frafra

Metabase works great with DuckDB as well, thanks to metabase_duckdb_driver by MotherDuck.

Play Integrity API requirement dropped: https://github.com/eu-digital-identity-wallet/eudi-app-andro...

Price != cost/value. You can produce cheap electricity at noon, which would have little value.

Update: you can buy from Norway now, but you need to get it shipped to a different country. You need to select a different country and then chose a billing address different from the shipping one. The message that the website displays on not being able to order from Norway is misleading, and it looks like no email to Norwegian customers has been sent with respect to this possibility. Not perfect, but they got better.

https://knowledgebase.frame.work/en_us/what-countries-and-re...

I asked Framework that repeatedly, but no progress. I think they might be violating EU Regulation 2018/302, which is rather common, mostly due to ignorance. The problem is that it is rather hard to enforce such regulation to non-EU/EEA companies. You can still send your wishes to support@frame.work.

[citation needed]

Lazard 2024, CAISO scenario: nuclear is cheaper compared to go with renewables + batteries (max 4 hours). It also does not take into account integration costs, such improving network connectivity.

It is quite ironic, because European Nordic countries do not want to build more network because of the crazy electricity spot prices that Germany has because of renewables. I live in Norway and no-one wants to further connect their electricity network to Germany, and the Swedish government blocked the construction of new connections. When Germany needs electricity, people in Oslo start to pay electricity even hundreds of times more, and when Germany has too much power from renewables, the energy price goes below zero, which means that German taxpayers are paying people from other countries to buy their discounted low value electricity, damaging the other producers. It is a terrible system, and it will only get worse without a good base load or accumulators that are not realistic for the foreseeable future. If Germany had a stable electricity production with renewables+nuclear, it would be beneficial to strength the network, which would indeed be beneficial to renewables.

If there is a place which clearly show how the fight against nuclear caused damaged is Germany: ~700 b€ between investments and subsidies to renewables, has very high emissions in the energy sector, while being dependent on Russian gas (costed ~1500 b€ in the last years) and France export of nuclear energy, high and unstable energy prices, that contributed to an industrial crisis that made France more attractive (where electricity is cheap and stable), while still failing at reaching climate targets.

The alternative would have been to keep the existing reactors open, build new ones, for a grand total of ~36 b€.

Source: doi.org/10.1080/14786451.2024.2355642

The belief that renewables+batteries alone are the only solution (even in hard to abate sectors) is not supported by real world data, nor by simulations. IPCC scenarios clearly shows that there is the need of a nuclear+renewable mix to meet the climate targets. The report from JRC recommends the same.

Historically, German citizens have chosen to be reliant on fossil fuels and highly subsidized electricity to not use nuclear energy. I just hope that at Germany will stop blocking nuclear at the EU level if other countries have different opinions on that and rather prefer not to follow the demise of the German energy policy.

Cost != price/value. You can produce energy cheaply at noon, but it has little value compared to electricity produced at 18:00. The higher the share of renewables in the electricity mix, the more storage is needed, and it grows faster than linearly. You can also not stock electricity in advance for months in northern areas. There are a lot of factors to keep into account, and the cost of electricity production is often a minor one, when considering the total price.

Short answer: no, they are not (read footnotes 1 and 2)

CAISO, 1st column, 1st bar: - blue is the cost of solar - beige is the cost of firming intermittency using gas

CAISO, 2nd column, 1st bar: - blue is the cost of solar+battery (max 4 hours) - beige is the cost of firming intermittency using gas

Using batteries improves the ELCC (contribution to meet peak demand), but it is not enough, so it has to be compensated somehow. Want to get a higher ELCC? Get a larger battery (and install more solar panels). Be aware, this is not a linear relationship: getting from 10 % to 20 % of renewables is cheaper than getting from 70 % to 80 % (this is why the costs are lower when the penetration rate shown in the slide is low). You reach a point where you just waste energy or need to pay to use it, like in Germany, Netherlands or Denmark.

There is no best energy source. There are different networks, energy mixes, needs, etc. Under CAISO, it is just more convenient to go with nuclear. Under SPP, solar has a very high ELCC and a very low penetration, which makes it convenient just to install solar, but up to which percentage?

Overall, some mix of renewables and nuclear, depending on the network, seems a reasonable solution. Otherwise we would need to go with fossil power plants to meet the remaining demand (carbon capture seems wishful thinking) or to over provision renewables while building incredibly large storage systems (be aware that there are places where fluctuation are not on a daily or weekly basis, but on a seasonal basis - good luck storing the energy for ~3 months using lithium ion batteries because you live in a polar region).

