Yes, just solar. Hydro is bigger now, but it doesn’t have the growing potential. Wind is currently also growing exponential, but I don’t see it doing that for 20 more years. And even if it does, it doesn’t really make a big difference since exponential + exponential is still exponential. If it grows as fast as solar that would mean we’re just a few years ahead of the curve.
Here you go, you’ll need numpy, scipy and matplotlib:
from scipy.optimize import curve_fit
from matplotlib import pyplot as plt
# 2010-2013 data from https://ourworldindata.org/renewable-energy [TWh]
y = np.array([32, 63, 97, 132, 198, 256, 328, 445, 575, 659, 853, 1055, 1323, 1629])
x = np.arange(0, len(y))
# function we expect the data to fit
fit_func = lambda x, a, b, c: a * np.exp2(b * x ) + c
popt, _ = curve_fit(fit_func, x, y, maxfev=5000)
fig, ax = plt.subplots()
ax.scatter(x + 2010, y, label="Data", color="b", linestyle=":")
ax.plot(x + 2010, fit_func(x, *popt), color="r", linewidth=3.0, linestyle="-", label='best fit curve: $y={0:.3f} * 2^{{{1:.3f}x}} + {2:.3f}$'.format(*popt))
plt.legend()
plt.show()
Here’s what I get, global solar energy generated doubles every ~3.5 (1/0.284) years.
Exponential, it fits the curve very nicely. I can give you the python code if you want to. I got 2 decades for all energy usage, not only electricity, which is only one sixth of that.
I just took the numbers for the whole world, that’s easier to find and in the end the only thing that matters.
The next few years are going to be interesting in my opinion. If we can make efuels cheaper than fossil fuels (look up Prometheus Fuels and Terraform Industries), we’re going to jump even harder on solar and if production can keep up it will even grow faster.
Then look at the total TWh from renewables, and rate it has been growing Y-o-Y and extrapolate until it reaches the number needed to eliminate fossil fuels.
You’ll find it will take decades to build enough renewable capacity to replace fossil fuel based electricity generation.
I get ~2 decades when I extrapolate these numbers (from 2010-2023) to get to 2022 total primary energy usage for solar alone.
Energy usage will grow as well, and keeping that growth is ambitious, but it the future doesn’t look that bleak too me if you look at it that way.
I’ve never had UHT milk go bad in less than a week. Longest I’ve had it in my fridge and passed the smell and taste check was over a month, but at that point I didn’t trust it anymore.
You guys don’t have UHT milk?
Yes someone gave the green light, someone shot at them. Nowhere it’s said those were the same people, nor that the people giving green light knew that the other people were going to shoot.
The most likely thing is that they forgot to inform one group of soldiers, or that they misunderstood, or some other fatal miscommunication. Miscommunication is common in war. Deliberately baiting an ambulance is both extremely evil and stupid.
I see no evidence that they deliberately baited the ambulance? Bad coordination is the most likely explanation.
To be clear, even in that case it’s still a war crime to shoot an ambulance.
If you can’t see pedestrians on the road (on time) you’re either driving too fast, or you’re not paying enough attention, or you’re driving a car that is not suited for roads with pedestrians. That’s totally on the driver.
Leaving that aside, what do you think causes the increase? Dark clothes getting more popular…? I believe it’s the rising popularity of bigger cars with bad visibility (and maybe also the increase of phone usage while driving).
No, reunification isn’t the status quo, that’s ending the status quo.
Xijinping saying mainland China and Taiwan will reunite basically means he wants to invade Taiwan. That is newsworthy.
At this time is history reunification means joining the PRC, there’s no question about that. And support for that is very low in Taiwan.
The reason they don’t say that in official statements and prefer the status quo is because they are afraid of war.
I don’t know anything about a “constitutional vow”.
They are named the Republic of China and claim all (or most?) of mainland China in the claimed territories, (but where those are defined I can’t find):, I suppose it’s not really wrong to call that wanting to be a part of China.
Also in the amendments they talk about the free area and the mainland area https://law.moj.gov.tw/ENG/LawClass/LawAll.aspx?pcode=A0000002
Of course it’s a very misleading claim because if they would claim anything else they risk war with the PRC.
All the discussion I’ve seen is also about independence vs the status quo, not independence vs joining the PRC. That’s not really on the table.
Only a very small minority did protest, that’s why it didn’t work.
No, it’s a law criminalizing the act of insulting “heroes and martyrs”
A moral cause in one country can be an evil wrongdoing in other. Case in point - Al-Qaeda was formed because US troops were deployed in some country in the middle east to defend someone.
Uhm, where did you get that from?
Anyway, I get your point, but your example only shows that morality doesn’t really stop at borders for most people.
I’m okay with helping Ukraine. I’m not okay if it’s helping only to fuck with Russia.
If it’s to stop an authoritarian state from taking over a democratic state it’s good for me. If it’s because of other less ulterior motives (and let’s not kid ourselves, it’s at least partly because of that), I don’t mind. Is it bad when a doctor only saves lives because it pays well?
That’s one weird argument. Are you implying morality stops at borders?
And it’s not even meddling, they are asking for help.
I never said that. Of course you pay for everything that’s in your car, but it’s certainly possible it would cost you more not to have them put it in there, that’s the crux of the matter.
Yes, and no. Imagine it costs $20/car to install seat heating in every car, but by making two assembly lines, one for with and one without it every car becomes $25 more expensive. Software disabling costs $1/car. In this scenario it would cost more to make a car without physical seat heating than one with. This is just an extreme example to show the problem, with other costs it can be more complicated, but the principle stands.
But instead of passing the economic gain to the customers, they arbitrarily lock it to maximize profit.
In a perfect market those things are the same, that’s the beauty of capitalism. By software disabling features they can lower prices for customers who don’t want them and asking higher prices of people who are willing to pay for it.
Obviously perfect markets don’t exist, but cars are a super competitive market.
Rail? They border Russia and there’s a railroad over the border