Viewing a single comment thread. View all comments

SaintLouisduHaHa t1_j1q8cnm wrote

  1. "Elon..." Sure, that seems likely. He's seems to have gone off the rails recently and Tesla's stock price is pretty inflated.
  2. "Moon base..." I doubt this. Russia isn't in much of a position to invest in it's space program and is generally a liability in terms of international partnerships. China may try, but it would likely take longer than 5 years.
  3. "Hydrogen..." Definitely not. Hydrogen infrastructure is expensive and complex, EV technology (for cars) has already covered almost every use-case in terms of range and performance and the infrastructure is developing rapidly. Hydrogen for truck traffic is entirely possible though.
  4. "10-1 EV to ICE" BYD is already partnered with Toyota so Toyota will probably survive but more importantly BYD isn't even close to the scale required to dominate the auto industry. I'm sure they will move quickly in the next five years, but not to that extent. 10-1 EV to ICE sales will probably be achieved in markets with significant subsidies (Norway is almost there, if you include plug in hybrids).
  5. "Flu" I guess? That said, H5N1 is well researched and already in the influenza vaccine mix so while its a major risk, it's probably not in the "millions dead" level of pandemics. (There have been a few influenza pandemics in the ~1 million range)
  6. "Earthquakes" Japan isn't high on my list of potential collapses. That said, a major series of earthquake could bring that about. It would also bring a significant international response in terms of aid before the unrest got too bad. That generally means a major military presence, often the US (Helicopter Carriers are great humanitarian aid vessels). The US who has a mutual defense treaty with Japan that explicitly includes the Senkaku islands. It would be a very bold move.
66

[deleted] t1_j1qb995 wrote

Yeah, the Moon base isn't correct. China will almost certainly land someone on the Moon in the next 10 years, probably by 2030, which is around when the US will be landing people. But neither US and allies nor China need Russia for that. Russia stopped innovating space stuff years ago and just ran a space taxi business. US and friends don't need a space taxi, and neither does China. And space taxis don't go to the Moon anyway. If Russia were to be a valuable partner to anyone, it would need to rebuild the space infrastructure and workforce that it has let atrophy. And I don't see any signs of that happening.

Russia used to be a dominant space power. It no longer is, and it's the fault of the kleptocrats. Russia sent up the first person, the first woman, the first satellite, the first space station - it did so much. And the thieves ruined it for them. Russia is not going to the Moon with China.

28

CharleyZia t1_j1qpn0l wrote

Putin would rather have Ukraine than the Moon. All Russian resources are being spilled in that endeavor. We see that they're not even equipped to do that. #fellas

11

punksmurph t1_j1snext wrote

The US has a major presence in Japan and its society as a culture will come together during a major event to support the community. Unless many people at all levels in the government die I don't see them collapsing. It would do a ton of damage to the economy though. The US would immediately jump in to help using its military. Those stationed in Japan would move to humanitarian relief and ships in Hawaii and San Diego would be immediately dispatched. you could have 3 air craft carries, 8 large amphibious ships (including 3 help carriers) and a whole range of smaller vessels there within 2 weeks. They would spread out and start support every majorly affect community.

2

AnotherDayinGold t1_j1qrm3s wrote

With our current grid, I could totally see hydrogen cell tech becoming at least equal to EVs. I spent Christmas with no power because the grid can’t support everyone heating their homes. Why do you say it’s possible for trucks but not regular drivers if they still need infrastructure?

1

SaintLouisduHaHa t1_j1rcmah wrote

Hydrogen may still see more widespread adoption, but definitely not in the next five years. As for trucks, they tend to rely on more centralized infrastructure and have a better use case for hydrogen over batteries (energy density).

2