Heads up on a chart mix-up some sharp-eyed folks spotted: that top label should read TWh, not GWh. So when we're talking coal's year-over-year jump, we're actually looking at roughly 64,300 GWh. Just wanted to set the record straight on those units—makes a pretty big difference when you're tracking energy numbers at this scale.
This page may contain third-party content, which is provided for information purposes only (not representations/warranties) and should not be considered as an endorsement of its views by Gate, nor as financial or professional advice. See Disclaimer for details.
20 Likes
Reward
20
10
Repost
Share
Comment
0/400
FUDwatcher
· 23h ago
Haha, I said the numbers look off, the units are indeed reversed, that's a real issue.
View OriginalReply0
AlphaWhisperer
· 12-01 10:59
Ha, it's the old trick of getting the units wrong again, but the number 64300GWh really can't hold up.
View OriginalReply0
JustHereForMemes
· 12-01 08:36
Haha, it's another blunder caused by unit confusion, such things are common in the Web3 data space.
View OriginalReply0
CounterIndicator
· 11-28 19:50
Oh no, it's unbelievable that the organization made such a basic mistake.
View OriginalReply0
0xDreamChaser
· 11-28 19:48
Dude, this detail is absolutely spot on; getting the unit wrong by that much can be terrifying.
View OriginalReply0
DegenWhisperer
· 11-28 19:45
Oh dear, how could such a basic mistake get through with the unit reversed? Luckily, someone was sharp-eyed.
View OriginalReply0
AirdropCollector
· 11-28 19:39
What the hell, the unit can even be mistaken? This is really the devil in the details.
View OriginalReply0
UnruggableChad
· 11-28 19:29
Dude, this unit really messed up, it's absurd, almost got led astray.
View OriginalReply0
DefiOldTrickster
· 11-28 19:27
Ha, did the units get reversed? I used to make this kind of rookie mistake every day while looking for arbitrage opportunities in 2017, almost flipped the direction of a 10x leverage trade, and I still can’t laugh about it now.
View OriginalReply0
TokenRationEater
· 11-28 19:24
Ha, it's another blunder caused by the unit mix-up; Web3 data isn't that easy to mess up.
Heads up on a chart mix-up some sharp-eyed folks spotted: that top label should read TWh, not GWh. So when we're talking coal's year-over-year jump, we're actually looking at roughly 64,300 GWh. Just wanted to set the record straight on those units—makes a pretty big difference when you're tracking energy numbers at this scale.