Jeff Dantzler wrote:

Interesting comments by a former Fed chairman:

NewsMax.com Wires
Friday, June 10, 2005

"Former Fed Chairman Paul Volcker said he doesn't see how the U.S.
can keep borrowing and consuming while letting foreign countries do
all the producing.

It's a recipe for American economic disaster.

On Thursday the Wall Street Journal reported bluntly that
"Mr. Volcker thinks a crisis is likely."

[snip]"

Rest of article he

http://www.newsmax.com/archives/arti...9/161923.shtml

JLD

I believe the theory here is that the US is supposed to be producing and
exporting "intellectual property" with value that will offset the value
of the "hard goods" we import. Unfortunately this is not working since
we are also exporting our capacity to generate "IP" with all of the
overseas outsourcing, and we don't have an exclusive on the capacity to
produce "IP" to begin with.

What we'll end up with is a bunch of lawyers feeding off of each other
in the downward spiral as we end up with no capacity to produce anything
for ourselves and consequently no money to import what we need. We'll
end up rather like the undeveloped parts of the world are now.

Pete C.

"Pete C." wrote in message
...

What we'll end up with is a bunch of lawyers feeding off of each other
in the downward spiral as we end up with no capacity to produce anything
for ourselves and consequently no money to import what we need. We'll
end up rather like the undeveloped parts of the world are now.

Well, here's a guy who agrees with you...or he did g:

"We live in cheap and twisted times. Our leaders are low-rent Fascists and
our laws are a tangle of mockeries. Recent polls indicate that the only
people who feel optimistic about the future are first-year law students who
expect to get rich by haggling over the ruins.and they are probably
right." -- Hunter S. Thompson

Scott Willing wrote:
On Wed, 15 Jun 2005 18:30:40 GMT, (Dave Mundt) wrote:


Greetings and Salutations....

On Wed, 15 Jun 2005 17:29:43 GMT, Richard the Dreaded Libertarian
wrote:


On Wed, 15 Jun 2005 07:36:34 -0700, F.George wrote:

snip
Given the current economic/social/political environment your
concerns are well founded, however I think the primary or basic
problem will not be limited or unavailable [electrical] power,
but rather the more pervasive and dangerous problem of a lack of
spare parts, raw materials and most critical HSS and carbide
tools and blanks.

Whether by design or stupidity, the American
manufacturing/industrial infrastructure is rapidly being
destroyed, primarily by management "outsourcing" and plant
transfer.

Thank you, Chicken Little.

Hum...so you DON'T think it is a problem that America
is losing the knowledge, skills and tools to manufacture
even the basic tools we need to keep society going and the
infrastructure kept up?


Consider the (tongue in cheek of course) upside: We're also exporting
all the toxic aspects of manufacture and mind-numbing, RSI-prone jobs
overseas, where the Chinese and others can gleefully destroy their
corner of the environment and burn through workers without the pesky
EPA or labour standards in the way. Although - if you remember ye
olde "Asian brown cloud" - you might rightly regard this as farting
down a tube, only to have the smell return eventually. It's a small
planet.

Last night on the news there was footage of armed government troops
(police, whatever) forceably "relocating" Chinese farmers. Probably to
make way for another widget factory to feed the Wal-Mart cash export
conveyor.

Ever tried to get through so much as a month -- a week -- without
buying something made in China? Difficult and disturbing.

I try to buy locally produced and supplied goods as much as possible.
Being a Canuck, I look for Canadian-made goods first, then US-made
goods. These days I consider myself lucky to find something made in
the US much less in Canada. However I recently became aware that
countries like the US (dunno about Canada) can set up special regions
in overseas countries that are classified as sovereign extensions of
the homeland.

Mexico -- Maquialldora.

(Sorry the proper term escapes me.) In this way they can
run sweatshops in wire-fenced compounds and legally print "Made in
USA" on the goods produced there.

Don't think so.



If that ain't double-speak, Mr. Orwell, I dunno what is.

-=s



With the trade deficit [current account trade balance]
approaching 2 billion dollars *PER DAY* it does not require a
degree in rocket science or a tarot deck to see that the time is
near when imports by the U.S. economy will be on a C.O.D. or even
a "pre-pay" basis [in gold, not dollars].

Odd, that's not what my crystal ball tells me. ;-)

And that "trade deficit" is the stupidest boogeyman ever perpetrated -
well, at least up in the top five stupid boogeymen - since the
nervous nellies found out that it's a scary buzzword.

Do you even have any idea what a "trade deficit" _is_? It means
we have two billion dollars more per day to spend on their crap
than they have to spend on our crap. That means WE ARE TWO BILLION
DOLLARS RICHER THAN THEY ARE!!!!! PER DAY!!!!!!!!!!

You have a significant "trade deficit" with the grocery store.
How much do you spend there? Maybe $100.00/week? That's a ONE
HUNDRED DOLLARS PER WEEK TRADE DEFICIT with the grocery store.
They don't buy anything from you, do they?

And imagine your employer's trade deficit with _you_! He buys
your labor for, what, $50K, $100K/year? How much stuff do you
buy from him? Your EMPLOYER HAS A SERIOUS TRADE DEFICIT WITH
YOU!!!!!

"Trade Deficit". Pfaugh!

Thanks!
Rich
UT o

While your point may have some validity here, the
major difference is that the money in your examples is
circulating INSIDE the USA. The dollars spent in a
foreign market are dollars that are taken out of the
economy "forever".
As an analogy, if dollars are the life-blood
of the economy, foreign trade is like cutting an
artery.
Now...The fact of the matter is that SOME of
those dollars DO come back in, but, since it is a
DEFICIT, far more are going out than are coming in.
Those dollars have to be replaced in the economy
somehow. One "bad" way is to simply print more
money. While this gets more bucks in circulation,
it also cuts down on the value of each dollar.
We have to remember that the world economy
is more like a war than a cheerful family gathering.
All the countries in the world are jockeying to
gain advantage over the other countries, and, one
way to do that is to drain the cash of one country.
America, although economically large, is
not infinite, and, if we believed we were, we would
be fools. The fact that the dollar has dropped
in relative value on the world market is proof that
the deficits are having their desired effects. Also,
remember that the growing European Union can (and
perhaps already has) become a larger economic power
than America.
Finally, there is the basic problem that
the world, in general, is not a friendly place.
Countries that were our friends are now our
enemies; countries that were our enemies are
now our friends; The only lesson we can
learn from this is that this is likely to
happen again, so, to end up totally dependent
on another country for our major manufacturing
is a stupid thing to do.

Regards
Dave Mundt




--
Will
Occasional Techno-geek

On Thu, 16 Jun 2005 15:43:10 GMT, "Pete C."
wrote:

Too_Many_Tools wrote:

I would agree but an VFD that is unnecessary is a current draw that is
not needed.

Like any system, one needs to plan a workshop as a whole.

At this point, I could go single phase, 3 phase or DC motors on on all
my machines. One of the reasons why I started this discussion was to
make that decision based partially on the experiences of others who
have hopefully gone before me.

TMT

I've been following this thread with some interest and now have some
thoughts and comments to add to it.

I may have missed something along the way, but I don't recall you
specifying what type(s) of alternative energy sources you have
available. This makes quite a difference in determining the best
options.

As an example, if your alternate source(s) provide mechanical power such
as found with water power, wind power, or a solar boiler driving a
turbine or steam engine, then air power could be quite advantageous.

A source of mechanical energy can directly drive a compressor head,
saving the extremely inefficient conversions to electricity and back.
Compressed air is easy and economical to store in large volumes and is
free from the chemical hazards of batteries. Useable service life of
compressed air tanks is much higher than batteries as well.

Wind driven compressor - storage tank - air motors? Could be OK if
one had a really windy site, lots of surplus pressure vessels, and a
plenty of rotor diameter. To get an idea of the diameter versus work
produced, check out the size and pumping rates of Bowjon well pumps.

In addition to the obvious air tools, compressed air can also be used to
power things such as refrigeration if you use the belt driven type
refrigeration compressors.

Mechanical drive all the way to the pump? That would work well with a
large mill, when the wind is blowing, and be as efficient as these
http://www.deanbennett.com/windmills.htm. But in that application
there's the advantage of easy storage for when there's no wind.

Those mechanical energy sources can also simultaneously drive electrical
generators to charge conventional batteries for loads such as lighting.

Which is why the conventional rotor/alternator is so popular with home
power users. Ours is similar to this one
http://www.windenergy.com/whisper_200.htm.

Battery charging for cordless tools is no less efficient that the
charging of your "regular" battery string, as long as the charging is
limited to peak energy generation times.

For the usual home power setup, cordless tools are no more and no less
advantageous than they are on-grid. Unless the power setup is very
small, the double conversion isn't worth trying to work around.

The efficiency of converting DC from your battery string to AC so you
can use conventional appliances is fairly good with modern inverters.
The conversion efficiency also improves when you use a higher voltage
battery string since inverters switching higher voltages at lower
currents will have lower resistive / heat losses.

Solar PV conversion efficiency is incredibly low to begin with and PV
cost is high so if that is your only energy source you really do need to
watch every miliamp.

That depends. On very small systems, it's often true. Our setup isn't
huge, and costs about as much as a medium priced SUV. The idle loads
are about 100 Watts 24-7. That's a waste versus
convenience/practicality issue, and it's a long way from watching
every milliamp.

Of course, even with that inefficiency a solar PV
panel charging batteries for your cordless tools is just fine as long as
it has the capacity to keep up with your usage.

For items like welders that require huge gulps of power it's really
difficult to get away from an IC engine / generator for practicality.

Not necessarily. Home welding tends to be short duration. The hardware
to supply that kind of power is actually affordable, and if one is
designing the power system from scratch for what most would consider a
normal home, then the extra inverter capacity isn't a big deal. In our
case, for the house loads alone we could have gotten away with a
single SW4024 plus a transformer for the 220V loads. Instead we used
dual inverters, which eliminated the need for the transformer, and
provided sufficient power for most anything used in the usual home
shop.

A decent welder / generator can serve two needs and may be the most
practical solution.

Welder generators aren't a good match for backup duty, or even for
backup charging. Their advantage is portability for welding, and
they're only best (in the home power context) when you need high amps
for short periods. For any application that needs longer run times
supplying small loads, something like the Honda EU series is far
better. After a few years of living off-grid, like many others I found
that a DC backup generator that works independently of the
inverter/chargers is nice to have. The one I built drives a $5 scrap
Delco 27SI, and only produces about 2000 Watts. When there's no sun or
wind, we can do nicely on about 4 hours run time per day, at a
charging rate that's similar to when the other sources are on line.

If you've got really good water power available you could probably use
it to drive the head from an engine driven welder. A DC inverter type
welder could probably be modified to accept DC from a large battery
bank, but that would require you to have a fairly high voltage battery
string to be practical.

Like some of the other comments in this thread (line shafts for
instance), that suggestion may be feasible. But unless one has way
more time than money, conventional methods are more practical.

Someone else posted about the differences in energy needs of a shop vs.
home. They had more or less the correct idea, but got their terminology
a bit out of whack. A shop has mostly high peak energy loads at low duty
cycles and a home has mostly low peak loads with high duty cycles. The
total energy consumption over the course of a day could be similar
depending on how busy the shop is.

That was probably me you're talking about, and my terminology was
quite correct for our setup. Occasionally our shop energy use is
higher than for our house, but usually it's the other way around by a
big margin. Normal power tool energy consumption in a home shop is
lost in the noise of an all-electric home's consumption. Welders,
plasma cutters, chop saws, table saws, planers, etc. are all high
power, but relatively low energy because of their short run times.

Keep in mind that we're talking *home* shop here, which I consider to
be small projects by one person. Many off-gridders go the route of
putting a high percentage of their loads onto propane, leaving much
less for the actual power system to do. For them, shop energy
consumption may indeed cause the need for a much larger system, or the
pain and cost of running a big generator. But we're very nearly 100%
solar/wind powered. We don't even have propane, and fuel use for
backup generator and the welder/generator combined isn't much
different than what some folks consume in a season of mowing a big
lawn with a garden tractor.

Here are a couple of my projects from my off-grid shop. I only needed
the engine-driven welder a few times, mostly for its portability.

http://www.citlink.net/~wmbjk/images...als%20only.jpg top 40' of
a 65' free-standing wind generator tower (in progress)
http://www.citlink.net/~wmbjk/images/tower%20top.JPG tower nearly
finished and erected
http://www.citlink.net/~wmbjk/frank.htm cactus transport

Wayne

Pete C. wrote:
What we'll end up with is a bunch of lawyers feeding off of each other
in the downward spiral as we end up with no capacity to produce anything
for ourselves and consequently no money to import what we need. We'll
end up rather like the undeveloped parts of the world are now.

The only poetic justice to this is that legal research is now being
outsourced to India as well.

--
jeff

"Ed Huntress" wrote in message
...
"F. George McDuffee" wrote in message
...

"Desperate situations demand desperate remedies" is a time-proven
adage. Given the disastrous impact that the cascading failures of
these major players will have on the U.S. economy/society, I
propose a "super bankruptcy court" be created to establish the
likely economic viability of these organizations, with immediate
liquidation (Chapt. 7) [not reorganization (Chapt. 11)] of those
unlikely to survive, with a 10 year suspension from any
management position of the current and previous corporate
executives and directors. (The stockholders have already lost
all their equity, although they might not yet realize this.)

The PBGC should have priority claim on any assets for full
pension funding, and any trust-fund/lockboxes established for
management retirement benefits and/or "differed compensation"
should be recaptured on the basis that this was an attempt to
conceal corporate assets.

The choice is not between a "good" and better" solution, but
between a "bad" and a "worse" solution.

