Pat @Pat@qoto.org

(from https://qoto.org/@lucifargundam/107449561857051096)

>"Is there enough infrastructure to support going on a trip, longer than 200 Km?"

Yes, there is. Before this decade is out, there will be cars with a range exceeding 1500Km.

>"For this technology to reach any sort of adoption, the electric grid is going to need massive retooling too."

Too late. It's already here, it's been adopted. Nearly every auto manufacturer is now into electric cars and most will stop making the old putt-putt cars in a few years. (The grid can handle that expected increase in load today, no retooling needed.)

@lucifargundam @marathon

#electricCar #auto #grid #electric #car #tesla #battery #charger

@lucifargundam @trinsec

Thank God they specified that it's artificially flavored!

@olamundo

If you give permission, it's not stolen.

@lucifargundam @marathon@mastodon.online

My windshield wiper broke, and I fixed that.

I have a mechanic. (Who hates me now that I got an electric car.)

Oh, and by the way, it costs me $2.80 to fill it up.

@lupyuen

Well, that $8 just wiped out $800 million they spent last year in good will advertising.

@lupyuen

Really? The worst?

Adolf Hitler (1938), Joseph Stalin (1939 and 1942), Nikita Khrushchev (1957) and Ayatollah Khomeini (1979)

@olamundo

Maybe because it's stolen.

@lucifargundam @marathon@mastodon.online

I got some work to do on my car too.

Here's the list:

++ Change the windshield wipers.

(I own an electric car.)

#electricCar #hybrid #electric #vehicle #car

@tripu

Being 98 years old doesn't hurt either. The longer you live, the wiser you can get.

@OmegaVariant @eclectic@venera.social @freemo @trinsec

>"Exaggeration is the new norm."

>"...and the I will punch you in the face for not wearing a mask normie."

People who use excessive hyperbole should be lined up against the wall and shot.

#dry #gallows #humor

I think the OP might be a bot. Hey, OV, if you are a human, then tell me you are a robot. But if you are a robot, tell me you are human (or just don't answer at all or spew out another scripted post).

#this #is #a #test

@bonifartius @MyriadTribulations

I don't understand any of this. I don't know who that person is the picture. I don't know what the post is trying to say. Are they trying to say he died from getting vaxed or that he died because he wasn't vaxed?

Is the photo staged because he really didn't get vaxed?

@freemo @torresjrjr @NEETzsche @mkljczk @ducheng

This was an interesting discussion, I'm tagging with some tags to make it more discoverable.

#COVID19 #virus #airborne #science
#vax #vaccine #masks #respirator
#respirators #coronavirus

@freemo @torresjrjr @NEETzsche @mkljczk @ducheng

Yes, talking likely produces more particles because of the vocal cords shaking off a bunch stuff (using scientific terms - #humor).

Smoke does last longer -- so if you use that as an analogy, and tell people to act like they are avoiding smoke -- then they will also be protected against the virus, which is less pervasive.

Yes, you have to dig into the articles to understand what they offer. Many times the studies don't offer much additional to the body of knowledge because of how they designed, etc.

One thing I know for sure, most reporters who cover this area are certainly not up to the task. The same could probably be said about those who are in policy-making positions as well.

@freemo @torresjrjr @NEETzsche @mkljczk @ducheng

>"Read the data not the commentary. Normal breathing was shown in their study to produce virtually no aerosol. Any commentary about it is moot against the data."

Do you mean that chart from the 1945 study of >1um particles? Specifically which data -- it's a long article.

>"False the study clearly shows in its data that normal breathing produces virtually no aeresol (<5um) or droplet (>5um), period!"

Again, it's an overview article covering a lot of material. Exactly where in there is that data?

>"There is no reason to think that all of a sudden post-delta variants can magically exist outside of a droplet. The only difference of consequence is the density of the virus is much much higher."

I said post-alpha, not post-delta. There are a lot of differences, not just density (if you mean viral load per particle -- mass/volume density also plays into, too, with regard to settle time). The ability of the outer proteins to protect the RNA inside the virus and the ability the spike proteins to attach and get the RNA into the cells is also a big factor. It's not just viral load.

The point is that if a sick person breathes or talks, with or without a cloth mask, they'll put particles with virus into the air. That's how it's transmitted -- sick people breathe it out, and potential hosts breathe it in. It's airborne.

Also, viruses are not just protected by small water molecules which quickly evaporate, there are also larger molecules -- proteins, peptides, lipids, and glycoconjugates of those and other large molecules in those particles that can help or hinder the virus. It's not just water.

@freemo @torresjrjr @NEETzsche @mkljczk @ducheng

Pre-covid research (mostly influenza) focused on transmisiblity due to particle size, i.e., that stopping "droplets" would stop the virus because they thought smaller particles would not be viable, but since the start of the pandemic they've completely changed that paradigm...

