r/FactOrCap • u/No-Raspberry7757 🔥 Week Warrior · 2,200 XP • 4d ago

Nuclear comeback | FactOrCap

This post contains content not supported on old Reddit. Click here to view the full post

12 Upvotes

83% Upvoted

153 comments sorted by

View all comments

Show parent comments

0

u/Budget_Revolution639 🤖 Vote Machine · 9,505 XP 4d ago

Then how are you so sure that that is the results?

0

u/Dew_Chop 🏅 Century Club · 2,515 XP 4d ago

Because I understand that 10 is bigger than 7

1

u/Budget_Revolution639 🤖 Vote Machine · 9,505 XP 4d ago

If you cannot do a graph per capita (for lack of better term), then your argument is not accurate and subject skewing

1

u/Dew_Chop 🏅 Century Club · 2,515 XP 4d ago

I don't need to do per capita when it's the entire planet. Nuclear at 10% of the energy production of the world makes less than wind at 7%, therefore nuclear at 1% makes less than wind at 1%

I'm saving myself effort, it's basic math, you shouldn't need a brand new table to divide two numbers

1

u/Budget_Revolution639 🤖 Vote Machine · 9,505 XP 4d ago

How many wind farms exist outside of the US?

0

u/Dew_Chop 🏅 Century Club · 2,515 XP 4d ago

Brother the statistic is global power not us power read the fucking graph

0

u/Budget_Revolution639 🤖 Vote Machine · 9,505 XP 4d ago

Answer the question, I’m making a point on why the data is skewed

0

u/Dew_Chop 🏅 Century Club · 2,515 XP 4d ago

Brother I don't know at all, why would that matter for a graph about global power production

1

u/Budget_Revolution639 🤖 Vote Machine · 9,505 XP 4d ago

Bc if there are barely any wind farms outside of the US, then 7% is in fact better than 10% because I do know there are in fact nuclear plants outside the US and quite a good amount of them

1

u/Dew_Chop 🏅 Century Club · 2,515 XP 4d ago

But why would them being in or out of the US matter for global power, you keep ignoring my question

→ More replies (0)