4 ms·
Absolute fatalities are not a useful comparison, in fact they are meaningless without the context of the proportion of each source of power. The same study prov
by tomxor 4y ago
Absolute fatalities are not a useful comparison, in fact they are meaningless without the context of the proportion of each source of power. The same study provides adjusted numbers per GWh in the abstract:
0.3 to 0.4 fatalities per GWh for Wind farms and nuclear power
5.2 fatalities per GWh for fossil fueled power stations
i.e Wind and Nuclear cause between 5.8% and 7.7% fatalities per GWh compared that of fossil fuels.
- ncmncm 4y agoYes, numbers that mean something, and may be compared with other meaningful numbers, is a necessity for useful reporting. There was a very dumb Two Bit da Vinci vid recently on YouTube about a big advance in dehumidifier tech. It had lots of numbers, but none of the meaningful numbers. The meaningful numbers they did not say were that it captured moisture 2.4x cheaper than current methods, but still 60x more expensive (in kWh/L) than desalination. There is a hell of a lot of basement dehumidification going on, so switching to the new method will be very valuable. But it won't supply drinking water. In other news, desalination is astonishingly cheap nowadays. It just needs cheap, opportunistic power, and could be built out everywhere. Inland, aquifers that are a little too salty for irrigation could be put into use.