By: Misha Sibirsk

Misha Sibirsk — Fri, 24 Mar 2017 06:35:09 +0000

It is on this occasion understandable that the electricity generation of the 5 MW solar plant is described in terms of the population of the locality it supplies. However, that is still dangerously close to the widespread faux pas of describing generation as “enough to power X thousand homes.” – this far into the twenty-first century, a capital offence roughly equivalent to using football fields as a unit of area. For Bolivia, near the equator, it can be surmised that the electricity generated would be between 7 and 7.5 GWhs/yr; but, you know, I would like to see that figure. Call me a pedant, but I want to know its significance in terms of national generation – apparently about .08%. Cultivation of the habit of referring always to MWhs/GWhs/TWhs/PWhs, as relevant, would preemptively take care of other problems, such as occurring later in the article, “…74%…from renewable, …gas will generate…30%.” …?? A new kind of mathematics? Or no, I see: 74% of generating capacity, not as stated, “74% of its electricity.” That misuse of terminology undermines the whole article from that point on. One other thing, much less important: Irrespective of English, American, Irish, Canadian, etc. usage, all Anglophone communities use a decimal point, not a decimal comma, as in continental Europe. It is actually read: “one point five,” and there is no currency for any alternative. (Actually, the true decimal point appeared to disappear decades ago. It used to be placed at mid-height between digits, so in 10.05, it would be between the fat parts of the 0’s. I suppose it fell victim to the limited symbols available on the typewriter keyboard, and to the typesetter. Had word-processing arrived a little earlier, perhaps the true decimal point could have been saved.)

Comments on: Bolivia – a model for energy storage in Latin America?

By: Misha Sibirsk