legulere

29 ms·

331.
by legulere 4y ago
The problem in reality is that people have wildly different amounts of disposable income and that there are more and less important uses. Rich people use drastically more resources. If you want to curb their resource usage with price you wo
332.
by legulere 4y ago
That's a pretty long list of small changes, but nothing really sticks out. I don't really see any ground of discussion about this.
333.
by legulere 4y ago
I guess the lesson to be learned is that you will need to support multiple classification systems. For biological taxonomy both morphological as well as genetics classifcation makes sense. In the health data exchange format FHIR you have id
334.
by legulere 4y ago
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/774–775_carbon-14_spike > It is known as the Miyake event or the Charlemagne event and it produced the largest and most rapid rise in carbon-14 ever recorded. [...] "This year also
335.
by legulere 4y ago
500k for lets say 50 years means 10k per year (let's say you get out inflation by investing). That gets you pretty far in a lot of places.
336.
by legulere 4y ago
Considering the thermal properties, diamonds would make pretty good heat spreaders https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Diamond#Thermal_Conductivity
337.
by legulere 4y ago
You can also increase efficiency by using waste heat.
338.
by legulere 4y ago
It's important to note, that that methane will be used by the chemical industry and not get burned, it's more efficient to burn H2 directly. In Germany there's also plans to repurpose gas plants to burn H2 during Dunkelflaute
339.
by legulere 4y ago
The cost for the electricity net was around 7.5 cents in Germany last year: https://www.bmwk.de/Redaktion/DE/Artikel/Energie/strompreise...
340.
by legulere 4y ago
NH3 and CH4 both get produced with H2. H2 is difficult to transport in a lot of situations, so the idea is to transform it into NH3. For CH4 you need carbon capture which is energy intensive and only makes sense when you need the carbon lik
341.
by legulere 4y ago
Certainly, however Europe won’t be able to fulfill all of its energy needs by local production. Hydrogen is too difficult to ship, so probably ammonia will get shipped instead. Also you have the issue of ships that can’t get electrified yet
342.
by legulere 4y ago
In RFC 7807 all errors get an unique URI. Message texts might change or be translated into a language you don’t understand.
343.
by legulere 4y ago
Electricity in France is more expensive on the market. It’s just cheaper for households because of subsidies.
344.
by legulere 4y ago
Particulate emissions are a solved problem nowadays For coal plants at least in Germany (see the purple bar in this graphic https://www.umweltbundesamt.de/sites/default/files/medien/38... ). Traffic, wood
345.
by legulere 4y ago
Let's say a metric ton of coal has around 1 kBq and around 10000 PBq were released at Chernobyl. That would mean around 10 quadrillion tons of coal would need to get burned to emit the same amount of radiation. China is currently burni
346.
by legulere 4y ago
Your reasoning why nuclear accidents couldn't happen in Germany is moving the goalpost though. First the narrative was that they couldn't happen, then it was that they couldn't happen in western style reactors. The reality is
347.
by legulere 4y ago
Gas has lower CO2 emissions and the advantage over coal that it can better supply peak loads. At that point in time Russia was also seen as a reliable cheap supplier of it, as the UdSSR has been since the 70s before. It's unlikely that
348.
by legulere 4y ago
I would agree, especially from the standpoint of today, but I guess you have to see things historically. Issues with nuclear like fallout from Chernobyl still leading to contamination today in German or bad handling of nuclear waste at the
349.
by legulere 4y ago
> What are current things that are unpopular today but will be regrettable in 10-20 years? Wind turbines and power lines in my backyard. It's already regrettable today.
350.
by legulere 4y ago
That statistic is only about deaths. You still have to deal with nuclear accidents leading to evacuation of huge areas happening once around every 30 years (unknown unknowns and what not). Germany has a high population density. Such a catas
351.
by legulere 4y ago
And all of it was replaced by renewables: https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Energiemix_Deutschla...
352.
by legulere 4y ago
You can't switch 40 million heating systems overnight, though it's picking up steam ( https://www.waermepumpe.de/presse/zahlen-daten/ ).
353.
by legulere 4y ago
The coal plants are running as an alternative to gas plants, as is described in the link you posted. The shutdown of the nuclear plants was long planned. Germany managed to decrease dependence on fossil fuels for electricity production whil
354.
by legulere 4y ago
It's also good for France, which currently has a shortfall of electricity and is heating with electricity.
355.
by legulere 4y ago
There were problems already before. See those articles from 2016 for example: https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2016/nov/29/french-n... https://www.powermag.com/frances-nuclear-stor
356.
by legulere 4y ago
How is that different from nuclear? Half of France's power plants are offline. That's not reliable at all. Building new nuclear power plants also takes too long. We're talking about Sweden that has high amounts of hydro power
357.
by legulere 4y ago
The ratio of installed capacity and actual output is called load factor. It’s typically 30% for wind power. That’s still 12GW. 40 billion should be enough for one Hinkley point C type reactor, having 3 GW capacity. Mind you that especially
358.
by legulere 4y ago
$40bn would be enough for around 40GWh of wind power capacity which is around the same as total generation capacity installed totally in Sweden today. To me nuclear seems like a giant waste of money.
359.
by legulere 4y ago
And Denmark and Germany in turn are very connected to countries reliant on French nuclear power. Only half of French nuclear power plants are currently running.
360.
by legulere 4y ago
Germany also is just a transit country, producing more electricity than consuming. The problem is that half of Frances nuclear power plants aren’t running of which also surrounding countries like Italy are usually reliant on.

More ›