Except the two biggest exporters of electricity, not to mention Norway and Denmark (Finland?) Being well over 90% electric in their respective new sales car fleets, Spain going all out on solar, several off shore power plants and a number of long term batteries (non-electric). Oh and the number of hydrogen installations throughout germany. Except all those steps?

I agree, more needs to be done and fast!

The specs yes, but obviously not the skills. And that is the problem atm, The second best droneoperators are not of the western hemisphere...

Oil dependence is use as a of controlling the world. Renewables changes that control. Therefore Renewables must be stopped.

Depends on your view point. From a European perspective liberalism is center right, although I'd say that the so called liberalism as discussed in the US is pretty well into the right. The whole spectrum has shifted, so I'd say that what used to be conservative talking points are now liberal talking points.

Going to start asking copilot for daily positive news. Finally a worthwhile use of it!

I'd rather that than landfill, though. Today the tree tops, tomorrow the stars, as they say:)

Oh Donny. Have you lost another canal?

Oh, the new "renewables are bad" talking point. Unlike the general feel of the article I think this is actually just in time. The first TW took 70 years to install, but the second took 2 years (2024). Given 20 years of operational life that means that the quantities starts to accelerate by the end of the 2030-thirties. Which is when the article states that there will be price parity between recycling and landfill...

However, at least here, the cost of landfills has increased and will continue to increase so it quill only be a matter of time...

So far I've mostly changed how I do stuff, rather than what i do. Electric car instead of ICE, Bike and train for commuting, Solarpanels and 20kWh batteries for most of my summer time energy needs.

At work I have more possibility to make a difference, though. So far I've had batteries introduced (solar was already norm) as an accessory to "our" buildings, I've gotten 2 thermal batteries (sand) built and are currently investigating building mounted small scale wind power. Among other things.

I would think that the graph would be rather different had it been "last kilometer"? I'd expect to see electricity at the bottom there.

That doesn't seem relevant to the discussion at hand. The question is "is it better if something happens earlier" and if, as you say, the median reaction time is 273 ms, that means that median player a will consistently be 3 ms faster than median player b if they react to the same event all else being equal. 273 ms will beat a total of 276 ms every time in a race to react.

It is basically an isolated heat trap for excess electricity/heat during the summer to be used during winter. It is rather like ground heat except for a few notable differences:

The cons are obvious:

• Higher investment,
• More complicated

The pros:

• Doesn't need as much power (higher heat output during winter),
• The community has a goal of using 100% of produced electricity on site (as that is most economical), but this allow us to utilize the entire roof for solar energy, which will be more economical in autumn/spring.

Cost wise, for the tenants, it's no difference, as the lower running costs of the battery is predicted to out weight the extra cost of capital, but in an emergency the house will be much easier to keep light and warm. The plan is to fit the house with batterier and V2G EV-chargers.

Came here to post this

And that is where the question becomes, would you rather pay more, or pay less? "None" is optimal, but also a fairytale. And where do you draw the line? Cycling every time you travel less than 3km is healthier than going by car and would bring health care costs down. So ban cars, I guess?

This is not the application im worried about in regards to Jerome Paradox. There are other power guzzling techs that will eat any and all energy that can be produced while paying more per kwh than any of us can afford. Those technologies are my primary concern...

Conscription is the Nordic way. Train before it is needed, so that everyone knows what to do when shit hits the fan. And when it does a large part of the population knows how to enact a specific role in the army, would it be needed. From crewing submarines to driving tanks or how to use the communications equipment.

Not laughing. Crying

As bad as things are, I'm still glad that the oil wars are driven by greed and not scarcity. Had the option been mad max things would have been so much more desperate, as things stand, a world with energy and hope is still an option.

I'm not sure those conclusions can be drawn by that article. I mean, there was one solid regression in there which clearly showed a near perfect linearity between less gas-hours (that is more fossil free power) and lower electricity cost. And in that regression Sweden and norway was even omitted, had they not been the correlation would be even stronger.

As for the other regressions presented they were not apples to apples comparisons and no conclusions can be drawn because of bad methodology. Sure enough R-square was very low as well, but that would be expected.

The issues with the methodology are that A) the cost of electricity isnt decided by what is produced in a country, but by how much is in demand in neighboring electricity regions. For instance, the price of electricity in sweden is closely tied to demand in Germany. Thus will wind and solar in Sweden have very little explanative power on price. And B) the meassured price is t the true mean price as met by the consumers. If 5% of households has a solar installation it will skew the mean price by alot. Not only will their price of electricity inversely follow production as they will first use there own production, they will also see negative prices when the installation delivers more electricity than what is used by the household. Both mechanisms skew the price of the mean bought kwh electricity And neither is accounted for in this comparison.

But the main conclusion stands. Any reduction in gas-hours will lower the price of electricity.

Here, maybe. For most outside green energy I expect it to be more newsworthy that 50% of chinas electricity is from renewable and that solar alone eeks out coal. An interesting point about the molten salts approach is that cooldown doesn't happen immediately after sunset. The land use is problematic for most places, though.