All 50 States Get Green Light To Build EV Charging Stations

Catch up on stories from the past week (and beyond) at the Slashdot story archive

The Fine Print: The following comments are owned by whoever posted them. We are not responsible for them in any way.

Background: I have a model 3 and love it so don't accuse me of being anti-EV

It's nice that there's now approval to build charging stations. I don't know why the Feds would have to approve charging stations on non-Federal land but uh ok.

So what's going to back all these new chargers? Are new power plants being built? Are grids being upgraded? We already have huge and visible power problems in Texas and California (so no this isn't a left vs right issue, it's a general infrastructure issue). And no seri

The feds are approving these charging stations because the feds are paying for them (specifically they told the states "here is a bunch of money to spend on building charging stations, come up with a plan how to spend it" and now the states have submitted those plans and the plans they submitted are what have been approved by the feds)

You were replying to a known right-wing troll. He knows this, but wants to spread FUD about EVs anyway.

So we are essentially going to nationalize fueling vehicles? Or are we going to use federal tax money to build charging stations that private companies will make the profit from fueling vehicles?

Not trying to be a troll, just trying to understand the parts that I haven't seen discussed in this charging station rollout plan.

The feds are providing funding to states to build out fast charging infrastructure because the places the states are going to build these chargers are places where it is unviable for a commercial operator to build such high-speed chargers.

Its designed to ensure availability of fast chargers along these designated "corridors" to ensure that lack of chargers on long trips isn't a barrier to EV adoption.

We already have huge and visible power problems in Texas and California (so no this isn't a left vs right issue, it's a general infrastructure issue)

I think it's important to note that these "problems" are ones that businesses create but governments ask citizens to solve. Nashville Electric Services was telling customers to conserve electricity all the while the football stadium stayed on day and night, 24/7. The same is true for Texas and California. They want YOU to save electricity because they want THEIR problem to be YOUR problem.

And no serious plan in either state to fix their shit

Well Texas' problem is the "don't step on snek" mentality that abounds there. California's problem is the crunchy idiots who decided nuclear was too scary. So I mean the Government call tell them what to do, but then the Government is telling what to do. But I don't know, maybe that's someone here's cup of tea. Truth be told, they should just fix their shit, but political agendas be political agenda-ing.

And I wonder how many other states have similar problems or trending that way we haven't seen yet

Well that's because a lot of politicians like to put in people's hands so they can wash their hands of it. And that gets me to what I like this green light for EV stations. Usually you can nail politicians down to this issue about as well as you can nail down rain coming down the waterspout, that is usually "fixing shit" is something they just kick the can on because they'll only do it when 100% of the people agree to something which never happens. So the fact that someone is doing SOMETHING, I get it, it's not a complete package but I mean shit, progress is progress at this point.

But yeah every state has grid issues. We don't build shit in this country anymore. which is why when Trump was wanting to "build a wall" all I could reply with is "DO IT". Because even if it's a pretty shitty excuse for wasting tax payer money, we just don't build shit anymore.

This is like installing some pretty new faucets in your house but forgetting you need plumbing and a water source coming in

I get it. But it's a start. But yeah, it's nowhere near a complete package.

> Well Texas' problem is the "don't step on snek" mentality that abounds there. California's problem is the crunchy idiots who decided nuclear was too scary

Texas' problem is their utility providers prioritize profits over service, and their government permits this. They don't invest in even basic, common-sense preventative measures because that costs money.

California's problem is 20 years ago, a Texas company prioritized profits over service, fought for deregulation, neglected maintenance, skipped upgrades, and deliberately caused problems to increase profits. The result is California is still years and billions of dollars behind on maintenance and upgrades for their distribution grid, and is also still suffering the regulation policies implemented during that time.

California's problem is not a lack of generating capacity, but the inability of the distribution grid to cope with the extreme weather due to neglect at the hands of the same types of people who run Texas' grid to this day. Even if they built all the nuke plants they'd still have the same problems. =Smidge=

Are new power plants being built? Are grids being upgraded?

