"The new answer to a 77-year-old problem"

😭

https://t.co/hm9NoaU4nr
https://t.co/8fKDiKjSWc
https://t.co/jkaicC1F2x
https://t.co/PpxWT4Jef4
https://t.co/cGQyg9kuOA
https://t.co/2wwPQa8CQ5
https://t.co/7yNW4KgCPi
You've come this far and you're thinking... oh... but plot the difference...

Ok. https://t.co/ifP2RNpLIn
Or this. https://t.co/gwF3u4BVGQ
I will say, box plots / dynamite plots are a terrible way to display data and too many people still use them. But people make a lot of poor choices in their figures. Since you've come this far I'll share this ultimate useless figure... enjoy Figure 1... https://t.co/qI1RUtK0Fn

More from Science

Ever since @JesseJenkins and colleagues work on a zero carbon US and this work by @DrChrisClack and colleagues on incorporating DER, I've been having the following set of thoughts about how to reduce the risk of failure in a US clean energy buildout. Bottom line is much more DER.


Typically, when we see zero-carbon electricity coupled to electrification of transport and buildings, implicitly standing behind that is totally unprecedented buildout of the transmission system. The team from Princeton's modeling work has this in spades for example.

But that, more even than the new generation required, runs straight into a thicket/woodchipper of environmental laws and public objections that currently (and for the last 50y) limit new transmission in the US. We built most transmission prior to the advent of environmental law.

So what these studies are really (implicitly) saying is that NEPA, CEQA, ESA, §404 permitting, eminent domain law, etc, - and the public and democratic objections that drive them - will have to change in order to accommodate the necessary transmission buildout.

I live in a D supermajority state that has, for at least the last 20 years, been in the midst of a housing crisis that creates punishing impacts for people's lives in the here-and-now and is arguably mostly caused by the same issues that create the transmission bottlenecks.

You May Also Like