4 ms·
I wonder if this might be misleading. A lot of Los Angeles’ (LADWP) electricity has traditionally been generated generated by coal-fired plants in other states.
by angst_ridden 3y ago
I wonder if this might be misleading. A lot of Los Angeles’ (LADWP) electricity has traditionally been generated generated by coal-fired plants in other states. I’d have to dig into more recent sources to see if that’s still the case, and whether that’s reflected in this dataset.
(Edit: read the sources list, and that should be reflected, but the map is not displaying heavy imports to SoCal. If I had to hazard a guess, I’d suspect LADWP obscuring sources in the published data).
- api 3y agoNavajo shut down, so I think it’s substantially less today. Solar is also way way up in the entire Southwest.
- Gibbon1 3y agoBeen a few years so things may have changed. But California no longer has long term contracts with coal fired plants. But probably is buying it on the spot market. With California it's natural gas -> solar -> everything else.
- acc_297 3y agoThat’s interesting yeah like a tonne of Quebec hydro gets sold to New England it might or might not get counted But I also can’t tell where the data is coming from why are so many Canadian provinces gray? I’m sure the website had citations somewhere but it was pretty slow in mobile safari so I didn’t bother to check
- conradev 3y agoIt is open source and they generally scrape it from the most direct source: https://github.com/electricitymaps/electricitymaps-contrib https://github.com/electricitymaps/electricitymaps-contrib It started as an open source project and it became an entire company
- deleted 3y ago[deleted]
- wlonkly 3y agoThe test I always use for this is Prince Edward Island -- 100% of their provincial electricity generation is wind, but it only makes up 3% of their usage, the rest being imported from New Brunswick. From that perspective the map must be at least trying to reflect imports, as PEI isn't listed as 100% green energy.