Editing Talk:2710: Hydropower Breakthrough
Please sign your posts with ~~~~ |
Warning: You are not logged in. Your IP address will be publicly visible if you make any edits. If you log in or create an account, your edits will be attributed to your username, along with other benefits.
The edit can be undone.
Please check the comparison below to verify that this is what you want to do, and then save the changes below to finish undoing the edit.
Latest revision | Your text | ||
Line 13: | Line 13: | ||
More variation: "more water than *we* fed into it" ie not counting water from the river that feeds it, or rainfall. There's also the title text turn of phrase "heavy water reactor". "heavy" could refer to either the "water" (in the sense of gravity, or deuterium passing through), or the "reactor" (as in its mass) - [[Special:Contributions/172.70.210.242|172.70.210.242]] 05:43, 13 December 2022 (UTC) | More variation: "more water than *we* fed into it" ie not counting water from the river that feeds it, or rainfall. There's also the title text turn of phrase "heavy water reactor". "heavy" could refer to either the "water" (in the sense of gravity, or deuterium passing through), or the "reactor" (as in its mass) - [[Special:Contributions/172.70.210.242|172.70.210.242]] 05:43, 13 December 2022 (UTC) | ||
− | |||
− | |||
If Q is only barely >1 it could square the circle by converting atoms to oxygen by fusion in order to create water but the whole energy of the dam is used to make the fusion of a few oxygen atoms. | If Q is only barely >1 it could square the circle by converting atoms to oxygen by fusion in order to create water but the whole energy of the dam is used to make the fusion of a few oxygen atoms. | ||
Line 28: | Line 26: | ||
[[User:ProphetZarquon|ProphetZarquon]] ([[User talk:ProphetZarquon|talk]]) 16:00, 13 December 2022 (UTC) | [[User:ProphetZarquon|ProphetZarquon]] ([[User talk:ProphetZarquon|talk]]) 16:00, 13 December 2022 (UTC) | ||
:Top KWh:$ producers sure, by which statistics? The effectivity of different kinds of power plants varies widely both with specific location, cost of input and the method used, but usually the hydroelectric damns build in good terrain would take a lead, especially considering that they can work for more than century. Which wind or solar power plant can hope for that? There is sure lot of research still necessary to make fusion power plants reality, but long term it can easily pay itself, and it can work anywhere, while damns need to be build on river, wind onshore (offshore are MUCH less effective and no research will change that) and solar, well, not too far from equator and somewhere with sunny weather, it wouldn't work when raining. Or, well, in space. Fission might also get good value from research if the research actually will be happening. -- [[User:Hkmaly|Hkmaly]] ([[User talk:Hkmaly|talk]]) 23:21, 13 December 2022 (UTC) | :Top KWh:$ producers sure, by which statistics? The effectivity of different kinds of power plants varies widely both with specific location, cost of input and the method used, but usually the hydroelectric damns build in good terrain would take a lead, especially considering that they can work for more than century. Which wind or solar power plant can hope for that? There is sure lot of research still necessary to make fusion power plants reality, but long term it can easily pay itself, and it can work anywhere, while damns need to be build on river, wind onshore (offshore are MUCH less effective and no research will change that) and solar, well, not too far from equator and somewhere with sunny weather, it wouldn't work when raining. Or, well, in space. Fission might also get good value from research if the research actually will be happening. -- [[User:Hkmaly|Hkmaly]] ([[User talk:Hkmaly|talk]]) 23:21, 13 December 2022 (UTC) | ||
− | |||
− | |||
− | |||
− | |||
− | |||
I think the explanation is overthinking it. The joke is that there's a leak in the dam. | I think the explanation is overthinking it. The joke is that there's a leak in the dam. | ||
Line 58: | Line 51: | ||
The AWS stuff should all be deleted. It is nonsensical. AWS uses water for evaporative cooling of its data centers. It is spending loads of money on wet lands to feel better about it. That has nothing what-so-ever to do with this comic. | The AWS stuff should all be deleted. It is nonsensical. AWS uses water for evaporative cooling of its data centers. It is spending loads of money on wet lands to feel better about it. That has nothing what-so-ever to do with this comic. | ||
− | ChatGPT may be only barely mediocre at producing good | + | ChatGPT may be only barely mediocre at producing good explaations from the transcripts, but it did a fantastic job of reducing 14 absurdly verbose to 5 simple paragraphs (8.3 to 3.6 kilobytes.) I did maybe fiften words of cleanup, mostly to put the (wiki)links back in. [[Special:Contributions/162.158.142.124|162.158.142.124]] 05:19, 15 December 2022 (UTC) |
− | |||
− | |||
− | |||
− | |||
− | |||
− | |||
− | |||
− |