The book "How to avoid a climate disaster" (Bill Gates) has a chapter just for that. I would recommend it.

Of course it has debt, as almost every company and state :)

EDF got loans from banks and money on the market, based on the fact that investors thinks it is a good investment. That is economics 101 and holds true for all publicly traded companies. The numbers are freely available on the internet, as prescribed by the law for all companies listed.

The debt also went down in 2023. It is worth to remember that EDF is forced by the French government to sell cheap energy, below market price, to protect consumers from rising energy prices (caused by the high reliance of other countries on natural gas from Russia - like Germany that phased-out nuclear in the meanwhile).

Nuclear is also treated differently from renewables when it comes down to low-emission investments by the various EU investment funds, and cannot compete in bidding rounds together with renewables (which drives the prices up, as there is way more demand than offer, so it makes no sense to compete). If the EU commission decides that there should be technological neutrality on low-emission power plants, EDF would be in a quite good position.

If you are so sure that EDF will not be able to finance its debt or build new reactors, you can bet against it by short it and, if your analysis is correct, make quite some money.

When taking into account the "Cost of Firming Intermittency" the total cost can go up by 2/3 times in the "CAISO" case at page 8 of Lazard 2023, which is higher than LCOE for existing nuclear and to some LCOE estimates for new nuclear.

In addition to that, there are additional costs (integration costs) that are not considered in LCOE; for example, you can build PV power plants in sunny places, but that might not be where the electricity need is, so the network should be upgraded as well. All these costs are highly dependent on the penetration of intermittent sources and on the grid, and this is why the price of the electricity can be very different from the cost of electricity. I can produce electricity very cheaply, but maybe no one needs that. This is why Germany sometimes have negative prices, so it actually pays with subsidies the consumption of energy in neighbourhood countries, and then the price can skyrocket, which is why Sweden recently blocked a new connection towards Germany, "where the electricity market today does not function efficiently" (Energy Minister Ebba Busch).

Renewables are now cheaper than fossils

price of energy production != cost of energy

Lazard 2023 estimates that solar and wind in the California grid costs 2/3 times more than when just considering the LCOE. Solar and wind production can be cheaper, but the final price is way higher.

The amount of debt is not directly correlated to the health of a company: most companies have debts, and building nuclear reactors is very capital intensive. EDF net income for 2023 is 10B €, while for H1 2024 is 7B €. From 2007 to 2024 always had a positive net worth except for 2022. France is a net-exporter, with cheap, reliable and low emission electricity. Germany is almost the opposite of that.

This is not new functionality:

"There’s a new tool in systemd, called “run0”. Or actually, it’s not a new tool, it’s actually the long-existing tool “systemd-run”, but when invoked under the “run0” name (via a symlink)".

systemd-run is very useful to run tasks with specific cgroups settings, or at a specific time. It asks for password whenever needed.

Thanks for the links :) They should use EU/EEA actually, since the very same rule apply to the whole EEA. Given what they have written, I guess they would be glad to amend the page.

Well, if I select Norway I read:

"We haven’t opened ordering in your region yet, but we’re looking forward to getting there!"

This is definitely illegal inside the European Economic Area, but I guess they are not aware of that. It is allowed not to ship to a specific area in some cases, but not refuse to sell entirely based on the country.

If there is someone from Framework Computer Inc. reading this message: you do not need to comply with any local law if you are not targeting a specific country inside the European Economic Area; you just need to follow the EU rules. Therefore, it does not make any sense to prevent people from a specific EEA country to buy your products (and that is illegal as well). Please fix it! :)

It remembers me when I pasted a multiline SQL query started with `begin;`, but psql ignored the first due to a connection timeout, it automatically reconnected to the server, and proceeded to execute the following lines...

etcetera is found in ~500 years old books, and et cetera itself comes from et caetera, from the Greek καὶ τὰ ἕτερα. Which one should we use then? Should we only use the Latin from 1 BCE/CE or the vulgar Latin that evolved after? :-)

Maybe I do not feel it like a big issue, since many Latin languages use it a single word (such as Italian with eccetera, Spanish, Portuguese), due to the evolution of the language.

They are banning entire countries (violating the EU geo-blocking directive as well, probably).

