General statistics
List of Youtube channels
Youtube commenter search
Distinguished comments
About

Winnetou17
Thunderf00t
comments

Comments by "Winnetou17" (@Winnetou17) on "Thunderf00t" channel.

And even though they're REALLY expensive (and only financially worth in very densely populated areas), they're still much cheaper than hyperloop.
179
@TheWizardGamez It's not the cameras, it's the Starweak signal.
128
@david-3172 Still, give credit where credit is due. I'm still only 1% towards that 1 million dollars, as are most of its viewers.
18
I mean, it's not NASA's fault that it's massively underfunded. I'd say they still are doing very well given the circumstances. The recent Mars mission was a massive success. If only it would receive the money that SpaceX are burning, then it would be much better, though it will still be a very little budget.
13
I actually do have respect that he went there himself. Stupid, but respectable.
12
Well, Thunderf00t did mention a bit about that. So, you need roughly 1 MWh of energy for a full load of the semi. And in decently good conditions, you can about an average of 10 hours of peak time for solar panels. So to get 1 MWh of energy in a day, you need 100 kW worth of solar panels, that in 10 hours (well, in more than that, but in average) will gather 1 MWh. So, solar panels are usually 20 to 22.something percent effective. That is, they can gather about 20 something of the incoming solar energy which is around 1kW per square meter in a normal bright sunny day. It can go a bit more than that, though not by much. And when very bright, you usually have the problem of cooling the panels, otherwise their efficiency drops when overheated. So, let's assume the panels are at 25% efficiency. That means than 1 square meter of that can generate 250 W, so in one hour it will get 250 Wh of energy. Simply put, 4 square meters make 1 kW. To get to our 100 kW worth needed, we simply need to multiple the above figure by 100. So a megacharger needs gasp 400 sq.meters of good solar panels, and to run in good conditions, which California does have, but the northern part of USA and most of Europe (or rest of the world, really) do not. Now, usually a solar panel is bigger than a square meter, but less than 2. So the number of typical solar panels would be between 200 and 400, with a strong bias to be around 300, I'd say. Actually, if the conditions aren't that great or the efficiency is not the 25% I used... well, then having 400 might actually be the more realistic number.
8
I think you meant 3, not 300 billion dollars
8
So basically you're going to live forever .... longing
7
A unit is $2000, not $6000. At least that's what I understood from the video. The $6000 figure is because it needs 3 panels for 6L.
6
Yes, but Death would've taken the absolute clown show of watching Elon suffer the humiliation and stress of going down and (some, hopefully most) of its fans realizing just how d00mb they were and how bad Musk was. In the other scenario he would've been martyrized and people would go nuts with conspiracy theories, getting even d00m-ber.
6
@ Testing ™©®
5
Bullshit! The 3 year part. It stayed as a level 2 since... forever and you're claiming it will suddenly jump to level 5 in 3 years ? GET OUTTA HERE!
4
Like others said, I think at the first sign of trouble or good opportunity, Trump will kick Elon out like it's a flea. I got to say, it's weirdly satisfying seeing how Trump's got Elon under his boot. The old geezer still has tricks up his sleeve. Though overall, I fear it will only bring a massive amount of problems, globally and for USA. I do hope I'll be proven wrong on this.
4
@thelasthallow The launch itself is progress, though wildly expensive, but hey, it happens. But the detonation... I mean come on... totally not the reason to cheer. I mean, not even a shocked "oooh" or something like that, then follow up with "well, it launched, yaay" and only THEN cheer. It reeked of brainwashed people.
4
@thunder kus It won't take weeks. I don't know why Thunderf00t even mentioned how long it will take to charge using your standard home outlets, that's just stupid and a waste of time to think about and mention. Realistically, they will be mostly be charged overnight, when the driver sleeps. The most basic supercharger can get that done. Also, if those 1MW Semi chargers get to be a reality and actually not be very rare, they should also help a lot. Like you take a mandatory 30 minute break mid day, in that time you could charge 50% of the battery. So it's feaseable to reach 800 miles per day of driving. Really, if Elon Musk wouldn't have marketed insanely stupid things, people could see that in some cases this is a decent truck. For low-weight high volume short-to-medium hauls it's definitely usable.
