91–100 of 448 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
https://www.mccallum-layton.co.uk/tools/statistic-calculator... Sample Size: 1000 Observed Proportion: 15.64% Confidence Level: 95% Confidence Interval: ±2.25 Range for the true population proportion: 13.39% to 17.89% It's noise.
Hmm, I tried playing around with this tool. When I enter 250000 in sample size I get ranges that don't overlap. Does that mean I would need that many samples to answer this?
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Batteries would be great but they are not necessary unless you want to replace all generation with solar which would be a gargantuan undertaking. As part of the current generation stack, even at expanded scale, solar works very well without storage.
Yup. There's no reason why we can't rely on peaker plants a little bit longer. In general, there's a ton of power-plants designed to turn on and off throughout the day to inject power into the grid when demand grows. The chief benefit however, is that this happened starting at daytime hours (when workers come into factories and tons of energy is suddenly demanded from the grid). However, because 12:00 noon is peak so…
No reason other than them being more expensive than batteries:
http://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2015-12-22/batteries-...
>We need something to work on cloudy / rainy days after all.
Even without storage, interconnecting grids with HVDC across the US (or across a continent) solves this problem really really nicely. China is already building tons of HVDC to do this, and we need to as well. Long haul transport over HVDC is also cheaper than peaker plants.
That said, natural gas peaker plants stick around as long as the fuel costs are low, and the capital has already been sunk into the plant. But for new capacity, I think there's going to be a huge shift towards storage.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I think that's part of the reason the bids are so cheap, though. They're probably counting on some cost reductions over time so that even if they lose some money up front, the long-term profitability will be there. I doubt that anyone can actually deliver solar power at a profit today for the bid prices listed.
Given that the vast majority of solar costs are upfront, and that the lifetime of a solar install is greater than 20 years, how would future cost reductions help with a project that's starting soon?
>DEWA invited developers to submit bids for configurations made up of three sub-phases: a mandatory 200MW to be commissioned in April 2018, and another two optional 300MW tranches in 2019 and 2020, respectively,” the firm said in an analysis of the results.
so it's not being built for 2 or 3 years and they are probably hoping costs will continue dropping during that period.
The details of the situation are quite complicated, more details here http://www.apricum-group.com/dubai-shatters-records-cost-sol...
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Its SEO/Click-bait 101 unfortunately. It is sensationalisation of something to make it sound more interesting. Next it will be "See what crazy change to solar made energy purchasers sit up pay attention!"
But can it be improved with a "just?" "See what crazy change to solar just made energy purchasers sit up and pay attention!"
This article is making a really big deal out of bids . While the trend is encouraging, let's wait and see if the winning bidders can actually deliver at the prices they bid before getting too excited.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Given that the vast majority of solar costs are upfront, and that the lifetime of a solar install is greater than 20 years, how would future cost reductions help with a project that's starting soon?
In this case: >DEWA invited developers to submit bids for configurations made up of three sub-phases: a mandatory 200MW to be commissioned in April 2018, and another two optional 300MW tranches in 2019 and 2020, respectively,” the firm said in an analysis of the results. so it's not being built for 2 or 3 years and they are probably hoping costs will continue dropping during that period. The details of the situation…
And here in the USA some states are punishing solar customers who sell their energy, by taxing them on infrastructure costs, to protect the big energy companies. Their reasoning for taxing them is to "maintain the lines and equipment". The counter-argument to that is, "customers who consume pay taxes and fee's to maintain the lines, and on top of that, the government is giving them tax breaks to help "maintain the li…
It would be like demanding free Internet because you run a website lots of people visit so your upload is greater than your download.
This might seem like a weird thing to complain about, but am I the only person who is sick to death of headlines of the form "X just did Y"? It's the "just" I object to. It seems to be some sort of trend over the last couple of years. I think it's to make it seem more dramatic or something. It just happened! My god! In this case it is especially ridiculous, since the article describes something that happened over the…
Its SEO/Click-bait 101 unfortunately. It is sensationalisation of something to make it sound more interesting. Next it will be "See what crazy change to solar made energy purchasers sit up pay attention!"
This might seem like a weird thing to complain about, but am I the only person who is sick to death of headlines of the form "X just did Y"? It's the "just" I object to. It seems to be some sort of trend over the last couple of years. I think it's to make it seem more dramatic or something. It just happened! My god! In this case it is especially ridiculous, since the article describes something that happened over the…
https://hn.algolia.com/?query=quietly&sort=byPopularity&pref...
Really gives you the impression that Facebook deprecated their API's official Python bindings in order to be evil. Otherwise, they would have formally alerted the press.
"X just quietly did Y" is a thing, even:
https://hn.algolia.com/?query=just%20quietly&sort=byPopulari...
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Maybe people like fresh things? Here's an A/B test I recently ran on some notification messages. There were two messages, only difference is the word "new" in there. A: "You received a message from the admins about your Facebook page." B: "You received a new message from the admins about your Facebook page." A clickthrough 15.64%, B clickthrough 15.95%. About 1000 samples per group. Not sure if noise.
.3% on 1k? That's three people.. Yes, noise.