Normslly you'd expext that more (and cheaper) supply would drive down prices. Classic market logic.
How do do you explain that this market logic ceases to exist for renewables only? A whopping ~2TW or ~35% of generated power in China is renewable and since renewable energy is roughly 1.5 to 4 times cheaper than e.g. coal per kW/h produced that ought to have some impact.
If it has not I'd be curious in your explaination of the mechanism involved.
China's power price has never reflected market costs. But the reason why you arent seeing it drop with so much renewables added is because your numbers are wrong. Its about 20-25% generated as renewables over the past 5 years and while a lot of renewable capacity and non renewable capacity has been added the power demand has raised to match. When we look at the current demand its a near inf scale whatever is available modern industry will consume.
When we compare this to the power boom in the 2000s they were able to build enough energy generation to meet demand and were able to drive the price down from 30c rural and 17c city to 8cents for both.
Oh look someone over glazing AI and its usefulness. I hope this is a real person authentically sharing their opinion and not some AI startup guerrilla marketing.
Are they really stealing it though? They only brought the IP 30 years later they didnt make it or put any work towards it. The openTTD community has easily done 100x the work to extend the game.
This makes me wonder why squatter's rights are not a thing here...but I don't know much about the current and previous legal status of the open genres like OpenTTD.
Well, because I'm not getting 80-100ms latency. In a first-person shooter, 100ms would be 6 frames and make the game basically unplayable with a mouse. Also there's nothing intrinsically expensive about DLSS to cause such a latency. I suspect something is wrong with your setup?
If you dont believe me you can look up latency tests for it. without DLSS rendering is ~15ms. With preformance mode DLSS that raises to about 30-35MS. Balanced is about 60ms and beautiful is 90-100ms input latency.
That's the low quality comments that ruin everything.
China connected 4 solar panels per SECOND last year. China is also has 265x the population and has growing energy demands. They build much less coal than they phase out.
All you can muster is a "But uh china is doing something so you are irrelevant" which is neither helpful nor correct. You are supporting the status quo and support not changing a damn thing.
China has not had a 3rd party verified emission report published in over 3 years. You can only go based on their word and very low quality articles reporting all this success. Every year I hear their emission are peaking and every time the emission report comes out it turns out they've increased. People say "oh China reduced emissions by 1% this year" but it turns out they only reduced the rate of emission growth by 1%. So I'll believe they are reducing emissions when I see it.
Also its fair to bring them up, they are responsible for 36% of the worlds pollution and hold the lowest environmental standards in the 1st world. Without them working to combat this issue its pointless for anyone else to try.
China: per capita about 1.8x the global average CO2
United States: per capita about 3x the global average CO2
Projections for China is that these numbers will go down massively over the next 10 years.
How is that going for the US for "lowest environmental standards in the 1st world"? Please get over your 20 year old views of china. They get their act together while the US shits the bed.
We can talk about 50% new car registrations are EVs in china and how the US is doing?
Or how ~60% of all renewable capacity added globally by 2030 will be in China? Or how it is already at 50%?
Per captia emissions are meaningless and only used because they obscure the damage china is doing. Projections *from China say this year is the peak and it will start going down. They've been saying that every year for the past 5 years by the way. It always gets revised. As for the solar thats maximum capacity and actual figures for electricity generation are significantly lower. Coal is higher in terms of actual energy generation added to the grid.
if the US doubled its output but added another 500m to its population would you consider that to be a reduction in emissions or a positive trend? No it wouldnt because emissions are still rising. Climate change doesnt care that you have 1.8b people it just looks at the Co2 output.
They constantly say they are a Public benefit corporation but there is no actual difference between that an a corporation. This leads to people assuming some kind of benevolence.
Wrong. B Corp boards are legally protected from lawsuits if they reject the highest bid when they put the company up for sale. In a C Corp, once the board puts the company on the auction block, not taking the highest bid, even from a company that's diametrically opposed to the goals of the C Corp, opens the board up to lawsuits from shareholders pissed about not getting the maximal return. Suggesting this is no difference shows a lack of understanding of the legal regime these types of corporations operate under.
B Corps allow the board to weigh things besides shareholder value. That's a meaningful distinction.
The idea is that shareholder primacy isn't compatible with everything every corporation wants to do, so having a board that's protected from lawsuits when they put things above shareholders is a useful thing and B Corps offer that.
The board can, for example, reject a "superior" takeover bid without fear of lawsuits from shareholders pissed off they didn't get the biggest payday available. A typical C Corp's board MUST take the highest offer, and not doing so WILL get them sued. That means if GoodGuy B Corp is about to be taken over by BadGuy Inc., the GoodGuy board can say "No, they're not compatible with the public benefit mission we incorporated under so we're not going to accept their offer." That's actually really useful.
No GoodGuy B Corp would still need to fear lawsuits in that situation and PBC or not they would be able rejecting that decision. If they get sued there is a good chance they can defend the decision.
reply