Several times a week I come across an interesting graphical presentation of some 'facts' on the interwebs, like this one today that was posted on Twitter:
(https://pbs.twimg.com/media/BiNWoMkIEAAD_o5.jpg)
But despite searching for the hashtags and looking on the company's website, I don't seem to find any statistics or facts linked to it that I can check.
So do I accept this at face value or do I think the worse and assume the originators are hiding details because they fudged the facts, to make the graphic more appealing ?
My question is sources on the internet do you accept at face value and what others do you find useful, but of which you have to do some checking to verify what's being presented to you.
Cambodians aren't black.
Perhaps the microwave has a grill setting.
That's a giant coffeemaker.
Quote from: mongers on April 27, 2014, 10:11:35 AM
So do I accept this at face value or do I think the worse and assume the originators are hiding details because they fudged the facts, to make the graphic more appealing ?
You discount it marginally because no one has an ulterior motive to lie about this particular set of facts.
Quote from: Habbaku on April 27, 2014, 10:35:27 AM
That's a giant coffeemaker.
I just ordered one from Addis Ababa Online.
Quote from: Admiral Yi on April 27, 2014, 10:38:47 AM
Quote from: mongers on April 27, 2014, 10:11:35 AM
So do I accept this at face value or do I think the worse and assume the originators are hiding details because they fudged the facts, to make the graphic more appealing ?
You discount it marginally because no one has an ulterior motive to lie about this particular set of facts.
Of the top of my head, what about the whole 'profligate,wasteful West/America, consuming far more than poor africans' ?
Back of the envelope calculations* suggest some of these are plausable, but would it have killed them to put their assumptions/methodology in a 'footnote'
*The laptop one seems reasonable, I've a small laptop, used a lot come in at around 35-40 kWh for a year.
A router consuming 10 watt left on 24/7 would produce that amount.
Don't know about the coffee machine, maybe an office or home perculator left on all the time or just all day ?
The microwave seems high, if it's just modest domestic use.
The fridge seems high, but maybe it's a large one or even what we call over here 'American style' so then it could be right.
Quote from: mongers on April 27, 2014, 10:57:18 AM
Of the top of my head, what about the whole 'profligate,wasteful West/America, consuming farF more than poor africans' ?
For one thing, the West is not directly mentioned. For another, high energy consumption in the West is already well documented, and not terribly controversial.
Quote from: Admiral Yi on April 27, 2014, 11:09:21 AM
Quote from: mongers on April 27, 2014, 10:57:18 AM
Of the top of my head, what about the whole 'profligate,wasteful West/America, consuming farF more than poor africans' ?
For one thing, the West is not directly mentioned. For another, high energy consumption in the West is already well documented, and not terribly controversial.
I'm glad I got you into a position, that you'd might not normally argue on Langish; Yi says 'West is consuming the planet and is evil' :P
:mellow:
(https://pbs.twimg.com/media/BmPH25kCIAE1p4A.jpg)
Quote from: grumbler on April 27, 2014, 11:47:35 AM
Quote from: Admiral Yi on April 27, 2014, 11:38:28 AM
:mellow:
Strawman: 165 kWh
I estimate that would equate to a 40kg strawman, is that too modest a size for a typical Languish construction ?
I'll let you judge. :P
Quote from: mongers on April 27, 2014, 10:11:35 AMMy question is sources on the internet do you accept at face value and what others do you find useful, but of which you have to do some checking to verify what's being presented to you.
any article that relates to (a) law in any material way. usually there's some bullshit attached
Quote from: LaCroix on April 27, 2014, 11:55:59 AM
Quote from: mongers on April 27, 2014, 10:11:35 AMMy question is sources on the internet do you accept at face value and what others do you find useful, but of which you have to do some checking to verify what's being presented to you.
any article that relates to (a) law in any material way. usually there's some bullshit attached
FYP.
(https://languish.org/forums/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fi.imgur.com%2FOmD1mMo.gif&hash=2ff794f8a5727a9363b07aa555ee2ee6e3942372)
I don't understand the first graphic at all. Why does it change countries? Why does the appliance get bigger along with the person the more power it uses.
Quote from: Razgovory on April 27, 2014, 01:02:56 PM
I don't understand the first graphic at all. Why does it change countries? Why does the appliance get bigger along with the person the more power it uses.
I assume it's annual per capita electricity consumption/generation in various African countries vs typical annual energy usage for various consumer/white goods, but without a legend and some explanation that's just a guess.
Haiti and Cambodia are not African countries.
Anyway I tend to distrust most statistics meant for the general public. Even the ones that are absolutely true get presented in a misleading way. This particular graphic theoretically should be easy to fact check though? Total energy consumption per person.
That graph doesn't even have a legend. Are you supposed to just guess what you're looking at?