I don't know about Texas but I haven't seen anything going on in California to fix anything. Just the usual PG&E political bullshit.

Where are power plants being built? How much money has been budgeted for grid improvements?

I'd love to be wrong about this one but pretty sure I'm not.

California announces a lot of shit. They announced high speed rail, too.

Talking and doing are very different things especially in California where the concept of virtue signaling was born, raised and set free into the world to wreak havoc.

More FUD, I see. New wind and solar installations are happening all the time. You know this, but insist on pushing your silly narrative anyway.

We are not going to run out of electricity or whatever nonsense you want us to believe because more people start driving EVs. Who believes that crap?

California is already out of electricity

Oh, no! Someone better tell them! LOL!

You right wing nuts are too much. Does anyone actually buy the nonsense you write ... or does someone pay for it?

California also announced several of their lithium battery storage went up in flames causing wildfires because storing tightly packed lithium in the blazing heat is a great idea.

What do you think an effort to improve the grid would look like?

You could simply Google to find the CAISO 10 year plan [caiso.com]. California has spending about 40 million / year over past five years, that will go up to 300 million averaged over the ten.

Improvements include new HVDC links both intrastate and interstate and multiple new substations. You probably won't notice any of that happening any more than you've noticed prior capital improvement projects.

There actually has been substantial capital planning, but you have to take into account the increased frequency of heat waves [ncics.org], and other changes/challenges to the grid like the increase in renewable energy and the rise of electric vehicles. You have to spend quite a bit just run in place.

I think there's a real chance to jump ahead in the next decade, due to the new grid storage technologies that are coming on the market, particularly liquid metal batteries.

PG&E keeps getting told by the people to lower prices, and then it can't afford to deliver the energy the people want. CA needs a Fed bailout every time a disaster strikes... wonder what would have happened in we said "Bah" when California disappeared into darkness because of Enron's one strategic cut.

Because CA has no power plants, they have to pay for longer delivery lines.

California is now fully used... there's no area to put a power plant, or anything else for that matter. That seems to be what Oregon and Washington State are needed for.

Saving on fuel would be a motivator, till I just read this article https://www.cnbc.com/2022/09/2... [cnbc.com] does this mean high charging prices are in store for us here too?

Another additional expense for EVs that nobody seems to be talking about, is the fact that insurance premiums for EVs runs about 30% higher than for non-EVs.

There are abundant articles with this information. Here's one of them that says the difference is 25% [valuepenguin.com] for car models available with either electric or gas engine. If you don't find that one convincing, five minutes with Google will give you lots to choose from.

Yes, and it's also driven by repair costs. From what I've read (see the article linked in my earlier post), EVs are more costly to repair. Part of that is the cost of batteries; part of it is that EVs have more sensors than ICE vehicles, and many of them get damaged in minor accidents and require replacement. I've seen claims that a Tesla Model S is roughly 50% more expensive to insure than a comparable luxury ICE vehicle; if that's true, it probably at least partially has something to do with the $16,000 b

using a rapid or ultra-rapid charger on the public network will now pay around 18p per mile for electricity,” the RAC said. “This compares to 19p per mile for a petrol [gasoline] car and 21p per mile for a diesel one, based on someone driving at an average of 40 miles to the gallon,”

But, nice try at spreading FUD....

So 60k for a vehicle

There are lots of EVs available that are much less than $60k, so stop acting like that is the entry point to get an EV. More FUD.

with no measurable savings when on a long trip.

What? I just SHOWED you that it is still cheaper per mile, and that is assuming ALL of your long trip is powered by more expensive rapid charging, which is not the case for long EV trips. And this is in Britain. Here in California, my EV is going to save me $3k/year in gas costs, easily.

