91–100 of 154 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Talk about putting words in someone's mouth. The original comment merely points out an interesting note in that both parties have their own interest in solar. You make so many specific counter-claims to a simple sentence that it seems like you're responding to the wrong comment.
If I misinterpreted the parent, I'm genuinely happy to delete my post and apologize. But I don't think I did.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
EVs burn frequently on the internet. Compared to the fema estimate of 171,500 highway car fires per year. https://www.usfa.fema.gov/downloads/pdf/statistics/v19i2.pdf Tesla has contributed 14 total since 2013. I know of at least 2 other cases by others have been reported https://www.theguardian.com/technology/2019/apr/22/tesla-inv...
Its 171k fires in 2 years not per year. You need the total Teslas vs ICE cars in the road to compare those figures. Even then not sure if its a good comparision because Tesla is on the luxury side, it should be compared with ICE cars in the same price range, not any chinese car with little safety. Common sense tells me that a big,unstable ion lithium battery at high speeds is not a good idea, gasoline is much less re…
>totaling hundreds of thousands of dollars in out-of-pocket losses, Walmart said in the lawsuit. This amount is immaterial for each party involved.
I wonder if theres any danger of walmart being declared a vexatious litigant, since this amount is clearly nonsense. If their concern is damage from public opinion, aren't they required to quantify the damages? I don't think the court appreciates being used only as a tool for public opinion. As is probably obvious to those with any legal knowledge, IANAL
Earlier quoted context omitted.
lack of clearance between panels. if a roof settles a bit after construction it might flex down reducing the space between panels. (i think)
How would that cause a fire?
>totaling hundreds of thousands of dollars in out-of-pocket losses, Walmart said in the lawsuit. This amount is immaterial for each party involved.
I wonder if theres any danger of walmart being declared a vexatious litigant, since this amount is clearly nonsense. If their concern is damage from public opinion, aren't they required to quantify the damages? I don't think the court appreciates being used only as a tool for public opinion. As is probably obvious to those with any legal knowledge, IANAL
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Lukas Walton owned 21% as of the start of the year, more than 3x Vanguard which owns 6.62%. I don't know about the rest of the Walton family - at one point the entire company was Walton owned - but that's nearly $1.5B owned by the company's "Significant Shareholder". I have no idea about the merits of this case but one should note that it's not uncommon for competing companies to sue each other.
"Lukas Walton owned 21% as of the start of the year" Are you sure about that? Do you have an authoritative source? I get zero hits for Lukas among Wal-Mart shareholder disclosures on sec.gov. Jim Walton, by contrast, does show up. Also, Wal-Mart is trading for about $320B, so $1.5B is more like half a percent than twenty percent.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I wonder if theres any danger of walmart being declared a vexatious litigant, since this amount is clearly nonsense. If their concern is damage from public opinion, aren't they required to quantify the damages? I don't think the court appreciates being used only as a tool for public opinion. As is probably obvious to those with any legal knowledge, IANAL
That's not what a vexatious litigant is. Hundreds of thousands of dollars is a real loss.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
That's not what a vexatious litigant is. Hundreds of thousands of dollars is a real loss.
Is it? Wal-Mart's revenue is 500billion. 500 thosand is .0001%. If you make 200k, thats like suing someone over 20 bucks
Earlier quoted context omitted.
These specific cases, no. But I used to work for a company that made solar components and fires were our biggest fear. The most likely issue is incorrect design or installation due to the complications of DC power. This article goes into details https://iffmag.mdmpublishing.com/solar-panels-and-the-dc-dan... Simply put DC power with enough current to power a home is much more dangerous than AC. And solar power isn't…
> And solar power isn't converted to AC until it gets to the inverter. Most solar installations now use micro-inverters at the panel. It's possible these installations predate micro-inverters.
My house is wired up this way, with individual DC/DC maximum power-point trackers at the panel, and a central inverter.
>totaling hundreds of thousands of dollars in out-of-pocket losses, Walmart said in the lawsuit. This amount is immaterial for each party involved.
I wonder if theres any danger of walmart being declared a vexatious litigant, since this amount is clearly nonsense. If their concern is damage from public opinion, aren't they required to quantify the damages? I don't think the court appreciates being used only as a tool for public opinion. As is probably obvious to those with any legal knowledge, IANAL
What amount sounds like nonsense? I'd sue someone if they stole $100 from me, or sold me $100 of bad goods and wont do anything about it, even if I make 200K!
And what part of "fires at stores" (regardless of amount) sounds comforting, legal, and acceptable?