4
@Unethical.Dodgson Don't kid yourself, he's not stupid. He always knows what to say to the public, be it normal people, investors or government officials/agencies so that they take his BS for granted. Nobody is even close to getting this far on this amount of BS. You can try your best to talk some people into an idea that's only 1/10 the amount of BS he does on a regular basis, and you'll get laughed out of the room and have nobody backing you up or giving you money. That's where his "genius" is.
4
@thelasthallow It's biased heavely in favour of science. Sorry that it makes you so salty about it, real people care about the real world, not about the fantasies of a con man.
3
@4Leka Dude, can you stop having EVs up yours so deep ? It's blatantly obvious that running low on fuel is much more of an issue with EVs than with gasoline cars. EVs are awesome but they specifically lack in this department (one of the few). EVs are awesome even with that, there's no need to act dumb and ignore the shortcomings in order to make EVs look better.
3
I would, after receiving an extra paycheck equal with the salary for one entire year, on the spot, so I can invest into my job security or a retirement fund. And, of course, a raised paycheck.
3
@JoeOvercoat Elon might've said that about Tesla, but I remember that rather recently (2020 maybe?) he said that about Space-X, so the need that everybody works extra hours go reach some goal/milestone. It was an internal email.
3
Nice, thanks for the info! Some others pointed that those barriers are actually heavier. I have no idea and I'm lazy to investigate myself, but it might be possible that the cargo is closer to 20 tons. On that idea, if the battery itself adds, at most, 6 tons extra than a diesel engine (7 tons battery, 1 ton less in engine+extras weight), why would it carry 10-14 tons less ? It doesn't make much sense. So I don't think that the drive and steer weigh 60000+lbs. Also, please split your text a bit. It's a wall of text right now. Readable, but not confortably so, once you passed the 2nd row.
2
@SR-ry6hs I don't think it's actually vaporware, just insane claims. I mean, for short to medium distances for low weight high volumes products, it makes a lot of sense. Toilet paper needs to be delivered too! It's just that it doesn't beat diesel in everything (not even close). And it's not even comparable with rail (why Elon isn't sued into jail for that and other impossibly stupid claims like that is beyond me. USA really is disappointing at times)
2
I don't understand the relevancy of that WAAAY OVERUSED "they're eating the dogs, they're eating the cats" clip. Of all the stupid things Trump said, this has to be on the 2000th place in that list. It's sincerely annoying to see it so much as if it's of any importance (one way or another).
2
It's not zero. Much energy was wasted into making the bullshit claims, and into the others parroting them, then Thunderfoot debunking them, and by everybody who watched the original videos and/or this one. GBs if not a couple of TBs of uploading and encoding (for all resolutions) are not free. Neither streaming PBs of videos (1 GB of one video * 1 million views = 1 PB. Ok, for 1080p resolution, the video certainly doesn't have 1 GB, but it's 4 videos, so combined, they surely passed the Petabyte mark)
2
@burgerjointgame Well, better late than never! It's a bit sad that the claimed things aren't actually sustainable (who wouldn't want to travel in an actual Hyperloop and go from London to New York in like 1 hour ?). But better be a bit sad than to be shocked when you realize it was a conjob all along. And that you actually spend money on that.
2
It shouldn't fully flop. There are use cases, like short-medium range hauls. And not everything is very heavy, toilet paper and other such things need to be carried too. So for low weight high volume stuff, the Tesla Semi should be actually decent.
2
@jerry2357 Oh, yeah, definitely. Servicing one truck per day is... not great :))
2
@sdwone Yeah, no problem doing that. It's not me who decided that the kid should go there. Also, by "that kid" do you mean Suleman Dawood ? Can't tell it to his father - he died with his son. Her mother also knew how risky it was and originally she was supposed to go, but eventually gave her ticket to her son, as he too wanted to go. At the end of the day, it's something very risky no matter what. And people do make mistakes. So I hope that they took the decision knowingly. From what I saw on Wikipedia everyone going had to sign an agreement that they know it's experimental and that bad stuff, up to and including death can happen.
2
Yeah, like Pablo said. I don't like Musk either, but right here you're strawmanning him.
2
That shows that he still either didn't learn anything or that he's still very willing to lie to his teeth for a nice lump sum of money. I wish the academia would single him out for making such a bad image of academics.
