In Flanders Fields

In Flanders' fields, the poppies blow

Between the crosses, row on row,

That mark our place: and in the sky

The larks, still bravely singing, fly

Scarce heard amid the guns below.

We are the dead. Short days ago

We lived, felt dawn, saw sunset glow,

Loved and were loved, and now we lie

In Flanders' fields.

Take up our quarrel with the foe;

To you from failing hands we throw

The torch; be yours to hold it high,

If ye break faith with us who die

We shall not sleep, though poppies grow

In Flanders' Fields.

- John McCrae

Nuclear, Solar, and Wind

Chris Martz

@ChrisMartzWX

𝐍𝐔𝐂𝐋𝐄𝐀𝐑 𝐅𝐈𝐒𝐒𝐈𝐎𝐍 A standard nuclear reactor has a 1,000-megawatt (MW) rating, which means that it is installed with 1,000 MW of power capacity. On average, a 1,000 MW nuclear facility occupies just over 640 acres of land. To figure out how many homes a single 1,000 MW plant would power, we can start by using the following equation, 𝑬 = 𝑷 × 𝒕, where, • 𝑬 = energy (megawatt hours, MWh) • 𝑷 = power (MW) • 𝒕 = time (hours, hr) If we assume that a standard reactor operates at FULL power throughout the course of a calendar year, then it will produce 8.76 terawatt-hours (TWh) of electricity per year. 𝑬 = 1,000 MW × 24 hr (1-day) × 365 [days] (1 year) = 8.76 million MWh / year (8.76 TWh / year) However, nuclear reactors do 𝒏𝒐𝒕 operate at full power 100% of the time. They have to come offline to refuel or undergo maintenance. Therefore, we must consider capacity factor in our calculation. According to the U.S. Energy Information Administration (EIA), nuclear has the highest capacity factor out of any electricity generation source, with a capacity factor of 0.93 in 2023. https://eia.gov/electricity/annual/html/epa_04_08_b.html… What this value means is that nuclear power plants operated at full power 93.0% of the time last year. So, to figure out how much electricity that the average nuclear power plant generates in a year, we must multiply the previously calculated value of 8.76 TWh / year by 0.93. 𝑬 = (8.76 TWh / year) × 0.93 ≈ 8.15 TWh / year To determine how many homes this powers, we have to divide 𝑬 by the average amount of electricity purchased by homeowners in a year, which according to the EIA, is 10,500 kilowatt-hours (kWh), which is equivalent to 1.05 × 10⁻⁵ TWh. https://eia.gov/energyexplained/use-of-energy/electricity-use-in-homes.php… So, dividing 8.15 TWh / year by 1.05 × 10⁻⁵ TWh / year equals 776,190.4762 homes. Therefore, the average nuclear reactor occupying one square mile of land, operating with a capacity factor of 0.93, can generate enough electricity to power more than 776,190 homes throughout the course of a year. Let's now compare these results to those for solar PV and utility-scale wind. 𝐒𝐎𝐋𝐀𝐑 𝐏𝐇𝐎𝐓𝐎𝐕𝐎𝐋𝐓𝐀𝐈𝐂 (𝐏𝐕) A utility-scale solar PV array which is used to generate electricity for homes requires 1 MW of installed power. https://cleanpower.org/facts/solar-power/… A 1 MW solar PV array requires about 5-7 acres of land according to the Solar Energy Industries Association (SEIA). So, let's just go with the median of six acres for sake of ease for calculation purposes. https://seia.org/initiatives/land-use-solar-development/… And, according to the U.S. EIA, solar PV had a capacity factor of 0.232 last year. What this means is that solar farms operated at full capacity only 23.2% of the year. Using these numbers, let's now figure out roughly how many homes a 1,000 MW solar PV farm could power. Recall that, 𝑬 = 𝑷 × 𝒕 × 𝒄𝒂𝒑𝒂𝒄𝒊𝒕𝒚 𝒇𝒂𝒄𝒕𝒐𝒓 Therefore, 𝑬 = 1,000 MW × 24 hr × 365 (days) [1 year] × 0.232 = 2,032,320 MWh / year (2.032 TWh / year) Dividing 𝑬 by 1.05 × 10⁻⁵ TWh / year gives us roughly 193,523 homes. How much land would be needed? Well, recall that for 1 MW of generating capacity, solar requires about six acres of land. Therefore, a 1,000 MW solar PV array would occupy approximately 6,000 acres of land area, some 9.4 × as much land area than is required by a 1,000 MW nuclear facility, but power 582,667 fewer homes. That's not exactly practical, is it? 𝐎𝐍𝐒𝐇𝐎𝐑𝐄 𝐔𝐓𝐈𝐋𝐈𝐓𝐘 𝐒𝐂𝐀𝐋𝐄 𝐖𝐈𝐍𝐃 A typical utility-scale wind turbine occupies about 80 acres of land, with each turbine given a 2.5 MW rating. https://landgate.com/news/does-my-land-qualify-for-a-wind-farm-lease… A 1,000 MW onshore wind farm would require about 400 turbines occupying 32,000 acres of land. Also, according to the EIA, wind had a capacity factor of 0.332 in 2023, which means that wind turbines had operated at full power capacity 33.2% of the year last year in the U.S. So, how many homes would this power? Well, let's run the numbers through our handy dandy equation again, 𝑬 = 𝑷 × 𝒕 × 𝒄𝒂𝒑𝒂𝒄𝒊𝒕𝒚 𝒇𝒂𝒄𝒕𝒐𝒓 Therefore, 𝑬 = 1,000 MW × 24 hr × 365 (days) [1 year] × 0.332 =2,908,320 MWh / year (~2.91 TWh / year) Dividing 𝑬 by 1.05 × 10⁻⁵ TWh / year gives us roughly 277,143 homes. Therefore, a 1,000 MW onshore wind farm would occupy approximately 32,000 acres of land, some 50 × as much land area than is required by a 1,000 MW nuclear facility, but power 499,047 fewer homes. That's not exactly efficient either, now, is it? 𝐒𝐔𝐌𝐌𝐀𝐑𝐈𝐙𝐈𝐍𝐆 𝐈𝐓 𝐀𝐋𝐋 𝐔𝐏 In order to power the same number of homes as a typical 1,000 MW nuclear power generation station, you would require either, • For 𝐬𝐨𝐥𝐚𝐫 𝐏𝐕: Approximately 4,000 MW of installed power (equivalent to four nuclear facilities) and 24,000 acres of land (some 37.5 × as much land area than a nuclear plant). • For 𝐨𝐧𝐬𝐡𝐨𝐫𝐞 𝐰𝐢𝐧𝐝: Approximately 2,800 MW of installed power (equivalent to 2.8 nuclear facilities) and 89,600 acres of land (some 140 × as much land area than a nuclear power generation station). These estimates are conservative, however, because they do 𝒏𝒐𝒕 include the land area required for battery storage because sunlight doesn't always reach the ground (e.g., on densely overcast days or at night) and the wind isn't always blowing. Based on the land requirements alone for “green” energy technologies, you should question the motives of anyone, especially climate activists, who are vehemently opposed to deploying nuclear power. They are often unserious about environmental protection and have an ulterior, more sinister political outcome that he or she is trying to achieve, using environmental concern as smoke and mirrors to meet those ends.

