u/WindUpCandler

I kind of hate how these two relationships were treated in the books. First we have Belinda. She tore Jory's heart out after years of stringing him along (he said she should have ended it earlier cause he's not worth her or something? So he has no self respect). But she finally break up with him when she finds someone better (who is shown to be a sleaze and go after people with low self esteem but that's cause she has low self esteem too so it's okay) and it's treated as a sentimental moment instead of the betrayal and abuse it is.

On the other hand we have Neil who broke up with cass after he had repeatedly asked not to talk about jason and hit a breaking point, upon which time everyone treats him like an idiot and cass says she's hurt despite the fact she's been hurting him for years at that point even after talking about bringing up jason.

My point being there's a pretty clear double standard in which the relationships see the guys as perpetually in the wrong for what they feel or their feelings are downplayed, unless they're Jason, and the girls have this weird you don't deserve the ground I walk on vibes.

The only relationship I actually like is Humphrey and Sofi but even then there's this weird mom vibe in which his discomfort is constantly played for laughs.

They're all very strange dynamics, maybe that's what shirt likes or wants in a relationship but always portraying the men as somehow in the wrong feels gross.

EDIT: I was wrong, I didn't account for the sun not being up for a large chunck of the day. it's not 18 times more expensive but closer to 5.366. Still much cheaper but overall a lot less dramatic then my terrible math would have indicated. There are also other factors that this doesn't take into account such as if it would cost less or more to install large solar installations as these figures are based on installing solar panels on single family homes or mining costs for getting Uranium and enrichment and many other factors. Take this with a grain of salt.

I was curious so I looked up some figures and did some math.

The US uses approximately 4.18 trillion kWh from the US energy information administration.

An average solar panel produces roughly 21.5 ish watts per square foot. From energysage.com. Using a calculation I found on a1solarstore.com and averaging between two cities in the US, Seattle which gets roughly 4.9 psh (peak sunlight hours) and Phoenix which gets about 6.6 psh and adding 25% to account for non peak sunlight hours but still energy producing at sunrise and sunset, We can see that solar panels on average would produce peak energy for about 7.1875 hours a day or about 30% of the day

Extrapolating to kWh for the whole year means it produces 56.4039062563 kWh per square foot.

Using this it would take 74,108,342,443.625 square feet of solar panels to power the US for an entire year.

From solar.com, they say the average cost per square foot of living space in your home for a solar panel is 6 to 12 dollars. So let's use the low end for this of 6 dollars. If y'all can find a cheap figure feel free to use that number with this math to produce a better figure for overall cost.

So multiplying the two, you would get 444,650,054,661.75 dollars to make all the solar panels you would need to power the US.

Now let's look at nuclear. From the US department of energy we find that a typical fisson reactor generates 1 GW of power or 1000000 kW. For a whole year thats 8,760,000,000 kWh.

With this figure is would take a little more than 477 nuclear reactors to power the US. Using the low end of 5 billion dollars per nuclear reactor, that would be a total of 2,385,844,748,858.5 dollars to power the US assuming your building them from scratch.

So that means that, as much as I love nuclear power, it is about 5.366 times cheaper to power the US via solar panels.

Please feel free to check the figures I used in this post as well as check my math. I went into this trying to show that nuclear wasn't much more expensive or was even cheaper than solar but it's pretty obvious I proved the opposite here. I still love nuclear power and want to see the technology used and refined in the future but yes, solar is significantly cheaper than nuclear power based on the numbers I was able to find.

Ultimately though if it's really that cheap to power the US via solar panels. I doubt it cause that number is based on consumer cost for a house, it would still cost a fraction of the US' military budget to fund something like this. Glad my taxes are going towards bombs and subsidizing fossil fuel companies instead.