2
@crocodile2006 Ok, ok, thanks for that. Sooo, let me quote "Recover up to 70 percent of range in 30 minutes using Tesla’s Semi Chargers". UP TO :)) Also, what numbers do add up ? If the battery is 1000kWh, then 70% of that is ... 700kWh. Charging 30 minutes from a 1000 kW station will give you ... 500 kWh. You might say, well, the battery is not actually 1000kWh, it's less because it needs less than 2kWh per mile. In the video they said 1.7 or 1.8 kWh per mile. Using 1.7 kWh (and we don't know the conditions for that, only that it was a full weight) per mile, in order to do 500 miles we'll need 1.7 * 500 = 850 kWh. 70% of that is 595 kWh. Which is 20% more than the 500kWh that 30 minutes at 1MW. These "numbers match" to you ??? Really, I think that the 70% figure is for the 300 mile variant. Or in a "best case" scenario, where you use much less than 2 or 1.7 kWh per mile, but it's not the average (or anything that you can rely upon)
2
Well, as an idea, it's not stupid. Choosing to implement it now, when it doesn't make any economical sense, that is VERY stupid. But who knows, maybe in another 100 years we might've developed something that would make it easier to implement. Or we might reach the level of need where the costs are feaseable... though I highly doubt that. Or simply have that much excess energy and prosperity that investing into something like this makes sense. Yeah, who am I kidding, we're never going to reach this.
2
@aturchomicz821 The idea isn't that brains make LOTS of power (what is that even supposed to mean ???). The human brain typically consumes 20W of energy to run. And it's much better at doing complex stuff than any processor today. And everything bigger/better than a lower power notebook's CPU consumes more than 20W of energy
2
No, it's clear enough that it's a scam. We should start an indigogo (GoFundMe?) campaign to collect&help&fund all those backers and those that bought that abomination to sue Waterseed into oblivion, so Nancy and Don can finally go and rot in jail as they deserve.
2
Or just plain normal infrastructure. Like normal trains that USA so desperately needs.
2
I wonder if the current harsher economical landscape impacted it. As in, if it were still like in 2018 if it would still have trudged along with the same lies, consuming even more money.
2
taking selfies ?? On a more serious note, taking pictures/videos of the situation might be good later. Also, doesn't the GPS still function ? And isn't there any chance to connect to a satellite or something ? To do an emergency call for example. Or simply so you can be tracked by any means.
2
@Malus Ex Machina what you said makes sense, but in this case it all stops when YT said that they examined the appeal in great detail. They have absolutely no excuse at this point. And they don't seem to be accountable by any means ? Can they be sued for clearly lying in regards to what they do versus what the Terms & Conditions are ?
1
Oh come on, he meant on separate continents, not necessarily that there's only 3 continents. I mean, I certainly think he's not smart, but that's a minor common mistake that (too) many people make. Not Musk related.
1
They have a full day (monday) to read and respond
1
I sure hope that things will get more responsable. But I'm not betting on it.
1
@jonbrokaw3569 Dude, just edit the original comment to correct it. No need for a reply.
1
Yup!
1
Holy crap, I really hate to do this, but the calculations at 9:00 are really off. Let me put it in another way. Let's actually compute the energy needed for a 36 t vehicle going at 60 kmph for 901 km (560 miles for the cavemen out there). Using the computing method as shown by Engineering Explained's video named "Why Teslas Are Bad At Towing (Today)" (search it here on YouTube) from 4th December 2019, and using the following assumptions: drag coeficient is 0.6 (what I found is typical for a truck, after a quick search), the same 3.7 sqm area as in the EE's video (40 sqft for the neanderthals out there that somehow know to read) which is almost 2 by 2 meters, and a rolling resistance coeficient of the same 0.015, which seems actually to be pretty conservative, I've found lower estimates after a quick search on the web. Also these 901 km are on completely flat land. Formulas used: on short, the total force needed is Fa (force to overcome aero drag resistance) + Fr (force to overcome rolling resistance). Fa = 1/2 * p (density of air, in kg/m^3) * v^2 (speed of the vehicle, in m/s then squared) * Cd (coefficient of drag resistance, unitless) * A (area displaced, in 1/m^2) Fr = G (vehicle's weight, which is mass * g, in N) * Crr (coefficent of rolling resistance, depending on tires and the surface, like asphalt, unitless) Then the force is multipled by the distance, to find out the energy in Joules and then I converted it to