• dudinax@programming.dev
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    18
    ·
    1 year ago

    He didn’t write GWH, he just said GW. For all we know, assuming this number relates to reality at all, that’s just smear across the whole eclipse and no single watt was lost for more than a few minutes.

    If we lost “30GW”, I’d bet we lost barely one GWH.

    • melpomenesclevage@lemm.eeBanned
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      13
      ·
      edit-2
      1 year ago

      I think a safer assumption is that he made it all up, because truth is dead.

      We lost some amount. Did he bother to google how much? Why would he?

    • Derpgon@programming.dev
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      4
      ·
      1 year ago

      If it really was GW, then just multiply the 30 with time the sun was covered, and boom, you have GWH. I don’t think it was even close to an hour.