Megalextoria
Retro computing and gaming, sci-fi books, tv and movies and other geeky stuff.

Home » Digital Archaeology » Computer Arcana » Computer Folklore » Office jobs eroding
Show: Today's Messages :: Show Polls :: Message Navigator
E-mail to friend 
Switch to threaded view of this topic Create a new topic Submit Reply
Re: Office jobs eroding [message #390075 is a reply to message #390063] Mon, 06 January 2020 16:54 Go to previous messageGo to next message
Ahem A Rivet's Shot is currently offline  Ahem A Rivet's Shot
Messages: 4550
Registered: January 2012
Karma: 0
Senior Member
On Mon, 6 Jan 2020 13:15:33 -0800 (PST)
hancock4@bbs.cpcn.com wrote:

> (How unventilated could it have
> been since it had to have air for the hot oldstyle bulb?)

Not really, nothing was going to go wrong with one of those until
the solder melted.

--
Steve O'Hara-Smith | Directable Mirror Arrays
C:\>WIN | A better way to focus the sun
The computer obeys and wins. | licences available see
You lose and Bill collects. | http://www.sohara.org/
Re: Office jobs eroding [message #390076 is a reply to message #390033] Mon, 06 January 2020 16:53 Go to previous messageGo to next message
Ahem A Rivet's Shot is currently offline  Ahem A Rivet's Shot
Messages: 4550
Registered: January 2012
Karma: 0
Senior Member
On Mon, 6 Jan 2020 12:58:40 -0800 (PST)
hancock4@bbs.cpcn.com wrote:

> So, like it or not, our world today uses a lot more electricity.
> Natural sources like solar, wind, and hydro are simply inadequate
> to meet demand.

Backed by sufficient power storage they can easily more than
adequate to meet demand (this is an easy calculation). Good enough power
storage is still a problem, although the huge battery packs in Australia and
California seem to be working well and making money for their owners.

Even without massive power storage natural sources accounted for
48.5% of the UK's electricity in 2019, fossil fuel burning produced 43%.
This marks the first year that natural sources produced more than fossil
fuel burning so you'll find it widely reported.

--
Steve O'Hara-Smith | Directable Mirror Arrays
C:\>WIN | A better way to focus the sun
The computer obeys and wins. | licences available see
You lose and Bill collects. | http://www.sohara.org/
Re: Office jobs eroding [message #390077 is a reply to message #389691] Mon, 06 January 2020 18:05 Go to previous messageGo to next message
scott is currently offline  scott
Messages: 4018
Registered: February 2012
Karma: 0
Senior Member
Dave Garland <dave.garland@wizinfo.com> writes:
> On 1/6/2020 2:48 PM, hancock4@bbs.cpcn.com wrote:
>> On Saturday, January 4, 2020 at 9:07:20 AM UTC-5, Dan Espen wrote:
>>
>>> 1. CFLs lasted longer than the incandescents they replaced
>>> and used less power. While they had some minor drawbacks
>>> they were still a step up. I have CFLs in my driveway lamp.
>>> The bulbs must be at least 15 years old now. Something I got nowhere
>>> near with incandescents.
>>
>> In my opinion, CFLs were lousy. They were expensive and lasted
>> no longer than incandessents. They broke easily and made a mess.
>> The light quality was lousy and there was flicker. They were
>> slow to get up to full brightness.
>
> They were expensive at first, but got cheaper (less than a buck) and
> were often subsidized by power companies. Personally, I saw less
> flicker than with conventional fluorescents (I think the CFL arc is at
> much higher frequency). Mine lasted (still do) far better than
> incandescents (the name brand ones were generally better than the
> Brand X Chinese ones). You're right about breakage, and slow startup.

There is one place where I miss the slow startup of CFL's - the bathroom at night.

When I had the CFL globes in the bathroom, it was much easier on the
eyes to turn the lights on when getting up in the middle of the night...
Re: Office jobs eroding [message #390078 is a reply to message #389691] Mon, 06 January 2020 18:07 Go to previous messageGo to next message
Ahem A Rivet's Shot is currently offline  Ahem A Rivet's Shot
Messages: 4550
Registered: January 2012
Karma: 0
Senior Member
On Mon, 6 Jan 2020 15:42:28 -0600
Dave Garland <dave.garland@wizinfo.com> wrote:

> As to
> light quality, neither fluorescent phosphors nor LEDs give you a nice
> clean spectrum like a photoflood does. But that's an incandescent that
> has a working life of only a few hours.

Have you tried the very high CRI LEDs made for photographic use ?
They're claimed to be a good match for a photoflood, it would be
interesting to know if they are.

--
Steve O'Hara-Smith | Directable Mirror Arrays
C:\>WIN | A better way to focus the sun
The computer obeys and wins. | licences available see
You lose and Bill collects. | http://www.sohara.org/
Re: Office jobs eroding [message #390079 is a reply to message #389691] Mon, 06 January 2020 18:08 Go to previous messageGo to next message
Ahem A Rivet's Shot is currently offline  Ahem A Rivet's Shot
Messages: 4550
Registered: January 2012
Karma: 0
Senior Member
On Mon, 6 Jan 2020 15:54:06 -0600
Dave Garland <dave.garland@wizinfo.com> wrote:

> On 1/6/2020 3:20 PM, hancock4@bbs.cpcn.com wrote:
>
>>
>> But in flashlights their service life is horrible. I bought
>> a punch of what we used to call penlights. Small and compact.
>> (Though used 3 AAA cells which was awkward). Terrible life
>> and the entire unit had to be discarded. I still use cheap 25
>> year old D cell flashlights that still work just fine.
>>
> IME the flashlight failures are usually due to crappy switches, rather
> than the LEDs themselves.

That and overheating regulators.

--
Steve O'Hara-Smith | Directable Mirror Arrays
C:\>WIN | A better way to focus the sun
The computer obeys and wins. | licences available see
You lose and Bill collects. | http://www.sohara.org/
Re: Office jobs eroding [message #390080 is a reply to message #389691] Mon, 06 January 2020 18:33 Go to previous messageGo to next message
scott is currently offline  scott
Messages: 4018
Registered: February 2012
Karma: 0
Senior Member
Dave Garland <dave.garland@wizinfo.com> writes:
> On 1/6/2020 3:32 PM, Peter Flass wrote:
>> Charlie Gibbs <cgibbs@kltpzyxm.invalid> wrote:
>>> On 2020-01-06, Dan Espen <dan1espen@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>
>>>> Joy Beeson <jbeeson@invalid.net.invalid> writes:
>>>>
>>>> > On Sun, 05 Jan 2020 11:36:42 -0500, Dan Espen <dan1espen@gmail.com>
>>>> > wrote:
>>>> >
>>>> >> Personally, I buy re-usable shopping bags.
>>>> >
>>>> > That doesn't stop the accumulation of plastic bags unless you make a
>>>> > real pest of yourself.
>>>> >
>>>> > Well, not even then.
>>>>
>>>> Okay, not clear to me how being a pest has any bearing
>>>> on the plastic bag outcome?
>>>
>>> Sometimes that's what it takes to stop a cashier from loading one
>>> before you can supply your own.
>>>
>>>> I just got one of my shopping bags in my junk mail.
>>>
>>> We just got given a couple by the city in comemmoration of the
>>> new rec centre. They look like they'll last a while.
>>>
>>>> They last pretty long, I've had a few of them for multiple years.
>>>
>>> We have a big one we picked up on a trip to Bonaire in 2009.
>>> It carries a _lot_ of stuff, and shows very little sign of wear.
>>>
>>
>> I recently read an article that said reusable bags are no more “green” than
>> disposables, due to manufacturing processes and disposal costs when they
>> finally *do* wear out.
>>
> https://www.theatlantic.com/technology/archive/2016/09/to-to te-or-note-to-tote/498557/
>
> HDPE bag = 2kg carbon
> paper bag = 14kg carbon
> recycled HDPE tote = 52kg carbon
> cotton tote = 654kg carbon

I'd rather see the underlying study and its methodology rather than
some reporter summarizing it. 30 pounds of carbon to make a paper
bag seems a bit on the high side.

