| Re: car charging, was: Adobe oddity? [message #403396 is a reply to message #403388] |
Wed, 30 December 2020 17:08   |
|
|
Originally posted by: Carlos E.R.
On 30/12/2020 21.54, Ahem A Rivet's Shot wrote:
> On Wed, 30 Dec 2020 20:25:32 +0100
> "Carlos E.R." <robin_listas@es.invalid> wrote:
>
>> On 30/12/2020 18.18, Ahem A Rivet's Shot wrote:
>>> On Wed, 30 Dec 2020 11:16:46 -0500
>>> J. Clarke <jclarke.873638@gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>> ...
>>
>>> There are driver reaction time tests that bear this out, drivers
>>> react faster under white LED streetlights than under orange sodium
>>> because they can see more clearly.
>>>
>>> The higher the CRI the better the light is for seeing things -
>>> I'm seriously considering replacing some of my 80 CRI strips with 95
>>> CRI strips.
>>
>> 95? I can hardly get 90% lamps.
>
> These are the ones I have in mind, but there are a lot of 95+ CRI
> LEDs on the market now including some quaint[1] incandescent lookalikes with
> long thin LEDs sort of looking like filaments.
>
> https://smile.amazon.co.uk/MARSWALLED-SMD5630-300LEDs-Daylig ht-Flexible/dp/B07GBQ5MKL/
I have not seen "lots", I have seen "some".
The link says:
* Length: 5M/Reel. LED Emitters (per 5m length):300leds. Lumens:
120-140lm/W. Voltage:DC12V. Power Consumption (per 5m length): 30-60W
(varies depending on power supply voltage and working current). Emitter
Type:SMD5630. Package include: 1 x 5M LED Strip Light (without power
supply)
What it doesn't say is how many Lumens per meter.
The power consumption varies a lot, 30 to 60W just for 5 metres. That's
a lot of variance and a lot of power.
>
> [1] I find it amusing the way each generation of lighting technology starts
> by trying to look like the last before settling down to take advantage of
> not doing so. I've always hated standard light fittings dangling from a
> cable with a shade (that immediately tells you there's a design error)
> collecting dust and always in the wrong place, so this place has long
> glowing strips instead - high light levels without bright spots.
Not a bad idea.
I use led "bulbs" simply because the fixtures are already there and it
is easier to replace the bulbs that the whole lot. Probably true for
many people. When I do replace a fixture, I like flat panels.
--
Cheers, Carlos.
|
|
|
|
| Re: Grid capacity was: car charging, was: Adobe oddity? [message #403397 is a reply to message #403389] |
Wed, 30 December 2020 17:16 |
|
|
Originally posted by: Carlos E.R.
On 30/12/2020 22.08, J. Clarke wrote:
> On 30 Dec 2020 20:31:57 GMT, Charlie Gibbs <cgibbs@kltpzyxm.invalid> wrote:
>> On 2020-12-30, Carlos E.R. <robin_listas@es.invalid> wrote:
>>
>>> There are very few devices that are "powered over the air", and the
>>> amounts of power they get are tiny.
>>>
>>> The oldest is perhaps the "galena radio receiver". Needs an AM radio
>>> station in the vicinity airing perhaps a megawatt of energy.
>>
>> Not that much. The crystal radio I built powered a telephone
>> handset with the signal from a nearby station of only a few
>> kilowatts. Then a station slightly farther away and 100kHz
>> up the dial upgraded to 50 kilowatts and wiped out the original
>> station (my radio's selectivity wasn't that great).
>>
>> I read an article about a self-powered radio with which you'd
>> tune in a powerful local station on one tuner, which just rectified
>> the signal and used it to power an amplifier for a second tuner
>> which pulled in the weaker station you actually wanted to hear.
>
> Crystal radios are actually high tech compared to what Marconi used
> for his first transatlantic signals. He used something called a
> "coherer" that apparently had to literally be hit with a hammer as a
> part of its normal operation.
Correct. The Branly coherer. The hammer thing was automated :-)
<https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/%C3%89douard_Branly>
<https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Coherer#/media/File:Marconi 's_Coherer_Receiver_at_Oxford_Museum_History_of_Science_(cro pped).jpg >
> There is a subset of amateur radio operators who engage in "Crystal
> DX"--seeing how far away they can recieve a signal using a crystal
> radio. On at least one occasion someone in Hawaii has detected
> amateur transmissions from Cuba using such a radio.
Wow.
--
Cheers, Carlos.
|
|
|
|
| Re: Grid capacity was: car charging, was: Adobe oddity? [message #403398 is a reply to message #403392] |
Wed, 30 December 2020 17:27 |
Ahem A Rivet's Shot
Messages: 4843
Registered: January 2012
Karma: 0
|
Senior Member |
|
|
On Wed, 30 Dec 2020 15:27:07 -0600
JimP <chucktheouch@gmail.com> wrote:
> On Wed, 30 Dec 2020 20:12:11 +0100, "Carlos E.R."
> <robin_listas@es.invalid> wrote:
>> On 30/12/2020 17.13, JimP wrote:
>>> Its proven, JP Morgan didn't like it becasue he couldn't charge money
>>> for it.
>>
>> Proven, where? I have not seen it, ever.
>
> A documentary on Science channel about Tesla. They quoted JP Morgan.
It is well known that JP Morgan refused to invest when he
understood that what was proposed precluded any way of charging for the
power delivered and thus any way of paying to generate it.
It is far from clear that what Tesla proposed was possible.
--
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: Grid capacity was: car charging, was: Adobe oddity? [message #403399 is a reply to message #403384] |
Wed, 30 December 2020 17:16 |
Ahem A Rivet's Shot
Messages: 4843
Registered: January 2012
Karma: 0
|
Senior Member |
|
|
On 30 Dec 2020 16:46:59 -0400
Mike Spencer <mds@bogus.nodomain.nowhere> wrote:
>
> Charlie Gibbs <cgibbs@kltpzyxm.invalid> writes:
>
>> On 2020-12-30, Carlos E.R. <robin_listas@es.invalid> wrote:
>>
>>> I believe that wireless energy is just smoke. Can not exist.
>>
>> In general, yes. But Apple seems to have a fairly successful
>> gimmick in their wireless chargers...
>
> AIUI, Tesla's notion was some kined of ELF global standing wave from
> which anyone, anywhere could tap energy, to be replenished at the
> wave-generating source. That (in Tesla's concept) would make distance
> from the source irrevelant but the dimensions of the generating
> antenna a problem.
Right - the key part being that it wasn't an energy source just a
transmission system so it had to be fed with energy with could then be
drawn anywhere with no means of metering or controlling use. It almost
certainly couldn't be made to work but even if it could nobody could be
induced to build it so that they could give power away for free.