Peanut and Fred

 524 views

Amy Curtis 🇮🇱

@RantyAmyCurtis

20h • 21 tweets • 4 min read •  Read on X

1/X Buckle up, guys and gals, it’s thread time.

Here’s why Peanut and Fred have become such a rallying point for people:

We aren’t suddenly in love with a squirrel and a raccoon.

They represent the problems of a very broken, petty government.

2/X

For years, we’ve watched as our betters in the Democratic Party have engaged in the selective application of our laws.

They call it “restorative justice” or “criminal justice reform” or some other nifty euphemism, but what it is is lawfare. 

3/X

It’s why violent repeat offenders can assault, rape, and steal and get a slap on the wrist.

Jordan Neely was arrested something like 40 times prior to his encounter with Daniel Penny.

The Left decided their crimes — which are still crimes — are somehow acceptable. 

4/X

So they turn a blind eye to the minority of citizens who are actually criminals and let them continue to harass and injure others.

Maybe — maybe — if they kill somebody they’ll get jail time. Simply because of the public outcry if they don’t. 

5/X

But it shouldn’t come to someone losing their life before the state protects us.

And eventually they’ll expect us to tolerate them setting murderers loose, too.

People see this. 

6/X

We see criminal illegal immigrants — who are criminals the second they illegally cross our border, btw — get a pass.

Including tens of thousands who are ACTUAL criminals: gang members, murderers, rapists.

And our government shrugs and says “Oh well, nothing we can do.” 

7/X

Martha Raddatz says it’s “a handful” of gang members taking over apartments.

As if the acceptable number of violent gangs running America apartment complexes should be anything other than ZERO. 

8/X

During COVID, we watched as government shut down our schools and businesses and arrested people who had the nerve to fish alone on an empty beach.

That was “unsafe”, you grandma killer.

The UK toyed with killing ALL PET CATS. 

9/X

Then George Floyd happened and suddenly riots and protests and being outside in large groups was okay.

My dad’s funeral? Nah.

Your kid’s graduation? Nope?

But assholes burning down cities? OKAY! 

10/X

Few of them were arrested as they did billions of dollars in damage to cities across the country.

But the rest of us? Government might not let us leave our homes if we don’t get a vaccine passport.

For our own good. 

11/X

I see a lot of people saying “Well, the squirrel was illegal!”

So?

Theft is illegal. Assault is illegal. Arson and rioting are illegal.

Crossing the border is illegal.

Our government decided not to enforce THOSE laws. 