The UKEA study (link in above article) is much more nuanced than the figures above. Firstly,
the carbon values listed above are actually
"IPCC 2007 Global Warming Potential (kg CO2 eq)", and the baseline
(table 6.2) for paper (used 4 times) is 1.381kg rather than the 14kg you extracted
from the article, and recycling the bag drops that to 1.09kg. This is the
best from all the bag-types.

See also Figure 5.1 which shows total lifecycle impact GWP for paper as 4.5kg CO2 eq.

The IPCC report (Table 5.4) shows the total global warming potential for paper as 5.523kg
when discarded after one use, and 1.381kg when discarded after four uses.

Note sure where the numbers you reported come from, but they don't seem correct.

They also attempt to take into account the electricity mix used to produce
the bags (considering the country/region where most of the bags are produced,
e.g. China for most HDPE bags).

The report notes that paper bags aren't commonly used in the UK, so they
have no evidence of re-use. re-use is common in California.

Mostly, the report is _very_ UK centric and makes assumptions about the
manufacture of the various bag types consistent with UK experience (i.e.
paper bags come from Europe, plastic from China) that may not apply
to the US or other parts of the world.

It does confirm to me that paper bags are probably the best all-around;
I shred mine into the compost pile after a dozen or more uses; the
report assumes they're incinerated.

Note also the study was published in 2011 using data from 2006, I expect
that the energy mix used to make the bags has changed (even in China)
in the direction of using more renewable energy in the last 14 years,
which would naturally reduce the IPCC GWP for each of the bag types.
Re: Office jobs eroding [message #390081 is a reply to message #389691] Mon, 06 January 2020 18:47 Go to previous messageGo to next message
Charlie Gibbs is currently offline  Charlie Gibbs
Messages: 5100
Registered: January 2012
Karma: 0
Senior Member
On 2020-01-06, Dave Garland <dave.garland@wizinfo.com> wrote:

> If we raised gas taxes to the point that they could pay for the entire
> upkeep and maintenance of roads that would help. But it would probably
> triple the taxes (right now, US gas tax and auto excise tax cover
> about half, but that doesn't include anything for city streets), no
> politician wants to go there.

Up here in Canada, gas taxes disappear down that black hole known as
"general revenue" (government-speak for "money laundering"). Rumour
has it that about 5% of gas taxes actually go towards roads.

--
/~\ Charlie Gibbs | Microsoft is a dictatorship.
\ / <cgibbs@kltpzyxm.invalid> | Apple is a cult.
X I'm really at ac.dekanfrus | Linux is anarchy.
/ \ if you read it the right way. | Pick your poison.
Re: Office jobs eroding [message #390082 is a reply to message #390069] Mon, 06 January 2020 18:47 Go to previous messageGo to next message
Charlie Gibbs is currently offline  Charlie Gibbs
Messages: 5100
Registered: January 2012
Karma: 0
Senior Member
On 2020-01-06, Peter Flass <peter_flass@yahoo.com> wrote:

> Charlie Gibbs <cgibbs@kltpzyxm.invalid> wrote:
>
>> On 2020-01-06, Dan Espen <dan1espen@gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>>> I haven't used a cashier since they started self checkout.
>>
>> Ugh. There's no way I'll ever put up with one of those machines
>> nattering at me. Besides, I'd rather give a job to a real person.
>
> I usually get into a rather one-sided argument with the self-checkout.

I bet my blood pressure is lower than yours. :-)

--
/~\ Charlie Gibbs | Microsoft is a dictatorship.
\ / <cgibbs@kltpzyxm.invalid> | Apple is a cult.
X I'm really at ac.dekanfrus | Linux is anarchy.
/ \ if you read it the right way. | Pick your poison.
Re: Office jobs eroding [message #390083 is a reply to message #390066] Mon, 06 January 2020 20:21 Go to previous messageGo to next message
Anonymous
Karma:
Originally posted by: J. Clarke

On Mon, 6 Jan 2020 13:27:59 -0800 (PST), hancock4@bbs.cpcn.com wrote:

> On Sunday, January 5, 2020 at 3:00:07 AM UTC-5, Ahem A Rivet's Shot wrote:
>> Agreed that is the important question, and as far as I can make out
>> the poorest of the poor have been getting steadily better off for a long
>> time.
>
> No.

Explain.
Re: Office jobs eroding [message #390084 is a reply to message #390064] Mon, 06 January 2020 20:25 Go to previous messageGo to next message
Anonymous
Karma:
Originally posted by: J. Clarke

On Mon, 6 Jan 2020 13:20:20 -0800 (PST), hancock4@bbs.cpcn.com wrote:

> On Sunday, January 5, 2020 at 2:18:09 AM UTC-5, Dave Garland wrote:
>
>> I don't see why people are so down on CFLs (and presumably
>> conventional fluorescents). Of course they're not suitable for every
>> application, any idiot can see that. But the "on for hours"
>> applications (and in the orientation and with the ventilation they
>> were designed for) they work fine, and usually they were cost
>> effective otherwise, so long as you didn't need "instant on full
>> bright" service. Even the cheap Chinese ones. LEDs are better and
>> cheaper now but weren't available at the beginning, and nobody knew
>> how long it would be until they were economically effective. Disposal
>> is commensurate with conventional fluorescents (i.e. inconvenient).
>
> I bought some traditional fluorescent 'stick lamps' (the kind
> you stick over your kitchen sink mounted on the cabinet).
> I discovered that while they lasted a long time and were
> efficient, they were not replaceable. Turned out the bulb
> was unique and not replaceable, so I had to throw out the
> whole fixture.
>
> As to LEDs, the jury is still out in my uses for plain
> lamp lights.
>
> But in flashlights their service life is horrible. I bought
> a punch of what we used to call penlights. Small and compact.
> (Though used 3 AAA cells which was awkward). Terrible life
> and the entire unit had to be discarded. I still use cheap 25
> year old D cell flashlights that still work just fine.

"Terrible life"?!?!?!? Compared to an incandescent?!?!?!? What did
you DO to the poor thing?