--
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: car charging, was: Adobe oddity? [message #403402 is a reply to message #403396] |
Wed, 30 December 2020 18:01 |
Ahem A Rivet's Shot
Messages: 4843
Registered: January 2012
Karma: 0
|
Senior Member |
|
|
On Wed, 30 Dec 2020 23:08:47 +0100
"Carlos E.R." <robin_listas@es.invalid> wrote:
> The link says:
>
> * Length: 5M/Reel. LED Emitters (per 5m length):300leds. Lumens:
> 120-140lm/W. Voltage:DC12V. Power Consumption (per 5m length): 30-60W
> (varies depending on power supply voltage and working current). Emitter
> Type:SMD5630. Package include: 1 x 5M LED Strip Light (without power
> supply)
>
>
> What it doesn't say is how many Lumens per meter.
You can do sums :)
> The power consumption varies a lot, 30 to 60W just for 5 metres. That's
The variance in power consumption is simple - if you power a 5m
length from one end then the drop along the strip will leave it pulling
just 30 watts, but if you power each metre separately then the vast
majority of the drop will be in the resistors where it belongs and you will
get 12 watts per metre so 1440-1680 lumens per metre when properly supplied
and half that when powered from one end of a 5m strip.
> a lot of variance and a lot of power.
Indeed, my kitchen (25 square metres or so) is very well lit by 60
watts of LED strips at a somewhat lower power density of 5W/m. I'm thinking
more in terms of task lighting with shortish lengths of these high CRI, high
output strips.
--
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: Grid capacity was: car charging, was: Adobe oddity? [message #403403 is a reply to message #403344] |
Wed, 30 December 2020 18:54 |
|
|
Originally posted by: Bud Spencer
On Wed, 30 Dec 2020, Ahem A Rivet's Shot wrote:
> On Wed, 30 Dec 2020 15:19:54 +0200
> Bud Spencer <bud@campo.verano.it> wrote:
>
>> We woud have free wireless energy everywhere.
>
> Assuming (for the moment) that he actually could have delivered the
> wireless transmission of electricity there was nothing about free
> generation of electricity.
You see why your thinking is faulty? You are immediatelly talking about
"electricity" when I mentioned "energy" ...
> Reasonable even if the transmission network is free and lossless
> somebody has to pay for the fuel that generates the power and if the
> transmission network provides no means to measure or control usage then
> nobody will pay so effectively Tesla was asking JP Morgan to pay
> everybody's electricity bill.
Every AC-generator in the world "magically" generates your precious
electricity. And no, there is no "energy transfer" happening. It doesn't
matter what is used to rotate the coil ... wind, water, nuclear, fire,
horses ... only in solar power there is direct energy transfer happening.
--
B̵̶̷̢⃨̺̠̐͆̀̈́̾̽U̸̶̷⃨̝͍͓̔́̔̈́̈́͋D⃨ ̸̶̷̫̟̔̀̀̔͛͛
|
|
|
|
| Re: car charging, was: Adobe oddity? [message #403404 is a reply to message #403351] |
Wed, 30 December 2020 19:12 |
|
|
Originally posted by: Bud Spencer
On Wed, 30 Dec 2020, J. Clarke wrote:
> You know, that is something that strikes me as weird. Don't get me
> wrong, I like Greta for standing up for what she believes in and
> admire her ability to get people to listen to her. But in what
> universe does a 15 year old know enough about anything other than the
> life of a 15 year old for their opinion to be worth listening to when
> deciding national environmental policy?
This poor abused girl doesn't "stand up for what she believes" she is
blatantly used by her parents and mad globalists who push this manmade
climate change nonsense. She is a tool nothing more. NOT a "rolemodel"
FFS!
>> Just like those wind powerplants they erect all over to ruin
>> nature.
>
> That actually points out the insanity of the environmental movement.
> One group of greenies agitates to get windmills built and then when
> they start another group of greenies file suit to block the
> construction.
Greenies are same kind of tools as this poor girl mentioned earlier ...
Pushing agenda that is not the one they think. Also you have to remember
that true enviromentalism is not any hippy-lefty-greenie-B$.
And our atmosphere is thermodynamic equilibrium, just like Michael and
Ronan Connoly's studies proves.
We need to take in account Le Chatelier's principle for example ...
But that is true science, which doesn't interest those climate-zealots ...
since there is a CONSENSUS! Which already indicates that it's all
politics.
--
B̵̶̷̢⃨̺̠̐͆̀̈́̾̽U̸̶̷⃨̝͍͓̔́̔̈́̈́͋D⃨ ̸̶̷̫̟̔̀̀̔͛͛
|
|
|
|
| Re: Grid capacity was: car charging, was: Adobe oddity? [message #403407 is a reply to message #403403] |
Wed, 30 December 2020 20:24 |
|
|
Originally posted by: J. Clarke
On Thu, 31 Dec 2020 01:54:10 +0200, Bud Spencer <bud@campo.verano.it>
wrote:
> On Wed, 30 Dec 2020, Ahem A Rivet's Shot wrote:
>
>> On Wed, 30 Dec 2020 15:19:54 +0200
>> Bud Spencer <bud@campo.verano.it> wrote:
>>
>>> We woud have free wireless energy everywhere.
>>
>> Assuming (for the moment) that he actually could have delivered the
>> wireless transmission of electricity there was nothing about free
>> generation of electricity.
>
> You see why your thinking is faulty? You are immediatelly talking about
> "electricity" when I mentioned "energy" ...
That is what Tesla was pushing. If you mean some scheme other than
Tesla's what do you have in mind, specifically?
>
>> Reasonable even if the transmission network is free and lossless
>> somebody has to pay for the fuel that generates the power and if the
>> transmission network provides no means to measure or control usage then
>> nobody will pay so effectively Tesla was asking JP Morgan to pay
>> everybody's electricity bill.
>
> Every AC-generator in the world "magically" generates your precious
> electricity. And no, there is no "energy transfer" happening. It doesn't
> matter what is used to rotate the coil ... wind, water, nuclear, fire,
> horses ... only in solar power there is direct energy transfer happening.
Of course there is "energy transfer". You think that generators
create energy from nothing? You might want to take a thermodynamics
course.
|
|
|
|
|
|
| Re: car charging, was: Adobe oddity? [message #403409 is a reply to message #403404] |
Wed, 30 December 2020 20:42 |
|
|
Originally posted by: J. Clarke
On Thu, 31 Dec 2020 02:12:51 +0200, Bud Spencer <bud@campo.verano.it>
wrote:
> On Wed, 30 Dec 2020, J. Clarke wrote:
>
>> You know, that is something that strikes me as weird. Don't get me
>> wrong, I like Greta for standing up for what she believes in and
>> admire her ability to get people to listen to her. But in what
>> universe does a 15 year old know enough about anything other than the
>> life of a 15 year old for their opinion to be worth listening to when
>> deciding national environmental policy?
>
> This poor abused girl doesn't "stand up for what she believes" she is
> blatantly used by her parents and mad globalists who push this manmade
> climate change nonsense. She is a tool nothing more. NOT a "rolemodel"
> FFS!
I don't see any reason to beat her or anybody else up over this. I
believed a bunch of stupid crap when I was 15 that my parents did not
agree with.
