"GW per year" and "TW per year" is nonsense.
Watts is a unit of power, which is energy per second.
Im not sure Musk even understands what a Watt is, he just wants to sound smart.
this post was submitted on 05 Nov 2025
119 points (99.2% liked)
Memes
53737 readers
2002 users here now
Rules:
- Be civil and nice.
- Try not to excessively repost, as a rule of thumb, wait at least 2 months to do it if you have to.
founded 6 years ago
MODERATORS
So what is a kWh then?
That's watts multiplied by time, aka energy.
So if you can have a kilowatt per hour, then why can't you have a gigawatt per year?
Because it's not kilowatt per hour (kW/h), it's kilowatt hours (kWh). It would be fine to say GW years, but then the question would be over how long? Most likely one year, which gives us GWy/y = GW.
Kilowatt per hour is not energy. It's just power generated per hour. Energy would be kilowatt × hour.
Energy Unit.
A unit of measurement that only makes sense in the context of domestic electricity meters. Supposedly to make it easier for consumers.
Or 3,6 Kilojoule.
Bro is cooked
As much as I'd like to shit on him, I believe he talks about building energy generation capacity (aka GW or TW) in a certain time period (i.e. one year). Like building 1000 100MW power stations every year, but in space.
Can't tell if it makes any sense economically though, getting anything in scale to space is still kinda very expensive.
And if you try to make whatever you need to get to space light, compact and efficient, it usually quickly becomes very expensive itself.
So "solve other parts of equation" probably means "give me money".
Later edit: if you ever played Factorio, this is equivalent of amount of solar panels crafted and delivered to space platform per hour.
Watt is an Energy unit, period, as electrical unit, as in this case, it's W=VA(δ), only as work/kinetic unit it's W = J/s = Nm/s = kgm²*s^-^³
Watt is not a unit of energy, it's a unit of power [Joules/second]. This definition doesn't change between kinetic and electrical contexts.
Well, power measure the rate of energy transfer, anyway Ws is not the same as W.
Classic tech bro solution. All bullshit and jargon. Razzle, dazzle the mark to buy into a sham investment.
It’s cooked 😭
Are we talking about Musky's brain being cooked by ketamine?
Yee
Yeah it's all possible when you asspull nonexistent tech. Oh wait, USA tried to make railgun but failed. In making a gun. In Murica. Let that sink in about how cooked tech research there is if they can't even make a gun.
Uh, what? Railguns are a tech as old as time, i highly doubt the US was the first to create one. I could throw a railgun together in about 30 minutes with the stuff i have laying around the house. They are INCREDIBLY simple, literally 1 moving part and no circutry whatsoever. Just hook your positive to one rail, negative to the other. Right hand rule tells you which direction your projectile will fire.
Yet they still failed to make railgun which would be viable as military weapon (iirc they intended to make it main weaponry for USS Zumwalt)
The issue is that large scale railguns tend to self destruct, either from the heat or from the immense forces, so it can only fire a few shots before it needs extensive maintenance, and the time it takes to recharge is quite long in most practical applications (warships and such) which is why the american military has given up on the concept.
For launching stuff you have the same issues, except you now the payload isn't a solid piece of metal but an intricate component which somehow needs to survive the insane acceleration (unless you use a really long barrel)
The first issue is definitely solvable, thats just a material science issue. The second one is also definitely possible, but depending on the payload it might be very difficult. Seems easier to just accelerate a tungsten sphere to mach 4 than to bother with a warhead.
For the intense heat, thats a waste product. Get rid of it by not producing it in the first place. Which means your rails are now cryocooled superconductors.
For the immense forces, i might need to look into railguns again. Afaik the only force that isnt being counteracted is the force on the projectile. I might be wrong at those power levels, while the net force should be zero the force on the arms could be opposite, ripping the railgun apart or crushing it. The solution i would think is coiling your rails around the barrel, now the rails effectively act as their own support with a minor bracing.
For the record, i didnt put it together that he was referring specifically to the large models. I just knew i made a rail gun back in high school and its wasnt difficult, so the idea that the US govt cant copy my project struck me as absurd.
Finally, im a hobby electrician with my passions lying more in technology and futurism, so i have looked into railguns in passing but I do not work for the military nor have i looked into the specifics of the large scale models, so corrections are more than welcome.
Yeah the first issue is in theory solvable, but they never managed to do it, not in a practical manner at least (huge cryocooled superconductors is probably not very practical)
The forces are from the immense magnetic fields, two parallel wires with current in opposite directions will repel eachother, so the rails are trying to move apart from eachother
This plus the heat causing material expansion plus the rails needing to be very straight for it all to work, and you end up having a bit of an engineering headache on your hands
But yeah it's mainly when you build large ones meant to fire things at really really high speeds, maybe we'll find a way to improve it one day, but for now it's sadly dead in the water (in the military sector at least, but they tend to be the main driving force behind technology that fires things)
"solar-powered AI satellites"
I mean I get the picture, but that picture is driven by buzzwords.
Great point. We should link up to discuss the productivity process and determine the best synergy for the moment.
You got me like huhhh
😭😭 true
Living in Texas, the land of massive, scorching hot, sun drenched parking lots, I just cannot understand why solar awnings like that have not become the standard.
Oh wait, oil lobbyists.... that's why....
Fuck Oilcels!