-------
quote:
"Recent studies indicates that aerosol transmission of the severe acute respiratory
42 syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) is plausible since the virus can remain viable and
43 infectious in aerosol form for hours.

"Is the Current N95 Respirator Filtration Efficiency Test Sufficient for Evaluating
Protection Against Submicrometer Particles Containing SARS-CoV-2?
3
4 Changjie Cai 1,* , Evan L. Floyd 1 , Kathleen A. Aithinne 1 , Toluwanimi Oni 1
5 1
6
7
Department of Occupational and Environmental Health, University of Oklahoma
Health Sciences Center, University of Oklahoma, Oklahoma City, Oklahoma 73104,
USA
8
9
10
To be submitted to:
Revised on June 8, 2020

citing:
1. van Doremalen N, Bushmaker T, Morris DH, Holbrook MG, Gamble A, Williamson
179 BN, et al. Aerosol and surface stability of SARS-CoV-2 as compared with SARS-
180 CoV-1. New England Journal of Medicine. 2020; DOI: 10.1056/NEJMc2004973
181
2. Asadi S, Bouvier N, Wexler AS, & Ristenpart WD. The coronavirus pandemic and
182 aerosols: Does COVID-19 transmit via expiratory particles? Aerosol Science and
183 Technology, 2020; 54(6), 635-638.

@freemo @torresjrjr @NEETzsche @mkljczk @ducheng

I remember reading that first study you cited (Jayaweera, et al., 2020 Jun 13), and I've used it in helping to form my understanding. It said, "In general, infected people spread viral particles whenever they talk, breathe, cough, or sneeze."

Breathe.

I don't like to use the words "aerosol" and "droplet" because, as that study said, those terms mean different things to different people. When an infected person breathes they shed virus within sub-micron particles. Period.

That second study (Morawska L, Cao J. 2020 Apr) which studied COVID transmisability and made a claim about viability in particles with little or no H2O, that was studying pre-delta variants.

As I said, the newer variants are better at surviving in the air, that's why the R0 is so high, why people who wear cloth masks still get sick and transmit. It's airborne.

>"sub micron particles are considered aeresol. They arent really produced in any detectable quantity with normal breathing, though they arent non existant. However unless its humid out they are going to evaporate super fast as well."

Actually sub-micron particles are created in infectious levels with every breath.

@freemo @torresjrjr @NEETzsche @mkljczk @ducheng

Even when all the H2O has evaporated from a particle, there can remain lipids and the protein shell of the virus itself can help keep it viable. This is one of the reasons why variants can become more transmissible, because outer proteins can allow them to survive even when all the water has evaporated. UV light also plays a factor.

>"The point here is that airborne isnt airborne in the same sense as smoke."

The particles are roughly the same size, and can stay in the air the same amount of time, its survivability that makes the difference, not the time it's airborne.

@freemo @torresjrjr @NEETzsche @mkljczk @ducheng

There's a lot more to it.

Every breath contains sub-mircon particles. Smaller particles also tend to come from deeper in the respiratory tract, which is where more COVID-19 virus is in an infected person. Also, smaller particles are more likely to infect a person deeper in their respiratory tract when they breath them in. (which is bad)

Re particle size, larger particles can partially evaporate after leaving the mouth/nose before they come in contact with a surface and then become airborne, even though they leave the mouth/nose as "droplets" (>1um). This is why cloth masks are partially effective (20-30%), because they stop some of the larger droplets, but sub-micron particles flow right through a cloth mask or a surgical mask.

But a respirator can stop sub-micron particles using electrostatic filtering and prevent virtually all particles containing virus from entering the wearer's respiratory system (when properly worn).

@freemo @torresjrjr @NEETzsche @mkljczk @ducheng

>"Though to be clear airborne diseases arent o literally airborne. That is the virus only persists in droplets. So smoke is going to carry way more than the virus would."

It's not the particle size with the smoke/virus comparison. Airborne COVID-19 can be in particles nearly as small the virus itself, <200nm. Anything below 1um is going to hang around in the air a long time. The difference between smoke and virus is that smoke particles can continue to cause sensors in the nose to detect them for days or even weeks, whereas a virus will die usually within hours. The virus dies before their particles settle.

But particles containing virus can spread throughout an entire room within a few minutes while the virus is still viable.

@freemo @torresjrjr @NEETzsche @mkljczk @ducheng

You shouldn't be in the same room as others without a properly worn respirator. You shouldn't go into a room that others have recently been in.

It's an airborne disease. That means if anyone else within temporal/spacial proximity were smoking and you could smell the smoke, you're too close (in time or space).

Although smell is a parts-per-billion sensor and likely can detect levels that would not result in viral inoculation, it's a simple way to explain to people how cautious they should be if they don't want to get infected.