> We need power sources that have some resilience to those things.
None of the power sources have resilience to politics.
1,824 karma · joined March 6, 2023
None of the power sources have resilience to politics.
Yes, I do.
> And you've got a… distinct… writing style
Ad hominem is not as good an argument as you think it is.
So. This is what I actually wrote, and not what you pretend I wrote.
The original statement was this: "If you push for renewables instead of wasting money on over due and over budget nuclear reactors"
To which I replied: "Almost three-quarters of hydropower, water, coal and nuclear infrastructure projects were over budget by 49% on average"
Which means only one thing: renewable projects are just as prone to time and buget overruns as nuclear. That is it.
How you imagined what you think I wrote, I cannot even begin to comprehend.
It was a rather regular, quiet, night in a nation of 80 million people in the middle of Europe. Which means that it was a quiet night across much of Europe.
As a result last year energy prices shot up and there was nothing to counterbalance energy shortages.
This literally happened just 6 days ago.
> we have a diverse mix of electricity production.
Yes, yes we do: coal and biofuel (so more burning), and corn for biofuel is taking up 6% of Germany's land area.
> When wind gets more dominant, it will be offshore and connected to a larger North Sea grid
So, some magical future
> I'd guess that in ten years the max capacity for wind electrical energy in my region (Northern Germany) is around 2 to 3 times larger than the max demand.
Max capacity means nothing when production is low.
> Thus large scale storage will be build up.
More magical thinking (there are currently no grid-scale storage solutions that would've survived just one night from the link I provided)
Do not ascribe words to me that I didn't say or imply
> You don't get to use that quote to say everything else is more expense
I literally said nothing of the kind
That person is really just spreading FUD: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=35659262
> How many times do people need to be told that with all the renewables coming onto the grid, we don't need more base load?
Of course we do
> We need storage.
Yes. And it's non-existent. There are literally no grid-scale strage solutions in existence.
> Do any of you geniuses realize that it's a lot more difficult for the grid to accommodate the injection of tens of gigawatts of power, than it is to handle tens of gigawatts of highly distributed generation and storage across a large region?
Neither are particularly true statements. Also, what do you think grid-scale storage would do if not inject gigawatts of power into a grid when needed?
> Nuclear capacity takes a minimum of ten years, more like 20,
Fuqing Nuclear Power Plant in China: 6.1 GW nameplate capacity. Built over 14 years at 1 reactor per 6 years. Operational.
Meanwhile the very distributed Xlinks Morocco-UK Power Project was founded in 2018, and is promised to start powering Britain in 2030.
--- start quote ---
Of the megaprojects surveyed, 64% were delayed and 57% were over budget.
https://www.offshorewind.biz/2016/12/02/offshore-wind-projec... --- end quote ---
So we know how that will go.
> Nuclear plants require a continuous, expensive, complicated supply chain and hundreds of people supervising and maintaining it.
> The panels last for decades, and can be recycled. Wind turbines require more maintenance but it's standard industrial electrical/mechanical stuff, just on a tall stick.
Of course it's not just a tal stick. It's a rather complicated machine that you can't even safely get to since it's so tall. And that's before we start talking about offshore wind farms like Hornsea 2. Yo need a lot of specialist equipment to maintain those.
There are 500 to 800 people working on a nuclear power plant.
--- start quote ---
Each windfarm tends to have between 7 and 11 employees per 100 MW
https://graham.umich.edu/media/pubs/Wind-Turbine-Economic-Im...
--- end quote ---
So while fewer than per a nuclear plant, you still have to keep in mind that you need to massively overbuild renewables because their generation fluctuates.
Unfortunately, the discussion is so emotionally and politically charged, that I'm afraid no one is actually properly calculating all the costs, and risks etc.
This is beautifully put, thank you
Ah yes. The magical grid that will surely have the capacity to supply all of Germany's power if suddenly there's night and no wind just in Germany (and nowhere else in Europe, stopping at the border, apparently).
"Almost three-quarters of hydropower, water, coal and nuclear infrastructure projects were over budget by 49% on average,".
ALL OF THEM. Not just nuclear.
- "Look for the Tricastin plant I don't know enough to answer precisely but it has leaked recently and a few years ago. Of course it doesn't leak uranium"
So, your original statement was an untruth. Or "alternative facts"
> of micro-breaches caused by maintenance decades ago. That's actually a sign of proper management, but a counter-argument to reliability.