Quote from: fhdz on April 27, 2014, 01:34:54 PM
That graph doesn't even have a legend. Are you supposed to just guess what you're looking at?
I thought they were telling me Haiti had laptops much more efficient than Ghanan refrigerators.
Quote from: fhdz on April 27, 2014, 01:34:54 PM
That graph doesn't even have a legend. Are you supposed to just guess what you're looking at?
Presumably the person who retweeted it chopped all the pointy head parts off.
I understand it to mean that stand your ground has worked wonders.
Quote from: fhdz on April 27, 2014, 01:34:54 PM
That graph doesn't even have a legend. Are you supposed to just guess what you're looking at?
I think so yes.
I don't think it presents energy consumption, but more narrowly electric consumption per capita, hence the comparisons with electrical goods.
Quote from: mongers on April 27, 2014, 02:24:53 PM
I think so yes.
I don't think it presents energy consumption, but more narrowly electric consumption per capita, hence the comparisons with electrical goods.
Watt-hours are a unit of energy. I am confused by the distinction between electric and energy here.
Quote from: Valmy on April 27, 2014, 02:34:02 PM
Watt-hours are a unit of energy. I am confused by the distinction between electric and energy here.
I thought watts and watt hours were only related to electricity.
For example, I don't think you can talk about the watts in a gallon of gasoline.
Quote from: Valmy on April 27, 2014, 02:34:02 PM
Quote from: mongers on April 27, 2014, 02:24:53 PM
I think so yes.
I don't think it presents energy consumption, but more narrowly electric consumption per capita, hence the comparisons with electrical goods.
Watt-hours are a unit of energy. I am confused by the distinction between electric and energy here.
Why?
Quote from: The Brain on April 27, 2014, 02:39:37 PM
Quote from: Valmy on April 27, 2014, 02:34:02 PM
Quote from: mongers on April 27, 2014, 02:24:53 PM
I think so yes.
I don't think it presents energy consumption, but more narrowly electric consumption per capita, hence the comparisons with electrical goods.
Watt-hours are a unit of energy. I am confused by the distinction between electric and energy here.
Why?
Lack of metrication.
Quote from: Admiral Yi on April 27, 2014, 02:36:51 PM
Quote from: Valmy on April 27, 2014, 02:34:02 PM
Watt-hours are a unit of energy. I am confused by the distinction between electric and energy here.
I thought watts and watt hours were only related to electricity.
For example, I don't think you can talk about the watts in a gallon of gasoline.
Sigh.
Quote from: Admiral Yi on April 27, 2014, 02:36:51 PM
For example, I don't think you can talk about the watts in a gallon of gasoline.
True. You can talk about the kilowatts in a liter of gasoline, but not watts per gallon.
Quote from: Admiral Yi on April 27, 2014, 01:36:46 PM
Quote from: fhdz on April 27, 2014, 01:34:54 PM
That graph doesn't even have a legend. Are you supposed to just guess what you're looking at?
Presumably the person who retweeted it chopped all the pointy head parts off.
Well that makes sense. If they Kept the points on the heads it would have looked like they were wearing party hats. That makes me wonder, if they were wearing party hats maybe it's graph of the most common birthday presents in each country.
Quote from: Valmy on April 27, 2014, 02:34:02 PM
Quote from: mongers on April 27, 2014, 02:24:53 PM
I think so yes.
I don't think it presents energy consumption, but more narrowly electric consumption per capita, hence the comparisons with electrical goods.
Watt-hours are a unit of energy. I am confused by the distinction between electric and energy here.
Typically total energy production/consumption seems to be given in ton/tonnes of oil equivalent.
Well using Wiki listings by country, my maths makes it the per capita annual electricity consumption in Ghana to be 250 kWh, whereas total energy use annual per capita works out at 382.2 kg of oil equivalent or 4461 kWh per year.
No idea if those figures are accurate from wiki, but I'd expect only a small amount of a developing African country's energy usage to be grid electricity, no doubt wood, kerosene and natural biomass products would be more important.
Quote from: mongers on April 27, 2014, 10:11:35 AM
My question is sources on the internet do you accept at face value and what others do you find useful, but of which you have to do some checking to verify what's being presented to you.
Mostly, I accept raw numbers from government statistics without further fact-checking. They usually also disclose some information about the methodology.
Otherwise, knowing how many employees there are in the PR business and how little journalists normally learn about quantitative methods, I trust that most of them will make errors and draw conclusions of causality based on correlation.
I am assuming this chart is in some way related to either power consumption or availability. While troubling, if it includes only electrical power consumption or availability, it doesn't present the entire picture, as many developing countries still use firewood as a primary energy source for say cooking.
My car gets 40 rods to the hogshead and that's the way I likes it!
