Fun fact: USSR provided Cuba provided with discounted oil in exchange for Cuban sugar at above market prices.

  • Des [she/her, they/them]@hexbear.net
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    43
    ·
    edit-2
    4 days ago

    come on Russia. im sure you need some tasty sugar, rum, cigars, etc. and you got all this oil that’s complicated to sell on the U.S. dominated market

    (but honestly wish China would just donate a bunch of solar panels or do a Belt & Road and build them some power plants in exchange for some port access or something)

    • Speaker [e/em/eir]@hexbear.net
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      22
      ·
      4 days ago

      I’m sure the Hitlerian state of Amerikkka would be extremely chill about China having access to ports visible from Key West.

    • Hexboare [they/them]@hexbear.net
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      15
      ·
      3 days ago

      China has announced the construction of 92 solar farms in Cuba as part of a joint effort to address the island’s energy crisis. The projects, carried out in collaboration between Cuban and Chinese companies, aim to add more than 2,000 megawatts to the island’s National Electric System.

      It’s underway but not really happening very quickly

        • Hexboare [they/them]@hexbear.net
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          4
          ·
          2 days ago

          MWh? That can’t be right, that’s too low (although I appreciate the numbers for reference)

          The US DOE says about 16 TWh which sounds more reasonable for a population of ~11 million.

          2GW times 24 hours time 365 days times a capacity factor of 20 percent is an annual production of 3.5 TWh so the planned solar farms would cover about 20 percent of annual usage

          • Sodium_nitride@lemmygrad.ml
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            edit-2
            2 days ago

            No idea why the numbers are so different. The numbers I found were 120 GWh (not MWh, it was a typo). But that is still significantly less than the us doe estimate.