And how can you stand those horribly dim battery eating incandescent
flashlights after using an LED that gives the same brightness as the
incandescent literaly for _days_ or if you are willing to tolerate the
same battery life as the incandescent ten times the brightness? Of if
you really need to see turn it up all the way and have 100 times?
Re: Office jobs eroding [message #390086 is a reply to message #390068] Mon, 06 January 2020 22:01 Go to previous messageGo to next message
Dan Espen is currently offline  Dan Espen
Messages: 3783
Registered: January 2012
Karma: 0
Senior Member
Peter Flass <peter_flass@yahoo.com> writes:

> Charlie Gibbs <cgibbs@kltpzyxm.invalid> wrote:
>> On 2020-01-06, Dan Espen <dan1espen@gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>>> Joy Beeson <jbeeson@invalid.net.invalid> writes:
>>>
>>>> On Sun, 05 Jan 2020 11:36:42 -0500, Dan Espen <dan1espen@gmail.com>
>>>> wrote:
>>>>
>>>> > Personally, I buy re-usable shopping bags.
>>>>
>>>> That doesn't stop the accumulation of plastic bags unless you make a
>>>> real pest of yourself.
>>>>
>>>> Well, not even then.
>>>
>>> Okay, not clear to me how being a pest has any bearing
>>> on the plastic bag outcome?
>>
>> Sometimes that's what it takes to stop a cashier from loading one
>> before you can supply your own.
>>
>>> I just got one of my shopping bags in my junk mail.
>>
>> We just got given a couple by the city in comemmoration of the
>> new rec centre. They look like they'll last a while.
>>
>>> They last pretty long, I've had a few of them for multiple years.
>>
>> We have a big one we picked up on a trip to Bonaire in 2009.
>> It carries a _lot_ of stuff, and shows very little sign of wear.
>
> I recently read an article that said reusable bags are no more “green” than
> disposables, due to manufacturing processes and disposal costs when they
> finally *do* wear out.

They can't be recycled but they last for years.
For me, at least 3 or 4.
I doubt I put more than one bag a year into the landfills.

In that same one year I'd use hundreds of plastic bags.

I wouldn't mind paper bags.
I haven't seen any in ages.

--
Dan Espen
Re: plastic bags, was: Office jobs eroding [message #390087 is a reply to message #390021] Tue, 07 January 2020 00:22 Go to previous messageGo to next message
Joy Beeson is currently offline  Joy Beeson
Messages: 156
Registered: June 2012
Karma: 0
Senior Member
On Mon, 6 Jan 2020 14:49:05 +0000 (UTC), danny burstein
<dannyb@panix.com> wrote:

> (apologies for prior, empty, post. I hit the send keys too early)
>
> In <2023267094.600013116.732632.peter_flass-yahoo.com@news.eternal-september.org> Peter Flass <peter_flass@yahoo.com> writes:
>
> [snippeth]
>
>> We use plastic grocery bags as wastebasket liners, which at least saves us
>> from buying bags specifically for the wastebaskets.
>
> They also come in handy for people with dogs who lived in civilized
> areas that wish to "scoop the poop".

I always carry a plastic bag of loosely-crumpled plastic bags on my
bicycle. Very useful for packing material, and for attaching loaves
of bread and other squishables to the rack or the top of the pannier.
I put both handles of the bag through a hole in the pannier or rack,
pull it snug, then tie the handles to each other around something. (I
once used plastic bags as rope to keep some carpets samples I'd just
bought rolled up.)

When I started carryng it, I thought that if I wanted the space the
bag occupies, it would be because I'd just bought something, and
there's always a trashbin or recycling barrel in or near a store, but
it turns out that I always want a little padding on top of what I've
just bought before I bungee it down.

Bags accumulate fast enough that I'm quite fussy when sorting out
damaged or dirty bags to put into the bag to be taken to the recycling
barrel.


--
Joy Beeson
joy beeson at comcast dot net
http://wlweather.net/PAGEJOY/
Re: Office jobs eroding [message #390088 is a reply to message #390024] Tue, 07 January 2020 00:46 Go to previous messageGo to next message
Joy Beeson is currently offline  Joy Beeson
Messages: 156
Registered: June 2012
Karma: 0
Senior Member
On 6 Jan 2020 16:34:16 GMT, Charlie Gibbs <cgibbs@kltpzyxm.invalid>
wrote:

> We have a big one we picked up on a trip to Bonaire in 2009.
> It carries a _lot_ of stuff, and shows very little sign of wear.

I bought my bags when the SuperValu opened in 1995. They are
beginning to show signs of wear.

And I usually wash them in hot water with bleach, like the dish
towels.

--
Joy Beeson
joy beeson at comcast dot net
http://wlweather.net/PAGEJOY/
Re: Office jobs eroding [message #390089 is a reply to message #390019] Tue, 07 January 2020 00:46 Go to previous messageGo to next message
Joy Beeson is currently offline  Joy Beeson
Messages: 156
Registered: June 2012
Karma: 0
Senior Member
On Mon, 06 Jan 2020 09:41:20 -0500, Dan Espen <dan1espen@gmail.com>
wrote:

> I haven't used a cashier since they started self checkout.

Everyone has a superpower. Mine is crashing self-checkout computers.

--
Joy Beeson
joy beeson at comcast dot net
http://wlweather.net/PAGEJOY/
Re: Light 'Bulbs' [message #390090 is a reply to message #389995] Tue, 07 January 2020 02:49 Go to previous messageGo to next message
Mike Spencer is currently offline  Mike Spencer
Messages: 964
Registered: January 2012
Karma: 0
Senior Member
John Levine <johnl@taugh.com> writes:

> In article <87blrh7jke.fsf@bogus.nodomain.nowhere>,
> Mike Spencer <mds@bogus.nodomain.nowhere> wrote:
>
>> I'm lighting my studio/shop/atelier with 300W incandescents. I'm
>> gonna be really annoyed when I run out and have to figure out an
>> alternative.
>
> 300W incandescents put out 3500 to 5500 lumens depending on the type
> of bulb. Poking around online it's not hard to find LED bulbs in the
> 4000-5000 lumen range. If you're used to incandescents you'd probably
> prefer the warmer looking 3000K rather than the usual 500K but they're
> not much harder to find. Most of them screw into the same socket as
> the incandescent they replace.

Well, that would be good. Buying "online" not so good but doable.

Saved for future reference, tnx. The world may change again before I
have to give up on what I'm using.

> They cost a lot more than incandescents but since they last for
> decades and use 1/10 the power I expect they'll pay for themselves
> soon enough.

The 300W bulbs I've been using last pretty well. Replaced maybe 6 in
the 17 years since I built the shop.

--
Mike Spencer Nova Scotia, Canada
Re: Light 'Bulbs' [message #390091 is a reply to message #390009] Tue, 07 January 2020 02:57 Go to previous messageGo to next message
Mike Spencer is currently offline  Mike Spencer
Messages: 964
Registered: January 2012
Karma: 0
Senior Member
jmreno <none@znet.com> writes:

> I never did like those newfangled incandescent lights.
>
> I use only good old gas lights in my house.

I lived for a decade without electricity, had two gas lights and a
mantle-type oil lamp. Liked the newfangled incandescents well enough
but not the cost or bother of getting the powerco to put in half a
mile of poles.

ObAFC: No contact with computers whatsoever during those years. Did a
lot of dead-tree reading though.

> But for those times I need a really bright light I have a few nice arc
> lights that I got for free from a movie theater that was converting from
> film to video.

One-upped me there. Even now, my brightest light is a 1500W flood
that I use for splitting wood when evenings are dark.


--
Mike Spencer Nova Scotia, Canada
Re: Office jobs eroding [message #390092 is a reply to message #390025] Tue, 07 January 2020 03:12 Go to previous messageGo to next message
Mike Spencer is currently offline  Mike Spencer
Messages: 964
Registered: January 2012
Karma: 0
Senior Member
Charlie Gibbs <cgibbs@kltpzyxm.invalid> writes:

> On 2020-01-06, Dan Espen <dan1espen@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> I haven't used a cashier since they started self checkout.
>
> Ugh. There's no way I'll ever put up with one of those machines
> nattering at me. Besides, I'd rather give a job to a real person.

