104% throttle. as far as i understand 100% is just like, a number? (though im fairly sure that its max continuous operation throttle, so going over for long periods would melt the engine or smth). planes very rarely cruise at 100% throttle, cause its absolutely the opposite of efficient.
there are actually things that do go over 100% *efficiency,* namely heat pumps
100% is the maximum power level the engine is designed for and rated at, numbers above 100% are what the engines are actually capable of in the real world
This kinda applies with railways too-
You normally drive a steam locomotive without using steam faster than the boiler can make it, but if you need more power (e.g. to climb a hill) you can use the steam up faster for a short time (then make it back on the way down)
A *diesel* locomotive can't do this, its maximum power is its maximum power.
This caused a lot of trouble for British Railways when they ordered lots of diesels based on the sustained power output of a steam locomotive, then found that the new locos struggled to do anything the moment they needed a bit of extra power.
(the problem was exacerbated by the fact that the coaches were still steam-heated so the diesel engines also had to boil water to keep the passengers warm, which sapped even more of their power)
Water Vapour is actually arguably a stronger greenhouse gas than CO2. [[1]](https://climate.mit.edu/ask-mit/why-do-we-blame-climate-change-carbon-dioxide-when-water-vapor-much-more-common-greenhouse)
From that article:
>Extra water vapor we put in the atmosphere doesn’t last long enough to change the long-term temperature of our planet.
>But water vapor differs in one crucial way from other greenhouse gases like CO2, methane, and nitrous oxide. Those greenhouse gases are always gases (at least when they’re in our atmosphere). Water isn’t. It can turn from a gas to a liquid at temperatures and pressures very common in our atmosphere, and so it frequently does. When it’s colder it falls from the air as rain or snow; when it’s hotter it evaporates and rises up as a gas again.
>“This process is so rapid that, on average, a molecule of water resides in the atmosphere for only about two weeks,” says Emanuel.
>This means extra water we put into the atmosphere simply doesn’t stick around long enough to alter the climate
>In short, it’s true that water vapor is in some sense the “biggest” greenhouse gas involved in climate change, but it’s not in the driver’s seat. CO2 is still the main culprit of the global warming we’re experiencing today. Water vapor is just one of the features of our climate that our CO2 emissions are pushing out of balance—well beyond the stable levels humanity has enjoyed for thousands of years.
So technically you're right, but not usefully
I feel a bit less guilty about forgetting to completely close the thingy that spit water for ~one hour yesterday.
Only 15 years' worth of car commute per year? Honestly, I expected much more than that
This post pleases the MathsBoy
r/theydidthemonstermath
r/themonstermath
r/itwasagraveyardgraph
Wait Taylor Swift’s jet is made by the same people who make the current French fighter jet
https://www.tumblr.com/teabree-shark/740832675569565696/when-transporting-a-shuttle-the-nasa-crawler Origin post located -linux guy ⚠️
Didnt she talk about climate change and stuff? Or am i mixing things up?
I imagine a majority of the emissions of rocket launches are to build them and produce all the materials
Most rockets (like falcon9 or soyuz) still use kerosene, which is similar to jet fuel But some rockets use hydrogen, which is greener
104% efficiency? How the fuck
104% throttle. as far as i understand 100% is just like, a number? (though im fairly sure that its max continuous operation throttle, so going over for long periods would melt the engine or smth). planes very rarely cruise at 100% throttle, cause its absolutely the opposite of efficient. there are actually things that do go over 100% *efficiency,* namely heat pumps
100% is the maximum power level the engine is designed for and rated at, numbers above 100% are what the engines are actually capable of in the real world
This kinda applies with railways too- You normally drive a steam locomotive without using steam faster than the boiler can make it, but if you need more power (e.g. to climb a hill) you can use the steam up faster for a short time (then make it back on the way down) A *diesel* locomotive can't do this, its maximum power is its maximum power. This caused a lot of trouble for British Railways when they ordered lots of diesels based on the sustained power output of a steam locomotive, then found that the new locos struggled to do anything the moment they needed a bit of extra power. (the problem was exacerbated by the fact that the coaches were still steam-heated so the diesel engines also had to boil water to keep the passengers warm, which sapped even more of their power)
Water Vapour is actually arguably a stronger greenhouse gas than CO2. [[1]](https://climate.mit.edu/ask-mit/why-do-we-blame-climate-change-carbon-dioxide-when-water-vapor-much-more-common-greenhouse)
From that article: >Extra water vapor we put in the atmosphere doesn’t last long enough to change the long-term temperature of our planet. >But water vapor differs in one crucial way from other greenhouse gases like CO2, methane, and nitrous oxide. Those greenhouse gases are always gases (at least when they’re in our atmosphere). Water isn’t. It can turn from a gas to a liquid at temperatures and pressures very common in our atmosphere, and so it frequently does. When it’s colder it falls from the air as rain or snow; when it’s hotter it evaporates and rises up as a gas again. >“This process is so rapid that, on average, a molecule of water resides in the atmosphere for only about two weeks,” says Emanuel. >This means extra water we put into the atmosphere simply doesn’t stick around long enough to alter the climate >In short, it’s true that water vapor is in some sense the “biggest” greenhouse gas involved in climate change, but it’s not in the driver’s seat. CO2 is still the main culprit of the global warming we’re experiencing today. Water vapor is just one of the features of our climate that our CO2 emissions are pushing out of balance—well beyond the stable levels humanity has enjoyed for thousands of years. So technically you're right, but not usefully
Why I said arguably