Best guess, sunset is being defined as a specific time. Sunset isn’t necessarily the point at which all sunlight is gone, and even then, the time the sun goes down varies depending on where you are within a given time zone. If they just used an arbitrary time or an almanac listing for twilight for each day, they could easily end up including slivers of daylight in their post sunset data.
Which is really pointless since this is just the same old “BuT sOlAr DoEsN’t WoRk At NiGhT” argument that idiots have been making for decades. But I suppose you gotta at least pretend to use real world data to make it look sciencey.
Had to rely on Google AI for this (downvote all you want but good luck trying to find this without it), but it says dusk/dawn can produce 0.1% to 0.01% capacity. But inverters for DC to AC have a minimum threshold so it’s nothing. So not that.
And as most chatbots list sources, you can always check them out yourself and cut out the middleman. Most of academia - some 45% do that. Another 45% don’t even bother. A lone 10% still do things the old fashioned way. In any case, you’re not alone in relying on AI to find obscure information.
With search engines becoming increasingly infested with low-quality and obvious-slop sites, relying on the same methods as the slopmasters isn’t even a big stain on your morality. Because of it was, the slopmasters would be drowning in the ink required, and billionaires would already have caused another biblical flood of it.
Could be residual energy generation from the few operating concentrated solar power stations (generating great by reflecting sunlight and that heat persists for a time)
I’m wondering how that 1% remained operating?
Best guess, sunset is being defined as a specific time. Sunset isn’t necessarily the point at which all sunlight is gone, and even then, the time the sun goes down varies depending on where you are within a given time zone. If they just used an arbitrary time or an almanac listing for twilight for each day, they could easily end up including slivers of daylight in their post sunset data.
Which is really pointless since this is just the same old “BuT sOlAr DoEsN’t WoRk At NiGhT” argument that idiots have been making for decades. But I suppose you gotta at least pretend to use real world data to make it look sciencey.
Moonlight
138 MW generated from moonlight is insane to me.
I’m investing in lunar power now
Had to rely on Google AI for this (downvote all you want but good luck trying to find this without it), but it says dusk/dawn can produce 0.1% to 0.01% capacity. But inverters for DC to AC have a minimum threshold so it’s nothing. So not that.
Firstly: I’m not the downvoter.
Secondly: you didn’t have to - you chose to.
And as most chatbots list sources, you can always check them out yourself and cut out the middleman. Most of academia - some 45% do that. Another 45% don’t even bother. A lone 10% still do things the old fashioned way. In any case, you’re not alone in relying on AI to find obscure information.
With search engines becoming increasingly infested with low-quality and obvious-slop sites, relying on the same methods as the slopmasters isn’t even a big stain on your morality. Because of it was, the slopmasters would be drowning in the ink required, and billionaires would already have caused another biblical flood of it.
Did you know that 87% of all statistics are made up on the spot?
60% of the time it works every time
49% of us think we’re not divided.
Half the population can’t read statistics and the other third choose not to.
Academia calls these heuristics, not statistics.
Thank God we had you here to tell us what the slop machine sharted out.
You’re welcome!
It was sarcasm. Next time keep that shit to yourself.
It was?!?!? Rudeness from ml?!? Well I never!
AI slop garbage defenders from .world!? Who’da thunk it?
Could be residual energy generation from the few operating concentrated solar power stations (generating great by reflecting sunlight and that heat persists for a time)