Same here. We get acquainted with checkout clerks, are sorry when
they get reassigned or move on. But the we shop in a small market
town, not a huge 21st c. metropolis.

--
Mike Spencer Nova Scotia, Canada
Re: Office jobs eroding [message #390093 is a reply to message #390033] Tue, 07 January 2020 03:37 Go to previous messageGo to next message
Mike Spencer is currently offline  Mike Spencer
Messages: 964
Registered: January 2012
Karma: 0
Senior Member
hancock4@bbs.cpcn.com writes:

> Here's a question: why can't we use coke as a fuel? Coke
> is processed coal with the impurities burned off in a sealed
> oven (the chemicals are captured and used for other things).
> Yes, it would still cost more, but it would be a lot cleaner.

The "impurities" are a horrible mess of many variously sticky, ikky or
toxic compounds, typically including a lot sulfur. Nova Scotia's
chief environmental disaster site is the site of a coking plant run
for decades with no controls other than settling "ponds". I actually
saw it in operation in the early 70s -- gondolar car loads of red-hot
coke hosed down with thousands of gallons of water.

The steel industry uses "metalurgical" coal, viz. low-sulfur
bituminous coal, that they coke out before putting it into the blast
furnace. North American blacksmith use metalurgical coal (when they
can get it) and coke it out on the fly so the crap burns off and goes
up the fue. British blacksmiths prefer "breeze", pea-sized coke that
tends not to be an article of commerce in Leftpondia.

A curious story: Only a few years ago, a state of the art coking plant
was completed in (IIRC) Germany. And they found they couldn't make a
profit under the market circumstances of the moment. The Chinese, who
were so desperate for coke for their steel industry that they were
buying bulk shiploads of coke already in transit to other users,
bought the coking plant. Sent a crew of Chinese workmen and and
engineers over, dismantled the whole shebang and shipped it back to
China in containers.

One thing I *don't* understand is petroleum coke, a byproduct of
refining. AFAIK, it's nearly 100% carbon but (again, AFAIK) there
are huge mountains of it sitting around because nobody knows what to do
(profitably) with it.

--
Mike Spencer Nova Scotia, Canada
Re: Office jobs eroding [message #390095 is a reply to message #390084] Tue, 07 January 2020 04:58 Go to previous messageGo to next message
Ahem A Rivet's Shot is currently offline  Ahem A Rivet's Shot
Messages: 4550
Registered: January 2012
Karma: 0
Senior Member
On Mon, 06 Jan 2020 20:25:32 -0500
J. Clarke <jclarke.873638@gmail.com> wrote:

> On Mon, 6 Jan 2020 13:20:20 -0800 (PST), hancock4@bbs.cpcn.com wrote:
>
>> But in flashlights their service life is horrible. I bought
>> a punch of what we used to call penlights. Small and compact.
>> (Though used 3 AAA cells which was awkward). Terrible life
>> and the entire unit had to be discarded. I still use cheap 25
>> year old D cell flashlights that still work just fine.
>
> "Terrible life"?!?!?!? Compared to an incandescent?!?!?!? What did

The torches last forever - eating batteries and bulbs the whole
time.

> you DO to the poor thing?

A lot of cheap LED torches are really badly built, cheap bright
ones tend to overheat too.

> And how can you stand those horribly dim battery eating incandescent
> flashlights after using an LED that gives the same brightness as the

Yeah they do throw good light, but even reasonably good ones (I've
not tried the really expensive ones) tend to pack up within a small number
of years.

Currently that's not too much of a problem because they're
improving significantly in that time - my current outgoing crop have
three AAA batteries[1] and a point LED while the incoming ones have a USB
charge port, a removable 18650 Li-Ion battery and both COB flood and point
LEDs. The latest ones also seem to be better built, but time will tell as
always.

[1] Conveniently my collection of low self-discharge NiMH batteries is
running low as one by one they stop taking charge after many years of use.

--
Steve O'Hara-Smith | Directable Mirror Arrays
C:\>WIN | A better way to focus the sun
The computer obeys and wins. | licences available see
You lose and Bill collects. | http://www.sohara.org/
Re: Office jobs eroding [message #390096 is a reply to message #390077] Tue, 07 January 2020 04:40 Go to previous messageGo to next message
Ahem A Rivet's Shot is currently offline  Ahem A Rivet's Shot
Messages: 4550
Registered: January 2012
Karma: 0
Senior Member
On Mon, 06 Jan 2020 23:05:53 GMT
scott@slp53.sl.home (Scott Lurndal) wrote:

> There is one place where I miss the slow startup of CFL's - the bathroom
> at night.
>
> When I had the CFL globes in the bathroom, it was much easier on the
> eyes to turn the lights on when getting up in the middle of the night...

Sounds like a good use for a dimmer - or if you're feeling
inventive a soft-start circuit (were you looking for a business
opportunity ?).

--
Steve O'Hara-Smith | Directable Mirror Arrays
C:\>WIN | A better way to focus the sun
The computer obeys and wins. | licences available see
You lose and Bill collects. | http://www.sohara.org/
Re: Office jobs eroding [message #390099 is a reply to message #389691] Tue, 07 January 2020 06:38 Go to previous messageGo to next message
Ahem A Rivet's Shot is currently offline  Ahem A Rivet's Shot
Messages: 4550
Registered: January 2012
Karma: 0
Senior Member
On 7 Jan 2020 10:29:04 GMT
Huge <Huge@nowhere.much.invalid> wrote:

> On 2020-01-06, Ahem A Rivet's Shot <steveo@eircom.net> wrote:
>> On Mon, 6 Jan 2020 12:58:40 -0800 (PST)
>> hancock4@bbs.cpcn.com wrote:
>>
>>> So, like it or not, our world today uses a lot more electricity.
>>> Natural sources like solar, wind, and hydro are simply inadequate
>>> to meet demand.
>>
>> Backed by sufficient power storage they can easily more than
>> adequate to meet demand (this is an easy calculation). Good enough power
>> storage is still a problem, although the huge battery packs in
>> Australia and California seem to be working well and making money for
>> their owners.
>
> Those "huge battery packs" aren't what you think they are. They're to
> cover the gap while a thermal power station can be brought on-line, not

Yes I know, they're an alternative to expensive, fast-turn-on, gas
turbines for filling in peaks. They also get used to hold cheap electricity
for sale at peak times which is where they're making money hand over fist.

> to provide power for the week while an Atlantic high comes and sits over
> your country (as regularly happens in the UK at this time of year) and
> there's no wind or sunlight.

It's not that bad but yes power storage is nowhere near sufficient,
and on the scale required is not even remotely economically feasible ...
today. Those batteries indicate that it might be technically feasible if we
wanted to pay for it.

From time to time I cost providing enough storage to take my home
off grid or nearly so (around 120kWh of storage), it's certainly
technically feasible to run my house on solar and wind with batteries at
or above my current consumption level. As best I can make out such a system
would pay for itself in ten to fifteen years (depending on how much
contractors scalp^Wcharge and maintenance estimates - rather less if you
assume horrendous price increases and energy shortages) while lasting
twenty-five to thirty years.

It would perhaps be a good use for a small lottery win, but it's
far more than I'd think about investing on that kind of return.

