The Current Events, News, and Politics Thread
- Coal has an energy density of around 30 MJ/kg on the high end (anthracite coal, enthalpy of combustion in a typical coal-burning environment)
- 170 tons of coal is 154,221kg
- Burning all that coal would release 4,626,630MJ of thermal energy
- A 2MW wind turbine takes 2,313,315 seconds to produce this much energy
- This seems like a lot, but is actually just under 27 days!
TLDR: I don't think that this Thomas Homer-Dixon guy did a whole lot of math when coming up with these claims.
Reply
2
2
Joined: Sep 2005
Posts: 34,397
Total Cats: 7,520
From: Chicago. (The less-murder part.)
Do not fact check infographics which you see online. If they reinforce your beliefs, then just accept them as truth. If you do not, then the Other Side will win.
Reply
0
0
- Coal has an energy density of around 30 MJ/kg on the high end (anthracite coal, enthalpy of combustion in a typical coal-burning environment)
- 170 tons of coal is 154,221kg
- Burning all that coal would release 4,626,630MJ of thermal energy
- A 2MW wind turbine takes 2,313,315 seconds to produce this much energy
- This seems like a lot, but is actually just under 27 days!
TLDR: I don't think that this Thomas Homer-Dixon guy did a whole lot of math when coming up with these claims.
Reply
0
0
Nice bit of sleuthing.
Anecdotally, I remember driving to the Southern tip of Hawaii island where the trade winds blow constantly. An abandoned wind farm sits there, most not turning and some toppled over. I always wondered why this was the case. My guesses were a) too much wind or b) the cost of operation didn't outweigh the profit made generating power.
Anecdotally, I remember driving to the Southern tip of Hawaii island where the trade winds blow constantly. An abandoned wind farm sits there, most not turning and some toppled over. I always wondered why this was the case. My guesses were a) too much wind or b) the cost of operation didn't outweigh the profit made generating power.
Reply
0
0
Joined: Sep 2005
Posts: 34,397
Total Cats: 7,520
From: Chicago. (The less-murder part.)
Reply
0
0
Joined: Sep 2005
Posts: 34,397
Total Cats: 7,520
From: Chicago. (The less-murder part.)
Reply
0
0
Thread Starter
Joined: May 2005
Posts: 80,552
Total Cats: 4,368
From: Chantilly, VA
Reply
0
0
Joined: Sep 2005
Posts: 34,397
Total Cats: 7,520
From: Chicago. (The less-murder part.)
Did some research. Estimates I've found range from around 481,000 officers (source) to over 900,000 officers (source) in the US. Taking an average of the high and low figures, that's 0.2% of the total population, and around 0.43% of the active labor force.
If 0.2% of the population are committing 50-52% of the crimes, then that's just an unimaginably staggering figure. I can totally understand your hatred for the police.
Reply
0
0
Thread Starter
Joined: May 2005
Posts: 80,552
Total Cats: 4,368
From: Chantilly, VA
(K.R.) SUPREME COURT RULES ANTITRUST LAWSUIT OVER APPLE’S APP STORE CAN PROCEED
The Supreme Court this morning has ruled that con-sumers can pro-ceed with an an-titrust law-suit accusing Apple of monopolizing the market for iPhone software applications and forcing them to overpay.
Apple requires apps to be sold through its App Store, and charges developers a $99 annual membership fee plus a 30% commission on every app sale.
The lawsuit alleges that apps would be cheaper if software developers could sell them directly and bypass Apple as a middleman.
The ruling didn’t address the merits of the plaintiffs’ claims, but instead focused on whether consumers had a right to sue Apple over these practices. The court, in a 5-4 opinion by Justice Brett Kavanaugh, said they did. Justices Gorsuch, Thomas, Roberts, and Alito dissented.
The case itself could take one to two years, if not longer, to resolve.
The Supreme Court this morning has ruled that con-sumers can pro-ceed with an an-titrust law-suit accusing Apple of monopolizing the market for iPhone software applications and forcing them to overpay.
Apple requires apps to be sold through its App Store, and charges developers a $99 annual membership fee plus a 30% commission on every app sale.
The lawsuit alleges that apps would be cheaper if software developers could sell them directly and bypass Apple as a middleman.
The ruling didn’t address the merits of the plaintiffs’ claims, but instead focused on whether consumers had a right to sue Apple over these practices. The court, in a 5-4 opinion by Justice Brett Kavanaugh, said they did. Justices Gorsuch, Thomas, Roberts, and Alito dissented.
The case itself could take one to two years, if not longer, to resolve.
Reply
0
0
Reply
0
0
