Readit NewsYou can get a more detailed breakdown on Wikipedia:
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/World_War_II_casualties#mili...
> There is a clear inflection point around March 1943: From this point onward, the Allied forces sank more ships every month than they lost.
Any idea what what happened early 1943? Was there a specific event that changed the direction, or is the balance point of slow attrition?
The Allied line goes slowly down and the Axis line goes slowly up. At one point they cross, but there's nothing particularly significant about that crossing point. Nothing happened in the month that they crossed other than the two numbers were equal momentarily.
>During 1943, only about 25% of Eighth Air Force bomber crewmen completed their 25-mission tours—the other 75% were killed, severely wounded, or captured.
https://www.nationalmuseum.af.mil/Visit/Museum-Exhibits/Fact...
Dead Comment
You can imagine home appliances having an 'eco' setting which runs the appliance like the washing or the dishwasher at the cheapest time in the next 12 hours.
Or the water heating systems which heat more water when prices are cheap.
Or heaters which switch between natural gas and heat pump based on price.
Or electric car chargers which charge during the cheapest hours.
(all of these already exist, but none are yet common).
Over the long term there is also plenty of elasticity. If electric heating is expensive, people will install gas/oil heaters when they renovate. If electricity is cheap, more people buy electric cars. With cheap electricity, maybe fewer people decide to add more insulation to their houses. Businesses don't upgrade energy inefficient equipment to be more energy efficient, etc.
Plenty of demand elasticity in both the short and long term. End result: As long as the market is unconstrained, prices won't hit zero more than say ~5% of the time.
If peak to trough is a large gap, say 60% of peak, this tends to make it less likely that peak will be met by overproduction, since that would involve very large capital costs.
The picture you paint above would suggest a very small gap between peak and trough, say 2% of peak. This means that almost certainly there would be enough over capacity to more than meet peak demand. Therefore the total daily demand would be more than met by capacity, leading to some energy being thrown away. So at all times except the peak, the marginal cost would be zero.
You have given an accurate argument for why demand would be elastic at trough. But you haven't given any reason why overall demand would be very elastic.
The Wikipedia entry does suggest a greedy algorithm (at each step choosing the largest fib number that fits) though, using that we have
121 = 89 + 21 + 8 + 3
At that point, it's always summertime somewhere and it's always daylight somewhere, and if prices were to fall to zero there is always someone who would like more heat for something.
Therefore I suspect zero-priced energy will stop existing.
'Take my energy and allow me to stop accelerating my flywheels which regulate production' seems more plausible than 'someone would always like more heat for something' (what?)
Or possibly 'take my energy and I'll cut off some of the people using spare energy to do low priority, low value computation for free'?
Also, the LSAT is not static. It has changed over the years as instruction methods have also changed and as demographics have changed; so it is not a reliable measure of aptitude in any way.