Unit Conversion W➝J: Break-Even in 50 Years?

AI Thread Summary
The discussion centers on calculating the break-even point for a power plant with an effective power generation of 5.43 x 10^7 W and an energy requirement of 9 x 10^16 J. Participants confirm that the break-even time is indeed around 50 years, despite a minor typo in the power value used for calculations. One contributor notes issues with Wolfram Alpha's output, suggesting it may require additional input to clarify results. A strong conclusion is drawn that investing in this power station may not be worthwhile, although some participants question the criteria for this conclusion. Overall, the conversation highlights concerns about the viability of the power plant based on the break-even analysis.
JJ91
Messages
40
Reaction score
0

Homework Statement


Effective Power generation of the plant is 5.43*10^{7}W but it will required 9*10^{16}J to be created.

Essentially the break-even will after solving equation Energy required/Power Generated however I get results of almost 50 years. Would this be correct?

https://www.wolframalpha.com/input/?i=9E16+Joules+/+5.34E7+Watts
 
Physics news on Phys.org
In your problem statement you say the Effective Power is 5.43 x 107 W, but on the web page calculation you used 5.34 x 107 W. A typo no doubt. But yes, the result can be expected to be in the neighborhood of 50 years.
 
JJ91 said:
Essentially the break-even will after solving equation Energy required/Power Generated however I get results of almost 50 years. Would this be correct?

https://www.wolframalpha.com/input/?i=9E16+Joules+/+5.34E7+Watts
Sans the typo gneill noted, this is correct.

Your link stops for me at 1.685×109 J/W. (Perhaps I've overused wolfram alpha?) Sometimes it helps have to cajole wolfram alpha to that it will take the answer a step further.

https://www.wolframalpha.com/input/?i=convert+9E16+Joules+/+5.34E7+Watts+to+years
 
The conclusion is simple. There is no point to invest a broken penny into this power station.
 
JJ91 said:
The conclusion is simple. There is no point to invest a broken penny into this power station.

:confused: Huh? Did you fail to properly state the problem? What is the criterion for your conclusion?
 
I don't like the title of that thread. That problem has nothing to do with unit conversion.
 
TL;DR Summary: I came across this question from a Sri Lankan A-level textbook. Question - An ice cube with a length of 10 cm is immersed in water at 0 °C. An observer observes the ice cube from the water, and it seems to be 7.75 cm long. If the refractive index of water is 4/3, find the height of the ice cube immersed in the water. I could not understand how the apparent height of the ice cube in the water depends on the height of the ice cube immersed in the water. Does anyone have an...
Thread 'Variable mass system : water sprayed into a moving container'
Starting with the mass considerations #m(t)# is mass of water #M_{c}# mass of container and #M(t)# mass of total system $$M(t) = M_{C} + m(t)$$ $$\Rightarrow \frac{dM(t)}{dt} = \frac{dm(t)}{dt}$$ $$P_i = Mv + u \, dm$$ $$P_f = (M + dm)(v + dv)$$ $$\Delta P = M \, dv + (v - u) \, dm$$ $$F = \frac{dP}{dt} = M \frac{dv}{dt} + (v - u) \frac{dm}{dt}$$ $$F = u \frac{dm}{dt} = \rho A u^2$$ from conservation of momentum , the cannon recoils with the same force which it applies. $$\quad \frac{dm}{dt}...
Back
Top