Jeez, you're brutal. g I'm going to wait to hear if John has a solution
that's less drastic.


Let me offer you a little encouragement in the interim Ed. 65 million
dollars per year worth of manufacturing will be back in the US from Korea
beginning in October of this year and the customer involved will be able to
reduce their price, improve their margin and put a little sugar on it for me
and my guys. The meeting ended an hour ago and before you ask me where we
found the capacity let me just tell you that we did, and we did it without
pushing any capacity envelopes.

I realize this is a small sum in the grand scheme of things but you know
what they say -it does add up. I also have to say that pulling something
like this off is better than sex -it lasts longer as well. I will probably
be bouncin' off the ceiling for a day or two at least.

--
John R. Carroll
Machining Solution Software, Inc.
Los Angeles San Francisco
www.machiningsolution.com

wmbjk wrote:

On Thu, 16 Jun 2005 15:43:10 GMT, "Pete C."
wrote:

Too_Many_Tools wrote:

I would agree but an VFD that is unnecessary is a current draw that is
not needed.

Like any system, one needs to plan a workshop as a whole.

At this point, I could go single phase, 3 phase or DC motors on on all
my machines. One of the reasons why I started this discussion was to
make that decision based partially on the experiences of others who
have hopefully gone before me.

TMT

I've been following this thread with some interest and now have some
thoughts and comments to add to it.

I may have missed something along the way, but I don't recall you
specifying what type(s) of alternative energy sources you have
available. This makes quite a difference in determining the best
options.

As an example, if your alternate source(s) provide mechanical power such
as found with water power, wind power, or a solar boiler driving a
turbine or steam engine, then air power could be quite advantageous.

A source of mechanical energy can directly drive a compressor head,
saving the extremely inefficient conversions to electricity and back.
Compressed air is easy and economical to store in large volumes and is
free from the chemical hazards of batteries. Useable service life of
compressed air tanks is much higher than batteries as well.

Wind driven compressor - storage tank - air motors? Could be OK if
one had a really windy site, lots of surplus pressure vessels, and a
plenty of rotor diameter. To get an idea of the diameter versus work
produced, check out the size and pumping rates of Bowjon well pumps.

Should be comparable or better efficiency than a wind driven generator
charging batteries. In either case you're capturing and storing the
intermittently produced power for later use and a more convenient rate.
A compressor powered by water or a solar steam generator would work well
also.

Various electric utilities have been experimenting with compressed air
storage as a way to store power from excess generating capacity during
off peak times for use later during the peak times. They also do this
with pumped hydro, but CAS is far more practical than pumped hydro in a
homepower environment.


In addition to the obvious air tools, compressed air can also be used to
power things such as refrigeration if you use the belt driven type
refrigeration compressors.

Mechanical drive all the way to the pump? That would work well with a
large mill, when the wind is blowing, and be as efficient as these
http://www.deanbennett.com/windmills.htm. But in that application
there's the advantage of easy storage for when there's no wind.

No, not mechanically driven. The refrigeration compressor would be belt
driven from an air motor. The thermostat simply opens the air valve when
it needs to spin up the compressor. Again the ultimate source of power
does not have to be wind, and in fact with CAS it's even easier to
combine energy captured from multiple sources. No need to worry about
charge controllers when you're simply pumping air into a big tank.


Those mechanical energy sources can also simultaneously drive electrical
generators to charge conventional batteries for loads such as lighting.

Which is why the conventional rotor/alternator is so popular with home
power users. Ours is similar to this one
http://www.windenergy.com/whisper_200.htm.

The point is that batteries can only accept a charge at a certain rate,
potentially wasting captured energy during peaks. There is no such
limitation with an air tank, unless it's already at max capacity. Air
tanks are also a lot less expensive and lower maintenance than battery
strings. By combining both an electrical generator and an air compressor
on the wind plant you can better capture peak output.

The efficiency of directly utilizing the energy of the compressed air
for mechanical applications is also higher. Instead of capturing wind
energy, converting to electricity, storing in a battery, converting to
AC, converting to mechanical energy with a motor, converting to
compressed air with a compressor coupled to the motor and then utilizing
the compresses air to fire your nail gun, you eliminate four conversion
steps.


Battery charging for cordless tools is no less efficient that the
charging of your "regular" battery string, as long as the charging is
limited to peak energy generation times.

For the usual home power setup, cordless tools are no more and no less
advantageous than they are on-grid. Unless the power setup is very
small, the double conversion isn't worth trying to work around.

I know, but someone posted elsewhere in the thread that charging
cordless tools was horrifically inefficient.


The efficiency of converting DC from your battery string to AC so you
can use conventional appliances is fairly good with modern inverters.
The conversion efficiency also improves when you use a higher voltage
battery string since inverters switching higher voltages at lower
currents will have lower resistive / heat losses.

Solar PV conversion efficiency is incredibly low to begin with and PV
cost is high so if that is your only energy source you really do need to
watch every miliamp.

That depends. On very small systems, it's often true. Our setup isn't
huge, and costs about as much as a medium priced SUV. The idle loads
are about 100 Watts 24-7. That's a waste versus
convenience/practicality issue, and it's a long way from watching
every milliamp.

This is where you really need the hybrid system. You run the inverter to
power your conventional appliances. When you are not running the
appliances you turn the inverter off. You run your lighting and TV and
whatnot that are your much higher duty cycle items from DC and avoid the
conversion.


Of course, even with that inefficiency a solar PV
panel charging batteries for your cordless tools is just fine as long as
it has the capacity to keep up with your usage.

For items like welders that require huge gulps of power it's really
difficult to get away from an IC engine / generator for practicality.

Not necessarily. Home welding tends to be short duration. The hardware
to supply that kind of power is actually affordable, and if one is
designing the power system from scratch for what most would consider a
normal home, then the extra inverter capacity isn't a big deal. In our
case, for the house loads alone we could have gotten away with a
single SW4024 plus a transformer for the 220V loads. Instead we used
dual inverters, which eliminated the need for the transformer, and
provided sufficient power for most anything used in the usual home
shop.

Perhaps your home welding is less than mine. I've got a Miller
Syncrowave 250 that I love and it can see quite a bit of use on project
weekends. I'm thinking your inverters would gag at the 240v 100a gulps
the Syncrowave takes, even if the typical gulp is only about 10 seconds
duration. On a big project those 10 second gulps add up to quite a few
minutes.

I'm on-grid, but having recently moved to an area with much better solar
and wind potential I'm investigating options to take advantage of those
sources.


A decent welder / generator can serve two needs and may be the most
practical solution.

Welder generators aren't a good match for backup duty, or even for
backup charging. Their advantage is portability for welding, and
they're only best (in the home power context) when you need high amps
for short periods. For any application that needs longer run times
supplying small loads, something like the Honda EU series is far
better. After a few years of living off-grid, like many others I found
that a DC backup generator that works independently of the
inverter/chargers is nice to have. The one I built drives a $5 scrap
Delco 27SI, and only produces about 2000 Watts. When there's no sun or
wind, we can do nicely on about 4 hours run time per day, at a
charging rate that's similar to when the other sources are on line.

I didn't really intend the welder / generator to be used for backup to
the regular power system. I really meant it more as an option for
powering larger shop tools.

If you want to make it a bit more efficient in this capacity you can
build an automatic transfer switch so that when you are not drawing a
load from the generator to operate say a 5 hp table saw, the capacity
can be diverted to a charger to add some extra power to your regular
battery string.


If you've got really good water power available you could probably use
it to drive the head from an engine driven welder. A DC inverter type
welder could probably be modified to accept DC from a large battery
bank, but that would require you to have a fairly high voltage battery
string to be practical.

Like some of the other comments in this thread (line shafts for
instance), that suggestion may be feasible. But unless one has way
more time than money, conventional methods are more practical.

Modifying a DC inverter welder which are pretty inexpensive these days
is likely the most efficient way to get quality welding capacity from a
home power system. No line shaft required, and no need for oversized
inverters or load shedding.


Someone else posted about the differences in energy needs of a shop vs.
home. They had more or less the correct idea, but got their terminology
a bit out of whack. A shop has mostly high peak energy loads at low duty
cycles and a home has mostly low peak loads with high duty cycles. The
total energy consumption over the course of a day could be similar
depending on how busy the shop is.

That was probably me you're talking about, and my terminology was
quite correct for our setup. Occasionally our shop energy use is
higher than for our house, but usually it's the other way around by a
big margin. Normal power tool energy consumption in a home shop is
lost in the noise of an all-electric home's consumption. Welders,
plasma cutters, chop saws, table saws, planers, etc. are all high
power, but relatively low energy because of their short run times.

Shop = big gulps, house = long sips :)


Keep in mind that we're talking *home* shop here, which I consider to
be small projects by one person. Many off-gridders go the route of
putting a high percentage of their loads onto propane, leaving much
less for the actual power system to do. For them, shop energy
consumption may indeed cause the need for a much larger system, or the
pain and cost of running a big generator. But we're very nearly 100%
solar/wind powered. We don't even have propane, and fuel use for
backup generator and the welder/generator combined isn't much
different than what some folks consume in a season of mowing a big
lawn with a garden tractor.

Well, my home shop which is just for me, includes a Bridgeport mill, a
metal lathe, the big honkin' TIG welder mentioned earlier, a CNC router,
60gal compressor, 10" table saw, an electric forklift and a host of
smaller items like sawsalls and grinders.

This is of course partly attributable to my preference for metal
projects which tend to require bigger tools and more power tools than
woodworking.


Here are a couple of my projects from my off-grid shop. I only needed
the engine-driven welder a few times, mostly for its portability.

http://www.citlink.net/~wmbjk/images...als%20only.jpg top 40' of
a 65' free-standing wind generator tower (in progress)
http://www.citlink.net/~wmbjk/images/tower%20top.JPG tower nearly
finished and erected
http://www.citlink.net/~wmbjk/frank.htm cactus transport

Wayne

Nice projects. Someday I'd like to do that. Somehow it seems to cost
more to live self sufficient off-grid than it does to just pay the
utilities...

Just out of curiosity how do you make a living?

Pete C.

On Thu, 16 Jun 2005 10:56:39 -0700, F. George McDuffee
wrote:

snip
How about making the share holders liable for the debt. They are after all
"owners" of the companies :-)
snip
This simply echos a legal fiction. In fact 'shareholders' have
almost no control, otherwise the corporations would have been
forced to declare dividends rather than hording cash, and the
executives would have received human salaries. While there is
more than ample "blame" to go around, the major enablers were the
financial institutions that handled the IPOs, made the loans,
audited the books, created the "special purpose entities,"
managed the pension funds, etc. As such, these should be the
people that get the big "hair cut" [like down to their knees]
rather than the employees or taxpayers [who tend to be the
shareholders when the music stops].

The neocons have a planned fix for this.
Default on Social Security (worthless junk bonds, like
T bills) and force the new money into stocks & T bills ...
where, if needed (and it will), it is all handy to be taxed again ....

Australia used to tax unrealized capital gains. Stock went up?
Pay taxes on it ... they still may for all I know .....
--
Cliff

On Thu, 16 Jun 2005 21:29:02 GMT, the opaque "J. R. Carroll"
spake:

Let me offer you a little encouragement in the interim Ed. 65 million
dollars per year worth of manufacturing will be back in the US from Korea
beginning in October of this year and the customer involved will be able to
reduce their price, improve their margin and put a little sugar on it for me
and my guys. The meeting ended an hour ago and before you ask me where we
found the capacity let me just tell you that we did, and we did it without
pushing any capacity envelopes.

Kudos for bringin' it on home, J.R. That's great.


I realize this is a small sum in the grand scheme of things but you know
what they say -it does add up. I also have to say that pulling something
like this off is better than sex -it lasts longer as well. I will probably
be bouncin' off the ceiling for a day or two at least.

Congrats again, John!


-------------------------------------------
Crapsman tools are their own punishment
http://diversify.com Comprehensive Website Design
================================================== ====

On Thu, 16 Jun 2005 09:30:54 -0700, "Ulysses"
wrote:


"Scott Willing" wrote in message
.. .
On 15 Jun 2005 11:36:20 -0700, "Too_Many_Tools"
wrote:

Thanks for the reply.


I started out at 12V primary by virtue of buying a house with an
existing PV system. Like many frontier homebrew systems, it had
started as a purely DC system to which an inverter was added later.

Having no plumbing in the house, I've acquired a number of small 12V
pumps for various specific purposes, such as our bucket shower.

Just curious, but how do you go to the bathroom? Composting toilet?

Yes and no. :-) We have a simple sawdust bucket toilet that sits
beside a commercial composting toilet, now retired. I'm going to tear
out the latter and build a nicer bucket toilet when the time is
available.

Long story, but the commercial toilet is, IMHO, a waste of money.
(Fortunately, wasn't my decision; came with the house.) A bucket
toilet is superior to it in every way.

Most so-called composting toilets, including this one, are actually
evaporating toilets and don't compost per se.

Outhouse?

There are two of those here, also retired.

We have shallow groundwater, and an outhouse is an potentially nasty
polluter. Actually septic systems can be just as bad - so many people
manage to pollute their wells with those too. Above-ground aerobic
composting is the way to go IMHO.

-=s

"J. R. Carroll" wrote in message
...
Let me offer you a little encouragement in the interim Ed. 65 million
dollars per year worth of manufacturing will be back in the US from Korea
beginning in October of this year and the customer involved will be able
to
reduce their price, improve their margin and put a little sugar on it for
me
and my guys.

That's great news, John! When you get to it, let us know how general you
think this approach can be for the rest of us. g

--
Ed Huntress

On Thu, 16 Jun 2005 16:00:07 -0400, WillR
wrote:

Scott Willing wrote:
On Wed, 15 Jun 2005 18:30:40 GMT, (Dave Mundt) wrote:


Greetings and Salutations....

