growsomethinggood

joined 1 year ago
[–] [email protected] 18 points 9 months ago

Coding skills are almost always valuable even if you're not coding directly. Depending on what you're good at/interested in, I'd recommend data analysis (everyone has data! Gotta look at it somehow), database management, engineering roles other than just software engineering, IT, etc. Might not pay exactly as well as a big coding job out the gate, but it'll certainly be interesting if you like coding.

[–] [email protected] 2 points 9 months ago

Not a national park and kind of on the outskirts of your radius, but any thoughts on the Finger Lakes region of NY? Lots of hiking, waterfalls, lakes, etc.

Ithaca

Watkins Glen

[–] [email protected] 5 points 1 year ago

I have a very old Kindle that's still kicking. No reason to replace it if it still works right? I'm concerned that borrowing books from the library uses this delivery system and therefore might not be able to deliver to my Kindle. Ironically, piracy might be the only option to still use my working and not otherwise obsolete device.

[–] [email protected] 79 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Hey this is a pretty common misconception! Project lifespan here is used like a financial term, not an engineering one. It's cost of initial project + maintainance and other costs, compared to energy generation $ minus energy losses over time from equipment degrading. Infrastructure requires maintenance and replacement, and 35 years here is kind of a "best by" guarantee.

Also, 35 years is actually a pretty long time! From now, that's 2058; looking backwards, that's 1988. Take a look at what wind turbine engineering looked like in 1988 and the difference to modern equipment is enormous. 35 years is a full generation of people: someone 18 today will be 53 when this project needs refurbishment.

This is a really exciting project (I think the article quoted some 5% total energy generation for the UK? That is truly insane) and I don't think that excitement should be outweighed by pretty mundane lifespan number! This much clean energy is awesome, will be present for a long long time, and get recycled and rebuilt when it has run its course.

[–] [email protected] 33 points 1 year ago (1 children)

This is a typical "lifespan" of these types of projects, that is to say, the lifespan where it produces sufficient amounts of energy versus the degradation of the equipment to justify upkeep costs (which may be greater for offshore wind than on-shore). It's not going to break down over night after 35 years, it could go 50 or even more, but at lower energy production. The other reason for these lifespan calculations is that, in 35 years, the technology may far out pace what is currently installed in likely a prime location, and maybe local energy demands have changed. If that's the case, a "repower" may occur where existing infrastructure is adapted to new equipment which produces far more energy.

view more: ‹ prev next ›