Hacker News new | ask | show | jobs
by tialaramex 103 days ago
I mean, the EIA says "U.S. generation fueled by coal increased by 13% in 2025 to 731 BkWh"

The article you linked is mostly about a model of 2026 and 2027 and sure, in the model coal goes away but that's not a fact about coal it's just a model.
1 comments
nomel 103 days ago
Yes with the next sentence explaining why, and how future years are planned to decrease.

"Ramping up" means planned to increase.

Feel free to provide a reference that supports that it's "ramping up". I, and parent, couldn't find one. This is a super boring factual thing that I was curious about, where opinion has no place or purpose.

link
lmm 103 days ago
> "Ramping up" means planned to increase.

No it doesn't. It means increasing.

link
nomel 101 days ago
Sure, but increasing something like fucking coal power plants isn't some instantaneous event that could start and stop at any time, putting some ambiguity at the moment between "increased" and "increasing". If plants are or will be built, it's because it's planned for development. That '-ing' isn't just present tense, it's there for the continuous/progressive aspect of it.
link
lmm 101 days ago
If they produced 13% more energy from coal in 2025 than 2024, the latest point at which we have real numbers rather than projections, it's fair to say that production of energy from coal is increasing rather than decreasing.
link
nomel 101 days ago
as the references point out (please re-read this chain), it increased but is not increasing. the context of what your replying to:

> The US is in an excellent position to massively harness wind and solar and yet right now it's dialing up the coal usage

they are not "dialing it up", they instead have planned reduction.

link
lmm 100 days ago
> as the references point out (please re-read this chain), it increased but is not increasing.

As I pointed out (please re-read my comment), it was increasing as of the most recent time for which we have data (not projections) available.

link