>>> Just like those wind powerplants they erect all over to ruin
>>> nature.
>>
>> That actually points out the insanity of the environmental movement.
>> One group of greenies agitates to get windmills built and then when
>> they start another group of greenies file suit to block the
>> construction.
>
> Greenies are same kind of tools as this poor girl mentioned earlier ...
> Pushing agenda that is not the one they think. Also you have to remember
> that true enviromentalism is not any hippy-lefty-greenie-B$.
>
> And our atmosphere is thermodynamic equilibrium, just like Michael and
> Ronan Connoly's studies proves.
>
> We need to take in account Le Chatelier's principle for example ...
>
> But that is true science, which doesn't interest those climate-zealots ...
> since there is a CONSENSUS! Which already indicates that it's all
> politics.
Interesting researchers. Do they have any street cred in climatology?
|
|
|
|
|
|
| Re: Grid capacity was: car charging, was: Adobe oddity? [message #403419 is a reply to message #403380] |
Thu, 31 December 2020 07:50 |
|
|
Originally posted by: Thomas Koenig
Ahem A Rivet's Shot <steveo@eircom.net> schrieb:
> On Wed, 30 Dec 2020 19:11:21 +0000
> gareth evans <headstone255@yahoo.com> wrote:
>
>> But, talking of hydrogen, how do we get "buckets" of it without
>> having to use a lot of fossil fuels to generate the electricity
>> to separate it from the water?
>
> If you look upthread you'll see the suggestion was to use nuclear,
> solar and wind as the energy sources.
More specifically (not spelled out completely in the
original post) was to use a high-temperature nuclear reactor
to heat up water to something in the 850°C and then apply
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/High-temperature_electrolysis if
you have excess wind / solar power to create hydrogen at
high efficiency from excess electricity.
Of course, it is far from completely developed (which is the
probem with all energy storage schemes up to date). We should
have something going on stream now instead of still searching
for viable technical concepts. Currently, solar and wind are
parasites on the normal generation and may even contribute to more
CO2 emission because reserve power stations which are needed have
_much_ lower efficiencies.
|
|
|
|
|
|
| Re: car charging, was: Adobe oddity? [message #403426 is a reply to message #403404] |
Thu, 31 December 2020 13:29 |
|
|
Originally posted by: maus
On 2020-12-31, Bud Spencer <bud@campo.verano.it> wrote:
> This message is in MIME format. The first part should be readable text,
> while the remaining parts are likely unreadable without MIME-aware tools.
>
> --2739015498-499222764-1609373574=:36173
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed
> Content-Transfer-Encoding: QUOTED-PRINTABLE
>
> On Wed, 30 Dec 2020, J. Clarke wrote:
>
>> You know, that is something that strikes me as weird. Don't get me
>> wrong, I like Greta for standing up for what she believes in and
>> admire her ability to get people to listen to her. But in what
>> universe does a 15 year old know enough about anything other than the
>> life of a 15 year old for their opinion to be worth listening to when
>> deciding national environmental policy?
>
I am somewhat suspicious of Greta. When she came to public focus first,
she was mostly worried about the amount of fruit that was being dumped
from supermarkrts, and the obvious way to lower that was irradiotion,
but the public are suspicious of that.
If I remember correctly, she was sponsored by Lever Brothers at the
time.
--
greymausg@mail.com
|
|
|
|
| Re: car charging, was: Adobe oddity? [message #403427 is a reply to message #403351] |
Thu, 31 December 2020 13:34 |
|
|
Originally posted by: JimP
On Wed, 30 Dec 2020 11:22:37 -0500, J. Clarke
<jclarke.873638@gmail.com> wrote:
> On Wed, 30 Dec 2020 15:02:25 +0200, Bud Spencer <bud@campo.verano.it>
> wrote:
>
>> On Tue, 29 Dec 2020, J. Clarke wrote:
>>
>>> I don't think we should spend VAST amounts of money that we don't have
>>> just because somebody thinks it might "do good".
>>
>> Oh, but we already are thanks to all those climate-zealots like greta and
>> rest of the zombies. Not only that ... western dietary guidelines, all
>> this nondemic nonsense and such are surely coming with a BIG pricetag!
>
> You know, that is something that strikes me as weird. Don't get me
> wrong, I like Greta for standing up for what she believes in and
> admire her ability to get people to listen to her. But in what
> universe does a 15 year old know enough about anything other than the
> life of a 15 year old for their opinion to be worth listening to when
> deciding national environmental policy?
When I was 15 I knew substationaly more about WW2 than my teachers did
in high school. I read books not assigned, but they had lived it.
Maybe they just didn't want to talk about it.
--
Jim
|
|
|
|
| Re: car charging, was: Adobe oddity? [message #403428 is a reply to message #403404] |
Thu, 31 December 2020 13:35 |
|
|
Originally posted by: JimP
On Thu, 31 Dec 2020 02:12:51 +0200, Bud Spencer <bud@campo.verano.it>
wrote:
> On Wed, 30 Dec 2020, J. Clarke wrote:
>
>> You know, that is something that strikes me as weird. Don't get me
>> wrong, I like Greta for standing up for what she believes in and
>> admire her ability to get people to listen to her. But in what
>> universe does a 15 year old know enough about anything other than the
>> life of a 15 year old for their opinion to be worth listening to when
>> deciding national environmental policy?
>
> This poor abused girl doesn't "stand up for what she believes" she is
> blatantly used by her parents and mad globalists who push this manmade
> climate change nonsense. She is a tool nothing more. NOT a "rolemodel"
> FFS!
Climate changes whether you believe it does or not.
--
Jim
|
|
|
|
| Re: car charging, was: Adobe oddity? [message #403429 is a reply to message #403427] |
Thu, 31 December 2020 13:47 |
|
|
Originally posted by: maus
On 2020-12-31, JimP <chucktheouch@gmail.com> wrote:
> On Wed, 30 Dec 2020 11:22:37 -0500, J. Clarke
> <jclarke.873638@gmail.com> wrote:
>> On Wed, 30 Dec 2020 15:02:25 +0200, Bud Spencer <bud@campo.verano.it>
>> wrote:
>>
>>> On Tue, 29 Dec 2020, J. Clarke wrote:
>>>
>>>> I don't think we should spend VAST amounts of money that we don't have
>>>> just because somebody thinks it might "do good".
>>>
>>> Oh, but we already are thanks to all those climate-zealots like greta and
>>> rest of the zombies. Not only that ... western dietary guidelines, all
>>> this nondemic nonsense and such are surely coming with a BIG pricetag!
>>
>> You know, that is something that strikes me as weird. Don't get me
>> wrong, I like Greta for standing up for what she believes in and
>> admire her ability to get people to listen to her. But in what
>> universe does a 15 year old know enough about anything other than the
>> life of a 15 year old for their opinion to be worth listening to when
>> deciding national environmental policy?