OTOH if trends continue it will eventually become the best option
for powering rural properties, especially in areas where the grid is spotty
and subject to weather induced outages.

Cities are another problem, in theory covering the roofs of a city
with solar cells does the job but property rights, maintenance ... it's not
going to happen until/unless it is so cheap it beats paying bills in a year
or two.

In the meantime there's a lesser option of providing about 15kWh
of storage, no generation and switching to day/night rates and only using
night rate power. I haven't costed it in a while but it might be worthwhile
sometime soon.

> Until we can solve the intermittency issue
> at an industrial scale, we will never be able to run purely on
> renewables. The obvious solution is nuclear for baseline power, but the
> greenies don't like that, either.

I have always liked that approach - but I'd prefer a lot more work
to be done on fail-safe designs such as pebble-bed reactors rather than
pressure cookers designed to make weapons grade plutonium with power as a
side effect of cooling.

--
Steve O'Hara-Smith | Directable Mirror Arrays
C:\>WIN | A better way to focus the sun
The computer obeys and wins. | licences available see
You lose and Bill collects. | http://www.sohara.org/
Re: Office jobs eroding [message #390102 is a reply to message #390030] Tue, 07 January 2020 13:25 Go to previous messageGo to next message
Anonymous
Karma:
Originally posted by: JimP

On Mon, 06 Jan 2020 19:04:20 GMT, scott@slp53.sl.home (Scott Lurndal)
wrote:
> Jim Wrote:
>>
>>> Which halogens ? They used to be used in stage theaters, probably
>>> still are, to light up the stage.
>>
>
> Modern theatrical lighting is mostly LED.

Wowsers. I have been outside the loop.

--
Jim
Re: Office jobs eroding [message #390103 is a reply to message #390031] Tue, 07 January 2020 13:27 Go to previous messageGo to next message
Anonymous
Karma:
Originally posted by: JimP

On Mon, 6 Jan 2020 20:27:02 +0000, Ahem A Rivet's Shot
<steveo@eircom.net> wrote:
> On Mon, 06 Jan 2020 11:43:35 -0600
> JimP <solosam90@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> Which halogens ? They used to be used in stage theaters, probably
>> still are, to light up the stage.
>
> They're getting replaced by LEDs for stage use - long life, fast
> switching (most stage lighting needs to be faded not switched, LEDs don't
> care), any colour you want from RGB mixers with no gels to change. It almost
> makes me wish I was still doing stage lighting instead of seeing it done.
> Halogens were just coming in last time I ran a lighting rig.

I distinctly remember a dress rehearsal for stage at the university
where the lighting director and the play director arguing over color
gels that didn't exist. According to the lighting director.

I don't miss gels for sure.

No, I didn't fall for the 'go wash these dirty gels' and have them
disintegrate under the water.

--
Jim
Re: Office jobs eroding [message #390104 is a reply to message #390073] Tue, 07 January 2020 13:39 Go to previous messageGo to next message
Anonymous
Karma:
Originally posted by: JimP

On Mon, 06 Jan 2020 21:45:53 GMT, scott@slp53.sl.home (Scott Lurndal)
wrote:
> hancock4@bbs.cpcn.com writes:
>
>> As to LEDs, the jury is still out in my uses for plain
>> lamp lights.
>>
>> But in flashlights their service life is horrible. I bought
>> a punch of what we used to call penlights. Small and compact.
>> (Though used 3 AAA cells which was awkward). Terrible life
>> and the entire unit had to be discarded.
>
> You know, you get what you pay for. Buy something that wasn't
> designed to last a week and you'll be much happier. I have
> LED flashlights that work extremely well; I didn't get them
> at harbor freight, but rather paid for higher quality.

I've bought several styles and cost LED flashlights. The dollar ones
don't last long, but might be good for a day of an emergency.

Since I go camping, I have bought around 3 headlamps. The go through
batteries quickly.

What typically fails on the LED flashlights I have bought is the
switch to turn then on and off. The 'rotate the barrel' to turn them
on/off, can last years, and might not.

I do remember the glass bulb flashlights. The filament would break if
you dropped flashlight and it was on for more than a few minutes.
Which we kids did rather often when out camping.

--
Jim
Re: Office jobs eroding [message #390105 is a reply to message #390071] Tue, 07 January 2020 13:48 Go to previous messageGo to next message
hancock4 is currently offline  hancock4
Messages: 6746
Registered: December 2011
Karma: 0
Senior Member
On Monday, January 6, 2020 at 4:42:04 PM UTC-5, Scott Lurndal wrote:
> hancock4@bbs.cpcn.com writes:
>> On Saturday, January 4, 2020 at 2:50:27 PM UTC-5, Peter Flass wrote:
>
>>
>> California suffered disastrous power failures years ago
>> thanks to foolish ideas.
>
> California has _NEVER_ suffered disasterous power failures. Ever.
>
> There were brownouts caused by market manipulations, not by any
> shortage of energy generation capability. Note that the 'brownouts'
> did not effect the entire bay area (only some 96k customers out of
> more than 2 million). They certainly cannot be categorized as
> "disasterous".
>
> Please learn about it before writing about it.
>
> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/California_electricity_crisis
>
> "California had an installed generating capacity of 45 GW. At
> the time of the blackouts, demand was 28 GW. A demand-supply gap
> was created by energy companies, mainly Enron, to create an artificial shortage."

The book "Kochland : the secret history of Koch Industries and
corporate power in America" presents a different view.
Re: Office jobs eroding [message #390106 is a reply to message #390072] Tue, 07 January 2020 13:50 Go to previous messageGo to next message
hancock4 is currently offline  hancock4
Messages: 6746
Registered: December 2011
Karma: 0
Senior Member
On Monday, January 6, 2020 at 4:44:00 PM UTC-5, Scott Lurndal wrote:
> hancock4@bbs.cpcn.com writes:
>> On Saturday, January 4, 2020 at 6:41:31 PM UTC-5, Scott Lurndal wrote:
>>
>>> FOr the most part, that's caused by people who don't RTFM. CFL's weren't suitable
>>> for certain usages (unventilated enclosures, for example) or mounting
>>> orientations (base up, in some cases); Improperly mounted or enclosed,
>>> the ballast electronics would overheat and fail prematurely.
>>
>> But what was an ordinary consumer supposed to do? Standard
>> incandescents were unavailable. We had to stick the CFL in
>> the sealed overhead fixture. (How unventilated could it have
>> been since it had to have air for the hot oldstyle bulb?)
>
> Incandescent bulbs can stand much higher temperatures
> without failing than the solid state electronics used in the CFL ballast, of course.
>
> The ordinary consumer could have troubled themselves to read
> the packaging when selecting a CFL to ensure that it was suitable
> for the desired purpose.

False to fact.

The packaging of CLFs did not contain that information.

Heck, it was hard enough to find the color temperature.

Further, consumers didn't have a choice of lamp beyond
the wattage equivalent.
Re: Office jobs eroding [message #390107 is a reply to message #390073] Tue, 07 January 2020 13:53 Go to previous messageGo to next message
hancock4 is currently offline  hancock4
Messages: 6746
Registered: December 2011
Karma: 0
Senior Member
On Monday, January 6, 2020 at 4:45:55 PM UTC-5, Scott Lurndal wrote:
> hancock4@bbs.cpcn.com writes:
>
>> As to LEDs, the jury is still out in my uses for plain
>> lamp lights.
>>
>> But in flashlights their service life is horrible. I bought
>> a punch of what we used to call penlights. Small and compact.
>> (Though used 3 AAA cells which was awkward). Terrible life
>> and the entire unit had to be discarded.
>
> You know, you get what you pay for. Buy something that wasn't
> designed to last a week and you'll be much happier. I have
> LED flashlights that work extremely well; I didn't get them
> at harbor freight, but rather paid for higher quality.

