4 ms·
~0.73 seems about right. 0.01 is about 1.26 MW. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kardashev_scale#:~:text=equivalent%20to%20an%20average%20power%20consumption%20o
by nmeagent 4y ago
~0.73 seems about right. 0.01 is about 1.26 MW.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kardashev_scale#:~:text=equivalent%20to%20an%20average%20power%20consumption%20of%2018.87%20TW%20or%200.73 https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kardashev_scale#:~:text=equiva...
- moloch-hai 4y agoAccording to the linked page, K1 = 10^16 W = 10,000 TW. We are at ~20 TW = 0.002 K1. 0.01 K1 was a generous overestimate. Strictly speaking, K1 really should be 2e17 W, putting us at .0001 K1. (600 exajoules/y = 600,000,000 Tj/y, divided by 31.5M s/y = 19 TW. https://www.statista.com/statistics/265598/consumption-of-primary-energy-worldwide/ https://www.statista.com/statistics/265598/consumption-of-pr... )
- nmeagent 4y agoIt's a logarithmic scale. The 0.73 value is not a linear scaling but a value given by Sagan's proposed interpolating/extrapolating function: K = (log10(P) - 6) / 10, where P is power in Watts. 20 TW = 2e13 W -> K = (log10(2e13) - 6) / 10 = ~(13.3 - 6) / 10 = ~0.73
- moloch-hai 4y agoThat is a very flattering way to formulate it.