>
> When I was 15 I knew substationaly more about WW2 than my teachers did
> in high school. I read books not assigned, but they had lived it.
> Maybe they just didn't want to talk about it.
>
A Lot of people who were involved in wars do not want to talk about
them, and anyway, a lot of what happened has only came out in recent
years, The Enigma machines and similiar things. At the present, much has
beeen made of the Polish Army having taken over a small part of
Czechslovakia at the same time the germans did take over large bits.
--
greymausg@mail.com
|
|
|
|
| Re: Grid capacity was: car charging, was: Adobe oddity? [message #403435 is a reply to message #403390] |
Thu, 31 December 2020 14:03 |
Charlie Gibbs
Messages: 5313
Registered: January 2012
Karma: 0
|
Senior Member |
|
|
On 2020-12-30, JimP <chucktheouch@gmail.com> wrote:
> On Wed, 30 Dec 2020 17:00:46 +0000, Ahem A Rivet's Shot
> <steveo@eircom.net> wrote:
>
>> On Wed, 30 Dec 2020 11:27:47 -0500
>> J. Clarke <jclarke.873638@gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>>> The main reason this hasn't been done is cost. If Starship actually
>>> hits its cost and performance targets that obstacle potentially goes
>>> away.
>>
>> Indeed, if that thing does hit those targets it completely
>> transforms what is feasible to do in space and may well bring microwave or
>> optical (essentially boosters for ground based solar power installations)
>> power satellites into the competitive mix. Asteroids will likely come into
>> the resource picture too. It will also put everyone else out of the launch
>> business (especially if a thousand of them actually get built) - I expect
>> there are cheers in a number of boardrooms every time a prototype Starship
>> (terrible name) blows up unexpectedly.
>
> Painfully terrible name, especially since it isn't a starship, but a
> space ship.
At least it didn't resort to CamelCase, like Virgin's SpaceShipTwo.
--
/~\ Charlie Gibbs | "Some of you may die,
\ / <cgibbs@kltpzyxm.invalid> | but it's a sacrifice
X I'm really at ac.dekanfrus | I'm willing to make."
/ \ if you read it the right way. | -- Lord Farquaad (Shrek)
|
|
|
|
| Re: car charging, was: Adobe oddity? [message #403436 is a reply to message #403429] |
Thu, 31 December 2020 15:03 |
|
|
Originally posted by: JimP
On 31 Dec 2020 18:47:15 GMT, maus <maus@dmaus.org> wrote:
> On 2020-12-31, JimP <chucktheouch@gmail.com> wrote:
>> On Wed, 30 Dec 2020 11:22:37 -0500, J. Clarke
>> <jclarke.873638@gmail.com> wrote:
>>> On Wed, 30 Dec 2020 15:02:25 +0200, Bud Spencer <bud@campo.verano.it>
>>> wrote:
>>>
>>>> On Tue, 29 Dec 2020, J. Clarke wrote:
>>>>
>>>> > I don't think we should spend VAST amounts of money that we don't have
>>>> > just because somebody thinks it might "do good".
>>>>
>>>> Oh, but we already are thanks to all those climate-zealots like greta and
>>>> rest of the zombies. Not only that ... western dietary guidelines, all
>>>> this nondemic nonsense and such are surely coming with a BIG pricetag!
>>>
>>> You know, that is something that strikes me as weird. Don't get me
>>> wrong, I like Greta for standing up for what she believes in and
>>> admire her ability to get people to listen to her. But in what
>>> universe does a 15 year old know enough about anything other than the
>>> life of a 15 year old for their opinion to be worth listening to when
>>> deciding national environmental policy?
>>
>> When I was 15 I knew substationaly more about WW2 than my teachers did
>> in high school. I read books not assigned, but they had lived it.
>> Maybe they just didn't want to talk about it.
>>
>
> A Lot of people who were involved in wars do not want to talk about
> them, and anyway, a lot of what happened has only came out in recent
> years, The Enigma machines and similiar things. At the present, much has
> beeen made of the Polish Army having taken over a small part of
> Czechslovakia at the same time the germans did take over large bits.
True, I did find an English translation of Guderian's book on the
Eastern Front just recently. Not so much informative, but he doesn't
mention several things. Like the gruppen that were not far behind the
lines who murdered people.
--
Jim
|
|
|
|
| Re: car charging, was: Adobe oddity? [message #403437 is a reply to message #403311] |
Thu, 31 December 2020 15:04 |
Peter Flass
Messages: 8375
Registered: December 2011
Karma: 0
|
Senior Member |
|
|
Ahem A Rivet's Shot <steveo@eircom.net> wrote:
> On Tue, 29 Dec 2020 17:24:42 -0500
> J. Clarke <jclarke.873638@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> However since you seem determined to go there:
>> A Level 2 charger, which can bring a Tesla Model 3 to a full charge in
>> about 8 hours, draws 40 amps at 220V.
>
> That full charge provides a range of around 350 miles (a little
> more according to the specs).
>
>> So let's say we're all electric. Say everybody charges their car
>> every night.
>
> Why does everyone suddenly start driving 350 miles a day ? I think
> you'll find that around a tenth of that is a more reasonable daily average.
>
>> 270 million cars times 220v times 40 amps = 2,376
>> gigawatts. US installed generating capacity is HALF that.
>
> Or five times a more reasonable estimate meaning that a 20%
> increase would cover it - which doesn't sound unreasonable even if you
> push it to 30% and have people averaging 50 miles a day.
These days it might even be low. Fortunately, I’ve never been in this
situation, but apparently one-hour or longer commutes are not uncommon
around big cities. Actually I had over an hour commute once for a few
months, from Victor, NY to a temp job in Ithaca. This was a nice drive,
though. No traffic and very pretty scenery.
> All this assumes
> that a Tesla model 3 is the last word in efficiency which I rather doubt
> even if it is among the best today.
>
--
Pete
|
|
|
|
| Re: Grid capacity was: car charging, was: Adobe oddity? [message #403438 is a reply to message #403326] |
Thu, 31 December 2020 15:04 |
Peter Flass
Messages: 8375
Registered: December 2011
Karma: 0
|
Senior Member |
|
|
Ahem A Rivet's Shot <steveo@eircom.net> wrote:
> On Wed, 30 Dec 2020 11:31:07 -0000 (UTC)
> Thomas Koenig <tkoenig@netcologne.de> wrote:
>
>> Nuclear combined with hydrogen generation from excess wind and
>> solar power using steam electrolysis: Much better.
>
> This has much to recommend it in principle but hydrogen storage is
> still tricky and the cycle efficiencies are pretty poor compared with
> batteries. That's before you get to the hydrogen == Hindenburg perception
> problem.