False to fact.

My plain D cell flashlights were 75c each, lasted for
35 years in rough service and still work just fine.
The LED flashlights lasted about a year sitting around
the house and were expensive. The electronics in them
was crap.

I wasn't alone. They rebuilt a parking lot near by and
put in LED streetlights. Not long after installation
several heads failed and had to be replaced.

I noticed in traffic signals with LED several of the dots
are out.
Re: Office jobs eroding [message #390108 is a reply to message #389691] Tue, 07 January 2020 13:54 Go to previous messageGo to next message
hancock4 is currently offline  hancock4
Messages: 6746
Registered: December 2011
Karma: 0
Senior Member
On Monday, January 6, 2020 at 4:54:09 PM UTC-5, Dave Garland wrote:
> On 1/6/2020 3:20 PM, hancock4@bbs.cpcn.com wrote:
>
>>
>> But in flashlights their service life is horrible. I bought
>> a punch of what we used to call penlights. Small and compact.
>> (Though used 3 AAA cells which was awkward). Terrible life
>> and the entire unit had to be discarded. I still use cheap 25
>> year old D cell flashlights that still work just fine.
>>
> IME the flashlight failures are usually due to crappy switches, rather
> than the LEDs themselves.

No, it was the electronics.
Re: Office jobs eroding [message #390109 is a reply to message #390077] Tue, 07 January 2020 13:56 Go to previous messageGo to next message
hancock4 is currently offline  hancock4
Messages: 6746
Registered: December 2011
Karma: 0
Senior Member
On Monday, January 6, 2020 at 6:05:55 PM UTC-5, Scott Lurndal wrote:

> There is one place where I miss the slow startup of CFL's - the bathroom at night.
>
> When I had the CFL globes in the bathroom, it was much easier on the
> eyes to turn the lights on when getting up in the middle of the night...

I use a nitelight. They are little fixtures that plug into an
outlet and support a 4 or 7 watt tiny bulb. Been around forever.
Very good for the purpose. Just enough light to not stumble,
but not a strain on sleepy eyes.
Re: Office jobs eroding [message #390110 is a reply to message #390103] Tue, 07 January 2020 14:02 Go to previous messageGo to next message
scott is currently offline  scott
Messages: 4018
Registered: February 2012
Karma: 0
Senior Member
JimP <solosam90@gmail.com> writes:
> On Mon, 6 Jan 2020 20:27:02 +0000, Ahem A Rivet's Shot
> <steveo@eircom.net> wrote:
>> On Mon, 06 Jan 2020 11:43:35 -0600
>> JimP <solosam90@gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>>> Which halogens ? They used to be used in stage theaters, probably
>>> still are, to light up the stage.
>>
>> They're getting replaced by LEDs for stage use - long life, fast
>> switching (most stage lighting needs to be faded not switched, LEDs don't
>> care), any colour you want from RGB mixers with no gels to change. It almost
>> makes me wish I was still doing stage lighting instead of seeing it done.
>> Halogens were just coming in last time I ran a lighting rig.
>
> I distinctly remember a dress rehearsal for stage at the university
> where the lighting director and the play director arguing over color
> gels that didn't exist. According to the lighting director.

I've still got my Roscolux swatch book. I worked my way up from
hanging lamps to lighting designer over a four-year period. Last
show was South Pacific; tropical lighting...

>
> I don't miss gels for sure.

LED's have really simplified things; starting back with the Vari-lights
that Genesis (the prog-rock band) invested in back in the 80s. Today,
the LED lamps are all bussed so they can be pointed in any axis and
changed in color via simple computer commands.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vari-Lite
Re: Office jobs eroding [message #390111 is a reply to message #390084] Tue, 07 January 2020 14:02 Go to previous messageGo to next message
hancock4 is currently offline  hancock4
Messages: 6746
Registered: December 2011
Karma: 0
Senior Member
On Monday, January 6, 2020 at 8:25:33 PM UTC-5, J. Clarke wrote:
> On Mon, 6 Jan 2020 13:20:20 -0800 (PST), hancock4@bbs.cpcn.com wrote:
>
>> On Sunday, January 5, 2020 at 2:18:09 AM UTC-5, Dave Garland wrote:
>>
>>> I don't see why people are so down on CFLs (and presumably
>>> conventional fluorescents). Of course they're not suitable for every
>>> application, any idiot can see that. But the "on for hours"
>>> applications (and in the orientation and with the ventilation they
>>> were designed for) they work fine, and usually they were cost
>>> effective otherwise, so long as you didn't need "instant on full
>>> bright" service. Even the cheap Chinese ones. LEDs are better and
>>> cheaper now but weren't available at the beginning, and nobody knew
>>> how long it would be until they were economically effective. Disposal
>>> is commensurate with conventional fluorescents (i.e. inconvenient).
>>
>> I bought some traditional fluorescent 'stick lamps' (the kind
>> you stick over your kitchen sink mounted on the cabinet).
>> I discovered that while they lasted a long time and were
>> efficient, they were not replaceable. Turned out the bulb
>> was unique and not replaceable, so I had to throw out the
>> whole fixture.
>>
>> As to LEDs, the jury is still out in my uses for plain
>> lamp lights.
>>
>> But in flashlights their service life is horrible. I bought
>> a punch of what we used to call penlights. Small and compact.
>> (Though used 3 AAA cells which was awkward). Terrible life
>> and the entire unit had to be discarded. I still use cheap 25
>> year old D cell flashlights that still work just fine.
>
> "Terrible life"?!?!?!? Compared to an incandescent?!?!?!? What did
> you DO to the poor thing?

The cheap D cell flashlights lasted a lot better through
rough service than the LED units that basically sat on a
shelf with limited use.

The electronics in them was crap.




> And how can you stand those horribly dim battery eating incandescent
> flashlights after using an LED that gives the same brightness as the
> incandescent literaly for _days_ or if you are willing to tolerate the
> same battery life as the incandescent ten times the brightness? Of if
> you really need to see turn it up all the way and have 100 times?