So you mean microbreaches were made decades ago, the plant has operated for decades with no issues, and you call that unreliable?
You mean, they are the most reliable base load and load-following power sources we know.
> References are easy to find if you want confirmation
It's just as easy to find confirmation that all the problems you listed are the result of neglect and politics of the past 20-30 years.
> it has to be done properly and safely, which is certainly not the case around here.
As in: France has 56 operable reactors that provide 75% of France's electricity... And you call that neither safe, nor reliable, nor...
--- start quote ---
Ernst & Young (EY) has found that an average power and utility megaproject is delivered 35% over budget and two years behind schedule
Of the megaprojects surveyed, 64% were delayed and 57% were over budge. Almost three-quarters of hydropower, water, coal and nuclear infrastructure projects were over budget by 49% on average,
--- end quote ---
https://www.offshorewind.biz/2016/12/02/offshore-wind-projec...
"Data shows the avg. 50MW PV construction project delays cost $2M. The average solar construction project is delayed by about 20% with the consequences hovering around $2M in costs."
https://percepto.co/solar-construction-delays-budget-overrun...
Yearly production means nothing on the night when it produces single-digit percentages of its installed capacity, does it?
We have just as many left to die. We just don't know or don't talk about them anymore.
> WebOS is a great example. Created by Palm as a mobile OS before they sold it to HP, who open sourced it. Now the primary contributor is LG, who uses it in smart tvs.
Ah. So the mythical "community" that will scoop in and continue developing is a compani with a 60-billion yearly revenue. Got it.
> Chromium is far too important, and there's already thousands of eyeballs on that code base.
Eyeballs rarely, if ever, translate into understanding the codebase, or being able to do anything about it.
> There would be a Chromium Foundation established very quickly if Google abandoned.
Can I interest you in Apache Foundation where great amazing projects no longer supported by their original company go to slowly slide into oblivion?
I've used debuggers in general (IDEA, Resharper, Visual Studio), and even dabbled with disassemblers like IDA in my youth.
> Browser developer tools don't "emulate hardware" they change the viewport and throttle network, there's a huge difference.
So, out-of-thebox int their primary tool frontend developers get: viewport simulation, cpu throttling, network throttling, sensor simulation (geolocation and orientation).
And can emulate performance with different number of processor cores. Not bad https://developer.chrome.com/docs/devtools/performance/refer...
> As far as all-in-one solutions go that's a new goal post, your first comment mentioned "tooling", and hot reloading is not a part of the browser
Wat. The original comment claimed this: "Maybe the web ecosystem will finally get some sane tooling". So yes, hot loading is a part of tooling. I've yet to see anything outside the web manage hot reloading with any degree of confidence and speed.
You don't like the hot loading, and let's focus on non-moved non-goal non-posts. I hope you noticed the ellipsis at the end of my list?
What's that immediately available tool for GDB and Wireshark whatever that:
- can let me examine and change the UI of the app on the fly? Including handful tools like layout overlays, layers etc.
- examine and debug animations?
- analyze paint/re-paint performance?
- view and debug delayed background actions?
- record and replay user flows?
...
^ Note the ellipsis again.
The build tools for Web are undoubtedly atrocious. However, there are very few, if any, tools that come even close to the versatility and ease of use of the tools that exist for the web ecosystem.
F5 refreshes the browser page. This has been the way to develop pages since the first browsers.
And the original question was "Import a plain js file without any node tooling and see what you get for free." You don't get hot reloading but you get all I wrote in my original comment and much more for free.
I get F5 to refresh the page when source code changes. All the other tooling remains the same: https://developer.chrome.com/docs/devtools/
I mean, Chrome even has an animations debugger
Browser development is prohibitively expensive. Even Microsoft, a trillion-dollar company, gave up on developing their browser. What makes you think that some magical community will just pick up the development of Chrome?
Why doesn't community pick other browsers in a flash?
"Can be achieved" with some additional tools. I doubt you can easily expect the structure of the app, how it repaints, see all the relevant network requests, and also introspect and query the running app, emulate various hardware, inspect and debug animations etc. in most languages.
Yes, there are collections of tools that may give you all that in aggregate, but frankly, it's not close to an "out-of-the-box" experience.
> there's no point exaggerating.
It's not really exaggeration.
Of course it wouldn't. The number of people capable of managing and developing a full-blown browser is minuscule. Even Microsoft gave up and went with Chrome in the end.
Case in point: how many people picked up Servo? Hell, even Firefox?