>
Fusion is on the way, real soon now ;-)
--
Pete
|
|
|
|
| Re: Grid capacity was: car charging, was: Adobe oddity? [message #403439 is a reply to message #403331] |
Thu, 31 December 2020 15:04 |
Peter Flass
Messages: 8375
Registered: December 2011
Karma: 0
|
Senior Member |
|
|
Bud Spencer <bud@campo.verano.it> wrote:
> On Wed, 30 Dec 2020, Thomas Koenig wrote:
>
>> Carlos E.R. <robin_listas@es.invalid> schrieb:
>>> On 29/12/2020 22.35, Vir Campestris wrote:
>>
>>>> There just isn't the spare _generation_ capacity in the UK to feed
>>>> widespread adoption of electric cars.
>>>
>>> Install it. Simple.
>>
>> Which kind?
>>
>> Wind / solar: You don't get to charge your car if it is dark and
>> there is no wind (the dreaded "Dunkelflaute") in German.
>>
>> Reserve gas power stations: These emit a factor of two more CO2
>> than combined cycle power stations per kWh (30% efficiency vs >
>> 60% efficiency) because the combined cycle is _slow_ in adjusting to
>> shifting demands. So, if your wind / solar drops, you need those.
>>
>> If using wind / solar / reserve gas actually reduces CO2 emissions
>> vs. combined cycle gas is anybody's guess, from what I have read, the
>> balance is slightly towards more CO2 emission.
>>
>> Nuclar: Probably better.
>>
>> Nuclear combined with hydrogen generation from excess wind and
>> solar power using steam electrolysis: Much better.
>>
>
> And if we would have listened and embraced one Nikola Tesla and his
> brilliance, we wouldn't have the need to thing about these matter. We woud
> have free wireless energy everywhere. But no.
>
> Like jp morgan said to Tesla "If we cannot put meter on it, we renot
> interested!"
>
I worry about wireless energy. There’s now talk about large solar arrays in
orbit beaming power back to earth. People are worried about radiation from
cell phones, what’s the scoop on large amounts of radiation (microwaves?)
being transmitted from space?
--
Pete
|
|
|
|
| Re: car charging, was: Adobe oddity? [message #403440 is a reply to message #403351] |
Thu, 31 December 2020 15:04 |
Peter Flass
Messages: 8375
Registered: December 2011
Karma: 0
|
Senior Member |
|
|
J. Clarke <jclarke.873638@gmail.com> wrote:
> On Wed, 30 Dec 2020 15:02:25 +0200, Bud Spencer <bud@campo.verano.it>
> wrote:
>
>> On Tue, 29 Dec 2020, J. Clarke wrote:
>>
>>> I don't think we should spend VAST amounts of money that we don't have
>>> just because somebody thinks it might "do good".
>>
>> Oh, but we already are thanks to all those climate-zealots like greta and
>> rest of the zombies. Not only that ... western dietary guidelines, all
>> this nondemic nonsense and such are surely coming with a BIG pricetag!
>
> You know, that is something that strikes me as weird. Don't get me
> wrong, I like Greta for standing up for what she believes in and
> admire her ability to get people to listen to her. But in what
> universe does a 15 year old know enough about anything other than the
> life of a 15 year old for their opinion to be worth listening to when
> deciding national environmental policy?
>
>> What comes to electric cars, those things surely aren't good for the
>> environment.
>
> That's actually a good question. They do cut down on emissions while
> in operation, for a variety of reasons, but how energy use in
> construction of them compares I have no idea. My gut says that they
> have about the same environmental signature in that regard as
> conventional cars but my gut may be completely off-base.
Plus the environmental cost of the batteries, which as of now require
open-pit mining for rare earth metals (AFAIK), and then have a disposal
problem.
>
>> Just like those wind powerplants they erect all over to ruin
>> nature.
>
> That actually points out the insanity of the environmental movement.
> One group of greenies agitates to get windmills built and then when
> they start another group of greenies file suit to block the
> construction.
>
>> Just to throw in couple things ...
>
--
Pete
|
|
|
|
| Re: Grid capacity was: car charging, was: Adobe oddity? [message #403441 is a reply to message #403357] |
Thu, 31 December 2020 15:04 |
Peter Flass
Messages: 8375
Registered: December 2011
Karma: 0
|
Senior Member |
|
|
Ahem A Rivet's Shot <steveo@eircom.net> wrote:
> On Wed, 30 Dec 2020 10:14:20 -0600
> JimP <chucktheouch@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> On Wed, 30 Dec 2020 15:13:57 +0100, "Carlos E.R."
>
>>> It is still different than powering any device in the world (or a big
>>> area) from the air filled with "waves".
>>
>> Since I can download gigabytes of software I have paid for 'over the
>> air waves', your claim seems a bit odd.
>
> That says nothing about being able to deliver useful amounts of
> energy over long distances to arbitrary locations (nobody knows any way to
> do this - two out of three applies) and a great deal about the
> sophistication of our data transmission technology.
>
So we need to find a way to compress the energy for transmission, and then
decompress it for use. <g>
--
Pete
|
|
|
|
| Re: Grid capacity was: car charging, was: Adobe oddity? [message #403442 is a reply to message #403360] |
Thu, 31 December 2020 15:04 |
Peter Flass
Messages: 8375
Registered: December 2011
Karma: 0
|
Senior Member |
|
|
Ahem A Rivet's Shot <steveo@eircom.net> wrote:
> On Wed, 30 Dec 2020 11:27:47 -0500
> J. Clarke <jclarke.873638@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> The main reason this hasn't been done is cost. If Starship actually
>> hits its cost and performance targets that obstacle potentially goes
>> away.
>
> Indeed, if that thing does hit those targets it completely
> transforms what is feasible to do in space and may well bring microwave or
> optical (essentially boosters for ground based solar power installations)
> power satellites into the competitive mix. Asteroids will likely come into
> the resource picture too. It will also put everyone else out of the launch
> business (especially if a thousand of them actually get built) - I expect
> there are cheers in a number of boardrooms every time a prototype Starship
> (terrible name) blows up unexpectedly.
>
Do you remember the early days of the US space program? It seemed like more
boosters blew up spectacularly than actually got off the ground.
--
Pete
|
|
|
|
| Re: Grid capacity was: car charging, was: Adobe oddity? [message #403443 is a reply to message #403369] |
Thu, 31 December 2020 15:04 |
Peter Flass
Messages: 8375
Registered: December 2011
Karma: 0
|
Senior Member |
|
|
gareth evans <headstone255@yahoo.com> wrote:
> On 30/12/2020 19:00, John Levine wrote:
>> In article <iocubh-0oh.ln1@Telcontar.valinor>,
>> Carlos E.R. <robin_listas@es.invalid> wrote:
>>> I don't like the idea of massive hydrogen usage. It leaks and is lost
>>> for ever from the Earth, for instance.
>>
>> Hydrogen is indeed tricky to store and transport, but I wouldn't worry
>> about running out. You can find quite a lot of it in the world's oceans.
>>
>> Also, free hydrogen in the atmosphere is not lost. As this article
>> notes, it reacts with oxygen and turns back into water. Are you
>> perhaps confusing it with helium?
