dgmib

Such an incredibly misleading article.

1 GW of nuclear capacity generates several times more electricity than 1 GW of PV capacity.

Nuclear power plants run at almost full capacity pretty much 24/7/365. With the occasional shutdown every few years for maintenance and to replace the fuel rods.

PVs only generate electricity during the day, and only hit their maximum capacity under ideal conditions. The average output of PVs is 15-25% of their capacity.

Globally we generate more electricity from nuclear than we do from all PVs together.

At the typical sizes we’re building them you need dozens of PV farms to match the energy output of a single nuclear reactor.

Yea basically. Creative accounting abuses of RECs are rampant. There’s no tangible product or service delivered when you buy a REC so there’s nothing stopping a bad actor from selling the same “REC” to more than one buyer.

But more importantly, RECs don't work to reduce GHG emissions even if they’re purchased and sold in good faith. RECs don’t change anything, that’s the problem. They don’t reduce electricity usage, or change the grid mix. All RECs do is give a company the ability to claim that it was magically someone else’s electricity that resulted in fossil fuels being burned and not their’s. Companies that buy RECs are paying to shift the blame onto companies that didn’t.

Back when solar and wind was more expensive than fossil fuels it may have made sense to offer companies the option of paying extra to get “green” power that otherwise wouldn’t have made financial sense. But now that wind and solar are cheaper than coal and nat gas, utility providers will buy all available green power regardless of RECs.

The bottleneck to building more renewable power isn’t money. Companies paying for RECs aren’t making that happen any faster, they’re just Greenwashing their ESG reporting.

RECs and similar market based methods for Scope 2 accounting are complete bullshit and need to be removed from the GHG protocol.

It’s not driving a transition to renewables just literally just giving companies permission to claim their emissions are lower without actually changing anything.

In high school one of my classmates was named Benjamin Dover.

Also had a classmate named Ma Deek.

I read in a firefighter’s thread that the trick is to use a low pressure spray directly on the battery compartment. (It was a thread about Tesla cars not semis though so that might not apply)

The reason was you can’t actually put the fire out, it’s self oxidizing (it can literally burn underwater) so you basically need to wait till it burns itself out. Fortunately batteries only hold something like 1/10th the energy of gasoline and can’t release that energy as quickly so a fine light spray is enough to keep it from getting hot enough to catch anything else on fire including batteries in the surrounding battery modules.

Takes a long time, like hours to get it to a point they can move the vehicle and literally a couple weeks before the reaction completely fizzles out. They have special lots they tow them to where the car can fizzle itself out without damaging anything surrounding it.

I can understand debating whether an intersex or transgender athlete should be allowed to compete in the women’s division at the Olympic / world championship level.

But ffs do we really need to make a federal case about it in high school sports?

This isn’t about athletic performance.

We call it the “Mens” category, but for all intents and purposes it is the same as an “open to all genders” category.

Female athletes don’t compete in it because they’re physically not strong enough to even qualify to compete in it at the world level. The gender they identify as or were assigned at birth is irrelevant. There’s no genetic testing requirement to compete at the men’s level.

In almost every sport, the world record performance from a women isn’t even good enough to meet the minimum bar for quality to compete in the men’s competitions at the world level.

Even sports like diving where you’re judged more than measured, the male athletes strength makes it possible for them to do things the female athletes simply can’t.

There was a time when they only was open to all competition, adding a protected women’s only category was to make it fair for women. And then we started calling the open category the men’s category.

We could call it the open category and the low-T category instead, and it would have the exact same participants in each.

Found the Canadian.

I got a 2400 baud modem and thought it was so cool that I didn’t need to use an acoustic coupler

The fastest a woman has ever run the 100m dash is 10.49 seconds.

The Olympic qualifying time, that all runners needed to beat to even complete in men’s 100m dash this year was 10.00 seconds.

If we didn’t have a women’s division, there couldn’t be women in sports.

It depends on the jurisdiction, but in most cases if you have a salaried position with say 3 weeks of PTO but you only take 2 weeks of it. The employer is usually required to pay you over and above your salary for working during your “vacation time”.

If there’s an unlimited PTO policy, they don’t have an obligation to pay you extra for working during vacation time.

It’s a lie.

By making it “unlimited” they don’t need to pay you out of you don’t use all of PTO days.

If you use it more than they think you’ve earned you get terminated.

Employees end up afraid of taking their PTO days and typically end up taking even less time off than if they knew there was a expectation of 3 weeks or whatever.