On Wed, 31 Oct 2012 11:01:45 -0400, Jim Elbrecht
wrote:

I agree. Before the storm I noticed that the State[?] had chained a
generator tot he pole at a very busy intersection.

Seems to me that was a waste of a generator that could have been
better used somewhere else.

You could hide a battery, but that thing was just screaming 'steal
me!'.

A battery is a lot more reliable left unattended.

you could swap out batteries faster than you can refuel a generator.

seems like a good marine battery would last longer than a tank of gas-
and would cost 1/5 of the generator. [this was a 5K or so generator.]

Am I all wrong here? Do traffic lights need more juice than an
inverter could supply? [granted there are 8 lights at the
intersection, but they are LED-- plus the switching equipment]

Might be a question of the kind of voltage. If the traffic system is
set up for 120AC power - probably is - the generator is simpler than
the several pieces you would need for a battery/inverter/charger or
quick change hardware. Got to mount them into some kind of assembly
and wire them somehow and then do it different the next time you use
it for something else. Might have to make the battery change without
interruption or you might lose the synchronization between
intersections.

Multiple use - that same generator can be used to power other things
in other times and places. Battery? Back to having to adapt it to the
load de jure.

More likely the reason - a generator can be drained and stored
indefinitely. If it's quality, it can be rebuilt indefinitely. A
battery needs service even in storage and with the best of care, it's
life is limited.