In article
,
harry wrote:
Have you managed to design a car which runs without electricity? If not
suggest an alternative way of generating it. Solar panels, maybe?

I have already mentioned the thermopile in the exhaust VW are working
on. This uses energy that otherwise would be lost.

Yes, you have mentioned it. It is likely just another pie in the sky idea.
Car makers do research on things they know from the start will never end
up being used. That research may well throw up some useful things to be
used elsewhere, though.

--
*Puritanism: The haunting fear that someone, somewhere may be happy.

Dave Plowman London SW
To e-mail, change noise into sound.

In article
,
harry wrote:
Its very efficient. Probably 80% or better.

Wrong as usual TurNiP.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Alterna...ve_alternators

Efficiency of automotive alternators is limited by fan cooling loss,
bearing loss, iron loss, copper loss, and the voltage drop in the
diode bridges. At partial load efficiency is between 50-62% depending
on the size of alternator and varies with alternator speed.[8] This is
similar to very small high-performance permanent magnet alternators,
such as those used for bicycle lighting systems, which achieve an
efficiency around 60%.

What's the efficiency of your solar panels, Harry?

--
*Rehab is for quitters.

Dave Plowman London SW
To e-mail, change noise into sound.

In article
,
harry wrote:
And engine wear is a problem these days? Most cars go to the scrapyard
on their original engine.


No need to rest on laurels. Engines could normally last a million
miles.
Most wear occurs on startup. Wear reduces efficiency.

Can you give some figures about this? Most engines are more efficient
after thousands of miles use than when new.

But electric motors could last longer than that.

But the rest of the vehicle won't. And electric motors still have bearings
which can and will fail.

The batteries are the problem.

And likely always will be. Despite the hype. And the idiots who think they
already exist.

--
*Heart attacks... God's revenge for eating his animal friends

Dave Plowman London SW
To e-mail, change noise into sound.

In article
,
harry wrote:
All electricity producing devices need energy to manufacture.
But with renewables it's a one off.

They last forever? I must have imagined all those broken windmills, then.

--
*You're just jealous because the voices only talk to me *

Dave Plowman London SW
To e-mail, change noise into sound.

On Mon, 24 Sep 2012 20:27:52 +0100, tony sayer wrote:


I remember driving a rather olde Lotus many years ago that had vacuum
headlamps .. foot to the floor lamps down.. Back off the power lamps
up;!...

Sort of inbuilt speed limiter I suppose;!...

You had a faulty non return valve in the vacuum line. The biggest problem is
raising the lamps at high speed as it is very easy for them to overtravel and
crack the fibreglass on the body.

Early cars used vacuum to raise the lamps, later ones moved to failsafe lamps
that were raised by a spring and needed the vacuum to stay down.


--

On Mon, 24 Sep 2012 09:03:53 -0700 (PDT), harry
wrote:

When the oil runs outbecomes rare/expensive and all energy costs more,
solar panels will be even more viable because they need no oil to run.

At that point you will find solar panels get stoned to death alongside those
previously receiving the FIT payment.

Welcome to the new stone age, caused by thousands of money grabbing greedy
*******s like you.

--

In article
,
harry wrote:
On Sep 24, 5:24 pm, John Williamson
wrote:
harry wrote:
On Sep 24, 10:49 am, "Dave Plowman (News)"
wrote:
Of course there are alternatives. But in the event of oil running
out those alternatives will massively shoot up in price. Making
solar panels even more uneconomic.
.

When the oil runs outbecomes rare/expensive and all energy costs more,
solar panels will be even more viable because they need no oil to run.

At the same time as they become more expensive to make and buy due to
the increased cost of the energy used to make them.

If you build an oil fired power station you need oil to build it and
oil to run it.

With a renewable energy source you might need oil to build it and then
nothing.
That is what TurNiP can't/won't get his fat head round.

My PV panels will last 25 years without further expense.

Keep that statement in mind when they fail before that. Even if the panels
don't the control gear will.

The drop in efficiency is less than 1%/year.

assuming you get up to clean them on a regular basis.

--
From KT24

Using a RISC OS computer running v5.18

On 25/09/12 11:40, Tim Streater wrote:
In article
,
harry wrote:

With a renewable energy source you might need oil to build it and then
nothing.

