We’d like to remind Forumites to please avoid political debate on the Forum.
This is to keep it a safe and useful space for MoneySaving discussions. Threads that are – or become – political in nature may be removed in line with the Forum’s rules. Thank you for your understanding.
📨 Have you signed up to the Forum's new Email Digest yet? Get a selection of trending threads sent straight to your inbox daily, weekly or monthly!
The Forum now has a brand new text editor, adding a bunch of handy features to use when creating posts. Read more in our how-to guide
Texas Freeze Raises Cost Of Charging A Tesla To $900
Comments
-
I think the two of you are agreeing vehemently.lemondrops69 said:
I think you have read the figure incorrectly it's 13,739. (point)625. I can round it up, the decimal is too small for some people to read.daivid said:
The offshore turbines are 3 times as powerful/efficient, wow! I hope your dropping the decimals from the offshore MW was accidental, not a deliberate attempt to make one number appear much smaller than another (the onshore capacity).lemondrops69 said:Since when?Onshore Turbines 8,663 Onshore Operational Capacity (MW) 13,739.625 Offshore Turbines 2,292 Offshore Operational Capacity (MW) 10,415.
Onshore 13,739MW
Offshore 10,415MW
This is installed capacity
However, off shore turbines are much bigger.
13739MW from 8663 turbines = 1.58MW/turbine
10415MW from 2292 turbines = 4.54MW/turbine = roughly 3x 1.58.
And, yes, at first glance eight digits looks a lot more than five, hence the comment about precision.0
Confirm your email address to Create Threads and Reply
Categories
- All Categories
- 354.6K Banking & Borrowing
- 254.5K Reduce Debt & Boost Income
- 455.5K Spending & Discounts
- 247.5K Work, Benefits & Business
- 604.4K Mortgages, Homes & Bills
- 178.6K Life & Family
- 261.9K Travel & Transport
- 1.5M Hobbies & Leisure
- 16.1K Discuss & Feedback
- 37.7K Read-Only Boards