efficient as the Tesla Model 3. It is so efficient that in California sun, its solar panels can generate 40 miles each day. It is also available with smaller batteries with only 500 or 250 miles per day. People who don't drive more than 40 miles per day might never need to charge their Aptera. Overview: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mpiH-Y-HOvE
you are mistaken. its combination of aerodynamics and composite bodyweight give it particularly excellent range. also as a byproduct of the teardrop aerodynamic design it actually has a somewhat absurd amount of luggage space. third it is not particularly tiny, no more so than any other compact. fourth its design tradeoff (the bodystyle) is specifically most relevant at higher speeds when drag is the predominant energy factor, its made for high speed trunk roads.
That's kind of funny because I considered buying an Aptera specifically for long trips. A 1000 mile battery and a 40 minute recharge time at only 40kw makes it ideal for long trips. Especially with very few 100kw chargers on your route. The cargo space is large because it lacks a back seat and on our Fit we always fold down the back anyways.
If you have kids, or a ton of stuff you need to carry I would recommend a Prius Prime instead.
The problem is that bringing a car to production is incredibly hard and incredibly expensive. Even in the best of times where the market shoves free money into you, its incredibly hard to get a mass production vehicle to market.
Lots of EV companies were high on cash and most still couldn't get a car into production.
Trying to do it now where it is way, way harder to raise massive amounts of cash is incredibly hard. And this start-up has already gone bust once, and are trying to bring a vehicle to market that is quite complex and has limited appeal.
Depends. There are venture capitalists who are looking at the interest rate shift and claiming they are shifting away from low capex lottery tickets to taking another look at high capex, especially if there are fanatical buyers on the market.
That said: 1. VCs say a lot of things, and don't always put their money where they say they do. 2. It's troubling that aptera is going for even more equity crowdfunding, and that they are throwing a lot of their fanatical (first mover) supporters under the bus by preference exclusively to crowdfund investors, it's a sign of desperation.
VCs were pushing "let's build things" puff pieces about infra/physical production/goods/supply chains, at the same time they were going full degen in crypto/de-fi/web3 so.. haha.
There are some YouTube channels that specialize in landscaping. I could see digitally and entrepreneurially minded landscaping professionals being a good part of their audience. Might be worth sponsoring a video or two.
A 4 or even 3 percent withdrawal rate is more likely to be sustainable. Those are also rates I see suggested more commonly on retirement planning sites.
If you're assuming withdrawing at a safe withdrawal rate you're assuming you're not compounding. You're assuming a safe withdrawal rate from principal/dividends/interest that will, on average, leave the principal constant. Of course, if you're older and are not looking to pass down money you may be fine with drawing down principal to some degree.
So, yes, $2m should probably be modeled at about $80K income per year before taxes without touching principal but without building savings.
(May be somewhat higher with higher interest rates/inflation.)
I said an annuity. An annuity would draw the principal down as well, and you generally make a drawdown assumption that leaves you with some safe margin for extended life and maybe some inheritance.
That is not accurate. The 4% withdrawal rate is based on the Trinity Study[1], which showed that it was unlikely to exhaust retirement funds over a 30 year retirement. It already includes compounding and draw down calculations.
There's a whole active debate around exactly what numbers are sufficiently safe over what time horizons and what portfolio mixes. For a fun long read, see ERN's series on safe withdrawal rates https://earlyretirementnow.com/safe-withdrawal-rate-series/
Test order should be random, so that the ability to run them in parallel and distribute them across multiple hosts is not lost by missing enforcement of test isolation.
I meant the Netherlands actually, the country this is about. It's like speaking of Medicine Hat[1] specifically, when it's actually normal in all of Canada.
Sure, but why single out a random town instead of just using the model that is being applied similarly throughout the country? 17 million people is a much larger sample size than 60 thousand, ought to be more convincing that it can work in various situations.
Yes, which feels kind of weird: first mention Assen, then start writing about the Netherlands as a whole as though that was the topic all along. Idk, maybe it's just me
Not refundable, but at least a donation to UNICEF allows the receiver to impose a submission cost without the implication they are doing so out of greed.