On Wed, 15 Jun 2005 17:29:43 GMT, Richard the Dreaded Libertarian
wrote:


On Wed, 15 Jun 2005 07:36:34 -0700, F.George wrote:

snip
Given the current economic/social/political environment your
concerns are well founded, however I think the primary or basic
problem will not be limited or unavailable [electrical] power,
but rather the more pervasive and dangerous problem of a lack of
spare parts, raw materials and most critical HSS and carbide
tools and blanks.

Whether by design or stupidity, the American
manufacturing/industrial infrastructure is rapidly being
destroyed, primarily by management "outsourcing" and plant
transfer.

Thank you, Chicken Little.

Hum...so you DON'T think it is a problem that America
is losing the knowledge, skills and tools to manufacture
even the basic tools we need to keep society going and the
infrastructure kept up?


Consider the (tongue in cheek of course) upside: We're also exporting
all the toxic aspects of manufacture and mind-numbing, RSI-prone jobs
overseas, where the Chinese and others can gleefully destroy their
corner of the environment and burn through workers without the pesky
EPA or labour standards in the way. Although - if you remember ye
olde "Asian brown cloud" - you might rightly regard this as farting
down a tube, only to have the smell return eventually. It's a small
planet.

Last night on the news there was footage of armed government troops
(police, whatever) forceably "relocating" Chinese farmers. Probably to
make way for another widget factory to feed the Wal-Mart cash export
conveyor.

Ever tried to get through so much as a month -- a week -- without
buying something made in China? Difficult and disturbing.

I try to buy locally produced and supplied goods as much as possible.
Being a Canuck, I look for Canadian-made goods first, then US-made
goods. These days I consider myself lucky to find something made in
the US much less in Canada. However I recently became aware that
countries like the US (dunno about Canada) can set up special regions
in overseas countries that are classified as sovereign extensions of
the homeland.

Mexico -- Maquialldora.

(Sorry the proper term escapes me.) In this way they can
run sweatshops in wire-fenced compounds and legally print "Made in
USA" on the goods produced there.

Don't think so.

From: http://www.thehoya.com/news/031700/news6.htm


Students and faculty gathered Wednesday evening to hear Chie Abad, a
former Saipan sweatshop worker, speak about the conditions of offshore
garment factories as well as discuss the political ramifications of
sweatshop labor.

Abad, a Filipino accountant, found work in a factory on the small
island of Saipan in the Mariana Islands, located in the South Pacific.
Abad worked for a Korean contract company, producing clothing for Gap,
Inc. and collegiate apparel. Since Saipan is a protectorate of the
United States similar to Puerto Rico, manufacturers who purchase
manufactured goods in Saipan may use a label claiming "Made in USA."
However, U.S. labor laws are not enforced on the island, according to
Abad.


This isn't even quite as extreme as the example I was thinking of.
I'll see if I can dig up another cite, but I think it's probably in a
magazine here so don't hold your breath.

BTW, a related article mentions Rep Tom Delay was working dilligently
to ensure that US labour laws wouldn't be enforced there.

-=s




If that ain't double-speak, Mr. Orwell, I dunno what is.

-=s



With the trade deficit [current account trade balance]
approaching 2 billion dollars *PER DAY* it does not require a
degree in rocket science or a tarot deck to see that the time is
near when imports by the U.S. economy will be on a C.O.D. or even
a "pre-pay" basis [in gold, not dollars].

Odd, that's not what my crystal ball tells me. ;-)

And that "trade deficit" is the stupidest boogeyman ever perpetrated -
well, at least up in the top five stupid boogeymen - since the
nervous nellies found out that it's a scary buzzword.

Do you even have any idea what a "trade deficit" _is_? It means
we have two billion dollars more per day to spend on their crap
than they have to spend on our crap. That means WE ARE TWO BILLION
DOLLARS RICHER THAN THEY ARE!!!!! PER DAY!!!!!!!!!!

You have a significant "trade deficit" with the grocery store.
How much do you spend there? Maybe $100.00/week? That's a ONE
HUNDRED DOLLARS PER WEEK TRADE DEFICIT with the grocery store.
They don't buy anything from you, do they?

And imagine your employer's trade deficit with _you_! He buys
your labor for, what, $50K, $100K/year? How much stuff do you
buy from him? Your EMPLOYER HAS A SERIOUS TRADE DEFICIT WITH
YOU!!!!!

"Trade Deficit". Pfaugh!

Thanks!
Rich
UT o

While your point may have some validity here, the
major difference is that the money in your examples is
circulating INSIDE the USA. The dollars spent in a
foreign market are dollars that are taken out of the
economy "forever".
As an analogy, if dollars are the life-blood
of the economy, foreign trade is like cutting an
artery.
Now...The fact of the matter is that SOME of
those dollars DO come back in, but, since it is a
DEFICIT, far more are going out than are coming in.
Those dollars have to be replaced in the economy
somehow. One "bad" way is to simply print more
money. While this gets more bucks in circulation,
it also cuts down on the value of each dollar.
We have to remember that the world economy
is more like a war than a cheerful family gathering.
All the countries in the world are jockeying to
gain advantage over the other countries, and, one
way to do that is to drain the cash of one country.
America, although economically large, is
not infinite, and, if we believed we were, we would
be fools. The fact that the dollar has dropped
in relative value on the world market is proof that
the deficits are having their desired effects. Also,
remember that the growing European Union can (and
perhaps already has) become a larger economic power
than America.
Finally, there is the basic problem that
the world, in general, is not a friendly place.
Countries that were our friends are now our
enemies; countries that were our enemies are
now our friends; The only lesson we can
learn from this is that this is likely to
happen again, so, to end up totally dependent
on another country for our major manufacturing
is a stupid thing to do.

Regards
Dave Mundt

In article ,
Cliff wrote:

Found a live one, eh?
One day they will demand their VALUE back ...... as promised
by that paper ....

Then those taxes will ......
--
Cliff

Naw, we will just Nationalize their Dept, just like they did with
ours, years ago....Payback is a bitch...isn't it.....
Remeber the Red chineese never did pay us back for WWII........


Me

Me wrote:
In article ,
Cliff wrote:

Found a live one, eh?
One day they will demand their VALUE back ...... as promised
by that paper ....

Then those taxes will ......
--
Cliff

Naw, we will just Nationalize their Dept, just like they did with
ours, years ago....Payback is a bitch...isn't it.....
Remeber the Red chineese never did pay us back for WWII........


Me

You think? It was the Nationalist Chinese we assisted in WWII, not the
Reds. IIRC, Mao and buddies didn't take over until '49, at which time
the Nationalists boogied to Formosa (aka Taiwan). The Reds have never
owed us anything but a hard time, in their philosophy, which they have
given us time after time.

On Thu, 16 Jun 2005 20:19:43 -0500, Scott Willing
wrote:

This isn't even quite as extreme as the example I was thinking of.
I'll see if I can dig up another cite, but I think it's probably in a
magazine here so don't hold your breath.

USA is an island in Japan.

BTW, a related article mentions Rep Tom Delay was working dilligently
to ensure that US labour laws wouldn't be enforced there.

IIRC He also has part ownership ...
--
Cliff

Actually the US worked with both the Nationalists and the Communists during
WWII. The Chinese Communists were very helpful during WWII. The
Nationalist government, army and police were largely corrupt while the
Communist were much better disciplined and effective at fighting the
Japanese. That is also why it was so easy for them to chase the
Nationalists off the mainland. We supplied them with quite a bit of arms
and equipment. The communists returned any escaped POWs to US units while
the nationalist were just as likely to give them back to the Japanese if the
money was right.

It was only after the war when the Communists started gaining ground and Mao
aligned himself closer to Stalin that we started getting nervous.

--
Glenn Ashmore

I'm building a 45' cutter in strip/composite. Watch my progress (or lack
there of) at: http://www.rutuonline.com
Shameless Commercial Division: http://www.spade-anchor-us.com

"Charlie Self" wrote in message

You think? It was the Nationalist Chinese we assisted in WWII, not the
Reds. IIRC, Mao and buddies didn't take over until '49, at which time
the Nationalists boogied to Formosa (aka Taiwan). The Reds have never
owed us anything but a hard time, in their philosophy, which they have
given us time after time.

On Thu, 16 Jun 2005 21:55:15 GMT, "Pete C."
wrote:


compressed air storage Should be comparable or better efficiency than a wind driven generator
charging batteries.

Perhaps in some niches... but in any event a practical home power
setup needs some batteries, and charging them with wind, assuming
there's wind to harvest, is highly recommended. So you're talking
about *adding* systems because you believe it's worth the trouble, but
you haven't supplied any numbers or examples to back up your position.

They also do this
with pumped hydro, but CAS is far more practical than pumped hydro in a
homepower environment.

But both are less practical than batteries.

No, not mechanically driven. The refrigeration compressor would be belt
driven from an air motor. The thermostat simply opens the air valve when
it needs to spin up the compressor. Again the ultimate source of power
does not have to be wind, and in fact with CAS it's even easier to
combine energy captured from multiple sources. No need to worry about
charge controllers when you're simply pumping air into a big tank.

How big a tank? I think you're going to find a fly in the ointment
once you run some numbers on air consumption. And if air power could
be so efficient and practical, why do you believe it is that
off-gridders, often known to be innovative and unafraid of breaking
with convention, haven't flocked to the concept?

The point is that batteries can only accept a charge at a certain rate,
potentially wasting captured energy during peaks.

There's isn't any peak power wasting problem that I'm aware of with
home power systems, since the cost of generating prevents people from
buying excess capacity. Can you give an example of the problem you're
citing?

The efficiency of directly utilizing the energy of the compressed air
for mechanical applications is also higher. Instead of capturing wind
energy, converting to electricity, storing in a battery, converting to
AC, converting to mechanical energy with a motor, converting to
compressed air with a compressor coupled to the motor and then utilizing
the compresses air to fire your nail gun, you eliminate four conversion
steps.

You left out the AC to DC conversion of the turbine, and assumed that
energy used must be stored in a battery first. It's true that
compressed air for tools is a very inefficient process, on-grid or
off. Yet I've managed quite well with the just the same sort of
compressor that grid-connected folks use. I could do wind-powered shop
air more easily than most, but I wouldn't dream of adding another
system to cure an inefficiency that's such a small part of the big
picture.

Coincidentally, I have a neighbor who plans a Bowjon type installation
(low tower, bulky rotor, single-stage compressor) for shop air using
multiple surplus storage tanks. I've suggested that since he hasn't
any wind power at present and could really use some, that the time and
money he's going to put into the new setup would be better spent on a
conventional wind genny and a tall tower.

This is where you really need the hybrid system. You run the inverter to
power your conventional appliances. When you are not running the
appliances you turn the inverter off.

That's one of those convenience/practicalities tradeoffs. Many
appliances don't like being de-powered, and it's a nuisance to fight
it. IMO, biting the bullet for full time capacity is one of those
things that goes a long way to making off-grid living palatable for
the average person. After a hard day of pining over the dearth of
rural ballet, the last thing you want is to have to reprogram the
clock on the microwave. :-)

You run your lighting and TV and
whatnot that are your much higher duty cycle items from DC and avoid the
conversion.

The conversion losses are lamentable, but not generally worth working
around. As Scott mentioned, after you've fought that battle for a
while, you're ready for straight AC in order to eliminate the
diddling.

Perhaps your home welding is less than mine. I've got a Miller
Syncrowave 250 that I love and it can see quite a bit of use on project
weekends. I'm thinking your inverters would gag at the 240v 100a gulps
the Syncrowave takes, even if the typical gulp is only about 10 seconds
duration. On a big project those 10 second gulps add up to quite a few
minutes.

The fuses definitely couldn't handle it - 400A limit (24V system).
What kind of *home* welding are you doing that takes 24k Watts input?

People can size for whatever they can afford, but if I had the need
for more indoor stick/TIG, I'd be after one of these
http://cgi.ebay.com/ws/eBayISAPI.dll...m=7524207 277,
which should be a comfortable fit with our setup. But I find I rarely
stick weld indoors above about 120A, although I use the Powemig 255 up
to its max more often. The only really heavy stuff I have to work on
are the tractors, and that's only occasionally. Since they don't fit
inside, and neither does the smoke and dust of heavy work, I roll an
engine-driven unit outdoors.

I didn't really intend the welder / generator to be used for backup to
the regular power system. I really meant it more as an option for
powering larger shop tools.

The auto-idle feature of a good unit will make that bearable, if the
tools' idle use is compatible. Still, the generator is going to be
either idling or roaring in between power tool use, at an average of
about $2 per hour in fuel. When we first moved onto our site, but
before we had the power system set up temporarily, I was stuck with
the welder generator. The running hours add up quickly, and I wouldn't
recommend it to anyone else except for occasional or temporary use, or
because there was no alternative, or if it's for a job that pays
enough to cover the expenses and aggravation.

Modifying a DC inverter welder which are pretty inexpensive these days
is likely the most efficient way to get quality welding capacity from a
home power system. No line shaft required, and no need for oversized
inverters or load shedding.

Everyone has different needs, wants, and budget, but I think you'll
find that more and more people have a potential combination of house
loads that need such capacity that shop use isn't a leap. Around here
for instance are many who need to power the surge of a 2 hp well pump,
along with other use concurrent. It can be done with a smaller
inverter and a generator, but it's sure nice to get that generator
time down if you can. We used to have a couple nearby who had a
generator/battery/inverter setup, over 10 hours generator time per
day. That's about 4000 hours and 2000 gallons of fuel per year. I
think the fuel cost, repair costs, and eventual generator replacement
cost were big factors in their pulling out after a few years. Even a
modest amount of PV could have cut that generator time in half, and
would have been far cheaper in the long run. Better still, the cost of
that (very nice) generator and fuel could have bought a combination of
hardware including a much smaller generator needing only a few hours
per week run time.