Do you know how elitist you/biden come across when hiving a speech to a group whose median household income is $38,000,

What speech are you talking about? Where did Biden tell a bunch of low-income people to buy

So they asked all the people in the audience there income before entering?

I assume you mean this speech:

https://www.whitehouse.gov/briefing-room/speeches-remarks/2022/09/14/remarks-by-president-biden-on-the-electric-vehicle-manufacturing-boom-in-america/

I looked through the speech and couldn't find at any point where he told the audience to have a bunch of people making $38k to go buy a $60k car.

Here is the only part I could find that mentioned buying cars:

Today, if you want an electric vehicle with a long range, you can buy one made in America. (Applause.) If you want one that charges quickly, buy American.

Yeah, he's really forcing those EVs down their

I don't know why the Feds would have to approve charging stations on non-Federal land but uh ok.

They don't. If you want to build a charging station on your privately held land with your own money, have at it. What you need approval for is to participate in a federal grant program to make interstate travel by e-vehicle more convenient. If you want that grant, you need approval for your project to be funded under that program.

The program doesn't want to fund charging stations where there are already others nearby; nor does it want to fund charging stations in the middle of nowhere far from any inter

Yeah. Keep telling yourself that...Bucko...

"Environmentalists despise..."? So, you're ok with a nuclear waste dump, for depleted cores, being built next to where you live, right? No problemo?

Don't take a plane to somewhere then. And don't go high into the mountains. Both of those activities expose you to more radiation you would ever get from working at a waste storage facility for your entire life. Your ignorance about radioactivity doesn't make nuclear power dangerous. The real danger is making decision based upon ignorance and fear which is exactly what you are doing here by spreading FUD.

then there just isn't even close to enough Li to build enough batteries to replace ICEs.

Incorrect. There are over a hundred billion tons of Lithium in the oceans, far more than we would ever need.

then there just isn't even close to enough Li to build enough batteries to replace ICEs. Incorrect. There are over a hundred billion tons of Lithium in the oceans, far more than we would ever need.

then there just isn't even close to enough Li to build enough batteries to replace ICEs.

Incorrect. There are over a hundred billion tons of Lithium in the oceans, far more than we would ever need.

So your plan is to filter the ocean? How much energy do you think that would take? I find it amazing that anyone thinks this is a reasonable plan. It certainly isn't economical. And I wouldn't be surprised if it doesn't take more energy than humans have used in the last 200 years. Water is heavy. The oceans are large.

PS. This is why we have engineers. Scientists don't always think things through.

So your plan is to filter the ocean?

No, that is not my plan.

How much energy do you think that would take?

"The researchers estimate that the cell would need only $5 of electricity to extract 1 kilogram of lithium from seawater..."

I find it amazing that anyone thinks this is a reasonable plan.

That's why we haven't put you in charge of figuring out how to extract lithium from seawater.

"...and the value of hydrogen and chlorine produced by the cell would more than offset the cost. Further, residual seawater could be used in desalination plants to provide fr

The worst kind of right-wing fascist oil believer: climate change isn't happening, he says.

TF are you talking about? The power line to Canada is being blocked by Maine by people that don't want a power line going through their state to benefit others.

Pilgrim Nuclear plant had reached its end of life which is why it was shut down and no one is interested in building a new one (not economical). There is a lot of new off-shore wind being constructed along with solar which works well with the significant pumped storage facility.

TF are you talking about? The power line to Canada is being blocked by Maine by people that don't want a power line going through their state to benefit others.

I don't think GP named the people blocking the line, other than "Tesla driving tree huggers". That could be people in Maine.

Pilgrim Nuclear plant had reached its end of life which is why it was shut down

Not quite, according to this [entergynewsroom.com] article, which lists the cause: "The decision to shut down Pilgrim was the result of a number of financial factors, including low wholesale energy prices."

I don't think GP named the people blocking the line, other than "Tesla driving tree huggers". That could be people in Maine.

