Generator Size Based On Average Kilowatt
On Thu, 29 Aug 2013 06:40:22 -0700 (PDT), "
wrote:
On Wednesday, August 28, 2013 1:46:54 PM UTC-4, wrote:
On Tue, 27 Aug 2013 17:50:35 -0700 (PDT), "
wrote:
On Tuesday, August 27, 2013 8:40:35 PM UTC-4, wrote:
On Tue, 27 Aug 2013 16:59:54 -0700 (PDT), "
wrote:
On Tuesday, August 27, 2013 6:26:16 PM UTC-4, wrote:
On Tue, 27 Aug 2013 17:01:17 -0400, "(PeteCresswell)"
wrote:
Per Stormin Mormon:
I'd dare to guess that you get good clean power.
That was another major consideration. I wanted an inverter-type gennie
because of all the computer-type stuff I have.
Aren't they all "inverter type", now?
No, only the most expensive generators are inverter
type. Not the typical 6KW that you buy for $800 to $1200.
The inverter ones I've seen have been 3 to 4X the price
of the equivalent conventional types.
I would have thought that with the cost of electronics falling through
the floor, there was no point in the complications of constant-speed
engines anymore.
The cost of electronics that continues to drop off a
cliff is where you can put ever increasing numbers of transistors on
a small piece of silicon, ie Moore's Law. This inverter stuff needs some of that to control it, but it also needs the much larger power electronics, that hasn't shrunk, needs heat sinks, etc. You
can't put 6KW through a wee little chip.
The cost of all electronics is in free-fall. ...not just
$/transistor.
The prices of all electronic devices are not in a free fall.
Bull****. They have been for forty years.
The large price drops over time are typically
in either new technology
that is initially very expensive and then drops off as it
gets into high volume production, an example being LCD panels.
Or in the application of Moore's
Law, where you can pack more transistors onto a given size
piece of silicon.
Irrelevant. Because one area is falling faster than another doesn't
mean the bottom isn't dropping out of both. The fact is that it's
getting cheaper to process silicon.
|