Somehow it seems to cost
more to live self sufficient off-grid than it does to just pay the
utilities...

Not necessarily. Cashing out of a grid-connected place allowed us to
retire, start with a clean slate, and as the yuppies say, "leverage"
the advantages of home power to help keep the big picture cost down.
Cheap land, lower taxes, fewer utilities (still need the phone
company) are some of the benefits. In talking to off-gridders, I find
that the main factor affecting success isn't so much the power issues,
but whether the folks can afford and are comfortable with truly rural
living. For most, that usually means retirement or telecommuting, and
precludes having children at home. For those who need to commute or be
close to school busses etc., they're usually stuck with paying the
premium for grid access. Then again, when they want to generate their
own power, they can have cheaper and more efficient systems, and use
the grid for storage.

Wayne

I have received many emails on this.

I will repeat that it is a legal fiction that the stockholders
control a corporation. If this were not the case, corporations
would not be allowed to hoard cash (rather than paying
dividends), squander profits on extraneous and unrelated business
ventures of doubtful potential, and pay exorbitant executive
compensation and perquisites. Additionally, some stockholders
are more equal than others. Different classes of stock have been
introduced so that control is no longer proportional to
ownership.

The real controllers of corporations are their financers as they
can fund or not fund the operations, issue or not issue their
IPOs, etc. Note that in making " secured " loans, operational
[policy] control is achieved without any concurrent/concomitant
risk. As most of the problems of the basket case corporations
have been created, maintained and exacerbated by the availability
of " easy money, " it is only reasonable the people that supplied
the " easy money " [and earned enormous profits] should be forced
to stand the resulting losses.

When a corporation goes bankrupt and is either reorganized
[chapter 11] or liquidated [chapter 7] the stockholders generally
lose their entire investment. In too many cases the employees
are also the stockholders where the company has crammed their
defined contribution plan [401k] with the company stock. When a
corporation is reorganized, new stock is issued and may be used
to " pay off " the unsecured creditors. Stock in the old
corporation is worthless. Another typical scam is to create an
ESOP or employee stock ownership program, where the employees may
own stock but have no voting rights. It is this " vapor paper "
that several corporations are proposing to use to pay their
obligations to the PBGC.

While it would have not affect on the terminal corporations we
have been discussing, it would be worthwhile to force the
remaining major US corporations to distribute 50% [or more] of
all claimed annual earnings as dividends. This would prevent the
pyramiding of phantom profits from year to year, flush out bogus
acquisition assets such as " good will " and capitalized R&D,
frustrate attempts to create cash hoards to be squandered on CEOs
" pipe dreams " [generally with kickbacks] and force any real
corporate profits into the mainstream economy. DRIPs [dividend
reinvestment programs] would allow any stockholder that still
believe they are better served by having their share of the
[claimed] earnings to be " retained " by the corporation for "
reinvestment " to do so.

============================
On Thu, 16 Jun 2005 10:56:39 -0700, F. George McDuffee
wrote:
snip
How about making the share holders liable for the debt. They are after all
"owners" of the companies :-)
snip
This simply echos a legal fiction. In fact 'shareholders' have
almost no control, otherwise the corporations would have been
forced to declare dividends rather than hording cash, and the
executives would have received human salaries. While there is
more than ample "blame" to go around, the major enablers were the
financial institutions that handled the IPOs, made the loans,
audited the books, created the "special purpose entities,"
managed the pension funds, etc. As such, these should be the
people that get the big "hair cut" [like down to their knees]
rather than the employees or taxpayers [who tend to be the
shareholders when the music stops].

wmbjk wrote:

On Thu, 16 Jun 2005 21:55:15 GMT, "Pete C."
wrote:

compressed air storage Should be comparable or better efficiency than a wind driven generator
charging batteries.

Perhaps in some niches... but in any event a practical home power
setup needs some batteries, and charging them with wind, assuming
there's wind to harvest, is highly recommended. So you're talking
about *adding* systems because you believe it's worth the trouble, but
you haven't supplied any numbers or examples to back up your position.

See my notes below saving four steps of energy conversion for
applications where you are able to use air power directly such as nail
guns and die grinders. Four fewer conversion steps *has* to be more
efficient.


They also do this
with pumped hydro, but CAS is far more practical than pumped hydro in a
homepower environment.

But both are less practical than batteries.

Not by a long shot, especially for a large scale installation as a power
utility would use. It is far cheaper and lower maintenance to use a
large air or water reservoir than to use a huge string of batteries with
limited life spans and hazardous lead and acid to dispose of properly at
every battery replacement.

The batteries in your string may last what, perhaps 8 years? A large air
tank that is drained regularly and kept in an area not exposed to
weather should easily last 80 years. When it finally is failing all you
have is scrap steel to dispose of and you can actually get a few dollars
for it.


No, not mechanically driven. The refrigeration compressor would be belt
driven from an air motor. The thermostat simply opens the air valve when
it needs to spin up the compressor. Again the ultimate source of power
does not have to be wind, and in fact with CAS it's even easier to
combine energy captured from multiple sources. No need to worry about
charge controllers when you're simply pumping air into a big tank.

How big a tank? I think you're going to find a fly in the ointment
once you run some numbers on air consumption. And if air power could
be so efficient and practical, why do you believe it is that
off-gridders, often known to be innovative and unafraid of breaking
with convention, haven't flocked to the concept?

Perhaps because I haven't seen the concept even proposed in any
alternate energy books. As far as I know CAS and PH are both fairly new
concepts that originated from electric utilities need for a way to store
excess generating capacity during off peak times for use in peak shaving
later.


The point is that batteries can only accept a charge at a certain rate,
potentially wasting captured energy during peaks.

There's isn't any peak power wasting problem that I'm aware of with
home power systems, since the cost of generating prevents people from
buying excess capacity. Can you give an example of the problem you're
citing?

This would primarily apply to wind generation where peak gusts could
produce power faster than the batteries could accept it, causing that
power to be dissipated by the charge controller.

Hydro could have a similar case where excess capacity could go
uncaptured after heavy rains.

Solar PV is inherently pretty immune from generating peaks.


The efficiency of directly utilizing the energy of the compressed air
for mechanical applications is also higher. Instead of capturing wind
energy, converting to electricity, storing in a battery, converting to
AC, converting to mechanical energy with a motor, converting to
compressed air with a compressor coupled to the motor and then utilizing
the compresses air to fire your nail gun, you eliminate four conversion
steps.

You left out the AC to DC conversion of the turbine, and assumed that
energy used must be stored in a battery first. It's true that
compressed air for tools is a very inefficient process, on-grid or
off. Yet I've managed quite well with the just the same sort of
compressor that grid-connected folks use. I could do wind-powered shop
air more easily than most, but I wouldn't dream of adding another
system to cure an inefficiency that's such a small part of the big
picture.

Ok, so five less conversion stages.

It's all relative. The more use your shop has, the more potential
savings. If the shop demand is such that you'll require more generating
capacity, more storage capacity and more inverter capacity then there
may well be cost savings since components for an air system are cheaper.

If you an over-the-top green type, perhaps the ability to eliminate or
keep to an absolute minimum the need for big ol' lead acid hydrogen and
corrosive fume belching batteries might be a positive.


Coincidentally, I have a neighbor who plans a Bowjon type installation
(low tower, bulky rotor, single-stage compressor) for shop air using
multiple surplus storage tanks. I've suggested that since he hasn't
any wind power at present and could really use some, that the time and
money he's going to put into the new setup would be better spent on a
conventional wind genny and a tall tower.

Any reason not to combine both and put up your tall tower with the
electric gen up top and hang a compressor at a lower point on the same
tower?


This is where you really need the hybrid system. You run the inverter to
power your conventional appliances. When you are not running the
appliances you turn the inverter off.

That's one of those convenience/practicalities tradeoffs. Many
appliances don't like being de-powered, and it's a nuisance to fight
it. IMO, biting the bullet for full time capacity is one of those
things that goes a long way to making off-grid living palatable for
the average person. After a hard day of pining over the dearth of
rural ballet, the last thing you want is to have to reprogram the
clock on the microwave. :-)

True, maximizing efficiency does require active management of the
system. Some things can be automated, and I've even seen a few
microwaves where you can disable the clock though.


You run your lighting and TV and
whatnot that are your much higher duty cycle items from DC and avoid the
conversion.

The conversion losses are lamentable, but not generally worth working
around. As Scott mentioned, after you've fought that battle for a
while, you're ready for straight AC in order to eliminate the
diddling.

Guess you just need to setup a heat exchanger from your inverter(s) to
capture the waste heat for your DHW.


Perhaps your home welding is less than mine. I've got a Miller
Syncrowave 250 that I love and it can see quite a bit of use on project
weekends. I'm thinking your inverters would gag at the 240v 100a gulps
the Syncrowave takes, even if the typical gulp is only about 10 seconds
duration. On a big project those 10 second gulps add up to quite a few
minutes.

The fuses definitely couldn't handle it - 400A limit (24V system).
What kind of *home* welding are you doing that takes 24k Watts input?

Pretty run of the mill stuff actually. The last moderate welding project
was building the CNC router which is framed mostly from 14ga square
steel tubing (http://wpnet.us/cnc_router.htm).

While the welder is rated at 250a and the full output at reduced duty
cycle is 310a, most of the time I'm running in the 150-175a range.


People can size for whatever they can afford, but if I had the need
for more indoor stick/TIG, I'd be after one of these
http://cgi.ebay.com/ws/eBayISAPI.dll...m=7524207 277,
which should be a comfortable fit with our setup. But I find I rarely
stick weld indoors above about 120A, although I use the Powemig 255 up
to its max more often. The only really heavy stuff I have to work on
are the tractors, and that's only occasionally. Since they don't fit
inside, and neither does the smoke and dust of heavy work, I roll an
engine-driven unit outdoors.

I primarily use TIG, if for no other reason than I'm most comfortable
with it. I also do aluminum from time to time.

The last time I did stick was a quick repair to my snow blower in the
middle of a storm. Even for that I would have used TIG if I was going to
take the time to do it right vs. just weld through the snow pack. I
won't be doing much of that anymore either since I'm in TX now and don't
get much snow.


I didn't really intend the welder / generator to be used for backup to
the regular power system. I really meant it more as an option for
powering larger shop tools.

The auto-idle feature of a good unit will make that bearable, if the
tools' idle use is compatible. Still, the generator is going to be
either idling or roaring in between power tool use, at an average of
about $2 per hour in fuel. When we first moved onto our site, but
before we had the power system set up temporarily, I was stuck with
the welder generator. The running hours add up quickly, and I wouldn't
recommend it to anyone else except for occasional or temporary use, or
because there was no alternative, or if it's for a job that pays
enough to cover the expenses and aggravation.

Any generator is going to be most efficient at or near full rated
output. Load management is always difficult.


Modifying a DC inverter welder which are pretty inexpensive these days
is likely the most efficient way to get quality welding capacity from a
home power system. No line shaft required, and no need for oversized
inverters or load shedding.

Everyone has different needs, wants, and budget, but I think you'll
find that more and more people have a potential combination of house
loads that need such capacity that shop use isn't a leap. Around here
for instance are many who need to power the surge of a 2 hp well pump,

Soft start inverter drive to a three phase well pump with an unloader
valve? :)

along with other use concurrent. It can be done with a smaller
inverter and a generator, but it's sure nice to get that generator
time down if you can. We used to have a couple nearby who had a
generator/battery/inverter setup, over 10 hours generator time per
day. That's about 4000 hours and 2000 gallons of fuel per year. I
think the fuel cost, repair costs, and eventual generator replacement
cost were big factors in their pulling out after a few years. Even a
modest amount of PV could have cut that generator time in half, and
would have been far cheaper in the long run. Better still, the cost of
that (very nice) generator and fuel could have bought a combination of
hardware including a much smaller generator needing only a few hours
per week run time.

The only way to get reasonable efficiency out of a gen/bat/inv setup is
to size the generator to just barely above the average load and run it
24x7, and that requires a pretty specialized generator to handle that
duty. Not something I'd consider unless I had my own nat gas well, or
bio-gas generator.


Somehow it seems to cost
more to live self sufficient off-grid than it does to just pay the
utilities...

Not necessarily. Cashing out of a grid-connected place allowed us to
retire, start with a clean slate, and as the yuppies say, "leverage"
the advantages of home power to help keep the big picture cost down.
Cheap land, lower taxes, fewer utilities (still need the phone
company) are some of the benefits.

Looks like you had to go to some extremes to get your Internet
connectivity. When I was moving to TX I had to base my house choice on
the availability of high speed connectivity. I investigated satellite,
but unfortunately it doesn't work well with VPN. I ended up on cable
which works well.

In talking to off-gridders, I find
that the main factor affecting success isn't so much the power issues,
but whether the folks can afford and are comfortable with truly rural
living. For most, that usually means retirement or telecommuting, and
precludes having children at home. For those who need to commute or be
close to school busses etc., they're usually stuck with paying the
premium for grid access. Then again, when they want to generate their
own power, they can have cheaper and more efficient systems, and use
the grid for storage.

Well, I telecommute now. Trading a cubicle in a windowless concrete
dungeon for a sunny window office with a purring cat on the windowsill
is a wonderful thing.

Since I'm also single and also quite mechanically and technically
inclined, in theory I could do the off-grid in the middle of nowhere
thing. In the event my job changed and I was no longer able to
telecommute I'd be f'd though.

