The exact quote is

“the propulsion force generated was less than the motor would have generated if it had been connected to a standard marine propeller.”

Based on that, the input power is a constant because they are comparing against the same motor. I would assume the power consumption is constant rather than bursty for either propulsion system, so there isn’t any peak-vs-avg power to be concerned about either.

One of the first things that page says is that it generates less force than a standard marine propeller. That seems like it’d be less efficient and use more fuel to me.

I guess you must live in that part of Alaska where it’s night time for half the year and don’t have daylight.

I actually did buy a Sony mirrorless camera several years ago when I was getting unhappy with the quality of my phone camera, right around the time the aggressive denoising tech was introduced. It made all the leaves in my forest photos turn into a smeary mess, not much different from an AI image.

These photos were 6 years apart, but I bought the nice camera shortly after the first photo. Galaxy S10 vs Sony A9 straight off the camera, similar shutter speeds, but different weather.

This was a whole thing with Samsung phones replacing the moon with a fake one in their telephoto images… I hate how much processing is going into phone images now.

Wow, that’s like 1000x more practical than putting them in space