Maine is pretty much the middle of the country in terms of EV adoption and the OP was trying to insinuate it was a Massachusetts problem so maybe he's confused.

"The decision to shut down Pilgrim was the result of a number of financial factors, including low wholesale energy prices."

A big reason there were "financial factors" was it had reached the end of its life and would need tens of millions of upgrades to keep it running

Just like the majority of charging stations, these will be backed by gas, diesel and NG generators. Not solar panels.

https://m.media-amazon.com/ima... [media-amazon.com]

If only there were other ways to generate electricity...

Way to totally miss the point.

My point is this: "Most charging stations aren't running on green power."

You keep dancing around this.

An ICE car that directly converts petroleum fuel to power?

An electric car that requires a charge from an ICE generator that's burning petroleum fuel?

In BOTH cases, you get all the downsides of burning petroleum fuel.

Most automotive engines are 30-35% efficient. Most gasoline generators are MAYBE 20% efficient.

> What's more efficient? An ICE car that directly converts petroleum fuel to power? OR An electric car that requires a charge from an ICE generator that's burning petroleum fuel?

I can't think of any real-life situation where EVs are charged using what I can only assume you mean to be portable/small gasoline generators. That's just not a normal thing. I don't even think that's something you'd do in an "emergency" roadside assistance scenario.

I've seen some meme photos showing what appear to be generators

Do we have road service toting out generators to electric cars? No. It's just cheaper in the long run to tow them.

HOWEVER, there are actual charging stations that are either:

A: Running off locally installed gas/diesel/NG generators. B: Tied to the grid in locations that basically guarantee fossil fuels are being burned to provide the power.

And, if an EV is getting their power from any such sources, HOW IS IT "more efficient"?

Does someone NOT understand thermodynamics?

I've only found ONE legitimate example of A. It's a privately owned and operated, self-contained, single charger unit deployed in the Australian outback literally a hundred miles from the nearest anything. It also runs on biodiesel.

As for B, this is pretty easy to demonstrate. If we use CO2 emissions per mile driven as a proxy for efficiency, we readily see EVs are far more efficient [energy.gov]. To justify the use of CO2 emissions as a proxy, consider that in any amount of fuel there is a certain and finite amount of

Okay, regardless of what I've seen and found, we'll go with YOUR anecdotal "research"...

https://sciendo.com/pdf/10.247... [sciendo.com]

https://uk.mer.eco/news/ev-vs-... [mer.eco]

https://insideevs.com/features... [insideevs.com]

https://www.elastoproxy.com/ic... [elastoproxy.com]

But hey! We'll just take your word for it! ...

I can only assume you didn't actually read any of those sites before posting the links, because either they echo what I just said (and refute what you're claiming) or they're not even relevant.

Did... did you just copy the first four links off of a Bing search? =Smidge=

Fossil fuel electricity generation is less polluting then gas/diesel automobiles. And the amount of renewable energy on the grid is steadily increasing so the overall trend is away from fossil fuel and the accompanying pollution and C02 emissions.

You comment shows a complete lack of thought. Your sig shows that you have a bloated ego. You are a prime example of the idiotic side of Slashdot.

The op isn't showing lack of thought. Given that he's repeating and endlessly debunked talking point from over a decade ago he must have displayed actual willful effort in retaining ignorance. It's simply not possible that someone can make that comment in 2022 without having been corrected about its stupidity in the past.

And slashdot only has one side!

Just like the majority of charging stations, these will be backed by gas, diesel, and NG generators. Not solar panels.

Electric power is fungible, so it doesn't matter where it comes from.

NG to EV is way more efficient than oil to ICE.

Just like the majority of charging stations, these will be backed by gas, diesel, and NG generators. Not solar panels. Electric power is fungible, so it doesn't matter where it comes from. NG to EV is way more efficient than oil to ICE.

Just like the majority of charging stations, these will be backed by gas, diesel, and NG generators. Not solar panels.