>>
>> https://www.caltech.edu/about/news/hydrogen-economy-might-im pactearths-stratosphere-study-shows-722
>>
>
> But, talking of hydrogen, how do we get "buckets" of it without
> having to use a lot of fossil fuels to generate the electricity
> to separate it from the water?
>
They’re working on it. I think some recent work with catalysts can generate
more with less power. Actually, Saudi Arabia and North Africa could be the
titans of hydrogen: limitless free solar power and easy access to oceans
full of water.
--
Pete
|
|
|
|
| Re: Grid capacity was: car charging, was: Adobe oddity? [message #403444 is a reply to message #403385] |
Thu, 31 December 2020 15:04 |
Peter Flass
Messages: 8375
Registered: December 2011
Karma: 0
|
Senior Member |
|
|
Carlos E.R. <robin_listas@es.invalid> wrote:
> On 30/12/2020 21.31, Charlie Gibbs wrote:
>> On 2020-12-30, Carlos E.R. <robin_listas@es.invalid> wrote:
>>
>>> There are very few devices that are "powered over the air", and the
>>> amounts of power they get are tiny.
>>>
>>> The oldest is perhaps the "galena radio receiver". Needs an AM radio
>>> station in the vicinity airing perhaps a megawatt of energy.
>>
>> Not that much. The crystal radio I built powered a telephone
>> handset with the signal from a nearby station of only a few
>> kilowatts. Then a station slightly farther away and 100kHz
>> up the dial upgraded to 50 kilowatts and wiped out the original
>> station (my radio's selectivity wasn't that great).
>
> When I was at school I inherited two or three actual galena receivers
> and headsets. I also built one using an OA91 diode. None worked, the
> nearest AM station was about 50 Km away. I could only hear electrical
> noises when switching on the house lights.
I built one from a kit as a kid, and it worked OK. I remember my father
saying he built one, back when radio was a new thing.
>
> On my first university year at that other city, I tested the receivers
> and they worked, using the metal mesh of my bed as antenna.
>
> Much later they built an AM station at my city, and the three receivers
> work.
>
>
>> I read an article about a self-powered radio with which you'd
>> tune in a powerful local station on one tuner, which just rectified
>> the signal and used it to power an amplifier for a second tuner
>> which pulled in the weaker station you actually wanted to hear.
>
>
> I thought of doing that :-D
>
>
--
Pete
|
|
|
|
| Re: car charging, was: Adobe oddity? [message #403445 is a reply to message #403428] |
Thu, 31 December 2020 15:04 |
Peter Flass
Messages: 8375
Registered: December 2011
Karma: 0
|
Senior Member |
|
|
JimP <chucktheouch@gmail.com> wrote:
> On Thu, 31 Dec 2020 02:12:51 +0200, Bud Spencer <bud@campo.verano.it>
> wrote:
>> On Wed, 30 Dec 2020, J. Clarke wrote:
>>
>>> You know, that is something that strikes me as weird. Don't get me
>>> wrong, I like Greta for standing up for what she believes in and
>>> admire her ability to get people to listen to her. But in what
>>> universe does a 15 year old know enough about anything other than the
>>> life of a 15 year old for their opinion to be worth listening to when
>>> deciding national environmental policy?
>>
>> This poor abused girl doesn't "stand up for what she believes" she is
>> blatantly used by her parents and mad globalists who push this manmade
>> climate change nonsense. She is a tool nothing more. NOT a "rolemodel"
>> FFS!
>
> Climate changes whether you believe it does or not.
>
I’m thinking we’re about one good volcanic eruption away from being back to
worrying about an oncoming ice age.
--
Pete
|
|
|
|
| Re: Grid capacity was: car charging, was: Adobe oddity? [message #403446 is a reply to message #403441] |
Thu, 31 December 2020 15:34 |
Dan Espen
Messages: 3867
Registered: January 2012
Karma: 0
|
Senior Member |
|
|
Peter Flass <peter_flass@yahoo.com> writes:
> Ahem A Rivet's Shot <steveo@eircom.net> wrote:
>> On Wed, 30 Dec 2020 10:14:20 -0600
>> JimP <chucktheouch@gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>>> On Wed, 30 Dec 2020 15:13:57 +0100, "Carlos E.R."
>>
>>>> It is still different than powering any device in the world (or a big
>>>> area) from the air filled with "waves".
>>>
>>> Since I can download gigabytes of software I have paid for 'over the
>>> air waves', your claim seems a bit odd.
>>
>> That says nothing about being able to deliver useful amounts of
>> energy over long distances to arbitrary locations (nobody knows any way to
>> do this - two out of three applies) and a great deal about the
>> sophistication of our data transmission technology.
>
> So we need to find a way to compress the energy for transmission, and then
> decompress it for use. <g>
Given that there's not supposed to be much variation in the signal it
should compress down to almost nothing.
Win/win.
--
Dan Espen
|
|
|
|
| Re: Grid capacity was: car charging, was: Adobe oddity? [message #403447 is a reply to message #403444] |
Thu, 31 December 2020 15:35 |
|
|
Originally posted by: Carlos E.R.
On 31/12/2020 21.04, Peter Flass wrote:
> Carlos E.R. <robin_listas@es.invalid> wrote:
>> On 30/12/2020 21.31, Charlie Gibbs wrote:
>>> On 2020-12-30, Carlos E.R. <robin_listas@es.invalid> wrote:
>>>
>>>> There are very few devices that are "powered over the air", and the
>>>> amounts of power they get are tiny.
>>>>
>>>> The oldest is perhaps the "galena radio receiver". Needs an AM radio
>>>> station in the vicinity airing perhaps a megawatt of energy.
>>>
>>> Not that much. The crystal radio I built powered a telephone
>>> handset with the signal from a nearby station of only a few
>>> kilowatts. Then a station slightly farther away and 100kHz
>>> up the dial upgraded to 50 kilowatts and wiped out the original
>>> station (my radio's selectivity wasn't that great).
>>
>> When I was at school I inherited two or three actual galena receivers
>> and headsets. I also built one using an OA91 diode. None worked, the
>> nearest AM station was about 50 Km away. I could only hear electrical
>> noises when switching on the house lights.
>
> I built one from a kit as a kid, and it worked OK. I remember my father
> saying he built one, back when radio was a new thing.
There was no fault at all with my equipment. There was simply no AM
station near enough or powerful enough at that time.
>> On my first university year at that other city, I tested the receivers
>> and they worked, using the metal mesh of my bed as antenna.
>>
>> Much later they built an AM station at my city, and the three receivers
>> work.
>>
>>
>>> I read an article about a self-powered radio with which you'd
>>> tune in a powerful local station on one tuner, which just rectified
>>> the signal and used it to power an amplifier for a second tuner
>>> which pulled in the weaker station you actually wanted to hear.