This seems very cool, but last release is from 2014, last commit is from 2018, and there are various bug fixing PR that have been waiting for years to be merged :( What about https://github.com/jazzband/docopt-ng?

Thanks for pointing it out. The website is rather opaque with respect to funding. It looks that both associations are non-profits, with a lot of students, scientists, professors and professionals. This does not seem incompatible with their grassroots claims, but they really need to clarify funding and expenses of this new group.

This does not invalidate IPCC or JRC reports on nuclear power, nor the scientific papers, or the fact that there are various pro-nuclear environmental movements and political parties that are transparent about their funding and relations. Nuclear is more popular between younger people that are more worried about climate change than the effects of Chernobyl nowadays.

France's total electricity production from nuclear is expected to rise, actually: the government, after abandoning the plan to have nuclear covering just 50 % of its electricity mix, removed the cap on the total nuclear power installed. In addition to that, almost all the existing reactors got their life extended (so up to 50 years of operating life), and the final aim is to reach 60 years. 6 new reactors have been approved, and another 8 could get approved. Basically, the whole President Holland's plan from 2014 on reducing nuclear has been dismantled.

Denmark's renewables are highly subsidized, construction is quick (which means short-term loans), so it should not impact so much on energy prices. Finland has built the first-of-a-kind highly delayed EPR 3 reactor Olkiluoto 3, and the electricity prices felt sharply nonetheless.

I do not see the reason why decommissioning costs should make electricity more expensive in the future, because the owner has to pay and prove that the decommissioning will be done even if the company goes bankrupt (by allocating funds in advance or by providing an insurance).

This is not to say that a solution is better than the other: it is always a matter of finding a good energy mix for a network. France is investing in energy efficiency and renewables as well.

Italy has been slowly going down for the last 30 years. Too many small businesses that are not competitive, providing lower salaries; populism rose. The State of Italy is spending ~30 billions each year for improving the insulation of old buildings, without lowering emissions significantly or having a real effect on the economy. With all the money that have already been spent just on this measure, Italy could have built so many nuclear reactors that it would have ensured zero carbon emission electricity for many years. That is just an example.

Do you have proof that she gain money or benefits because of its involvement in such group, and/or that that group is funded by the nuclear industry, as you said? I found no information about that, just a generic and vague "partners" page.

Is it Denmark really putting taxes on electricity so high that a kWh costs 2 times more than in France? Just to reduce consumption?

The interesting data you linked clearly shows the problem with high mix of renewables: even if the average wholesale price is the similar, the final cost can be way higher because people need electricity at 6 PM and not so much at 4 AM, and the costs of a more unstable system are higher (such as delivery costs). Similar production price, totally different value. That is the difference between LCOE and the costs estimates which include other factors, such as the firming intermittency price estimations published in Lazard 2023.

The similar patter you see in oil and gas could be because of taxes, but the difference is below 10 %, not 200 %.

The cost of energy does not only depend on the cost of production: Denmark has a lot of cheap wind energy, but it costs almost three times more than in France. And the higher share of intermittent sources you have, the less valuable the production of energy can be, because it is sometimes produced when not needed, so you need to build up infrastructure, accumulators, etc.

Nuclear is insurable, and in some countries is mandatory: https://www.world-nuclear.org/information-library/safety-and...

Both Fairphone 4 and 5 are dual SIM (nanoSIM + eSIM).

Denmark's electricity is almost three times more expensive than in France. Solar+wind does not cancel out variability. Backup is needed. LCOE does not mean lower prices. Higher shares of renewables drives up costs for the network to rebalance. Producing a lot of energy when it is not needed means producing low value energy. It really depends on the electricity mix.

The final price does not depend only on the production price. You cited Lazard 2023: if you read the firming intermittency price estimations, you figure out that solar and wind in the California grid costs 2/3 times more than when just considering the LCOE. Solar and wind production can be cheaper, but the final price is way higher, and it further increases when renewables take a larger share of the energy production.

AFAIK, other android phones, like Pixels, don't have DisplayPort via USB-C output capability or might be limited to lower resolutions. What phone do you have? Try plugging to DisplayPort directly without the dock.

Fairphone 4, which should support DP over USB-C, but I do not have a USB-C to DP cable at the moment to try. Thanks for your suggestion :)

I just plugged a USB-C docking station, and I can almost use the smartphone as a standalone computer, if it wasn't for the very low resolution that Android decided to use for the external monitor. It does not look like this is configurable on Android, isn't it? Has anyone tried this kind of setup?