Electric power is fungible, so it doesn't matter where it comes from.

NG to EV is way more efficient than oil to ICE.

... and it is amazing how many people have trouble understanding that. Plus, even in many red states, a whole lot of that fungible electric energy will come from wind farms and increasingly from solar. https://www.politico.com/newsl... [politico.com] ... so basically the GP is completely full of shit.

You're talking to the wind, my friend.

People that idle get charged fees for using up the space to encourage them to move.

It con only be a question of time before they automatically unplug themselves and move away from the charger. letting your car move up.

Or, even simpler: Each charger could have half a dozen cables coming out of it. You plug in your car even if the charger is busy and it will start charging when the current car finishes.

TLDR; Problems will be solved.

Could be a very long time. Tesla showed off their robotic charger back in 2016, claiming it would be ready the next year.

Tesla showed off their robotic charger back in 2016, claiming it would be ready the next year.

Yeah, but all the focus group responses were about tentacle porn so they decided to give their design a rethink.

Honestly looks like classic engineering blindness. "We made a robot that can line up a charger and a charge port, can deploy it next week" when in fact it needs to work outdoors, in the rain, with humans around, occasionally gets hit by people who are bad at parking etc.

You plug in your car even if the charger is busy and it will start charging when the current car finishes. While this idea is a good one, the issue with implementing it would come down to cooling. Due to the amount of power being pumped through the cables they get hot and often have liquid cooling to deal with that, unfortunately this tends to require short runs to ensure adequate flow for cooling. To allow multiple cars to be plugged in you'd need longer cables plus a switching pump controller that'd know which car was being charged, ensuring the active cable is being cooled. It might be worthwhile for some stations which are exceedingly busy, most installations wouldn't be worth the extra cost or complexity though. That said for dual head CCS or dual head CHADeMo stations, I could totally see allowing both cars to plug in and having the person enter their billing details into the station so it'll auto charge once the other vehicle is done. Interestingly, if this problem becomes big enough, we'll likely see a return of "full service" stations in busy travel corridors where you'll park your car and go inside while a service attendant will move your car and plug it in for you and send a text / update the charging status board inside when it's done.

You plug in your car even if the charger is busy and it will start charging when the current car finishes.

While this idea is a good one, the issue with implementing it would come down to cooling. Due to the amount of power being pumped through the cables they get hot and often have liquid cooling to deal with that, unfortunately this tends to require short runs to ensure adequate flow for cooling. To allow multiple cars to be plugged in you'd need longer cables plus a switching pump controller that'd know which car was being charged, ensuring the active cable is being cooled.

It might be worthwhile for some stations which are exceedingly busy, most installations wouldn't be worth the extra cost or complexity though. That said for dual head CCS or dual head CHADeMo stations, I could totally see allowing both cars to plug in and having the person enter their billing details into the station so it'll auto charge once the other vehicle is done.

Interestingly, if this problem becomes big enough, we'll likely see a return of "full service" stations in busy travel corridors where you'll park your car and go inside while a service attendant will move your car and plug it in for you and send a text / update the charging status board inside when it's done.

People that idle get charged fees for using up the space to encourage them to move.

It con only be a question of time before they automatically unplug themselves and move away from the charger. letting your car move up.

Or, even simpler: Each charger could have half a dozen cables coming out of it. You plug in your car even if the charger is busy and it will start charging when the current car finishes.

TLDR; Problems will be solved.

Fees are a simple way - which is why we should pepper workplaces and homes wit

In Europe, particularly Norway, you will find sites where there are 10+ chargers, with groups of them offered by different companies. So unlike a petro station you have a choice of which company you want to use, depending on your needs (350kW chargers tend to be a little more expensive than 150kW ones) and what discounts you have access to etc.

The problem is that each fast charger added slows down overall throughput unless you build significantly more power input. You need to charge 50kW in 15 minutes * 8, thatâ(TM)s ~800A in service at 240V continuously.

