117
Solar modules deployed in France in 1992 still provide 79.5% of original output power
(www.pv-magazine.com)
this post was submitted on 16 Jun 2024
117 points (98.3% liked)
Technology
1374 readers
231 users here now
Which posts fit here?
Anything that is at least tangentially connected to the technology, social media platforms, informational technologies and tech policy.
Rules
1. English only
Title and associated content has to be in English.
2. Use original link
Post URL should be the original link to the article (even if paywalled) and archived copies left in the body. It allows avoiding duplicate posts when cross-posting.
3. Respectful communication
All communication has to be respectful of differing opinions, viewpoints, and experiences.
4. Inclusivity
Everyone is welcome here regardless of age, body size, visible or invisible disability, ethnicity, sex characteristics, gender identity and expression, education, socio-economic status, nationality, personal appearance, race, caste, color, religion, or sexual identity and orientation.
5. Ad hominem attacks
Any kind of personal attacks are expressly forbidden. If you can't argue your position without attacking a person's character, you already lost the argument.
6. Off-topic tangents
Stay on topic. Keep it relevant.
7. Instance rules may apply
If something is not covered by community rules, but are against lemmy.zip instance rules, they will be enforced.
Companion communities
[email protected]
[email protected]
Icon attribution | Banner attribution
founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
Those are way more interesting than this single installation with -0.66%:
"Another more recent study carried out by the US Department of Energy's National Renewable Energy Laboratory (NREL) on 1,700 American sites totaling 7.2 GW of power, showed a median degradation of around -0.75%/year. Moveover, another research focused on 4,300 residential installations in operation in Europe and used different data processing methodologies. Depending on the methods, a median loss of -0.36% to -0.67%/year was obtained."
Also the article doesn't mention standard deviation or IQR of the drop, or what efficiency they originally had. Which is the minimum of information I would expect.
You are totally right. Median and average alone mean shit without each other and without deviation, and such article like this is considered by me a manipulation without further correctness check. The same shit is with journalists confuckulating percentages with percentage points.
In over 10 years I was made aware by my university professor of these practices I haven’t found a single article which got that right.