>>
>>
>> I thought of doing that :-D
>>
>>
>
>
>
--
Cheers, Carlos.
|
|
|
|
| Re: Grid capacity was: car charging, was: Adobe oddity? [message #403448 is a reply to message #403442] |
Thu, 31 December 2020 15:38 |
Dan Espen
Messages: 3867
Registered: January 2012
Karma: 0
|
Senior Member |
|
|
Peter Flass <peter_flass@yahoo.com> writes:
> Ahem A Rivet's Shot <steveo@eircom.net> wrote:
>> On Wed, 30 Dec 2020 11:27:47 -0500
>> J. Clarke <jclarke.873638@gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>>> The main reason this hasn't been done is cost. If Starship actually
>>> hits its cost and performance targets that obstacle potentially goes
>>> away.
>>
>> Indeed, if that thing does hit those targets it completely
>> transforms what is feasible to do in space and may well bring microwave or
>> optical (essentially boosters for ground based solar power installations)
>> power satellites into the competitive mix. Asteroids will likely come into
>> the resource picture too. It will also put everyone else out of the launch
>> business (especially if a thousand of them actually get built) - I expect
>> there are cheers in a number of boardrooms every time a prototype Starship
>> (terrible name) blows up unexpectedly.
>
> Do you remember the early days of the US space program? It seemed like more
> boosters blew up spectacularly than actually got off the ground.
I thought the Vanguard was really cool looking.
Then it did as you mention,
it blew up spectacularly.
We weren't doing well, so the government made much of the fact that at
least they showed their failures.
--
Dan Espen
|
|
|
|
| Re: Grid capacity was: car charging, was: Adobe oddity? [message #403450 is a reply to message #403438] |
Thu, 31 December 2020 16:25 |
Ahem A Rivet's Shot
Messages: 4843
Registered: January 2012
Karma: 0
|
Senior Member |
|
|
On Thu, 31 Dec 2020 13:04:15 -0700
Peter Flass <peter_flass@yahoo.com> wrote:
> Ahem A Rivet's Shot <steveo@eircom.net> wrote:
>> On Wed, 30 Dec 2020 11:31:07 -0000 (UTC)
>> Thomas Koenig <tkoenig@netcologne.de> wrote:
>>
>>> Nuclear combined with hydrogen generation from excess wind and
>>> solar power using steam electrolysis: Much better.
>>
>> This has much to recommend it in principle but hydrogen storage
>> is still tricky and the cycle efficiencies are pretty poor compared with
>> batteries. That's before you get to the hydrogen == Hindenburg
>> perception problem.
>>
>
> Fusion is on the way, real soon now ;-)
It's still ten years away last I checked.
--
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: Grid capacity was: car charging, was: Adobe oddity? [message #403451 is a reply to message #403443] |
Thu, 31 December 2020 16:50 |
|
|
Originally posted by: J. Clarke
On Thu, 31 Dec 2020 13:04:19 -0700, Peter Flass
<peter_flass@yahoo.com> wrote:
> gareth evans <headstone255@yahoo.com> wrote:
>> On 30/12/2020 19:00, John Levine wrote:
>>> In article <iocubh-0oh.ln1@Telcontar.valinor>,
>>> Carlos E.R. <robin_listas@es.invalid> wrote:
>>>> I don't like the idea of massive hydrogen usage. It leaks and is lost
>>>> for ever from the Earth, for instance.
>>>
>>> Hydrogen is indeed tricky to store and transport, but I wouldn't worry
>>> about running out. You can find quite a lot of it in the world's oceans.
>>>
>>> Also, free hydrogen in the atmosphere is not lost. As this article
>>> notes, it reacts with oxygen and turns back into water. Are you
>>> perhaps confusing it with helium?
>>>
>>> https://www.caltech.edu/about/news/hydrogen-economy-might-im pactearths-stratosphere-study-shows-722
>>>
>>
>> But, talking of hydrogen, how do we get "buckets" of it without
>> having to use a lot of fossil fuels to generate the electricity
>> to separate it from the water?
>>
>
> They’re working on it. I think some recent work with catalysts can generate
> more with less power.
It might make the process more efficient, but you still have to put
more energy into it than you get out of it.
Best summary of thermodynamics that I ever saw: "You can't win, you
can't break even, and you can't get out of the game".
> Actually, Saudi Arabia and North Africa could be the
> titans of hydrogen: limitless free solar power and easy access to oceans
> full of water.
|
|
|
|
| Re: Grid capacity was: car charging, was: Adobe oddity? [message #403452 is a reply to message #403450] |
Thu, 31 December 2020 16:54 |
Peter Flass
Messages: 8375
Registered: December 2011
Karma: 0
|
Senior Member |
|
|
Ahem A Rivet's Shot <steveo@eircom.net> wrote:
> On Thu, 31 Dec 2020 13:04:15 -0700
> Peter Flass <peter_flass@yahoo.com> wrote:
>
>> Ahem A Rivet's Shot <steveo@eircom.net> wrote:
>>> On Wed, 30 Dec 2020 11:31:07 -0000 (UTC)
>>> Thomas Koenig <tkoenig@netcologne.de> wrote:
>>>
>>>> Nuclear combined with hydrogen generation from excess wind and
>>>> solar power using steam electrolysis: Much better.
>>>
>>> This has much to recommend it in principle but hydrogen storage
>>> is still tricky and the cycle efficiencies are pretty poor compared with
>>> batteries. That's before you get to the hydrogen == Hindenburg
>>> perception problem.
>>>
>>
>> Fusion is on the way, real soon now ;-)
>
> It's still ten years away last I checked.
>
I think they’re saying 15 now. In 20 years it will probably be down to 10.
--
Pete
|
|
|
|
| Re: Grid capacity was: car charging, was: Adobe oddity? [message #403453 is a reply to message #403439] |
Thu, 31 December 2020 16:55 |
|
|
Originally posted by: J. Clarke
On Thu, 31 Dec 2020 13:04:16 -0700, Peter Flass
<peter_flass@yahoo.com> wrote:
> Bud Spencer <bud@campo.verano.it> wrote:
>> On Wed, 30 Dec 2020, Thomas Koenig wrote:
>>
>>> Carlos E.R. <robin_listas@es.invalid> schrieb:
>>>> On 29/12/2020 22.35, Vir Campestris wrote:
>>>
>>>> > There just isn't the spare _generation_ capacity in the UK to feed
>>>> > widespread adoption of electric cars.
>>>>
>>>> Install it. Simple.
>>>
>>> Which kind?
>>>
>>> Wind / solar: You don't get to charge your car if it is dark and
>>> there is no wind (the dreaded "Dunkelflaute") in German.
>>>
>>> Reserve gas power stations: These emit a factor of two more CO2
>>> than combined cycle power stations per kWh (30% efficiency vs >
>>> 60% efficiency) because the combined cycle is _slow_ in adjusting to
>>> shifting demands. So, if your wind / solar drops, you need those.
>>>
>>> If using wind / solar / reserve gas actually reduces CO2 emissions
>>> vs. combined cycle gas is anybody's guess, from what I have read, the
>>> balance is slightly towards more CO2 emission.
>>>
>>> Nuclar: Probably better.