And thatâ(TM)s just enough for a Chevy Volt, most vehicles will soon have 150-250kWh batteries to match ICE range capacity and large stations have 24 or more spots. Not sure where every gas station will find those HV power line direct attach services.

What is being built requires CCS connectors. Tesla just released their official one in the US a few days ago, but there have been third-party adaptors for some time. As those types of chargers are much more prolific than CHAdeMO -- which is pretty much just Nissan Leaf -- have you tried those?

If you're interested in details, every State plan is located here [driveelectric.gov].

The interstate freeway system itself is a product of the federal government, so be sure to avoid that on your road trips as well.

It's entirely possible to do...and I often do so. People are griping about a poor rail system in the US in another Slashdot post...ya think the interstate might have something to do with that? A moment of consideration, and you might realize it wasn't such a great "product of the federal government" after all... Let's consider it from an environmental perspective...wait, no...still not a great "product of the federal government".

bullshit - the Interstates are probably the best thing the federal government has ever done in all of American history. Not only do they offer tremendous value from a national defense prespective, they have been a economic miracle in terms of the flexibility they offer move goods around FAST.

They also afford average Americans access to relatively highspeed travel to any part of the country we might want to go! As opposed to a few shit-hole cities centers available by rail...

Trains - are good for moving bul

Wait... Are you implying the banking sector and roll out of cars based payment systems is free from government intervention? Wow.

Also the free market has had its chance and is operating too slowly to achieve government goals. If you didn't have governments involved in pursuing infrastructure you'd either be in the dark ages or buying different electrical appliances depending on which city you're in.

What is the "solution" that needs to be found?

Let me read between the lines for you: "a country-wide, unified, reasonably coherent solution"...for charging electric vehicles.

If there is "stomping and whining", it seems to be from those that bought vehicles with limited range..

You're not arguing the point. I'm commenting STRICTLY on AC's "gubmint is bad" attitude.

That's how they are now. Any individual can buy a charger, site it, hook it up, and charge people to use it. But for lots of reasons, they are part of networks. Those convenience stores don't own those ATMs, they are owned by companies that own ATMs in hundreds of convenience stores.

Let the local power company have a profit center service to deploy them and let individual companies have them available for a part of the profit.

This was the situation before federal intervention. Power companies weren't interested but private companies did it.

If people buy the electric vehicles and charging them is profitable,

This is a "chicken and the egg" situation which may gradually resolve itself in 20 years or so.

then you will see charging stations pop up everywhere without the need for government intervention.

The free market only works in a sane manner if it's composed of rational actors with perfect information. Since neither rational actors don't exist nor does perfect information, we have to work with what we have to slow down the devastating effects of climate change.

Let the local power company have a profit center service to deploy them and let individual companies have them available for a part of the profit. If people buy the electric vehicles and charging them is profitable, then you will see charging stations pop up everywhere without the need for government intervention.

The free market would probably be better at handling this if we weren't subsidizing vehicle travel and actually charging drivers of internal combustion engines for the pollution they cause.

Electric vehicle charging stations should be like ATMs you see in the convenience stores. Let the local power company have a profit center service to deploy them and let individual companies have them available for a part of the profit. If people buy the electric vehicles and charging them is profitable, then you will see charging stations pop up everywhere without the need for government intervention.

The thing is, ATMs are becoming less and less convenient. Its pretty much easier and faster to go into the shop, buy a single item and withdraw cash at the self service checkout than look for an ATM. The problem with putting charging points everywhere is both availability and maintenance. My PHEV owning friend tells me out of the 10 odd chargers at his local supermarket, there will be maybe 1 or 2 working and usually a line for those. Stores loved putting them in, hate making sure they work, they've poppe

They should someday, but ATMs didn't start that way either. Here's an article from 97 talking about the novelty of using them at convenience stores. They'd been around about 30 years at that point. https://www.sfgate.com/busines... [sfgate.com]

Here's an article from 91 that goes over the history of shared ATM networks. ATM networks were anti-competitive against smaller banks and non-banks for a while, laws were changed, lots of self-regulating, etc. I think what you find in the late 90's might have been a result of n

Whooot! Santa can early this year. Hopefully he brings the electric infrastructure to support this endevour next year.

