this post was submitted on 09 Apr 2024
23 points (100.0% liked)

solarpunk memes

2536 readers
430 users here now

For when you need a laugh!

The definition of a "meme" here is intentionally pretty loose. Images, screenshots, and the like are welcome!

But, keep it lighthearted and/or within our server's ideals.

Posts and comments that are hateful, trolling, inciting, and/or overly negative will be removed at the moderators' discretion.

Please follow all slrpnk.net rules and community guidelines

Have fun!

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
 
top 50 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] [email protected] 1 points 2 weeks ago

Don't tell him about nightfall!

[–] [email protected] 2 points 5 months ago

I mean, does this person know what happens at NIGHT?

[–] [email protected] 0 points 5 months ago

David Hume moment

[–] [email protected] 3 points 5 months ago

and im sure the US loses even more grid production capacity when it's flooded due to the inevitable warming of the ocean too huh?

[–] [email protected] 1 points 5 months ago* (last edited 5 months ago) (2 children)

Perhaps someone should tell this dickhead about all of the land the US will lose due to carbon emissions from coal power. Or maybe mention the continuing increase in business insurance due to the same thing. If we are going to point out the adverse effects of solar we should point out the adverse affects of coal.

[–] [email protected] 0 points 5 months ago

Also the incredibly long supply lines that go to fossil fuel plants. Solar panels aren't as green as we like to think, but they're rugged as fuck and require 0 infrastructure to produce power. Most of the maintenance is wiping them with a damp sponge¹, and (these ghouls should love this part) zero non-maintenance labor to operate, no moving parts, and they work best during peak demand times, right? If I were powering my Last Redoubt, solar would be up there on my list of options until the sun dies.

¹i know, hyperbole, but not much of it

[–] [email protected] 1 points 5 months ago

His followers are the literal caveman pointing wojack.

"Number big!! Number big!!"

[–] [email protected] 1 points 5 months ago (2 children)

Watts are a unit of power, not a unit of energy. The claim is nonsense to the core.

[–] [email protected] -1 points 5 months ago (4 children)

ok so technically, a watt is directly convertable to a joule, which is a unit of energy. So he isn't wrong. But he is also wrong because he is using name plate production capacity, rather than the total produced capacity, that or he is simply fucking up the numbers. But lets be honest, homie is NOT doing the math.

[–] [email protected] 0 points 5 months ago (1 children)

A watt is a joule per second. It is not “directly convertable” any more than mile is the not a speed just because you can divide it by an hour.

Watts are power, the rate at which you can work. Joules are units of energy, how much work you can do.

He is not fucking up the numbers. He is fucking up the units…and so are you

[–] [email protected] -1 points 5 months ago

in this scenario it wouldn't be speed, though, it would be speed over time. Speed is velocity.

Watts are just joules but arbitrarily defined. Joules are a unit of total energy. A collective amount of work potential. Watts are an in situ measurement of those joules doing work.

If we want to talk about confusing units, W and VA are the units to be talking about.

[–] [email protected] 0 points 5 months ago

A watt is a joule per second. It is not “directly convertable” any more than mile is the not a speed just because you can divide it by an hour.

Watts are power, the rate at which you can work. Joules are units of energy, how much work you can do.

He is not fucking up the numbers. He is fucking up the units…and so are you.

[–] [email protected] 0 points 5 months ago

"Math is science. Science is the work of the devil" - republicunts

[–] [email protected] 0 points 5 months ago (1 children)

A watt is a joule per second - they are not directly convertible.

[–] [email protected] -1 points 5 months ago

yes, and this twitter post, (or wherever it comes from) is definitely not representative of the original sites layout in any substantial manner.

[–] [email protected] 0 points 5 months ago (1 children)

I have no idea about the actual number, but saying the power is decreased by 30 GW does make sense, though... Of course it is not energy, but they might not have meant "solar energy" in the sense of a physical quantity. The sentiment is bullshit of course.

[–] [email protected] 0 points 5 months ago (1 children)

But even then only for a few minutes at each solar energy plant

[–] [email protected] 0 points 5 months ago

Sure. It is an effect that has been taken into account by government agencies and grid operators, though: https://www.eia.gov/todayinenergy/detail.php?id=61743

The good thing is you can predict it extremely accurately, probably much better than cloud cover...

[–] [email protected] 0 points 5 months ago (2 children)

The US used over 3.6 million gigawatts hours of energy in 2020. If you round down, and assume no increase in the last 4 years, that's over 9800 per day. 30 is a drop in the bucket. We have combined cycle natural gas plants, along with other green options to pick up for dips in production exactly like this.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 5 months ago

Or how much power was saved because people were outside watching and not inside consuming power.

[–] [email protected] 0 points 5 months ago (2 children)

He didn't write GWH, he just said GW. For all we know, assuming this number relates to reality at all, that's just smear across the whole eclipse and no single watt was lost for more than a few minutes.

If we lost "30GW", I'd bet we lost barely one GWH.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 5 months ago* (last edited 5 months ago)

I think a safer assumption is that he made it all up, because truth is dead.

We lost some amount. Did he bother to google how much? Why would he?

[–] [email protected] 0 points 5 months ago (1 children)

If it really was GW, then just multiply the 30 with time the sun was covered, and boom, you have GWH. I don't think it was even close to an hour.

[–] [email protected] 0 points 5 months ago (1 children)

I was in the penumbra, and around here I would say the entire event took an hour and a half, from "any of the sun at all is covered" to "none of the sun at all is covered." I'm sure our local solar panels did dip in output, probably to the point of producing no useful power for several minutes as it got noticeably darker.

[–] [email protected] 0 points 5 months ago

I see, given the worst case scenario of 1.5h coverage, with the average of 50% coverage, gives about 30*1.5=22.5 GWH.

[–] [email protected] 0 points 5 months ago

ok this one is funny

[–] [email protected] 1 points 5 months ago (1 children)

*points to like 17 gas panics that have happened in my relatively short life.

[–] [email protected] 0 points 5 months ago

"renewables are unsustainable"

"ignore the fact that we produce oil from the middle east because our locally produced oil is too clean to be refined into usable products for the US domestic market"

[–] [email protected] 0 points 5 months ago

Oh danny boy, the pipes the pipes are ca-alling for you shut your ignorant pie hole up

[–] [email protected] 1 points 5 months ago (1 children)

30GW out of how much Daniel? We need some proper stats from Koch's mouthpiece.

https://moneytrails.org/issue/power-the-future/

[–] [email protected] 1 points 5 months ago

Yes let's not invest in green energy because checks notes once every 20 years we will lose a fraction of a percentage of solar energy for about 4 minutes.

Also not for nothing but wind energy actually picks up during that time and generally for a few days before and after too.

[–] [email protected] 0 points 5 months ago (1 children)

Wait till hears about night.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 4 months ago

I suspect if you went through his history he has already told us that solar is useless because of night, and that wind is useless because sometimes it's still

load more comments
view more: next ›