Back to the Future’s 1.21 gigawatts sounds huge, but is it? We compare different power levels of common objects to see how much energy a gigawatt really is.

    • Technoguyfication@sh.itjust.works
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      4
      ·
      3 months ago

      Where are you getting those numbers from? First of all, GW is a unit of power, not energy. You can’t “produce 1.21GW in a day” because it’s a measurement of instantaneous power. Some nuclear reactors produce around 1GW(e), which means 1 gigawatt hour per hour.

        • ignirtoq@kbin.social
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          2
          ·
          3 months ago

          Yeah, and the article is wrong, though only slightly. They seem to be confusing watts (power, energy over time) with Joules (energy, power times a duration of time). They give a passable definition in the beginning (“energy transfer”), but they seem to misunderstand what the “transfer” part means exactly.

          If you find-replace all instances of “watt” with “watt-hour” after that starting definition, it would be more accurate. That’s why I say it’s only slightly wrong.

      • po-lina-ergi@kbin.social
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        3 months ago

        1.21 gw = output of one nuke plant
        1.21 gw × 1 day = (power requirements of a house) × (100 years)

        I’m guessing

    • reflex@kbin.social
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      2
      ·
      edit-2
      3 months ago

      1.21gw == output of 1 nuke plant for 1 day == power single home for 100 years

      avg lightning = 10gw

      Whoa, this is heavy.

      • inkican@kbin.socialOP
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        3 months ago

        There’s that word again. ‘Heavy.’ Why are things so heavy in the future? Is there a problem with the Earth’s gravitational pull?