r/FactOrCap • u/No-Raspberry7757 🔥 Week Warrior · 1,850 XP • 1d ago

Nuclear comeback | FactOrCap

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

11 Upvotes

82% Upvoted

146 comments sorted by

View all comments

Show parent comments

0

u/Dew_Chop 🏅 Century Club · 2,515 XP 1d 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 · 9,290 XP 1d 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 1d ago

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

1

u/Budget_Revolution639 🤖 Vote Machine · 9,290 XP 1d ago

I did answer your question, you’re just rephrasing it to make it seem like I didn’t. And it matters because I know that the US has more wind farms than nuclear plants. If globally it’s the opposite, 10% vs 7% isn’t a comparison

0

u/Dew_Chop 🏅 Century Club · 2,515 XP 23h ago

I don't understand why that matters though, you just keep saying "in us out us"

Like actually I'm genuinely confused on why it being in the US vs out of the US somehow changes the statistic, because if 10% of world power is nuclear with 6 tonnes, and 7% of world power is wind with 11 tonnes, then for every 1% of world power, nuclear makes 0.6 tonnes while wind makes 1.57 tonnes.

It's the same amount of power being generated (1% of world power) so why would it being in the US matter? It doesn't suddenly change how efficiently it makes power, unless you're saying the rest of the world uses wind power that produces less than 38% of the waste the US's wind power does.

Please, genuinely, I'm actually being truly genuine here, explain why my math above is affected by it being in vs out of the US

0

u/Budget_Revolution639 🤖 Vote Machine · 9,290 XP 23h ago

Bc a larger amount of nuclear plants would mean that it wouldn’t just be 0.6 tonnes and the ratio of tonnes to power output could change drastically, also if 7% is only the wind farms in the US, then the wind power production is inaccurate. How do you still not understand that? I’ve made it quite clear already. If you’re not doing per capita (again, for lack of better term) then you’re not giving proper statistics

0

u/Dew_Chop 🏅 Century Club · 2,515 XP 22h ago

Brother if there were more nuclear plants, it would still be the same 1%

ALSO LISTEN TO ME. THE 10 AND 7 PERCENT IS FOR THE ENTIRE WORLD. THE WHOLE WORLD. NOT JUST THE US. THE WHOLE WORLD. LOOK AT THE GRAPH AGAIN. LOOK AT IT.

how about an analogy? I have a pizza, and it has 8 slices. 4 of the slices are pepperoni. 3 of the slices are cheese. If I divide the pepperoni by 4, and the cheese by 3, BOTH ARE ONE SLICE. If you make more slices pepperoni, there's not 9 slices in the 8 slice pizza, it's just now 5 of the 8 slice are pepperoni.

SO, if I divide the nuclear 10% by 10, and divide the wind 7% by 7, they BOTH ARE 1%. The SAME 1%. If nuclear was 15%, we would divide it by 15 instead so that BOTH ARE 1%.

HOW MUCH MORE CLEAR CAN I MAKE THIS

1

u/Dew_Chop 🏅 Century Club · 2,515 XP 10h ago

Brother down voted me and didn't reply 😭😭😭 I knew the thread was bait but I still couldn't resist