Unfortunately I don't really expect I'll ever be able to retire. I'm
theoretically making good money these days, at least it looks good on
paper. Unfortunately the economy is such that unless you are a DINK
you're still barely covering living expenses.

Perhaps as I'm able to build up some AE projects I'll be able to cut
operating expenses enough to start to get ahead.

Pete C.

Cliff wrote:

On Thu, 16 Jun 2005 20:19:43 -0500, Scott Willing
wrote:

This isn't even quite as extreme as the example I was thinking of.
I'll see if I can dig up another cite, but I think it's probably in a
magazine here so don't hold your breath.

USA is an island in Japan.

Why would the Japanese devalue their product by putting "Made in USA" on
it?

Pete C.

"wmbjk" wrote in message
...
On Thu, 16 Jun 2005 21:55:15 GMT, "Pete C."
wrote:


compressed air storage Should be comparable or better efficiency than a
wind driven generator
charging batteries.

Perhaps in some niches... but in any event a practical home power
setup needs some batteries, and charging them with wind, assuming
there's wind to harvest, is highly recommended. So you're talking
about *adding* systems because you believe it's worth the trouble, but
you haven't supplied any numbers or examples to back up your position.

They also do this
with pumped hydro, but CAS is far more practical than pumped hydro in a
homepower environment.

But both are less practical than batteries.

No, not mechanically driven. The refrigeration compressor would be belt
driven from an air motor. The thermostat simply opens the air valve when
it needs to spin up the compressor. Again the ultimate source of power
does not have to be wind, and in fact with CAS it's even easier to
combine energy captured from multiple sources. No need to worry about
charge controllers when you're simply pumping air into a big tank.

How big a tank? I think you're going to find a fly in the ointment
once you run some numbers on air consumption. And if air power could
be so efficient and practical, why do you believe it is that
off-gridders, often known to be innovative and unafraid of breaking
with convention, haven't flocked to the concept?
Another fly in the oiment on your battery remark.....if batteries are so
much effecient
at storaging .Why are repair shop using air tools instead battery powered
tools.

The point is that batteries can only accept a charge at a certain rate,
potentially wasting captured energy during peaks.

There's isn't any peak power wasting problem that I'm aware of with
home power systems, since the cost of generating prevents people from
buying excess capacity. Can you give an example of the problem you're
citing?

The efficiency of directly utilizing the energy of the compressed air
for mechanical applications is also higher. Instead of capturing wind
energy, converting to electricity, storing in a battery, converting to
AC, converting to mechanical energy with a motor, converting to
compressed air with a compressor coupled to the motor and then utilizing
the compresses air to fire your nail gun, you eliminate four conversion
steps.

You left out the AC to DC conversion of the turbine, and assumed that
energy used must be stored in a battery first. It's true that
compressed air for tools is a very inefficient process, on-grid or
off. Yet I've managed quite well with the just the same sort of
compressor that grid-connected folks use. I could do wind-powered shop
air more easily than most, but I wouldn't dream of adding another
system to cure an inefficiency that's such a small part of the big
picture.

Coincidentally, I have a neighbor who plans a Bowjon type installation
(low tower, bulky rotor, single-stage compressor) for shop air using
multiple surplus storage tanks. I've suggested that since he hasn't
any wind power at present and could really use some, that the time and
money he's going to put into the new setup would be better spent on a
conventional wind genny and a tall tower.

This is where you really need the hybrid system. You run the inverter to
power your conventional appliances. When you are not running the
appliances you turn the inverter off.

That's one of those convenience/practicalities tradeoffs. Many
appliances don't like being de-powered, and it's a nuisance to fight
it. IMO, biting the bullet for full time capacity is one of those
things that goes a long way to making off-grid living palatable for
the average person. After a hard day of pining over the dearth of
rural ballet, the last thing you want is to have to reprogram the
clock on the microwave. :-)

You run your lighting and TV and
whatnot that are your much higher duty cycle items from DC and avoid the
conversion.

The conversion losses are lamentable, but not generally worth working
around. As Scott mentioned, after you've fought that battle for a
while, you're ready for straight AC in order to eliminate the
diddling.

Perhaps your home welding is less than mine. I've got a Miller
Syncrowave 250 that I love and it can see quite a bit of use on project
weekends. I'm thinking your inverters would gag at the 240v 100a gulps
the Syncrowave takes, even if the typical gulp is only about 10 seconds
duration. On a big project those 10 second gulps add up to quite a few
minutes.

The fuses definitely couldn't handle it - 400A limit (24V system).
What kind of *home* welding are you doing that takes 24k Watts input?

People can size for whatever they can afford, but if I had the need
for more indoor stick/TIG, I'd be after one of these

http://cgi.ebay.com/ws/eBayISAPI.dll...m=7524207 277
,
which should be a comfortable fit with our setup. But I find I rarely
stick weld indoors above about 120A, although I use the Powemig 255 up
to its max more often. The only really heavy stuff I have to work on
are the tractors, and that's only occasionally. Since they don't fit
inside, and neither does the smoke and dust of heavy work, I roll an
engine-driven unit outdoors.

I didn't really intend the welder / generator to be used for backup to
the regular power system. I really meant it more as an option for
powering larger shop tools.

The auto-idle feature of a good unit will make that bearable, if the
tools' idle use is compatible. Still, the generator is going to be
either idling or roaring in between power tool use, at an average of
about $2 per hour in fuel. When we first moved onto our site, but
before we had the power system set up temporarily, I was stuck with
the welder generator. The running hours add up quickly, and I wouldn't
recommend it to anyone else except for occasional or temporary use, or
because there was no alternative, or if it's for a job that pays
enough to cover the expenses and aggravation.

Modifying a DC inverter welder which are pretty inexpensive these days
is likely the most efficient way to get quality welding capacity from a
home power system. No line shaft required, and no need for oversized
inverters or load shedding.

Everyone has different needs, wants, and budget, but I think you'll
find that more and more people have a potential combination of house
loads that need such capacity that shop use isn't a leap. Around here
for instance are many who need to power the surge of a 2 hp well pump,
along with other use concurrent. It can be done with a smaller
inverter and a generator, but it's sure nice to get that generator
time down if you can. We used to have a couple nearby who had a
generator/battery/inverter setup, over 10 hours generator time per
day. That's about 4000 hours and 2000 gallons of fuel per year. I
think the fuel cost, repair costs, and eventual generator replacement
cost were big factors in their pulling out after a few years. Even a
modest amount of PV could have cut that generator time in half, and
would have been far cheaper in the long run. Better still, the cost of
that (very nice) generator and fuel could have bought a combination of
hardware including a much smaller generator needing only a few hours
per week run time.

Somehow it seems to cost
more to live self sufficient off-grid than it does to just pay the
utilities...

Not necessarily. Cashing out of a grid-connected place allowed us to
retire, start with a clean slate, and as the yuppies say, "leverage"
the advantages of home power to help keep the big picture cost down.
Cheap land, lower taxes, fewer utilities (still need the phone
company) are some of the benefits. In talking to off-gridders, I find
that the main factor affecting success isn't so much the power issues,
but whether the folks can afford and are comfortable with truly rural
living. For most, that usually means retirement or telecommuting, and
precludes having children at home. For those who need to commute or be
close to school busses etc., they're usually stuck with paying the
premium for grid access. Then again, when they want to generate their
own power, they can have cheaper and more efficient systems, and use
the grid for storage.

Wayne




----== Posted via Newsfeeds.Com - Unlimited-Uncensored-Secure Usenet News==----
http://www.newsfeeds.com The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World! 120,000+ Newsgroups
----= East and West-Coast Server Farms - Total Privacy via Encryption =----

"wmbjk" wrote in message
...
On Thu, 16 Jun 2005 21:55:15 GMT, "Pete C."
wrote:


compressed air storage Should be comparable or better efficiency than a
wind driven generator
charging batteries.

Perhaps in some niches... but in any event a practical home power
setup needs some batteries, and charging them with wind, assuming
there's wind to harvest, is highly recommended. So you're talking
about *adding* systems because you believe it's worth the trouble, but
you haven't supplied any numbers or examples to back up your position.

They also do this
with pumped hydro, but CAS is far more practical than pumped hydro in a
homepower environment.

But both are less practical than batteries.

No, not mechanically driven. The refrigeration compressor would be belt
driven from an air motor. The thermostat simply opens the air valve when
it needs to spin up the compressor. Again the ultimate source of power
does not have to be wind, and in fact with CAS it's even easier to
combine energy captured from multiple sources. No need to worry about
charge controllers when you're simply pumping air into a big tank.

How big a tank? I think you're going to find a fly in the ointment
once you run some numbers on air consumption. And if air power could
be so efficient and practical, why do you believe it is that
off-gridders, often known to be innovative and unafraid of breaking
with convention, haven't flocked to the concept?
Another fly in the oiment on your battery remark.....if batteries are so
much effecient
at storaging .Why are repair shop using air tools instead battery powered
tools.

The point is that batteries can only accept a charge at a certain rate,
potentially wasting captured energy during peaks.

There's isn't any peak power wasting problem that I'm aware of with
home power systems, since the cost of generating prevents people from
buying excess capacity. Can you give an example of the problem you're
citing?

The efficiency of directly utilizing the energy of the compressed air
for mechanical applications is also higher. Instead of capturing wind
energy, converting to electricity, storing in a battery, converting to
AC, converting to mechanical energy with a motor, converting to
compressed air with a compressor coupled to the motor and then utilizing
the compresses air to fire your nail gun, you eliminate four conversion
steps.

You left out the AC to DC conversion of the turbine, and assumed that
energy used must be stored in a battery first. It's true that
compressed air for tools is a very inefficient process, on-grid or
off. Yet I've managed quite well with the just the same sort of
compressor that grid-connected folks use. I could do wind-powered shop
air more easily than most, but I wouldn't dream of adding another
system to cure an inefficiency that's such a small part of the big
picture.

Coincidentally, I have a neighbor who plans a Bowjon type installation
(low tower, bulky rotor, single-stage compressor) for shop air using
multiple surplus storage tanks. I've suggested that since he hasn't
any wind power at present and could really use some, that the time and
money he's going to put into the new setup would be better spent on a
conventional wind genny and a tall tower.

This is where you really need the hybrid system. You run the inverter to
power your conventional appliances. When you are not running the
appliances you turn the inverter off.

That's one of those convenience/practicalities tradeoffs. Many
appliances don't like being de-powered, and it's a nuisance to fight
it. IMO, biting the bullet for full time capacity is one of those
things that goes a long way to making off-grid living palatable for
the average person. After a hard day of pining over the dearth of
rural ballet, the last thing you want is to have to reprogram the
clock on the microwave. :-)

You run your lighting and TV and
whatnot that are your much higher duty cycle items from DC and avoid the
conversion.

The conversion losses are lamentable, but not generally worth working
around. As Scott mentioned, after you've fought that battle for a
while, you're ready for straight AC in order to eliminate the
diddling.

Perhaps your home welding is less than mine. I've got a Miller
Syncrowave 250 that I love and it can see quite a bit of use on project
weekends. I'm thinking your inverters would gag at the 240v 100a gulps
the Syncrowave takes, even if the typical gulp is only about 10 seconds
duration. On a big project those 10 second gulps add up to quite a few
minutes.

The fuses definitely couldn't handle it - 400A limit (24V system).
What kind of *home* welding are you doing that takes 24k Watts input?

People can size for whatever they can afford, but if I had the need
for more indoor stick/TIG, I'd be after one of these

http://cgi.ebay.com/ws/eBayISAPI.dll...m=7524207 277
,
which should be a comfortable fit with our setup. But I find I rarely
stick weld indoors above about 120A, although I use the Powemig 255 up
to its max more often. The only really heavy stuff I have to work on
are the tractors, and that's only occasionally. Since they don't fit
inside, and neither does the smoke and dust of heavy work, I roll an
engine-driven unit outdoors.

I didn't really intend the welder / generator to be used for backup to
the regular power system. I really meant it more as an option for
powering larger shop tools.

The auto-idle feature of a good unit will make that bearable, if the
tools' idle use is compatible. Still, the generator is going to be
either idling or roaring in between power tool use, at an average of
about $2 per hour in fuel. When we first moved onto our site, but
before we had the power system set up temporarily, I was stuck with
the welder generator. The running hours add up quickly, and I wouldn't
recommend it to anyone else except for occasional or temporary use, or
because there was no alternative, or if it's for a job that pays
enough to cover the expenses and aggravation.

Modifying a DC inverter welder which are pretty inexpensive these days
is likely the most efficient way to get quality welding capacity from a
home power system. No line shaft required, and no need for oversized
inverters or load shedding.

Everyone has different needs, wants, and budget, but I think you'll
find that more and more people have a potential combination of house
loads that need such capacity that shop use isn't a leap. Around here
for instance are many who need to power the surge of a 2 hp well pump,
along with other use concurrent. It can be done with a smaller
inverter and a generator, but it's sure nice to get that generator
time down if you can. We used to have a couple nearby who had a
generator/battery/inverter setup, over 10 hours generator time per
day. That's about 4000 hours and 2000 gallons of fuel per year. I
think the fuel cost, repair costs, and eventual generator replacement
cost were big factors in their pulling out after a few years. Even a
modest amount of PV could have cut that generator time in half, and
would have been far cheaper in the long run. Better still, the cost of
that (very nice) generator and fuel could have bought a combination of
hardware including a much smaller generator needing only a few hours
per week run time.

Somehow it seems to cost
more to live self sufficient off-grid than it does to just pay the
utilities...

