swansont

I’ve got a space weather app that alerts me to flares and CMEs and whenever Kp hits a certain threshold. Seen a couple of aurorae because of the alerts.

Do phones have motion-activation capabilities? You might look for an app that takes pictures at regular intervals. Time-lapse with a large gap. Most phones nowadays have a feature that records several seconds of pictures with each shot, which improves odds of capturing something.

“Sunspot region 4366 produced the most powerful flare of 2026 on Monday, unleashing an X8.1 and associated coronal mass ejection (CME)—a massive explosion of plasma and magnetic field from the Sun’s outer atmosphere.“ https://gizmodo.com/this-earth-facing-sunspot-region-is-absolutely-popping-off-2000717888 Probably more to come, since 4366 just came into view a week ago

This wasn’t true last year when you claimed it and it’s still not. Germany’s oil imports are lower than when they started shutting down nuclear, and basically none of it is from Russia. So this is not only not a fact, it is a lie - a repetition of an untruth that was pointed out to you, yet you’ve repeated it https://www.scienceforums.net/topic/135990-anti-democratic-political-decisions-in-the-western-countries/#findComment-1290436 It’s also something whose connection to “less freedom” is unclear to me. Your survey quote lacks an actual link, but here it is https://www.cleanenergywire.org/news/two-thirds-germans-against-shutting-down-last-nuclear-power-plants-point-survey “32 percent of those surveyed were in favour of the remaining reactors continuing to run for a limited period, and an additional 33 percent were in favour of an unlimited runtime extension. Only 26 percent fully support a complete phase-out nuclear power at this point in time” So it’s the timing that’s the issue. Only a third wanted an unlimited extension. The shutdown plan predates that; it was made under Schröder and the first shutdown occurred in 2003. Merkel initially delayed it until Fukushima caused a pivot and she accelerated the plan.

Thanks. So it’s a location issue, not a size of demand issue. i.e. any power plant situated where the solar is would face the same problem.

It might, but it’s paywalled so I don’t know what the explanation is. edit: But electrical generation in the EU has been falling slightly (through 2023, at least), so it seems that it’s not increased demand causing this, it’s location and other issues https://ec.europa.eu/eurostat/statistics-explained/index.php?title=Electricity_production,_consumption_and_market_overview

The issue is that you write fiction too much of the time. Unsubstantiated claims deserve little weight in these discussions.

Increased use is largely untethered to the means of production, AFAICT - grid problems would affect any source in the same location. And solar/wind supplanting e.g. coal doesn’t increase load on the grid. In addition, rooftop solar reduces load on the grid.

It’s true that new EU solar has contracted slightly, but it still installed ~65GW of capacity each of the last 3 years. More of a flattening as compared to the US. ~400 GW of installed capacity at end of ‘25, while the US was at ~240GW at the end of ‘24, yet the US uses about twice as much. So the EU is pretty far ahead in this. https://www.solarpowereurope.org/press-releases/new-report-eu-hits-2025-solar-target-but-market-contraction-puts-2030-goal-at-risk

If you don’t have a point for discussion, the appropriate place would have been the “Today I learned” thread (or science news if it was news)

“By the end of the year, wind and solar energy combined are projected to account for about half of China’s total installed power capacity, while coal’s share falls to around one-third, according to the China Electricity Council.” Solar alone set to overtake next year. https://www.independent.co.uk/climate-change/news/china-solar-power-capacity-coal-first-time-b2912940.html This, amid other reports of places where renewables are occasionally accounting for all generated electricity. (Makes the US position all the more painful, though the courts have reinstated some renewables projects)

Confusing, because the map in the Wikipedia page shows a coefficient <30 https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gini_coefficient It also points out that the coefficient changes whether you are taking tax and public assistance into account, and that demographics has an effect. It also doesn’t appear to distinguish between overall standard of living - it’s possible to have a high value with everyone above some “poverty level” of minimum income covering basic needs, or everyone below that level.

Trust, perhaps? It’s a rather open-ended assertion, since the amount of supporting evidence one has when they “say something” is not addressed. To the extent this happens in science, it happens in other areas, too. Religion being one that leverages it heavily

I’ll second the call - what’s your point?

What’s the terminology in Russian? Thus, Credit Suisse and UBS report that the proportion of wealth held by the richest 1% of Russians equals 56.4% and Russia tops the world’s list by this indicator. As measured by the Gini coefficient for wealth, Russia (86.9) shares 10th place with the United Arab Emirates among the 164 countries surveyed behind several African countries, as well as Sweden and Brazil. https://econs.online/en/articles/opinions/super-wealth-in-russia-uneven-and-invariable/ Maybe it’s not democracy that’s the problem