Quote from: Norgy on April 27, 2014, 04:11:11 PM
I am assuming this chart is in some way related to either power consumption or availability. While troubling, if it includes only electrical power consumption or availability, it doesn't present the entire picture, as many developing countries still use firewood as a primary energy source for say cooking.
Well yeah it would hard to get good stats on that.
Quote from: Admiral Yi on April 27, 2014, 02:36:51 PM
I thought watts and watt hours were only related to electricity.
For example, I don't think you can talk about the watts in a gallon of gasoline.
Watts are a unit of power and of course you can. Though with motors you typically use horsepower around here but that is just 735 or so watts. So it would just be horsepower-hours, which could then be converted to miles per gallon.
Quote from: Valmy on April 27, 2014, 04:21:12 PM
Quote from: Admiral Yi on April 27, 2014, 02:36:51 PM
I thought watts and watt hours were only related to electricity.
For example, I don't think you can talk about the watts in a gallon of gasoline.
Watts are a unit of power and of course you can. Though with motors you typically use horsepower around here but that is just 735 or so watts. So it would just be horsepower-hours, which could then be converted to miles per gallon.
If I'm cycling somewhere and I need to keep up a good pace, I generally aim to stay above 40,000 furlongs per fortnight. :bowler:
Some day soon, a war will be fought over measurements. <_<
Quote from: Valmy on April 27, 2014, 04:21:12 PM
Quote from: Admiral Yi on April 27, 2014, 02:36:51 PM
I thought watts and watt hours were only related to electricity.
For example, I don't think you can talk about the watts in a gallon of gasoline.
Watts are a unit of power and of course you can. Though with motors you typically use horsepower around here but that is just 735 or so watts. So it would just be horsepower-hours, which could then be converted to miles per gallon.
Huh? I'm pretty sure that the power output of an automotive engine can't be converted directly to miles per gallon.
Quote from: Norgy on April 27, 2014, 04:31:03 PM
Some day soon, a war will be fought over measurements. <_<
Never, first they'd have to agree on how to measure what a war is.
Quote from: dps on April 27, 2014, 06:40:10 PM
Quote from: Valmy on April 27, 2014, 04:21:12 PM
Quote from: Admiral Yi on April 27, 2014, 02:36:51 PM
I thought watts and watt hours were only related to electricity.
For example, I don't think you can talk about the watts in a gallon of gasoline.
Watts are a unit of power and of course you can. Though with motors you typically use horsepower around here but that is just 735 or so watts. So it would just be horsepower-hours, which could then be converted to miles per gallon.
Huh? I'm pretty sure that the power output of an automotive engine can't be converted directly to miles per gallon.
Rubbish, I used to own a Austin Allegro, I could rely on losing additional 1/4 power (one piston) output each 1,000 miles. :bowler:
Quote from: Admiral Yi on April 27, 2014, 02:36:51 PM
Quote from: Valmy on April 27, 2014, 02:34:02 PM
Watt-hours are a unit of energy. I am confused by the distinction between electric and energy here.
I thought watts and watt hours were only related to electricity.
For example, I don't think you can talk about the watts in a gallon of gasoline.
You can't talk about watts in a gallon of gasoline, but you can talk about watt-hours in a gallon of gasoline. Watts are a unit of power, watt-hours are a unit of energy. And watts definitely aren't limited to electricity, it's just that we got into the convention of using horsepower rather than watts for things like car engines.
How much horsepower is in a pony?
Quote from: Razgovory on April 27, 2014, 07:42:50 PM
How much horsepower is in a pony?
None, a pony is twenty-five quid. :bowler:
The horse power/pony thing is how I proved to my teacher that there really are stupid questions. :D
Quote from: Razgovory on April 27, 2014, 08:16:20 PM
The horse power/pony thing is how I proved to my teacher that there really are stupid questions. :D
We should form a team, clearly I can provide the stupid answers. :smarty:
Quote from: dps on April 27, 2014, 06:40:10 PM
Huh? I'm pretty sure that the power output of an automotive engine can't be converted directly to miles per gallon.
Horsepower hours are energy not power and of course you can.
I prefer eV for energy.
Quote from: The Brain on April 28, 2014, 10:26:40 AM
I prefer eV for energy.
Look at that horse generate 1.67554538 × 10
25 eV! Does that warm your cockles?
I work with the design team to formulate infographics. You can trust mine implicitly. I even check some of the data on Wikipedia.
Quote from: Brazen on April 28, 2014, 10:49:13 AM
I work with the design team to formulate infographics. You can trust mine implicitly. I even check some of the data on Wikipedia.
:lol:
Good thread. Great job everyone! :bowler:
Quote from: Jacob on April 28, 2014, 03:33:32 PM
Good thread. Great job everyone! :bowler:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vJmp7L5q7ow