Not necessarily. Cashing out of a grid-connected place allowed us to
retire, start with a clean slate, and as the yuppies say, "leverage"
the advantages of home power to help keep the big picture cost down.
Cheap land, lower taxes, fewer utilities (still need the phone
company) are some of the benefits. In talking to off-gridders, I find
that the main factor affecting success isn't so much the power issues,
but whether the folks can afford and are comfortable with truly rural
living. For most, that usually means retirement or telecommuting, and
precludes having children at home. For those who need to commute or be
close to school busses etc., they're usually stuck with paying the
premium for grid access. Then again, when they want to generate their
own power, they can have cheaper and more efficient systems, and use
the grid for storage.

Wayne




----== Posted via Newsfeeds.Com - Unlimited-Uncensored-Secure Usenet News==----
http://www.newsfeeds.com The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World! 120,000+ Newsgroups
----= East and West-Coast Server Farms - Total Privacy via Encryption =----

"wmbjk" wrote in message
...
On Thu, 16 Jun 2005 21:55:15 GMT, "Pete C."
wrote:


compressed air storage Should be comparable or better efficiency than a
wind driven generator
charging batteries.

Perhaps in some niches... but in any event a practical home power
setup needs some batteries, and charging them with wind, assuming
there's wind to harvest, is highly recommended. So you're talking
about *adding* systems because you believe it's worth the trouble, but
you haven't supplied any numbers or examples to back up your position.

They also do this
with pumped hydro, but CAS is far more practical than pumped hydro in a
homepower environment.

But both are less practical than batteries.

No, not mechanically driven. The refrigeration compressor would be belt
driven from an air motor. The thermostat simply opens the air valve when
it needs to spin up the compressor. Again the ultimate source of power
does not have to be wind, and in fact with CAS it's even easier to
combine energy captured from multiple sources. No need to worry about
charge controllers when you're simply pumping air into a big tank.

How big a tank? I think you're going to find a fly in the ointment
once you run some numbers on air consumption. And if air power could
be so efficient and practical, why do you believe it is that
off-gridders, often known to be innovative and unafraid of breaking
with convention, haven't flocked to the concept?
Another fly in the oiment on your battery remark.....if batteries are so
much effecient
at storaging .Why are repair shop using air tools instead battery powered
tools.

The point is that batteries can only accept a charge at a certain rate,
potentially wasting captured energy during peaks.

There's isn't any peak power wasting problem that I'm aware of with
home power systems, since the cost of generating prevents people from
buying excess capacity. Can you give an example of the problem you're
citing?

The efficiency of directly utilizing the energy of the compressed air
for mechanical applications is also higher. Instead of capturing wind
energy, converting to electricity, storing in a battery, converting to
AC, converting to mechanical energy with a motor, converting to
compressed air with a compressor coupled to the motor and then utilizing
the compresses air to fire your nail gun, you eliminate four conversion
steps.

You left out the AC to DC conversion of the turbine, and assumed that
energy used must be stored in a battery first. It's true that
compressed air for tools is a very inefficient process, on-grid or
off. Yet I've managed quite well with the just the same sort of
compressor that grid-connected folks use. I could do wind-powered shop
air more easily than most, but I wouldn't dream of adding another
system to cure an inefficiency that's such a small part of the big
picture.

Coincidentally, I have a neighbor who plans a Bowjon type installation
(low tower, bulky rotor, single-stage compressor) for shop air using
multiple surplus storage tanks. I've suggested that since he hasn't
any wind power at present and could really use some, that the time and
money he's going to put into the new setup would be better spent on a
conventional wind genny and a tall tower.

This is where you really need the hybrid system. You run the inverter to
power your conventional appliances. When you are not running the
appliances you turn the inverter off.

That's one of those convenience/practicalities tradeoffs. Many
appliances don't like being de-powered, and it's a nuisance to fight
it. IMO, biting the bullet for full time capacity is one of those
things that goes a long way to making off-grid living palatable for
the average person. After a hard day of pining over the dearth of
rural ballet, the last thing you want is to have to reprogram the
clock on the microwave. :-)

You run your lighting and TV and
whatnot that are your much higher duty cycle items from DC and avoid the
conversion.

The conversion losses are lamentable, but not generally worth working
around. As Scott mentioned, after you've fought that battle for a
while, you're ready for straight AC in order to eliminate the
diddling.

Perhaps your home welding is less than mine. I've got a Miller
Syncrowave 250 that I love and it can see quite a bit of use on project
weekends. I'm thinking your inverters would gag at the 240v 100a gulps
the Syncrowave takes, even if the typical gulp is only about 10 seconds
duration. On a big project those 10 second gulps add up to quite a few
minutes.

The fuses definitely couldn't handle it - 400A limit (24V system).
What kind of *home* welding are you doing that takes 24k Watts input?

People can size for whatever they can afford, but if I had the need
for more indoor stick/TIG, I'd be after one of these

http://cgi.ebay.com/ws/eBayISAPI.dll...m=7524207 277
,
which should be a comfortable fit with our setup. But I find I rarely
stick weld indoors above about 120A, although I use the Powemig 255 up
to its max more often. The only really heavy stuff I have to work on
are the tractors, and that's only occasionally. Since they don't fit
inside, and neither does the smoke and dust of heavy work, I roll an
engine-driven unit outdoors.

I didn't really intend the welder / generator to be used for backup to
the regular power system. I really meant it more as an option for
powering larger shop tools.

The auto-idle feature of a good unit will make that bearable, if the
tools' idle use is compatible. Still, the generator is going to be
either idling or roaring in between power tool use, at an average of
about $2 per hour in fuel. When we first moved onto our site, but
before we had the power system set up temporarily, I was stuck with
the welder generator. The running hours add up quickly, and I wouldn't
recommend it to anyone else except for occasional or temporary use, or
because there was no alternative, or if it's for a job that pays
enough to cover the expenses and aggravation.

Modifying a DC inverter welder which are pretty inexpensive these days
is likely the most efficient way to get quality welding capacity from a
home power system. No line shaft required, and no need for oversized
inverters or load shedding.

Everyone has different needs, wants, and budget, but I think you'll
find that more and more people have a potential combination of house
loads that need such capacity that shop use isn't a leap. Around here
for instance are many who need to power the surge of a 2 hp well pump,
along with other use concurrent. It can be done with a smaller
inverter and a generator, but it's sure nice to get that generator
time down if you can. We used to have a couple nearby who had a
generator/battery/inverter setup, over 10 hours generator time per
day. That's about 4000 hours and 2000 gallons of fuel per year. I
think the fuel cost, repair costs, and eventual generator replacement
cost were big factors in their pulling out after a few years. Even a
modest amount of PV could have cut that generator time in half, and
would have been far cheaper in the long run. Better still, the cost of
that (very nice) generator and fuel could have bought a combination of
hardware including a much smaller generator needing only a few hours
per week run time.

Somehow it seems to cost
more to live self sufficient off-grid than it does to just pay the
utilities...

Not necessarily. Cashing out of a grid-connected place allowed us to
retire, start with a clean slate, and as the yuppies say, "leverage"
the advantages of home power to help keep the big picture cost down.
Cheap land, lower taxes, fewer utilities (still need the phone
company) are some of the benefits. In talking to off-gridders, I find
that the main factor affecting success isn't so much the power issues,
but whether the folks can afford and are comfortable with truly rural
living. For most, that usually means retirement or telecommuting, and
precludes having children at home. For those who need to commute or be
close to school busses etc., they're usually stuck with paying the
premium for grid access. Then again, when they want to generate their
own power, they can have cheaper and more efficient systems, and use
the grid for storage.

Wayne




----== Posted via Newsfeeds.Com - Unlimited-Uncensored-Secure Usenet News==----
http://www.newsfeeds.com The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World! 120,000+ Newsgroups
----= East and West-Coast Server Farms - Total Privacy via Encryption =----

"wmbjk" wrote in message
...
On Thu, 16 Jun 2005 21:55:15 GMT, "Pete C."
wrote:


compressed air storage Should be comparable or better efficiency than a
wind driven generator
charging batteries.

Perhaps in some niches... but in any event a practical home power
setup needs some batteries, and charging them with wind, assuming
there's wind to harvest, is highly recommended. So you're talking
about *adding* systems because you believe it's worth the trouble, but
you haven't supplied any numbers or examples to back up your position.

They also do this
with pumped hydro, but CAS is far more practical than pumped hydro in a
homepower environment.

But both are less practical than batteries.

No, not mechanically driven. The refrigeration compressor would be belt
driven from an air motor. The thermostat simply opens the air valve when
it needs to spin up the compressor. Again the ultimate source of power
does not have to be wind, and in fact with CAS it's even easier to
combine energy captured from multiple sources. No need to worry about
charge controllers when you're simply pumping air into a big tank.

How big a tank? I think you're going to find a fly in the ointment
once you run some numbers on air consumption. And if air power could
be so efficient and practical, why do you believe it is that
off-gridders, often known to be innovative and unafraid of breaking
with convention, haven't flocked to the concept?
Another fly in the oiment on your battery remark.....if batteries are so
much effecient
at storaging .Why are repair shop using air tools instead battery powered
tools.

The point is that batteries can only accept a charge at a certain rate,
potentially wasting captured energy during peaks.

There's isn't any peak power wasting problem that I'm aware of with
home power systems, since the cost of generating prevents people from
buying excess capacity. Can you give an example of the problem you're
citing?

The efficiency of directly utilizing the energy of the compressed air
for mechanical applications is also higher. Instead of capturing wind
energy, converting to electricity, storing in a battery, converting to
AC, converting to mechanical energy with a motor, converting to
compressed air with a compressor coupled to the motor and then utilizing
the compresses air to fire your nail gun, you eliminate four conversion
steps.

You left out the AC to DC conversion of the turbine, and assumed that
energy used must be stored in a battery first. It's true that
compressed air for tools is a very inefficient process, on-grid or
off. Yet I've managed quite well with the just the same sort of
compressor that grid-connected folks use. I could do wind-powered shop
air more easily than most, but I wouldn't dream of adding another
system to cure an inefficiency that's such a small part of the big
picture.

Coincidentally, I have a neighbor who plans a Bowjon type installation
(low tower, bulky rotor, single-stage compressor) for shop air using
multiple surplus storage tanks. I've suggested that since he hasn't
any wind power at present and could really use some, that the time and
money he's going to put into the new setup would be better spent on a
conventional wind genny and a tall tower.

This is where you really need the hybrid system. You run the inverter to
power your conventional appliances. When you are not running the
appliances you turn the inverter off.

That's one of those convenience/practicalities tradeoffs. Many
appliances don't like being de-powered, and it's a nuisance to fight
it. IMO, biting the bullet for full time capacity is one of those
things that goes a long way to making off-grid living palatable for
the average person. After a hard day of pining over the dearth of
rural ballet, the last thing you want is to have to reprogram the
clock on the microwave. :-)

You run your lighting and TV and
whatnot that are your much higher duty cycle items from DC and avoid the
conversion.

The conversion losses are lamentable, but not generally worth working
around. As Scott mentioned, after you've fought that battle for a
while, you're ready for straight AC in order to eliminate the
diddling.

Perhaps your home welding is less than mine. I've got a Miller
Syncrowave 250 that I love and it can see quite a bit of use on project
weekends. I'm thinking your inverters would gag at the 240v 100a gulps
the Syncrowave takes, even if the typical gulp is only about 10 seconds
duration. On a big project those 10 second gulps add up to quite a few
minutes.

The fuses definitely couldn't handle it - 400A limit (24V system).
What kind of *home* welding are you doing that takes 24k Watts input?

People can size for whatever they can afford, but if I had the need
for more indoor stick/TIG, I'd be after one of these

http://cgi.ebay.com/ws/eBayISAPI.dll...m=7524207 277
,
which should be a comfortable fit with our setup. But I find I rarely
stick weld indoors above about 120A, although I use the Powemig 255 up
to its max more often. The only really heavy stuff I have to work on
are the tractors, and that's only occasionally. Since they don't fit
inside, and neither does the smoke and dust of heavy work, I roll an
engine-driven unit outdoors.

I didn't really intend the welder / generator to be used for backup to
the regular power system. I really meant it more as an option for
powering larger shop tools.

The auto-idle feature of a good unit will make that bearable, if the
tools' idle use is compatible. Still, the generator is going to be
either idling or roaring in between power tool use, at an average of
about $2 per hour in fuel. When we first moved onto our site, but
before we had the power system set up temporarily, I was stuck with
the welder generator. The running hours add up quickly, and I wouldn't
recommend it to anyone else except for occasional or temporary use, or
because there was no alternative, or if it's for a job that pays
enough to cover the expenses and aggravation.

Modifying a DC inverter welder which are pretty inexpensive these days
is likely the most efficient way to get quality welding capacity from a
home power system. No line shaft required, and no need for oversized
inverters or load shedding.

Everyone has different needs, wants, and budget, but I think you'll
find that more and more people have a potential combination of house
loads that need such capacity that shop use isn't a leap. Around here
for instance are many who need to power the surge of a 2 hp well pump,
along with other use concurrent. It can be done with a smaller
inverter and a generator, but it's sure nice to get that generator
time down if you can. We used to have a couple nearby who had a
generator/battery/inverter setup, over 10 hours generator time per
day. That's about 4000 hours and 2000 gallons of fuel per year. I
think the fuel cost, repair costs, and eventual generator replacement
cost were big factors in their pulling out after a few years. Even a
modest amount of PV could have cut that generator time in half, and
would have been far cheaper in the long run. Better still, the cost of
that (very nice) generator and fuel could have bought a combination of
hardware including a much smaller generator needing only a few hours
per week run time.

Somehow it seems to cost
more to live self sufficient off-grid than it does to just pay the
utilities...

