I think the one exception is their money, you definitely need some basic math to use it.
ironeagl
joined 1 year ago
On the contrary, there is a lot of professional software that doesn't run on Windows!
.... battery heaters and block heaters are a thing for ICE too though?
FYI: there is actually an XKCD font if you want to match the original more closely. https://github.com/ipython/xkcd-font
It takes a while to gather the data, new areas all the time.
No, the plant is full of primary batteries! 4.2 million AA cells!
I'm surprised no one has mentioned Piwigo yet.
Also, starting in 2018 Google no longer actually searches for the words you entered. Instead, it tries to figure out "what you really mean" and shows results for that. See BERT
Ah, perhaps my source was off. Thanks for the additional data.
But looking at it another way, nuclear is less than twice coal. Estimating the cost of that georgia plant would put it at $16-17B, so those overruns would be atypical.
But my main point on cost is that government investment has been lacking in nuclear compared to renewables: https://www.forbes.com/sites/robertbryce/2021/12/27/why-is-solar-energy-getting-250-times-more-in-federal-tax-credits-than-nuclear/?sh=4a783c3221cf
Without investment, it's going to stay just as expensive. And the main regulating body not having a mandate to develop the technology has just been holding us back.
A coal power plant is rougly the same cost per GW as solar or wind, doesn't mean we should build more of them. I agree it's expensive, but so were solar and wind a couple decades ago. Government investment helped research, development, scaling up - imagine if that had been done in the '80s, we wouldn't be building natural gas plants right now.
view more: next ›
bonk go to horny jail