zlacker

Don't worry, they said they are doing it in Texas where the power grid is super reliable and able to handle the massive additional load.

>>dwnw+(OP)
Say what you will about Texas, but they are adding energy capacity, renewables especially, at a much faster rate than any comparable state.

>>dwnw+(OP)
Probably because they don’t have to deal with energy-related regulations…

>>heyden+C
Probably the first state to power all those renewables down at the whim of the president too.

>>heyden+C
Ok but their grid sure seems to fail a lot.

>>heyden+C
How much capacity does solar and wind add compared to nuclear, per square foot of land used? Also I thought the new administration was placing a ban on new renewable installations.

>>segasa+f1
Isn't there enough space in Texas? There are only 114 people per square mile. https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Texas

>>segasa+f1
Why does it matter? Is land at a premium in Texas?

>>segasa+f1
The ban is on offshore wind and for government loans for renewables. Won't really affect Texas much, it's Massachusetts that'll have to deal with more expensive energy.

>>segasa+f1
Why is that a useful metric? There is a lot of land.

>>dwnw+(OP)
"Don't be snarky."

"Eschew flamebait."

Let's not have regional flamewar on HN please.

https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html

>>lvl155+F
That was sarcasm, the Texas grid falls over pretty much annually at this point.

>>bryanl+g3
Does anyone know how the ban on onshore will work. Is it on federal lands only? If so, how big of a deal is that?

I read this but it lacks information: https://apnews.com/article/wind-energy-offshore-turbines-tru...

>>dang+s8
Not guilty. No sarcasm intended, of course. If your guidelines are so broad to include this, you should work on them, and in turn, yourself.

Governor says our power grid is the best in the universe. Why don't you believe us?

Stop breaking your own rules.

"Please respond to the strongest plausible interpretation of what someone says, not a weaker one that's easier to criticize. Assume good faith."

"Please don't post shallow dismissals, especially of other people's work. A good critical comment teaches us something."

Let's not ruin HN with overmoderation. This kind of thing is no longer in fashion, right?

>>dwnw+Ye
If you didn't intend your comment to be a snarky one-liner, that didn't come across to me, and I'm pretty sure that would also be the case for many others.

Intent is a funny thing—people usually assume that good intent is sufficient because it's obvious to themselves, but the rest of us don't have access to that state, so has to be encoded somehow in your actual comment in order to get communicated. I sometimes put it this way: the burden is on the commenter to disambiguate. https://hn.algolia.com/?dateRange=all&page=0&prefix=true&que...

I take your point at least halfway though, because it wasn't the worst violation of the guidelines. (Usually I say "this is not a borderline case" but this time it was!) I'm sensitive to regional flamewar because it's tedious and, unlike national flamewar or religious flamewar, it tends to sneak up on people (i.e. we don't realize we're doing it).

>>dang+Dj
So you are sorry and take it back? Should probably delete your comments rather than striking them out, as the guidelines say.

I live, work, and posted this from Texas, BTW...

Also it takes up more than one line on my screen. So, not a "one-liner" either. If you think it is, please follow the rules consistently and enforce them by deleting all comments on the site containing one sentence or even paragraph. My comment was a pretty long sentence (136 chars) and wouldn't come close to fitting in the 50 characters of a Git "one-liner".

Otherwise, people will just assume all the comments are filtered through your unpredictable and unfairly biased eye. And like I said (and you didn't answer), this kind of thing is no longer in fashion, right?

None of this is "borderline". I did nothing wrong and you publicly shamed me. Think before you start flamewars on HN. Bad mod.

>>malfis+v7
Because the commenter is a pro-nuclear who thinks nucler will solve all of short-term demand problems.

>>itisha+x2
It doesn’t.