kWh, since that seems to be used more in these kind of discussions. So, after doing the calculations, the energy needed is 94.94 kWh for the Aero drag resistance and 1325 kWh for the rolling resistance. For a total of 1420 kWh energy needed to move a 36 000 kg vehicle on flat asphalt for 901 km. And taking the current usually used estimate of 0.25 kWh per kg energy density of Li-ion batteries, we end up with a battery which has 5683 kg, so 5.7 tonnes. I wouldn't say I used optimistic numbers. And even for this truly unneeded long range of 900 km, the battery is much lower than "8-16 tonnes" nonsense. If the truck would go at 100 kmph then it would need 1589 kWh of energy, or 6358 kg of batteries. If the truck would go at 60kmph but just for 400 km, then it would need a mere 630 kWh energy or 2523 kg of batteries. As if it wasn't enough, there's one more thing that makes this even better, and can be seen in the Honda Accord vs Tesla Model 3: the car weight, without the batteries. The Tesla one vs Honda is 300 kg less. That's because the electrical engine is smaller and there's other stuff that's simply not needed. I expect this to be the same in a truck, and something like 1000 kg to be shed from a normal diesel truck when getting it to be electrical. So this means that the extra weight will be about 3-5 tonnes. And probably the range a bit smaller. But it's still up for 15 tonnes of payload or 25% less which might be less than the other economies of going electric. In other words, I can totally see this working. Please Thunderf00t stop these cringe calculations and most importantly, stop giving musktards fuel for refuting you or your points and videos. You represent the science community and this 8-16 tonnes of batteries bullshit is just... sad.
1
@Fourier21 I don't 100% agree with what TF says, though I'd say I'm like 90%. I like most of his videos. Only other criticism I had for him, but I think was also buried in the thousands of comments, was the total clickbait title of "Why Tesla's batteries suck" or something like that. And in that video it goes to show why batteries in general are not perfect one-size-fits-all solution and that they have lower energy density than gas. Absolutely nothing wrong with Tesla there, but he just had to put it there. Anyway, I do have faith that if TF sees my comment, he won't call me an Elon fanboy. I think it's obvious that I'm not and TF is not that bad.
1
But all of his business already have over 5 years ? So this prediction IS a very big deal, especially given how much credit people give Musk ? Do you think Ford or Jeff Bezos will be bankrupt in 5 years ? For some people Tesla or SpaceX or Musk being bankrupt in 5 years is as impossible as for normal people imagining Ford or Amazon or Jeff Bezos being bankrupt in 5 years.
1
I think the 16 tonnes battery is ... well... bullshit. I actually was curious and did some computations and for a 36 tonnes vehicle to go 901 kms (560 miles) at 60 kmph it would need 1420 kWh or 5683 kg of Li-ion batteries. Even if I was somehow too optimistic, from almost 6 tonnes to 16, that's waay to much. Not to mention that the engine would weight less.
1
@nodvick Uhm, and ? What I said is that basically I think that an electrical semi should be able to have at least 10 tonnes of cargo.
1
@nodvick So you're saying that most trucks have 2100 miles range ? That's... much more than I expected. I was thinking that even 560 miles is a bit much on most trips.
1
I don't like to play the devil's advocate, but the max cargo can't really be just 5-6 tons. By Thunderf00t own calculation, the battery would weight about 7 tons. And the electric motors are simpler and need less parts than a diesel engine. I'd say we can remove ~1 ton from less engine weight. So the engine+battery means 6 extra tons. If a diesel truck can haul 20 tons, then the Tesla Semi whould be able to haul 20 - 6 = 14 tons. With this in mind, I think there's enough scenarios where this would work. Overnight charging, while the driver sleeps, carrying low-weight-high-volume cargo and you can do 500 to 1000 miles per day. No, it totally doesn't surpass diesel in all areas. And that "beats rail" should get Elon a ticket straight to jail, but alas, the thing is that this Semi is not totally useless either.
1
@ Possible. But it's the only way I'd come back, given how easy it would be for them to kick me out on a whim. If not, well, I wish them happy hunting. Of course, it's easy for me to say this, I'm not in that position. I'm not even in the US. Here in Europe, we actually have some laws that prevent against this type of abuse, and largely, it works. Also if an individual is with high debt or really struggling financially for any reason, I guess that, yeah, it would be hard (or too risky) to negociate like that. I hope they're not in this situation though.