LEDs consume power too, and get dimmer over time as the battery
drains.
Re: Office jobs eroding [message #390112 is a reply to message #390105] Tue, 07 January 2020 14:02 Go to previous messageGo to next message
scott is currently offline  scott
Messages: 4018
Registered: February 2012
Karma: 0
Senior Member
hancock4@bbs.cpcn.com writes:
> On Monday, January 6, 2020 at 4:42:04 PM UTC-5, Scott Lurndal wrote:
>> hancock4@bbs.cpcn.com writes:
>>> On Saturday, January 4, 2020 at 2:50:27 PM UTC-5, Peter Flass wrote:
>>
>>>
>>> California suffered disastrous power failures years ago
>>> thanks to foolish ideas.
>>
>> California has _NEVER_ suffered disasterous power failures. Ever.
>>
>> There were brownouts caused by market manipulations, not by any
>> shortage of energy generation capability. Note that the 'brownouts'
>> did not effect the entire bay area (only some 96k customers out of
>> more than 2 million). They certainly cannot be categorized as
>> "disasterous".
>>
>> Please learn about it before writing about it.
>>
>> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/California_electricity_crisis
>>
>> "California had an installed generating capacity of 45 GW. At
>> the time of the blackouts, demand was 28 GW. A demand-supply gap
>> was created by energy companies, mainly Enron, to create an artificial shortage."
>
> The book "Kochland : the secret history of Koch Industries and
> corporate power in America" presents a different view.
>

Please, enlighten us further...
Re: Office jobs eroding [message #390113 is a reply to message #390107] Tue, 07 January 2020 14:05 Go to previous messageGo to next message
scott is currently offline  scott
Messages: 4018
Registered: February 2012
Karma: 0
Senior Member
hancock4@bbs.cpcn.com writes:
> On Monday, January 6, 2020 at 4:45:55 PM UTC-5, Scott Lurndal wrote:
>> hancock4@bbs.cpcn.com writes:
>>
>>> As to LEDs, the jury is still out in my uses for plain
>>> lamp lights.
>>>
>>> But in flashlights their service life is horrible. I bought
>>> a punch of what we used to call penlights. Small and compact.
>>> (Though used 3 AAA cells which was awkward). Terrible life
>>> and the entire unit had to be discarded.
>>
>> You know, you get what you pay for. Buy something that wasn't
>> designed to last a week and you'll be much happier. I have
>> LED flashlights that work extremely well; I didn't get them
>> at harbor freight, but rather paid for higher quality.
>
> False to fact.
>
> My plain D cell flashlights were 75c each, lasted for
> 35 years in rough service and still work just fine.
> The LED flashlights lasted about a year sitting around
> the house and were expensive. The electronics in them
> was crap.
>
> I wasn't alone. They rebuilt a parking lot near by and
> put in LED streetlights. Not long after installation
> several heads failed and had to be replaced.

Whereas my neighborhood switched to LEDs eight years
ago, and there have been no failures in that time acros
thousands of fixtures. Clearly Philly either buys
crap or doesn't know what their doing.

Far, Far superior to the old sodium vapor lamps in every respect.

>
> I noticed in traffic signals with LED several of the dots
> are out.

Better several of the dots than the entire bulb.
Re: Office jobs eroding [message #390114 is a reply to message #390109] Tue, 07 January 2020 14:07 Go to previous messageGo to next message
scott is currently offline  scott
Messages: 4018
Registered: February 2012
Karma: 0
Senior Member
hancock4@bbs.cpcn.com writes:
> On Monday, January 6, 2020 at 6:05:55 PM UTC-5, Scott Lurndal wrote:
>
>> There is one place where I miss the slow startup of CFL's - the bathroom at night.
>>
>> When I had the CFL globes in the bathroom, it was much easier on the
>> eyes to turn the lights on when getting up in the middle of the night...
>
> I use a nitelight. They are little fixtures that plug into an
> outlet and support a 4 or 7 watt tiny bulb. Been around forever.
> Very good for the purpose. Just enough light to not stumble,
> but not a strain on sleepy eyes.
>

Do you really believe that you needed to define 'nitelight'?

I just tap on the scale, which provides enough light to find
the target. The LED on the electric toothbrush is an effective
nite lite as well. In any case, there are LED night-lights
to replace your old 7watt incandescent.
Re: Office jobs eroding [message #390115 is a reply to message #390107] Tue, 07 January 2020 14:14 Go to previous messageGo to next message
Charlie Gibbs is currently offline  Charlie Gibbs
Messages: 5100
Registered: January 2012
Karma: 0
Senior Member
On 2020-01-07, hancock4@bbs.cpcn.com <hancock4@bbs.cpcn.com> wrote:

> I wasn't alone. They rebuilt a parking lot near by and
> put in LED streetlights. Not long after installation
> several heads failed and had to be replaced.
>
> I noticed in traffic signals with LED several of the dots
> are out.

High-power LEDs (or at least their electronics) are getting
better, but I still see some teething problems. The most
common failure mode is for the lights to start flickering;
I've seen this in some warehouse complexes. A few years ago
in our hangar complex, we replaced 8 wall packs - 70-watt
high-pressure sodium lamps - with 25-watt LED units.
The light is much better - white rather than orange - and
I calculated they'll pay for themselves in power savings in
10 years. But two or three of them failed; a couple quit
entirely, while the other one started flashing once a second
in a good imitation of an alarm strobe. I took them back to
the supplier, who replaced them with no questions asked.

Our city has been phasing in LED street lights; I haven't seen
any problems with them. They can only get better from here.

--
/~\ Charlie Gibbs | Microsoft is a dictatorship.
\ / <cgibbs@kltpzyxm.invalid> | Apple is a cult.
X I'm really at ac.dekanfrus | Linux is anarchy.
/ \ if you read it the right way. | Pick your poison.
Re: Office jobs eroding [message #390117 is a reply to message #390112] Tue, 07 January 2020 14:19 Go to previous messageGo to next message
hancock4 is currently offline  hancock4
Messages: 6746
Registered: December 2011
Karma: 0
Senior Member
On Tuesday, January 7, 2020 at 2:03:01 PM UTC-5, Scott Lurndal wrote:
> hancock4@bbs.cpcn.com writes:
>> On Monday, January 6, 2020 at 4:42:04 PM UTC-5, Scott Lurndal wrote:
>>> hancock4@bbs.cpcn.com writes:
>>>> On Saturday, January 4, 2020 at 2:50:27 PM UTC-5, Peter Flass wrote:
>>>
>>>>
>>>> California suffered disastrous power failures years ago
>>>> thanks to foolish ideas.
>>>
>>> California has _NEVER_ suffered disasterous power failures. Ever.
>>>
>>> There were brownouts caused by market manipulations, not by any
>>> shortage of energy generation capability. Note that the 'brownouts'
>>> did not effect the entire bay area (only some 96k customers out of
>>> more than 2 million). They certainly cannot be categorized as
>>> "disasterous".
>>>
>>> Please learn about it before writing about it.
>>>
>>> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/California_electricity_crisis
>>>
>>> "California had an installed generating capacity of 45 GW. At
>>> the time of the blackouts, demand was 28 GW. A demand-supply gap
>>> was created by energy companies, mainly Enron, to create an artificial shortage."
>>
>> The book "Kochland : the secret history of Koch Industries and
>> corporate power in America" presents a different view.
>>
>
> Please, enlighten us further...

