WalrusDragonOnABike @ WalrusDragonOnABike @kbin.social

Posts

0

Comments

345

Joined

2 yr. ago

The SAR limit recommended by The Council of the European Union is 2.0W/kg averaged over 10 grams of tissue for the body (4.0 W/kg averaged over 10 grams of tissue for the extremities - hands, wrists, ankles and feet).

Source: https://download.tomtom.com/open/manuals/newGO/html/en-gb/SpecificAbsorptionRate(SAR)compliance-EU.htm

Last modified: 3/3/2016 3:06:39 PM

So, looks like its just two different requirements that have been around since at least 2016 when tomtom posted that. Its low enough to not exceed the body limit when being held away from the body, but not the limit for extremities when being held or body when in pocket.

No surprise 2020 was the previous record with how active that Atlantic tropical storm season was. Guessing 2005 is up there on the list too.

Have a hard time dedicating consistent time with a single game because of other things like work. So any long story-driven game is gonna be a pass for me. If I need to remember a town name, map, or a character name and its more than a couple hours, its a nope. I simply have a hard time with dedicating the time to something like that, even if I enjoy it. MMORPGs or anything with dailies have similar issues.

I mostly tend to play games where I can spend a short period of time in a session and it doesn't matter if I come back to it in months. Over the past year or so, beatsaber and Terraria are the games that have fit that bill for me the most. Have over 1500 hours in Terraria and expect that number to probably grow over in bursts over the next decade.

That's 15MW for 4 hours. Typical period of tight conditions is probably more like 1 hour, so 4 hour capacity is overkill for what Texas has been going though this summer). You could get more capacity for a 2 hour period. I think Texas peak power demand was about 100GW (I think that excludes some parts of Texas that aren't part of the Texas grid at the East and West ends)

I thought it was the other way around; the instance is supposed to apologize to anotherlemmyuser.

What does it matter if its lemmy.ca?

Not exactly, but during the covid pandemic prices dropped and our lease was coming up for renewal and they wanted the standard 2-3% increase anyways. We ask them to lower it and they said corporate doesn't let them do it. So we gave 2 months notice and waited for our unit to appear on the website and started a new lease. Technically, there was a 2 week period between the leases, but we just bickered with them until they said we could stay, and they even charged us at the new lower lease rate for those 2 weeks. I think we saved like 20% a month compared to our original lease?

I'd assume you usually need to move to benefit from rent drops or at least put in notice that you're moving out.

Sure, but I don't know how much that would matter. In the short-term, batteries might be a viable solution, but $31million would get you about a 15MW storage system from my understanding, which is about 1 order of magnitude too small to be more than a rounding error and 2 orders of magnitude off from being a fix. Also, electric companies profit off of cryptominers (which theoretically could be used to improve the grid) and ERCOT sees them as a flexible demand that can be turned off in emergencies (at the cost of money).

They also built much of the solar in one region instead of diversifying. So even when other places are under fire-weather watch from high winds, we can have low wind energy because of low winds where they're built...

In fact killing him could have made things worse for the USA. See 9/11 for a recent example.

Pretty sure they're responding to that part.

He was an actor/celebrity who somehow became US president. Usual pro-corporate, racist republican politician.

That's probably because the website sent an email to the person and asked them to answer the questions.

Also, the US is one of the premier offshore place to hide money from my understanding. So even if it was money, a lot of the US tokens would be hidden locally.

Wind tends to be higher at night (at least here in Texas), so solar and wind are good complements. The biggest issue here is in the summer right after the sun sets, but that just means having enough battery storage for a couple hours for temps to start dropping. But wind/solar are still cheaper after including storage for that amount of time by far compared to new nuclear or new fossil fuels. Only existing facilities have a comparable per kWh cost when compared to new solar/wind + storage. Even if you quadrupled the storage, it would still be cheaper than new nuclear and comparable to existing nuclear iirc. Granted cost of storage partly depends on what storage options are viable locally for small grids.

Is PV common at commercial scale solar?

Ironically, I seen the claim that the original reason was because the US grid was outdated and Texas wanted to do better. Probably back when people who called themselves "conservatives" actually cared at little bit about conserving the environment (at least in some self-interested ways). Of course it didn't work out that way.

No clue why the rest of the US is divided into two grids.

The article itself said it's still counting in future tech advances. Just because the alpha test is done at full size is different than being commercial scale imo. But we shouldn't even be judging power plants success on how well they can make profits, so whether it's commercial scale or not should not be relevant. Unfortunately it is, but the article gives no indication that it is commercially viable with current tech. Just that it physically exists.

Nuclear has more location issues than renewable. Do you think people want a nuclear plant in their backyard?

It's the same issues of will, money, and location that limit both. Why waste all of those on nuclear in 20 years when the grid is unstable today?

Unfortunately simply using renewables alone is t enough to decentralize them. Lately Texas has been having near energy shortages and part of the problem is a few unexpected central outages at fossil fuel plants, but another is the vast majority of wind turbines are built in one sunset of the state, so if wind is low there it can (and has) cause massive decreased in available energy, far larger than a couple traditional large scale nuclear plants when other parts of the state are under fire warnings because of high wind and dry conditions. Of course this isn't an issue with the technology itself, but rather a problem with implementation. The issue isn't with what was built, but the lack of building more across the state (or joining one of the two larger grids to further decentralize power production over a broader area)

Anyways, another issue with security is centralized power production make a good target for disruption. And if you have the side effect of causing a meltdown...

This is the exact same for renewables, worse, arguably, since wind farms have to be off shore to be efficient

From the charts I've seen lately, offshore is much more expensive than onshore per kwhr for wind by a large margin. If that's the case, is offshore even valuable anymore?

however once its technology matures