12/X

But instead they come down on a family with a pet squirrel and raccoon like a ton of bricks.

The full weight of whatever fascist government agency that decided THIS was the law they’re gonna ruthlessly enforce. 

13/X

And this is how it always plays out: the Left’s preferred groups can get away with literal murder, and the Left will say they either don’t have the resources to enforce laws (“we can’t possibly deport tens of millions!”) 

14/X

Or they say not enforcing the laws with XZY groups is itself a form of “restorative justice.” 

15/X

This is an untenable and unsustainable position.

Peanut and Fred are simply the tipping point.

We are fed up with a government that picks winners and losers when the law should be applied equally and fairly. 

16/X

And we’re sick of government ignoring crimes that actually harm people and communities, but being absolutely brutal when enforcing a law over a squirrel and raccoon that were LITERALLY HURTING NO ONE. 

17/X

The problem is the hypocrisy.

Government will let guys like Jordan Neely wander free to harass and terrorize women and toddlers on subways.

They’ll ruin the life of anyone who defends the innocents against those criminals. 

18/X

Then they’ll find some law about pet squirrels and raccoons and decide THAT is the one they’re going to follow to the letter.

People are fed up with it. 

19/X

THAT is what Peanut and Fred represent.

A country fed up with a government that refuses to enforce its most fundamental laws but one that will give tyrants carte blanche to invade your home over the kinds of pets you have. 

20/X

As always, the Left don’t get this. Because they’re okay with this form of lawfare.

They LIKE lawfare, because right now it benefits them.

And a not insignificant portion of the Left get off on making others suffer like they did Peanut/Fred’s owners. 

21/21

They don’t care that a reckoning will come.

And they forget the other side gets to move and shoot, too.

If it takes a squirrel and a raccoon to remind them, so be it. 

Halloween Humor

 Halloween humor:

============================== A man was walking home alone late one foggy night, when behind him he hears: BUMP... BUMP... BUMP... Walking faster, he looks back and through the fog he makes out the image of an upright casket banging its way down the middle of the street toward him. BUMP... BUMP... BUMP... Terrified, the man begins to run toward his home, the casket bouncing quickly behind him. FASTER... FASTER... BUMP... BUMP... BUMP... He runs up to his door, fumbles with his keys, opens the door, rushes in, slams and locks the door behind him. However, the casket crashes through his door, with the lid of the casket clapping clappity-BUMP... clappity-BUMP... clappity-BUMP... on his heels, the terrified man runs. Rushing upstairs to the bathroom, the man locks himself in. His heart is pounding; his head is reeling; his breath is coming in sobbing gasps. With a loud CRASH the casket breaks down the door. Bumping and clapping toward him. The man screams and reaches for something, anything, but all he can find is a bottle of cough syrup! Desperate, he throws the cough syrup at the casket... and... the coffin stops.

Heaven

 "A man and his dog were walking along a road. The man was enjoying the scenery, when it suddenly occurred to him that he was dead.

He remembered dying, and that the dog walking beside him had been dead for years. He wondered where the road was leading them. After a while, they came to a high, white stone wall along one side of the road. It looked like fine marble. At the top of a long hill, it was broken by a tall arch that glowed in the sunlight. When he was standing before it he saw a magnificent gate in the arch that looked like mother-of-pearl, and the street that led to the gate looked like pure gold. He and the dog walked toward the gate, and as he got closer, he saw a man at a desk to one side. When he was close enough, he called out, 'Excuse me, where are we?' 'This is Heaven, sir,' the man answered. Would you happen to have some water?' the man asked. Of course, sir. Come right in, and I'll have some ice water brought right up'. The man gestured, and the gate began to open. 'Can my friend,' gesturing toward his dog, 'come in, too?' the traveller asked. 'I'm sorry, sir, but we don't accept pets.' The man thought a moment and then turned back toward the road and continued the way he had been going with his dog. After another long walk, and at the top of another long hill, he came to a dirt road leading through a farm gate that looked as if it had never been closed. There was no fence. As he approached the gate, he saw a man inside, leaning against a tree and reading a book. 'Excuse me!' he called to the man. 'Do you have any water?' 'Yeah, sure, there's a pump over there, come on in..' 'How about my friend here?' the traveller gestured to the dog. 'There should be a bowl by the pump.' They went through the gate, and sure enough, there was an old-fashioned hand pump with a bowl beside it. The traveller filled the water bowl and took a long drink himself, then he gave some to the dog. When they were full, he and the dog walked back toward the man who was standing by the tree. 'What do you call this place?' the traveller asked. This is Heaven,' he answered. 'Well, that's confusing,' the traveller said. 'The man down the road said that was Heaven, too.' 'Oh, you mean the place with the gold street and pearly gates? Nope. That's hell.' 'Doesn't it make you mad for them to use your name like that?' 'No, we're just happy that they screen out the folks who would leave their best friends behind.'" ~Anonymous Author and Artwork