1
It's still massively more simple than on a public road on the surface where people and cars and animals can always jump in front of you, some masked by other objects. And they had the time to do the model and train it and tweak it. Since the walls are so close, I don't even think there's a need for specific textures on the walls.
1
Greed and confort! The vast majority of people which choose confort time and again are enabling the greedy folks to thrive.
1
While the Musk fans are annoying as hell (I had to scroll so much on CNBC's video to see some normal people), there are apparently 2 main great/novel things here, though I can't really tell by how much: 1) apparently $53 million for almost one mile of tunnel (+ "stations") IS a very low price. Of course, the tunnels are as small as they can get (can't fit a bus/minivan or any kind of trains). Since apparently tunnels for subways start at $350 million / mile and can go over $1 billion, that $53 is impressive. Unless I'm missing something. 2) they do have drivers for now, but I think that's exactly the point of this tunnel - to jump start (if that term can be used anymore) the autonomous driving. On the tunnels you don't have the possibility of an idiot person running to cross the road, so this will be the fastest way to get approvals and legislation done in the matter. In the long run, Tesla could get to be a major "ride sharing" aka taxi company. Also car as a service.
1
Yup. I know that Sweden is testing that, adding an overhead cable on some highway, on the first lane, so they can have electric-driven trucks. Heard of that about 2 years ago, I think, but haven't heard more yet. To be frank, I haven't searched for either, so for all I know, it might be already in place and used by actual trucks. Also, in these videos, I think they go a bit too much on the idea. Yeah, it's overhyped, because Elon is Elon. But the Semis themselves I think that the can make actual sense in a few scenarios. Like hauling toilet paper or similarly high volume little weight cargo. And for short to medium trips (up to 800 km / 500 miles). One metric that Musk showed was that 80% of hauls are below 250 miles. I haven't seen anyone dispute that. So, there's certainly places where a cheaper fuel, more eco friendly, less noisy, less stinky and locally-polluting truck does make sense, including economically so. What Musk said that it's better than Diesel in all regards... yeah, no, not even close. I think it might get there in 20 years, where Diesel will be required only in quite niche situations (hauling in winter somewhere very high for example. Or actual 2000 miles trips in the middle of nowhere). I do expect that in 20 years the batteries, at worst, will be a bit better, a bit cheaper and there will be enough charging stations or, for these trucks, maybe even battery swap stations, so they don't have to be fast charged which does degrade the battery a bit faster. Unless the actual battery as compared to the usable battery, is much bigger in capacity, which I kind of doubt. Anyway, I expect, at minimum, in 20 years, to have a 500 miles fully loaded truck with, say, only 5 tons of battery and a cargo hold of 3-4 tons less than a diesel truck.
1
@mnomadvfx I agree with you, but even if magically everybody started investing into trains, trucking won't disappear in 20 years. What if you need a single 15t haul ASAP ? You'd have to be very lucky to have a train ready to go in a timely manner in the same direction. Having an entire train to haul 15 tons will totally not be feaseable. Even so, in practice this won't be the case. Because, collectively, humans are quite dumb, to put it mildly. Just look at the people elected as leaders and you'll see why. People are not able to choose what's best for them long term.
1
$500 milion is the investments put into it, but since everybody knows it's just a scam, you can bet that the actual money thrown to make this seem a legit try at doing it will be only a fraction. Say... $100 milion. You should be totally mad at it. Though I can't prove now, usually with these kind of scams, the source of the money, in the end, is tax-payers money. This is not funded from billionaire's own pockets. This is also a good way to see how much they trust it's own success.
1
@MrSGL21 I see what you did there ^^
1
Excluding the 60x error, why is that delusional ? Having multiple assembly lines can allow for that. Even if it's one factory you can produce multiple in parallel. If you have 10 lines (which is a gross simplification, I know) you'd need to make a car every 18-19 minutes. They'd need more of course, but seems doable. Unless they'd need like 4000, which would make the factory be too gigantic.
1
@yakojjy Oh, I wasn't speaking about Elon or Tesla in particular, I was asking theoretically, if 1 million cars / year is doable or not. Warren certainly is delusional. Elon surely isn't, he knows most of the time when things are impossible, just decides to straight up lie about it.