It was a whole chapter. Lots of bad decisions, lots of greed.

the book says the situation was so bad they resorted to
rolling blackouts. It made national news and I recall it.
Re: Office jobs eroding [message #390121 is a reply to message #390117] Tue, 07 January 2020 15:23 Go to previous messageGo to next message
scott is currently offline  scott
Messages: 4018
Registered: February 2012
Karma: 0
Senior Member
hancock4@bbs.cpcn.com writes:
> On Tuesday, January 7, 2020 at 2:03:01 PM UTC-5, Scott Lurndal wrote:
>> hancock4@bbs.cpcn.com writes:
>>> On Monday, January 6, 2020 at 4:42:04 PM UTC-5, Scott Lurndal wrote:
>>>> hancock4@bbs.cpcn.com writes:
>>>> >On Saturday, January 4, 2020 at 2:50:27 PM UTC-5, Peter Flass wrote:
>>>>
>>>> >
>>>> >California suffered disastrous power failures years ago
>>>> >thanks to foolish ideas.
>>>>
>>>> California has _NEVER_ suffered disasterous power failures. Ever.
>>>>
>>>> There were brownouts caused by market manipulations, not by any
>>>> shortage of energy generation capability. Note that the 'brownouts'
>>>> did not effect the entire bay area (only some 96k customers out of
>>>> more than 2 million). They certainly cannot be categorized as
>>>> "disasterous".
>>>>
>>>> Please learn about it before writing about it.
>>>>
>>>> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/California_electricity_crisis
>>>>
>>>> "California had an installed generating capacity of 45 GW. At
>>>> the time of the blackouts, demand was 28 GW. A demand-supply gap
>>>> was created by energy companies, mainly Enron, to create an artificial shortage."
>>>
>>> The book "Kochland : the secret history of Koch Industries and
>>> corporate power in America" presents a different view.
>>>
>>
>> Please, enlighten us further...
>
> It was a whole chapter. Lots of bad decisions, lots of greed.
>
> the book says the situation was so bad they resorted to
> rolling blackouts. It made national news and I recall it.
>

Still have no idea what you mean by "Different View". Do they
blame Enron or not?
Re: Office jobs eroding [message #390124 is a reply to message #390108] Tue, 07 January 2020 16:21 Go to previous messageGo to next message
Anonymous
Karma:
Originally posted by: JimP

On Tue, 7 Jan 2020 10:54:04 -0800 (PST), hancock4@bbs.cpcn.com wrote:
> On Monday, January 6, 2020 at 4:54:09 PM UTC-5, Dave Garland wrote:
>> On 1/6/2020 3:20 PM, hancock4@bbs.cpcn.com wrote:
>>
>>>
>>> But in flashlights their service life is horrible. I bought
>>> a punch of what we used to call penlights. Small and compact.
>>> (Though used 3 AAA cells which was awkward). Terrible life
>>> and the entire unit had to be discarded. I still use cheap 25
>>> year old D cell flashlights that still work just fine.
>>>
>> IME the flashlight failures are usually due to crappy switches, rather
>> than the LEDs themselves.
>
> No, it was the electronics.

In my current LED flashlight, I can hear the switch rattling around in
the flashlight. When I press the button on the end of the flashlight
to turn it on, it may not shine with any light. I shake it, it
rattles, and the light may or may not come on.

My older LED flashlights don't do that and work fine.

--
Jim
Re: Office jobs eroding [message #390126 is a reply to message #390084] Tue, 07 January 2020 16:40 Go to previous messageGo to next message
Peter Flass is currently offline  Peter Flass
Messages: 8054
Registered: December 2011
Karma: 0
Senior Member
J. Clarke <jclarke.873638@gmail.com> wrote:
> On Mon, 6 Jan 2020 13:20:20 -0800 (PST), hancock4@bbs.cpcn.com wrote:
>
>> On Sunday, January 5, 2020 at 2:18:09 AM UTC-5, Dave Garland wrote:
>>
>>> I don't see why people are so down on CFLs (and presumably
>>> conventional fluorescents). Of course they're not suitable for every
>>> application, any idiot can see that. But the "on for hours"
>>> applications (and in the orientation and with the ventilation they
>>> were designed for) they work fine, and usually they were cost
>>> effective otherwise, so long as you didn't need "instant on full
>>> bright" service. Even the cheap Chinese ones. LEDs are better and
>>> cheaper now but weren't available at the beginning, and nobody knew
>>> how long it would be until they were economically effective. Disposal
>>> is commensurate with conventional fluorescents (i.e. inconvenient).
>>
>> I bought some traditional fluorescent 'stick lamps' (the kind
>> you stick over your kitchen sink mounted on the cabinet).
>> I discovered that while they lasted a long time and were
>> efficient, they were not replaceable. Turned out the bulb
>> was unique and not replaceable, so I had to throw out the
>> whole fixture.
>>
>> As to LEDs, the jury is still out in my uses for plain
>> lamp lights.
>>
>> But in flashlights their service life is horrible. I bought
>> a punch of what we used to call penlights. Small and compact.
>> (Though used 3 AAA cells which was awkward). Terrible life
>> and the entire unit had to be discarded. I still use cheap 25
>> year old D cell flashlights that still work just fine.
>
> "Terrible life"?!?!?!? Compared to an incandescent?!?!?!? What did
> you DO to the poor thing?
>
> And how can you stand those horribly dim battery eating incandescent
> flashlights after using an LED that gives the same brightness as the
> incandescent literaly for _days_ or if you are willing to tolerate the
> same battery life as the incandescent ten times the brightness? Of if
> you really need to see turn it up all the way and have 100 times?
>

LED flashlights throw a lot of light, but they’re terrible for some
purposes. Try using one to check a sore throat to see how red it is.

--
Pete
Re: Office jobs eroding [message #390127 is a reply to message #390086] Tue, 07 January 2020 16:40 Go to previous messageGo to previous message
Peter Flass is currently offline  Peter Flass
Messages: 8054
Registered: December 2011
Karma: 0
Senior Member
Dan Espen <dan1espen@gmail.com> wrote:
> Peter Flass <peter_flass@yahoo.com> writes:
>
>> Charlie Gibbs <cgibbs@kltpzyxm.invalid> wrote:
>>> On 2020-01-06, Dan Espen <dan1espen@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>
>>>> Joy Beeson <jbeeson@invalid.net.invalid> writes:
>>>>
>>>> > On Sun, 05 Jan 2020 11:36:42 -0500, Dan Espen <dan1espen@gmail.com>
>>>> > wrote:
>>>> >
>>>> >> Personally, I buy re-usable shopping bags.
>>>> >
>>>> > That doesn't stop the accumulation of plastic bags unless you make a
>>>> > real pest of yourself.
>>>> >
>>>> > Well, not even then.
>>>>
>>>> Okay, not clear to me how being a pest has any bearing
>>>> on the plastic bag outcome?
>>>
>>> Sometimes that's what it takes to stop a cashier from loading one
>>> before you can supply your own.
>>>
>>>> I just got one of my shopping bags in my junk mail.
>>>
>>> We just got given a couple by the city in comemmoration of the
>>> new rec centre. They look like they'll last a while.
>>>
>>>> They last pretty long, I've had a few of them for multiple years.
>>>
>>> We have a big one we picked up on a trip to Bonaire in 2009.
>>> It carries a _lot_ of stuff, and shows very little sign of wear.
>>
>> I recently read an article that said reusable bags are no more “green” than
>> disposables, due to manufacturing processes and disposal costs when they
>> finally *do* wear out.
>
> They can't be recycled but they last for years.
> For me, at least 3 or 4.
> I doubt I put more than one bag a year into the landfills.
>
> In that same one year I'd use hundreds of plastic bags.
>
> I wouldn't mind paper bags.
> I haven't seen any in ages.
>

We can get them here, but have to ask. Lately I’ve been using them to take
shredded stuff to the recycle bin.

--
Pete
Pages (8): [ «    1  2  3  4  5  6  7  8    »]  Switch to threaded view of this topic Create a new topic Submit Reply
Previous Topic: 1920 census punched cards
Next Topic: IBM 5100: looking for a ROS control card P/N 1607132A
Goto Forum:
  

-=] Back to Top [=-
[ Syndicate this forum (XML) ] [ RSS ] [ PDF ]

Current Time: Fri Jun 24 21:10:55 EDT 2022

Total time taken to generate the page: 0.03451 seconds