• SpongyAneurysm@feddit.org
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    1
    ·
    1 hour ago

    If you seriously intend to keep this discussion going, I suggest we tune down the ad hominem and change to a more productive tone. I’m tired of internet discussions working the way they do, but only the participants can change that.

    I’d suggest lets focus on the topic of capacity factors first, since I’m under the impression, that that’s the biggest source of confusion/misunderstanding here and one that needs to be cleared for the whole topic to make any sense.

    While I couldn’t track down a primary ressource for the graph you provided, I’m assuming it’s based on data from the United States, that is also presented here (admittedly in a much more cumbersome way): https://www.eia.gov/electricity/monthly/

    You can find capacity factors here: https://www.eia.gov/electricity/monthly/epm_table_grapher.php?t=table_6_07_b (And in the similar table focussing on fossil power)

    While that might not be the exact source for the diagram you provided, the numbers come close enough, that I’d say it suffices as a base for discussion.

    The PDF containing technical notes explains, how capacity factor is being calculated. See p. 21 https://www.eia.gov/electricity/monthly/pdf/AppendixC.pdf

    Now I haven’t had time to look into the data more, but my main criticism about using that data is, that all it does (and checking the source and methodology here just confimed my view here) is tell you about how things work in the status quo. Not necessarily a good indicator of the potentials of a grid with a different structure. Can we agree on that?


    I’d like to leave it here for the time being. I felt like I have to adress the bit about needing energy sources with a lower capacity factor, to go along with renewables, that was very poor wording on my part. But I feel like I’d derail the discussion, so I’ll explain myself later on.