1
@sdwone Where have you seen that the kid didn't want to go ? I've seen the contrary, that he wanted to go, that's why his mother gave him her ticket. And I'm not defending him like he's a saint. I'm just stating that at least I respect that he put his money where his mouth was. He was willing to bet his life with his decisions. Many MANY other people don't do that. Case in point in video, Elon Musk. Also, stop portraying the rest as innocent civilians who were just peacefully going on with their lives, when the big bad evil engineer-CEO kidnapped them and put them on the submarine. They were aware of the risks. Like you said, there were warning and concerns already.
1
By my calculations, a 36 tonnes vehicle going 901 km (560 miles) at 60 kmph would need 1420 kWh or 5683 kg of batteries. In other words, I'm either very wrong or TF's napkin calculations are way off.
1
@roblaquiere8220 The Boston Dynamics one might!
1
@tdylan I can slightly, kind of, give a pass to the politicians in this case. They didn't verify the claims by themselves, and we're not expecting to. They have to trust other people, like that president of West Virginia university. Speaking of, that president has absolutely no excuse. That's why you're an university, people have to believe you actually know what you're talking about. And that you don't compromise your integrity for cash grabs. Or at the very least not in so blatant ways.
1
The actual contract of buying would've been much different than the stage presentation. It always does. Legally they're pretty well covered.
1
@Draco-jk3rb Says random troll on the internet, against a proven scientist
1
@crocodile2006 70% in 30 minutes my ass. At Semi chargers that don't exist. Get outta here!
1
@crocodile2006 LoL, you're the one coping. I have no problem seeing Thunderf00t making mistakes and he does so from time to time. He's still basically spotless in comparison to Elon Musk though. If USA wasn't a slave-rider-owned 3rd world grade of a country, Elon would've been in jail since long ago. "Beats rail", yeah, no, not even close. "Full self driving" - any normal country would have made that name illegal. Back to the topic. How did Thunderf00t lie, when he gave an estimation ? Why are you not at all concerned that Elon/Tesla were happy to give A LOT of bullshit totally meaningless details, but didn't said the max cargo ? How can you not see that that's the typical sign of a con man (as if he didn't showed plenty of signs already) ? Oh, sorry, you were speaking about the charging time, not the cargo limit. Here's the thing. In the Semi Event they only said that this new v4 supercharger is capable of delivering 1MW and that is uses liquid cooling in the cable so it doesn't require a massive-width cable. There's no mention of 70% in 30 minutes, or anything about the speed of recharding so there's no explanation either. Even so, in practice, I'm not even sure in how many years will those 1 MW stations will get to be plenty enough so you don't have to wait for your turn. 1 MW is no joke, you can't just simply make that everywhere. And it won't be able to simply service 20 trucks at once.
1
Regarding that totally not smooth break, Thunderf00t briefly commented about it in the video.
1
The rotting argument I feel is waaaaay overblown. Just that it happens to be a bit more production than demand and cars are a bit more accumulated and maybe spent several months in some parking lots doesn't mean they're rotting. I mean, yeah, they're sitting there doing nothing, but they don't decay as if they're a fresh vegetable. I'd say they need at least one year of sitting to be called rotting. Then it will be a significant problem. Right now I feel like it's only a minor hiccup.
1
@frankt2658 Ok, that does sound bad. When I saw the news a couple of weeks ago they were only showing like 50 cars in some random car lot. And overall it felt like it was several hundreds or thousands that aren't sold for a couple of months or so. And that it made a bit of panic because the EV sales are no longer increasing.
1
I wouldn't say that it's the worst that in this case Elon didn't lose any money. He just pitched a stupid idea. It's up to the rest to not take it seriously. I hate Elon too, but on this case, it's just a showing of how corrupt (or stupid) the rest of the landscape really is. And how willing others are to chip in to a money laundering scheme.
1
@terrence8634 You said it yourself, download speed. Have you ever checked the upload speed ? Also, the speed is not the same everywhere everytime.
1
What's the thing with eating crayons ? Did one of them do that on camera or something ?
1
Minor correction at 2:45 - Saudi Arabian Oil is 7 trillion SAR. Which, if I do the math right, means about 1.94 ... let's make it 2.0 trillion US dollars.
1
Oh maaan, he totally missed the opportunity to show a man working his ass off at that bike for 5 hours to charge his electric car so he can drive for 10 minutes.
1