That's the story.. they're being told IN THE FUTURE they can build these things, in sync with other plans.

Perhaps, but at least some of the "other people" who'll get jobs doing the install and supporting it after will be paid to do it and they'll spend that money in their local economy which is a good thing all around. Sure there's gonna be waste, pretty much any government program has waste, but public infrastructure projects at least provide some benefit for the "little guy".

You wanna talk about "spending other people's money" then let us talk about tax cuts which only benefit the very top. Every time the g

People have started vandalizing charging stations, as well as parking their big diesel penis size compensator trunks blocking them.

People... What a bunch of bastards.

More subsidies for the well-to-do, based on religion.

There are big challenges to building EV charging infrastructure, even just for the very limited goal of allowing recharging on major highways. These are not insurmountable challenges, but they will be costly and disruptive.

First, since traffic along different highways at different times is variable, each station needs to be overprovisioned to allow handling the expected highest demand.

Second, average traffic patterns evolve over time, so the charging infrastructure building needs to be amenable to expansion. This expansion especially needs to account for an expected explosion in EV usage. For example, current EV registrations in the US were about 1 million cars [electrek.co] at the end of 2021, compared to about 289 million total cars [financesonline.com]. So, within 10 years, the number of cars and needed charging stations could increase 10-100x or more. This increase exacerbates the required overprovisioning.

Third, until average recharging times decrease significantly (say, to about the five-minute range that we currently see for gas cars), long lines will form at the busiest charging stations. Quick charges that only result in less than 100% of a full charge only kick the problem down to the next charging station, as more charging stops are needed.

Fourth, the combination of EV usage expansion and the need to provision each station with a large number of chargers will require electrical distribution networks to be redesigned and planned specifically for these stations. For example, a station with 100 chargers capable of 75 kW uses a max of 7.5 MW, which is not an insignificant amount of power to provide to a single station.

I'm sure the local druggies will love EV stations. Means people are sitting ducks for hours on end waiting to get their vehicle charged, or in line to get their vehicle charged, and can't leave because they can't make it to the next charger.

Hahaha, apparently you've never heard of "parking". People do it for far longer periods then it takes to charge a car.

There may be more comments in this discussion. Without JavaScript enabled, you might want to turn on Classic Discussion System in your preferences instead.

Tim Cook: 'No Good Excuse' For Lack of Women In Tech

Klein bottle for rent -- inquire within.

We Have Professional Technology To Grasp The Quality And Create Classics

Oem And Odm Service Avaliable.

Focus On Development And Protection

All 50 States Get Green Light To Build EV Charging Stations - Slashdot

Featured Products

News & Blog

Problematic Power Filters: Why Voltbox is Useless Plagiarism-Market Research TV Broadcast

2021 Black Friday Aquarium Sale: The first aquarium, fish tanks, supplies and more offers are summarized by Deal Stripe

2021 Black Friday Aquarium Sale: The first aquarium, fish tanks, supplies and more offers are summarized by Deal Stripe | Business Wire China

Audeze FILTER flat magnetic speakerphone for your office-ecoustics.com

Audeze focuses on hybrid employees with portable conference speakers

CCTV camera settings: this is the way to get the best picture

Dismantling: Inverter-From Sunshine to Grid-EDN

Best Noise Reduction Software in 2021 | Digital Camera World

Oyster restoration started with small things and shined on the Severn River in Maryland-Southern Maryland Chronicles

The new version of the pump/fan driver IC raises the life span to a new level