>>>
>>> Nuclear combined with hydrogen generation from excess wind and
>>> solar power using steam electrolysis: Much better.
>>>
>>
>> And if we would have listened and embraced one Nikola Tesla and his
>> brilliance, we wouldn't have the need to thing about these matter. We woud
>> have free wireless energy everywhere. But no.
>>
>> Like jp morgan said to Tesla "If we cannot put meter on it, we renot
>> interested!"
>>
>
> I worry about wireless energy. There’s now talk about large solar arrays in
> orbit beaming power back to earth. People are worried about radiation from
> cell phones, what’s the scoop on large amounts of radiation (microwaves?)
> being transmitted from space?
Actually that was talk from the '70s before the Space Shuttle proved
to be as dismal as it was.
Radiation goes to rural areas, tightly focused, no humans in the way
unless someone jumps the fence or flies into the beam. Even flying
into the beam though, microwave is line of sight and the aircraft
structure should provide shielding.
|
|
|
|
| Re: car charging, was: Adobe oddity? [message #403454 is a reply to message #403437] |
Thu, 31 December 2020 16:58 |
|
|
Originally posted by: J. Clarke
On Thu, 31 Dec 2020 13:04:14 -0700, Peter Flass
<peter_flass@yahoo.com> wrote:
> Ahem A Rivet's Shot <steveo@eircom.net> wrote:
>> On Tue, 29 Dec 2020 17:24:42 -0500
>> J. Clarke <jclarke.873638@gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>>> However since you seem determined to go there:
>>> A Level 2 charger, which can bring a Tesla Model 3 to a full charge in
>>> about 8 hours, draws 40 amps at 220V.
>>
>> That full charge provides a range of around 350 miles (a little
>> more according to the specs).
>>
>>> So let's say we're all electric. Say everybody charges their car
>>> every night.
>>
>> Why does everyone suddenly start driving 350 miles a day ? I think
>> you'll find that around a tenth of that is a more reasonable daily average.
>>
>>> 270 million cars times 220v times 40 amps = 2,376
>>> gigawatts. US installed generating capacity is HALF that.
>>
>> Or five times a more reasonable estimate meaning that a 20%
>> increase would cover it - which doesn't sound unreasonable even if you
>> push it to 30% and have people averaging 50 miles a day.
>
Why is it an unreasonable estimate? Usage on electric cars is
different from gas cars. Instead of going to the gas station every so
often, people come home and plug in. So every afternoon every car
that was used for a daily commute will be plugged in and hit the grid.
> These days it might even be low. Fortunately, I’ve never been in this
> situation, but apparently one-hour or longer commutes are not uncommon
> around big cities. Actually I had over an hour commute once for a few
> months, from Victor, NY to a temp job in Ithaca. This was a nice drive,
> though. No traffic and very pretty scenery.
>
>> All this assumes
>> that a Tesla model 3 is the last word in efficiency which I rather doubt
>> even if it is among the best today.
>>
|
|
|
|
| Re: car charging, was: Adobe oddity? [message #403455 is a reply to message #403445] |
Thu, 31 December 2020 16:59 |
|
|
Originally posted by: J. Clarke
On Thu, 31 Dec 2020 13:04:21 -0700, Peter Flass
<peter_flass@yahoo.com> wrote:
> JimP <chucktheouch@gmail.com> wrote:
>> On Thu, 31 Dec 2020 02:12:51 +0200, Bud Spencer <bud@campo.verano.it>
>> wrote:
>>> On Wed, 30 Dec 2020, J. Clarke wrote:
>>>
>>>> You know, that is something that strikes me as weird. Don't get me
>>>> wrong, I like Greta for standing up for what she believes in and
>>>> admire her ability to get people to listen to her. But in what
>>>> universe does a 15 year old know enough about anything other than the
>>>> life of a 15 year old for their opinion to be worth listening to when
>>>> deciding national environmental policy?
>>>
>>> This poor abused girl doesn't "stand up for what she believes" she is
>>> blatantly used by her parents and mad globalists who push this manmade
>>> climate change nonsense. She is a tool nothing more. NOT a "rolemodel"
>>> FFS!
>>
>> Climate changes whether you believe it does or not.
>>
>
> I’m thinking we’re about one good volcanic eruption away from being back to
> worrying about an oncoming ice age.
In a way it would be nice if one happened--either it would bring on
the cooling, or it would dump so much CO2 that whatever we're
producing pales to insignificance.
|
|
|
|
| Re: Grid capacity was: car charging, was: Adobe oddity? [message #403456 is a reply to message #403439] |
Thu, 31 December 2020 16:44 |
Ahem A Rivet's Shot
Messages: 4843
Registered: January 2012
Karma: 0
|
Senior Member |
|
|
On Thu, 31 Dec 2020 13:04:16 -0700
Peter Flass <peter_flass@yahoo.com> wrote:
> I worry about wireless energy. There’s now talk about large solar arrays
> in orbit beaming power back to earth. People are worried about radiation
> from cell phones, what’s the scoop on large amounts of radiation
> (microwaves?) being transmitted from space?
I've read (many years ago) papers that concluded it could be done
with low enough energy density in the beam for it to be safe for birds to
fly through and people to work under. I don't recall anything in there that
suggested that it *had* to be done at that low a power density or that it
might not be more effective/profitable to use higher beam intensities. OTOH
it seems reasonable to design such a system so that people could maintain
the rectenna array without getting cooked and a beam aiming error couldn't
result in a city sized damages claim for parboiled citizens.
--
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: Grid capacity was: car charging, was: Adobe oddity? [message #403457 is a reply to message #403442] |
Thu, 31 December 2020 16:30 |
Ahem A Rivet's Shot
Messages: 4843
Registered: January 2012
Karma: 0
|
Senior Member |
|
|
On Thu, 31 Dec 2020 13:04:18 -0700
Peter Flass <peter_flass@yahoo.com> wrote:
> Ahem A Rivet's Shot <steveo@eircom.net> wrote:
>> On Wed, 30 Dec 2020 11:27:47 -0500
>> J. Clarke <jclarke.873638@gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>>> The main reason this hasn't been done is cost. If Starship actually
>>> hits its cost and performance targets that obstacle potentially goes
>>> away.
>>
>> Indeed, if that thing does hit those targets it completely
>> transforms what is feasible to do in space and may well bring microwave
>> or optical (essentially boosters for ground based solar power
>> installations) power satellites into the competitive mix. Asteroids
>> will likely come into the resource picture too. It will also put
>> everyone else out of the launch business (especially if a thousand of
>> them actually get built) - I expect there are cheers in a number of
>> boardrooms every time a prototype Starship (terrible name) blows up
>> unexpectedly.
>>
>
> Do you remember the early days of the US space program? It seemed like
> more boosters blew up spectacularly than actually got off the ground.
Yep, and it's hardly surprising. Rocket science is pretty
straightforward really but rocket engineering is hairy in the extreme.
--
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/
|
|
|
|
|
|
Members
Search
Help
Register
Login
Home
