How do you cool the steam off enough to condense so it can go and be boiler feed water again?

Lots of power plants use cooling towers for this which are typically evaporative. Some are dry, sure, but most are wet.

Suppose I have a 100MW gas turbine. And suppose there's 1MW of solar installed in my generation network. I don't really care if I sell 80MW at noon and 90MW around dinner time and 50MW through the night, or if instead it's 79MW at noon and 91MW at dinner and 51MW at night. The gas costs about the same irrespective of when I burn it so a bit of a fuel shift doesn't really matter.

But take that 1MW and turn it into 20MW and suddenly we go from 80MW at noon to 60MW at noon, 90MW at dinner to 110MW at dinner and uh oh. You see the problem? Whatever losses I endured at noon I don't get to make up for at dinner because my plant only goes up to 100MW and now we're not just shifting when we burn how much fuel, we're literally having to shift the power generation to a different plant.

Is this example precisely accurate? Absolutely not. But it helps you get a feel for the problem of net metering at scale. The grid can act as a battery for a few % of total generation, but by the time you hit some number, maybe 20% maybe 40% net metering turns from a cool math trick to a real cost on the grid.

One strategy to convince is to get someone less technical than you to sit by you while you try and trace everything from one error'd HTTP request from start to finish to diagnose the problem. If they see it takes half a day to check every call to every internal endpoint to 100% satisfy a particular request sometimes that can help.

Also sometimes they just think "this is a bunch of nerd stuff, why are you involving me?!" So it's not foolproof.

After doing some Google searches I realized the plants were related and eventually it sort of made sense. Peppers are almost like a very dry, very firm tomato.

In hindsight it's obvious but at the time it was very surprising.

This is the real problem with health insurance is that it covers relatively routine and non emergency healthcare services where you can ship around and have market forces encourage people to find efficiency.

I understand the "if I'm dying from a car crash I can't shop around" argument and I agree. But that's very different than shopping for a family doc you like for the half dozen times a year you or your family will need to see someone for a strep test and maybe antibiotics.

Good for them for trying to find a profitable proving ground for their engines.

That's me in the post you're critizing me for. I'm explicitly saying it's not good. What else do I need to do to make sure that you understand that I don't think it's okay?

Don't read what I'm saying as an endorsement of what the right is going to the left right now. Nor should you read it as an endorsement of what the left did to the right back then. They're both bad.

I'm merely trying to explain how it is that people can have a problem with virtue signalling and to them it doesn't really contradict what is to them true virtue where you do something good and stay quiet about it.

I don't agree that we're selecting against birds that get infected in the first place, or at least I don't think that's how it works. My understanding is that if any birds on a farm get sick, the whole house is killed. Maybe the whole farm.

To me that seems like selecting for lucky birds not selecting for populations that never get sick because lots of populations never get exposed.

I could be wrong on my understanding or how I interpret the impact, though, so I'm super open to learning more.

It's almost as if we want to give the flu as many opportunities as possible to spill over, instead of just letting the birds who have immunity survive and thus basically drive the virus to extinction.

That's something that companies do all the time, they pay people "out of band" or give them extra benefits or accelerate their vacation accrual or vesting, or one of hundreds of other things.

I agree it looks bad for sure but it isn't necessarily sinister.

I feel like this is an ugly truth, but still a truth. It's also very ugly.

For some people there's no tradeoff on how much they have to suffer to get some financial security because they already have it. Some people have to suffer a bit but quickly hit escape velocity. Some people never stop suffering. It's terrible.

I think Dave Ramsey has many annoying qualities but his "sometimes you have to act crazy to get out of it" is basically correct even if it's very, very uncomfortable IMO.

It's uglier this way for sure and will cause more suffering. Sucks.

Are the Republicans doing that right now? Probably not. Are the Democrats doing that right now? Also probably not.