Unlikely that its problematic, brands/stores know that positioning/caging on shelves matter and negotiate accordingly. Eye level sells more than top/floor shelf.
The issue of dunkelflaute is measurable and you can approach it the same way that storms are rated as being 100,1000-year storms. Not that I wouldn't appreciate more nuclear.
Not really, the over-cited LCOE of solar/wind does not account for the cost of (its increased need of) battery storage. As time of use does not align with the time of generation. Also, battery storage has its own ongoing costs with battery degradation.
You can tell solar+storage is cheaper than anything else except conditionally wind at least in the US because people have stopped building new generation capacity for anything else.
What is the point of citing theoretical values like LCOE when we have direct practical information on predicted profitability?
Energy producers in Texas are are adding 8x as much solar capacity (24 GW) as natural gas capacity (3 GW) [1] over 2024-2025. Do you believe that the entire Texas power plant industry is deliberately choosing less profitable and capital inefficient generation?
That could be the case, they may optimistically forecasted or undercounted potential future problems, but at this point in time their calculations seem to show that solar is tremendously more cost efficient to deploy over its expected lifetime.
It could also be the case that there are just subsidies for renewable energy in Texas that tip the balance. But at the scales we are now discussing, 10-20% of total energy generating capacity, the total value of those subsidies would need to be quite tremendous (in the G$ to 10 G$ per year range).
There isn’t a free market for energy really, it is a global marketplace and the government of every major player puts their thumb on the scale.
Governments are investing in solar because they want to be ahead in the renewable economy, where energy literally just falls from the sky. Is that a subsidy? I guess. It is also a good strategic move.
Are petrochemicals taxed or subsidized? I have no idea, it is a big tangled web. What are the costs of staying plausibly friendly with Saudi Arabia and other OPEC members, who pays that bill?
I’m not going to try and defend either way, but I don’t believe anybody who says they have an answer. If they did manage to analyze the entire global economy somehow (where to even start) I don’t think they’d post the answer here.
Wouldn't the answer be to provide a simple number for the cost of a thing (oil, solar, wind, etc), that removes the government subsidies/taxes from the equation.
Otherwise, you can tax what you don't like to oblivion or subsidise what you do like until it appears viable, but in neither case are you getting a true picture of the cost. The subsidies/tax moves a simple cost question, into the murky world of politics and society and opinion.
We are only pretending to discuss costs if the social infrastructure is determining taxes/subsidies.
Right. This is to say there nothing real or authentic about the numbers we are given. Solar numbers will shrink or inflate as a function of subsidies or taxes. The whole thing is operating within the confines of government largesse. It's nothing to do with the actual cost of energy, those numbers are a mystery.
I've thought about this type of thing, and the first step would be to do this in the browser kind of like ublock cosmetic filtering. Most sites don't apply alt-text to their images, so filtering by the html does not work for images, for now. But, I'm too lazy to figure it out.
It "makes more sense" to use a tablet as a second display when you need it. You just have to set up a headless display and use moonlight/sunshine. But then again, I couldn't tell you how to set up a headless display in Windows, in X11 it's 3 commands to set up and 2 to toggle on/off.
Indeed, I use my android tablet as a second screen for a Windows laptop and love it. No idea about headless displays though, I found the app superDisplay so just connect via usb cable and it all works like magic.
I've actually got a little clip thing that attaches the tablet to the side of my laptop screen so I can dual screen easier. Setup also works for watching Netflix on a tablet while using the laptop on a bed or couch... Only downside is the tablet pulls charge from the laptop so you get less battery life especially if the tablet isn't fully charged to start.
I'm only vaguely familiar with the "mark of the beast" stuff from my catechism days as a kid. Isn't it supposed to be a tattoo or physical mark on the body? How would the proposed national ID differ from the social security number we already receive?
It's whatever these luddites dream up in their intelligence-stricken skulls. It also changes depending on the day of the week and the direction of the wind.
For example, our current credit system is much closer to "mark of the beast" level stuff than a society where everything is paid for with physical cash, but the same people who are afraid of the mark are fine with credit cards because it keeps undesirables away from them. The truly destitute are not going to have a credit card most of the time, and if they do it's because they're cashing checks through a payday lender who keeps 3% of their income plus a service fee in order to keep their account.
You can get a loan to spread out payments, reducing operating costs would be similar to reducing those payments. It also impacts viability and resale in second hand markets.
The graphic from the OIST in the link makes reference to both the reduced power needed and reduced capital costs, less mirrors & cheaper EUV light source. Also, less power -> less heat -> less cooling.
I scoured for some other info as well: A single chip would go through a photo-lithography tool about 80 times. A photo-lithography tool can work on approx. 125 wafers per hour (5 FOUPS). A wafer contains ~230 chips. Current EUV light source requires a 20kw carbon laser.
Funnily enough, The Lion King is a property that has its own controversy of plagiarism of a different animation, Kimba The White Lion. But, I guess if Disney does it it's okay...
"Nissan invents" is a bit of a stretch. The article didn't mention that it was "developed with" a different company, Radi-Cool, which seems to be doing this for other products.
"Instead, China appears to be stockpiling materials at a rapid pace—and at a time when commodities are expensive." 2nd paragraph in the article disagrees.
reply