Not necessarily. Cashing out of a grid-connected place allowed us to
retire, start with a clean slate, and as the yuppies say, "leverage"
the advantages of home power to help keep the big picture cost down.
Cheap land, lower taxes, fewer utilities (still need the phone
company) are some of the benefits. In talking to off-gridders, I find
that the main factor affecting success isn't so much the power issues,
but whether the folks can afford and are comfortable with truly rural
living. For most, that usually means retirement or telecommuting, and
precludes having children at home. For those who need to commute or be
close to school busses etc., they're usually stuck with paying the
premium for grid access. Then again, when they want to generate their
own power, they can have cheaper and more efficient systems, and use
the grid for storage.

Wayne




----== Posted via Newsfeeds.Com - Unlimited-Uncensored-Secure Usenet News==----
http://www.newsfeeds.com The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World! 120,000+ Newsgroups
----= East and West-Coast Server Farms - Total Privacy via Encryption =----

On Fri, 17 Jun 2005 18:02:44 GMT, "Pete C."
wrote:

See my notes below saving four steps of energy conversion for
applications where you are able to use air power directly such as nail
guns and die grinders. Four fewer conversion steps *has* to be more
efficient.

You only need to calculate the numbers for volume and consumption, as
I'm in agreement that with good wind, it's feasible that a resourceful
scrounger could put up sufficient rotor area.

It is far cheaper and lower maintenance to use a
large air or water reservoir than to use a huge string of batteries with
limited life spans and hazardous lead and acid to dispose of properly at
every battery replacement.

Excellent point, and I've committed it to memory in case I decide to
do a utility-scale installation. :-)

The batteries in your string may last what, perhaps 8 years?

They're nearly ten years old now, and I won't be surprised if they
make 15 or 20. But home power systems pretty well always need *some*
batteries, so all we're talking about is whether the size could be
reduced somewhat by an additional system. And keep in mind that a
primary goal of home power (at least at my place), is to minimize the
energy that makes a trip through the batteries.

Perhaps because I haven't seen the concept even proposed in any
alternate energy books. As far as I know CAS and PH are both fairly new
concepts that originated from electric utilities need for a way to store
excess generating capacity during off peak times for use in peak shaving
later.

Well, since my uh, somewhat unconventional neighbor ;-) thought of
doing compressed air, I think that if it were viable for home power,
it should have become popular by now. The subject of home power scale
pumped hydro comes up here regularly, and those impossible numbers can
be found in the archives.

This would primarily apply to wind generation where peak gusts could
produce power faster than the batteries could accept it, causing that
power to be dissipated by the charge controller.

I've never heard of that being an issue, and it certainly hasn't come
up at my place, which has a high ratio of wind charging capacity to
battery size, and some pretty gusty winds.

Any reason not to combine both and put up your tall tower with the
electric gen up top and hang a compressor at a lower point on the same
tower?

I think that once you run some numbers, you'll find that an air system
with the capacity you're thinking of will need several big rotors.
While I do have a small wind turbine scabbed onto my tower some
distance from the top, I couldn't add even one Bowjon type thing the
same way. Cheap rotors (multi-piece sheet metal) end up being pretty
heavy. IIRC, the Bowjon has a gearbox as well as the pump.

Guess you just need to setup a heat exchanger from your inverter(s) to
capture the waste heat for your DHW.

If you're serious, I'd like to see some numbers. How much can the
waste heat from 12kWhrs of inverter use raise the temperature of 80
gallons of water? And how practical is it to capture that by adding
yet another element to a solar water-heating system?

Soft start inverter drive to a three phase well pump with an unloader
valve? :)

Except for the unloader valve which isn't required, that's an approach
I've recommended previously here, partly because the drop in wire size
can save a few bucks on a deep hole. But you're still talking about a
good-sized inverter, plus a transformer, plus a VFD. Considering the
other benefits of dual inverters, our preference was to do that
instead, even though at 1/2hp a VFD wasn't required here, so the
savings on that didn't count.

The only way to get reasonable efficiency out of a gen/bat/inv setup is
to size the generator to just barely above the average load and run it
24x7, and that requires a pretty specialized generator to handle that
duty. Not something I'd consider unless I had my own nat gas well, or
bio-gas generator.

Why do you say 24-7? An affordable startup concept I've recommended to
a few is an inverter/charger, batteries, and a Honda EU series. Run
the generator, say, every day for a couple of hours at max output
during peak load times, and for several hours every so often for
battery health. Add solar, wind, etc. as budget allows until generator
time is minimal. For example - DR1512, EU2000, and a string of
batteries from Sam's Club - perhaps $2k total.

Looks like you had to go to some extremes to get your Internet
connectivity.

We were fortunate to be the telco's guinea pig for a couple of radio
systems. The current one gives us multiple POTS lines (although we
only use one) plus DSL. Standard bill, same as if we were hard-wired.
Satellite intenet and next gen wi-fi brings similar connectivity to
just about anyone who needs it.

Perhaps as I'm able to build up some AE projects I'll be able to cut
operating expenses enough to start to get ahead.

You have a home shop and an idea for a cheaper alternative to
batteries, the cost of which home power users love to complain about.
Do I need to spell it out for you? ;-)

Wayne

On Fri, 17 Jun 2005 15:14:41 -0500, "Arnold Walker"
wrote:

"wmbjk" wrote in message
.. .

How big a tank? I think you're going to find a fly in the ointment
once you run some numbers on air consumption. And if air power could
be so efficient and practical, why do you believe it is that
off-gridders, often known to be innovative and unafraid of breaking
with convention, haven't flocked to the concept?

Another fly in the oiment on your battery remark.....if batteries are so
much effecient
at storaging .Why are repair shop using air tools instead battery powered
tools.

For the same reason that I use many air tools in my own shop - because
they're often lighter, cheaper, and more compact than electric
versions. Sometimes efficiency isn't very important.

Now, if compressed air is so much more efficient than batteries, then
why do *you* think that we're seeing ICE/battery hybrid cars driving
around, but not ICE/air hybrids?

Wayne

Another fly in the oiment on your battery remark.....if batteries are so
much effecient
at storaging .Why are repair shop using air tools instead battery powered
tools.

1] Habit; they were taught with air tools
2] They don't care a whit about efficiency
3] Seen a 300ft/lb cordless impact wrench lately?
4] electricity+gasoline=bad

wmbjk wrote:

On Fri, 17 Jun 2005 18:02:44 GMT, "Pete C."
wrote:

See my notes below saving four steps of energy conversion for
applications where you are able to use air power directly such as nail
guns and die grinders. Four fewer conversion steps *has* to be more
efficient.

You only need to calculate the numbers for volume and consumption, as
I'm in agreement that with good wind, it's feasible that a resourceful
scrounger could put up sufficient rotor area.

You would need the right location and the right shop use to make it
practical. Good wind and a custom cabinet shop perhaps.


It is far cheaper and lower maintenance to use a
large air or water reservoir than to use a huge string of batteries with
limited life spans and hazardous lead and acid to dispose of properly at
every battery replacement.

Excellent point, and I've committed it to memory in case I decide to
do a utility-scale installation. :-)

The batteries in your string may last what, perhaps 8 years?

They're nearly ten years old now, and I won't be surprised if they
make 15 or 20. But home power systems pretty well always need *some*
batteries, so all we're talking about is whether the size could be
reduced somewhat by an additional system. And keep in mind that a
primary goal of home power (at least at my place), is to minimize the
energy that makes a trip through the batteries.

That's pretty good battery life, you must keep on top of the
maintenance.


Perhaps because I haven't seen the concept even proposed in any
alternate energy books. As far as I know CAS and PH are both fairly new
concepts that originated from electric utilities need for a way to store
excess generating capacity during off peak times for use in peak shaving
later.

Well, since my uh, somewhat unconventional neighbor ;-) thought of
doing compressed air, I think that if it were viable for home power,
it should have become popular by now. The subject of home power scale
pumped hydro comes up here regularly, and those impossible numbers can
be found in the archives.

PH is indeed not feasible for 99.9% of potential homepower locations,
CAS is far more feasible.


This would primarily apply to wind generation where peak gusts could
produce power faster than the batteries could accept it, causing that
power to be dissipated by the charge controller.

I've never heard of that being an issue, and it certainly hasn't come
up at my place, which has a high ratio of wind charging capacity to
battery size, and some pretty gusty winds.

I don't have any cites for it, but it seems quite reasonable to me to
think that there could be windy times when the gen is capable of
supplying more power than the charger is drawing, much like the gas
generator running with the potential to supply say 4kw and a load on it
of only 2kw.


Any reason not to combine both and put up your tall tower with the
electric gen up top and hang a compressor at a lower point on the same
tower?

I think that once you run some numbers, you'll find that an air system
with the capacity you're thinking of will need several big rotors.
While I do have a small wind turbine scabbed onto my tower some
distance from the top, I couldn't add even one Bowjon type thing the
same way. Cheap rotors (multi-piece sheet metal) end up being pretty
heavy. IIRC, the Bowjon has a gearbox as well as the pump.

Tower loading is always an important thing to keep track of.


Guess you just need to setup a heat exchanger from your inverter(s) to
capture the waste heat for your DHW.

If you're serious, I'd like to see some numbers. How much can the
waste heat from 12kWhrs of inverter use raise the temperature of 80
gallons of water? And how practical is it to capture that by adding
yet another element to a solar water-heating system?

Well, they have systems for recapturing waste heat from showers
available commercially. They also have the energy recovery ventilators
to recover some of the heat from the stale air they are exhausting.
Someone's done the math on those items and determined that it's
worthwhile.

Unless you're in a cold climate where you can always directly utilize
the waste heat for space heating I'd think there would be some merit to
using it for preheat of water to the DHW system. Probably also slightly
increase the life and efficiency of the inverter.


Soft start inverter drive to a three phase well pump with an unloader
valve? :)

Except for the unloader valve which isn't required, that's an approach
I've recommended previously here, partly because the drop in wire size
can save a few bucks on a deep hole. But you're still talking about a
good-sized inverter, plus a transformer, plus a VFD. Considering the
other benefits of dual inverters, our preference was to do that
instead, even though at 1/2hp a VFD wasn't required here, so the
savings on that didn't count.

What's the transformer for? Most applications for VFDs that I've seen
don't use them. Many of the small to mid sized VFDs are specifically
rated to take single phase input and they're also a lot more reasonably
priced these days. At some point I'll replace the rotary phase converter
(home built, $20 in materials) on my Bridgeport with a VFD.


The only way to get reasonable efficiency out of a gen/bat/inv setup is
to size the generator to just barely above the average load and run it
24x7, and that requires a pretty specialized generator to handle that
duty. Not something I'd consider unless I had my own nat gas well, or
bio-gas generator.

Why do you say 24-7? An affordable startup concept I've recommended to
a few is an inverter/charger, batteries, and a Honda EU series. Run
the generator, say, every day for a couple of hours at max output
during peak load times, and for several hours every so often for
battery health. Add solar, wind, etc. as budget allows until generator
time is minimal. For example - DR1512, EU2000, and a string of
batteries from Sam's Club - perhaps $2k total.

That can work fine as long as the goal is to gradually add other
sources. If the plan is to stick with the generator as you comment I was
replying to implied, then the 24x7 operation is what should allow you to
operate at peak efficiency.


Looks like you had to go to some extremes to get your Internet
connectivity.

We were fortunate to be the telco's guinea pig for a couple of radio
systems. The current one gives us multiple POTS lines (although we
only use one) plus DSL. Standard bill, same as if we were hard-wired.
Satellite intenet and next gen wi-fi brings similar connectivity to
just about anyone who needs it.

I looked into satellite not long ago when I was moving to TX. Looks like
it's fine for general use, but it doesn't handle VPN for telecommuting
well at all.

Where I ended up I have cable modem which I got with the package deal
that comes with the expanded digital cable, and two phone lines from the
telco in a rotary hunt group with flat rate long distance. Work pays for
the cable modem and the second phone line, so I get quite a bit of
communications capability and halfway decent TV pretty cheap.


Perhaps as I'm able to build up some AE projects I'll be able to cut
operating expenses enough to start to get ahead.

You have a home shop and an idea for a cheaper alternative to
batteries, the cost of which home power users love to complain about.
Do I need to spell it out for you? ;-)

Well, up first on my list is a solar water heater to take over for the
electric one the place came with. Should be a really easy project that
will have a short payback time. Solar A/C will be a bit more
complicated.

Pete C.

yourname wrote:


Another fly in the oiment on your battery remark.....if batteries are so
much effecient
at storaging .Why are repair shop using air tools instead battery powered
tools.

1] Habit; they were taught with air tools
2] They don't care a whit about efficiency
3] Seen a 300ft/lb cordless impact wrench lately?
4] electricity+gasoline=bad

Partly true, but the big ones in the auto shop environment are cost and
durability. Air tools are much more durable than most battery powered
tools, and their cost relative to their performance is low since the
real power source for all those air tools is one big compressor and it
is directly providing mechanical energy to the tool.

Pete C.

Because it wouldn't.

"Pete C." wrote in message
...

Why would the Japanese devalue their product by putting "Made in USA" on
it?

Pete C.

"Scott Willing" wrote in message
...
On Thu, 16 Jun 2005 09:30:54 -0700, "Ulysses"
wrote:


"Scott Willing" wrote in message
.. .
On 15 Jun 2005 11:36:20 -0700, "Too_Many_Tools"
wrote:

Thanks for the reply.


I started out at 12V primary by virtue of buying a house with an
existing PV system. Like many frontier homebrew systems, it had
started as a purely DC system to which an inverter was added later.

Having no plumbing in the house, I've acquired a number of small 12V
pumps for various specific purposes, such as our bucket shower.

Just curious, but how do you go to the bathroom? Composting toilet?

Yes and no. :-) We have a simple sawdust bucket toilet that sits
beside a commercial composting toilet, now retired. I'm going to tear
out the latter and build a nicer bucket toilet when the time is
available.

Long story, but the commercial toilet is, IMHO, a waste of money.
(Fortunately, wasn't my decision; came with the house.) A bucket
toilet is superior to it in every way.

Most so-called composting toilets, including this one, are actually
evaporating toilets and don't compost per se.

I don't see how ANY of them could actually compost anything when you are
always adding new material. My composting takes place in the compost heap.
That actually works.

Outhouse?

There are two of those here, also retired.

We have shallow groundwater, and an outhouse is an potentially nasty
polluter. Actually septic systems can be just as bad - so many people
manage to pollute their wells with those too. Above-ground aerobic
composting is the way to go IMHO.

-=s
Yea. I built a composting toilet and replaced it with a bigger version (30
gallon) of the bucket toilet. I overcame the weight problem by putting a
drain at the bottom that goes into a hole (covered, of course) and I used
weeds chopped with a lawnmower or peat moss when there are no weeds instead
of sawdust. My well is about 300 feet away and down 126 feet. I've given
some thought to having it go into a solar still and then only clean water
would reach the ground. Haven't figured out yet how to clean the solar
still though. Might be ugly and stinky.

"wmbjk" wrote in message
...
On Thu, 16 Jun 2005 15:43:10 GMT, "Pete C."
wrote:

Too_Many_Tools wrote:

I would agree but an VFD that is unnecessary is a current draw that is
not needed.

Like any system, one needs to plan a workshop as a whole.

At this point, I could go single phase, 3 phase or DC motors on on all
my machines. One of the reasons why I started this discussion was to
make that decision based partially on the experiences of others who
have hopefully gone before me.

TMT

I've been following this thread with some interest and now have some
thoughts and comments to add to it.

I may have missed something along the way, but I don't recall you
specifying what type(s) of alternative energy sources you have
available. This makes quite a difference in determining the best
options.

As an example, if your alternate source(s) provide mechanical power such
as found with water power, wind power, or a solar boiler driving a
turbine or steam engine, then air power could be quite advantageous.

A source of mechanical energy can directly drive a compressor head,
saving the extremely inefficient conversions to electricity and back.
Compressed air is easy and economical to store in large volumes and is
free from the chemical hazards of batteries. Useable service life of
compressed air tanks is much higher than batteries as well.

Wind driven compressor - storage tank - air motors? Could be OK if
one had a really windy site, lots of surplus pressure vessels, and a
plenty of rotor diameter. To get an idea of the diameter versus work
produced, check out the size and pumping rates of Bowjon well pumps.

In addition to the obvious air tools, compressed air can also be used to
power things such as refrigeration if you use the belt driven type
refrigeration compressors.

Mechanical drive all the way to the pump? That would work well with a
large mill, when the wind is blowing, and be as efficient as these
http://www.deanbennett.com/windmills.htm. But in that application
there's the advantage of easy storage for when there's no wind.

Those mechanical energy sources can also simultaneously drive electrical
generators to charge conventional batteries for loads such as lighting.

Which is why the conventional rotor/alternator is so popular with home
power users. Ours is similar to this one
http://www.windenergy.com/whisper_200.htm.

Battery charging for cordless tools is no less efficient that the
charging of your "regular" battery string, as long as the charging is
limited to peak energy generation times.

For the usual home power setup, cordless tools are no more and no less
advantageous than they are on-grid. Unless the power setup is very
small, the double conversion isn't worth trying to work around.

The efficiency of converting DC from your battery string to AC so you
can use conventional appliances is fairly good with modern inverters.
The conversion efficiency also improves when you use a higher voltage
battery string since inverters switching higher voltages at lower
currents will have lower resistive / heat losses.

Solar PV conversion efficiency is incredibly low to begin with and PV
cost is high so if that is your only energy source you really do need to
watch every miliamp.

That depends. On very small systems, it's often true. Our setup isn't
huge, and costs about as much as a medium priced SUV. The idle loads
are about 100 Watts 24-7. That's a waste versus
convenience/practicality issue, and it's a long way from watching
every milliamp.

Of course, even with that inefficiency a solar PV
panel charging batteries for your cordless tools is just fine as long as
it has the capacity to keep up with your usage.

For items like welders that require huge gulps of power it's really
difficult to get away from an IC engine / generator for practicality.

Not necessarily. Home welding tends to be short duration. The hardware
to supply that kind of power is actually affordable, and if one is
designing the power system from scratch for what most would consider a
normal home, then the extra inverter capacity isn't a big deal. In our
case, for the house loads alone we could have gotten away with a
single SW4024 plus a transformer for the 220V loads.

How is this done, getting 220V from 110? How do you get the two "hot"
wires? Are there 2 secondary windings on the transformer? Wouldn't they
need to be out of phase with each other?

He stated the method in his last sentence. Transformer.

"Ulysses" wrote in message
...
How is this done, getting 220V from 110? How do you get the two "hot"
wires? Are there 2 secondary windings on the transformer? Wouldn't they
need to be out of phase with each other?

Ulysses wrote:
"Scott Willing" wrote in message
....
Most so-called composting toilets, including this one, are actually
evaporating toilets and don't compost per se.

I don't see how ANY of them could actually compost anything when you are
always adding new material. My composting takes place in the compost heap.
That actually works.

As I understand it, composting toilets always have a second compartment
where the final composting takes place before the stuff is removed.

We have shallow groundwater, and an outhouse is an potentially nasty
polluter. Actually septic systems can be just as bad - so many people
manage to pollute their wells with those too. Above-ground aerobic
composting is the way to go IMHO.

Yea. I built a composting toilet and replaced it with a bigger version (30
gallon) of the bucket toilet. I overcame the weight problem by putting a
drain at the bottom that goes into a hole (covered, of course) and I used
weeds chopped with a lawnmower or peat moss when there are no weeds instead
of sawdust. My well is about 300 feet away and down 126 feet. I've given
some thought to having it go into a solar still and then only clean water
would reach the ground. Haven't figured out yet how to clean the solar
still though. Might be ugly and stinky.

You might instead use a solar evaporator so that only vapor escapes.
The fellows doing those earthships (tire houses) did a bit of work on
these things. I found a page of theirs...
http://www.earthship.org/systems/sewage.php

Apparently they prefer to use a solar heated septic tank that drains
into a large outdoor lined planter. Plants do seem to do a good job
at both removing pollutants and evaporating water.

Anthony

On Fri, 17 Jun 2005 17:31:42 -0700, "Ulysses"
wrote:


"Scott Willing" wrote in message
.. .
On Thu, 16 Jun 2005 09:30:54 -0700, "Ulysses"
wrote:


"Scott Willing" wrote in message
.. .
On 15 Jun 2005 11:36:20 -0700, "Too_Many_Tools"
wrote:

Thanks for the reply.


I started out at 12V primary by virtue of buying a house with an
existing PV system. Like many frontier homebrew systems, it had
started as a purely DC system to which an inverter was added later.

Having no plumbing in the house, I've acquired a number of small 12V
pumps for various specific purposes, such as our bucket shower.

Just curious, but how do you go to the bathroom? Composting toilet?

Yes and no. :-) We have a simple sawdust bucket toilet that sits
beside a commercial composting toilet, now retired. I'm going to tear
out the latter and build a nicer bucket toilet when the time is
available.

Long story, but the commercial toilet is, IMHO, a waste of money.
(Fortunately, wasn't my decision; came with the house.) A bucket
toilet is superior to it in every way.

Most so-called composting toilets, including this one, are actually
evaporating toilets and don't compost per se.

I don't see how ANY of them could actually compost anything when you are
always adding new material.

I don't see a problem with that. I add fresh material to the top of
our working pile once a week until the bin is full and we let 'er
rest. The most active thermophilic zone *is* right near the top where
the new material is added. Our working bin is toasting along at 120
degrees F right at the moment.

We learned a lot from Joe Jenkin's "Humanure Handbook" e.g. that we
don't need to do a lot of work turning the pile, and that doing so can
actually kill the thermophilic action. That's exactly what we've found
in practice. Haven't flipped a pile since.

My composting takes place in the compost heap.
That actually works.

Yep.


Outhouse?

There are two of those here, also retired.

We have shallow groundwater, and an outhouse is an potentially nasty
polluter. Actually septic systems can be just as bad - so many people
manage to pollute their wells with those too. Above-ground aerobic
composting is the way to go IMHO.

-=s
Yea. I built a composting toilet and replaced it with a bigger version (30
gallon) of the bucket toilet. I overcame the weight problem by putting a
drain at the bottom that goes into a hole (covered, of course) and I used
weeds chopped with a lawnmower or peat moss when there are no weeds instead
of sawdust.

I'm fortunate enough to have two small smallmills run by neighbors
within a few miles. We tried leaves and stuff but kept bringing in too
many bugs with 'em.

My well is about 300 feet away and down 126 feet.

Excellent.

I've given
some thought to having it go into a solar still and then only clean water
would reach the ground. Haven't figured out yet how to clean the solar
still though. Might be ugly and stinky.

One reason I like the bucket thing is 'cos the pee just goes into the
pile where it contributes nitrogen and helps to keep it at the right
moisture level.

One of our problems with the commercial unit was that no matter what
we did we would eventually end up with flies, e.g. fungus gnats,
living in there. The buckets don't sit around long enough for anything
to breed in 'em.

I thought when we build the new house I might like to try a vault, but
the fly thing really worries me. Plus, we're trying to keep to a
single-story design with no stairs which kinda precludes that anyway.
Best site we have is on a hill though, so there's still the
possibility for ground-level access to a lower-level vault. Dunno.

I'll keep the commercial toilet around just to install it
(temporarily) for getting approvals... something prior residents here
haven't had to concern themselves with.

-=s

LOL....good one!

"Pete C." wrote in message
...

Why would the Japanese devalue their product by putting "Made in USA" on
it?

Pete C.

That is because the contract didn't spell their name correctly like you did.

"Me" wrote in message
...
Remeber the Red chineese never did pay us back for WWII........


Me

In article ,
Ulysses wrote:

Not necessarily. Home welding tends to be short duration. The hardware
to supply that kind of power is actually affordable, and if one is
designing the power system from scratch for what most would consider a
normal home, then the extra inverter capacity isn't a big deal. In our
case, for the house loads alone we could have gotten away with a
single SW4024 plus a transformer for the 220V loads.

How is this done, getting 220V from 110? How do you get the two "hot"
wires? Are there 2 secondary windings on the transformer? Wouldn't they
need to be out of phase with each other?

The magic is "the right transformer'. grin

a 2:1 step-up tranformer.

120V primary
240V center-tapped secondary.


No magic. just good engineering.

On Fri, 17 Jun 2005 09:18:47 -0400, "Glenn Ashmore"
wrote:

Actually the US worked with both the Nationalists and the Communists during
WWII. The Chinese Communists were very helpful during WWII. The
Nationalist government, army and police were largely corrupt while the
Communist were much better disciplined and effective at fighting the
Japanese. That is also why it was so easy for them to chase the
Nationalists off the mainland. We supplied them with quite a bit of arms
and equipment. The communists returned any escaped POWs to US units while
the nationalist were just as likely to give them back to the Japanese if the
money was right.

It was only after the war when the Communists started gaining ground and Mao
aligned himself closer to Stalin that we started getting nervous.

Yep. Not that any of the wingers would know that. Or the
revisionists, working way at history in the US.
The Communists were the reformers. They'd had enough of
the corruption.
The US may have pushed them towards Stalin by supporting
the corrupt Nationalists.

Where's Hamei when you need him?
--
Cliff

"Anthony Matonak" wrote in message
...
Ulysses wrote:
"Scott Willing" wrote in message
...
Most so-called composting toilets, including this one, are actually
evaporating toilets and don't compost per se.

I don't see how ANY of them could actually compost anything when you are
always adding new material. My composting takes place in the compost
heap.
That actually works.

As I understand it, composting toilets always have a second compartment
where the final composting takes place before the stuff is removed.

Yes, and so did mine. The problem I had was I built one that should have
had enough capacity for 5 people but I had to empty it somewhat every 2 or 3
days with 4 people using it. The stuff would sit in the drawer for only 2
days then have to be emptied into a compost heap. With my extra-large
bucket toilet I need to empty it every 7-10 days. Less work for me and a
lot less complicated. No moving parts.

I think in order for a composting toilet to work for a family of 4 it would
have to have a capacity of at least 200 gallons, probably more. It would be
huge and, if a drum type, would probably require an engine to turn it.

We have shallow groundwater, and an outhouse is an potentially nasty
polluter. Actually septic systems can be just as bad - so many people
manage to pollute their wells with those too. Above-ground aerobic
composting is the way to go IMHO.

Yea. I built a composting toilet and replaced it with a bigger version
(30
gallon) of the bucket toilet. I overcame the weight problem by putting
a
drain at the bottom that goes into a hole (covered, of course) and I
used
weeds chopped with a lawnmower or peat moss when there are no weeds
instead
of sawdust. My well is about 300 feet away and down 126 feet. I've
given
some thought to having it go into a solar still and then only clean
water
would reach the ground. Haven't figured out yet how to clean the solar
still though. Might be ugly and stinky.

You might instead use a solar evaporator so that only vapor escapes.
The fellows doing those earthships (tire houses) did a bit of work on
these things. I found a page of theirs...
http://www.earthship.org/systems/sewage.php

Thanks for the idea. I'll look into it.


Apparently they prefer to use a solar heated septic tank that drains
into a large outdoor lined planter. Plants do seem to do a good job
at both removing pollutants and evaporating water.

Probably wouldn't work for me because so little liquid leaves the toilet.
This methods seems to work well for flushing toilets though.


Anthony