Not nothing, harry. You need backup for when it's dark or there is no wind.

Possibly the Aussies might make solar work with their molten salt heat
storage, which powers the gennies overnight. But then they have billyuns
of sq miles of desert and *reliable* sunshine. And it still remains to
be seen how it compares to nuclear, neither am I sure how well it'd work
in winter.


Is that anything like http://www.archimedesolarenergy.com/ The new
factory was in the same half finished state this summer as it was a year
ago.

--
djc

On Sep 25, 11:32*am, "Dave Plowman (News)"
wrote:
In article
,
* *harry wrote:

Its very efficient. Probably 80% or better.

Wrong as usual TurNiP.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Alterna...ve_alternators
Efficiency of automotive alternators is limited by fan cooling loss,
bearing loss, iron loss, copper loss, and the voltage drop in the
diode bridges. At partial load efficiency is between 50-62% depending
on the size of alternator and varies with alternator speed.[8] This is
similar to very small high-performance permanent magnet alternators,
such as those used for bicycle lighting systems, which achieve an
efficiency around 60%.

What's the efficiency of your solar panels, Harry?


Around 11%.
But neither here nor there as sunshine is free. You have to pay for
petrol etc.
You can buy ones of around 14% (Cost more).
There are ones in the laboratory of around 40%.
Early days yet.

On Sep 25, 11:40*am, Tim Streater wrote:
In article
,

*harry wrote:
With a renewable energy source you might need oil to build it and then
nothing.

Not nothing, harry. You need backup for when it's dark or there is no
wind.

Possibly the Aussies might make solar work with their molten salt heat
storage, which powers the gennies overnight. But then they have billyuns
of sq miles of desert and *reliable* sunshine. And it still remains to
be seen how it compares to nuclear, neither am I sure how well it'd work
in winter.

--
Tim

"That excessive bail ought not to be required, nor excessive fines imposed,
nor cruel and unusual punishments inflicted" *-- *Bill of Rights 1689

Early days yet. We need as many different technologies as possible.
We need the smart grid.
There will be a backup, gas turbine eg
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pembroke_Power_Station
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Connah%..._Power_Station
Can be quickly started and high turndown ratio.
Renewable energy is about saving fuel. Capital costs will be higher
but so will the cost of energy in general.
And we're all going to have to use less.

On Sep 25, 12:07*pm, "Dave Plowman (News)"
wrote:
In article
,
* *harry wrote:

All electricity producing devices need energy to manufacture.
But with renewables it's a one off.

They last forever? I must have imagined all those broken windmills, then.


Early days.

On Sep 25, 12:11*pm, The Other Mike
wrote:
On Mon, 24 Sep 2012 09:03:53 -0700 (PDT), harry
wrote:

When the oil runs outbecomes rare/expensive and all energy costs more,
solar panels will be even more viable because they need no oil to run.

At that point you will find solar panels get stoned to death alongside those
previously receiving the FIT payment.

Welcome to the new stone age, caused by thousands of money grabbing greedy
*******s like you.

--

Well you are a sad, dullwitted, head in the sand *******.
You just can't get your head round the fact that there is no
alternative.

"Dave Plowman (News)" wrote in message
...
In article ,
Doctor Drivel wrote:

"Dave Plowman (News)" wrote in message
...
In article
,
harry wrote:
Volkswagen have been experimenting with thermpiles in the exhaust to
make electricity and thus eliminating the alternator.

Crikey. An alternator is actually a very efficient device. Sounds like
they're clutching at straws.

NO, using waste heat to produce electricity . Run a 100A alternator off
an electric motor. Most take around a 8 to 9 Hp motor to turn it when
charging. That is they take about 9 hp off the crank.

I think you've finally flipped. Use an electric motor to generate
electricity...

Effing senile fool.

Remove that, the mechanical oil pump, water pump, a/c and replace all
with electric and the fuel consumption rises, as the parasite hp
suckers are not sucking off the engine. An oil pump alone can consume
10hp off the crank.

Just do without one then. Who needs oil circulating in an engine?

Effing senile fool.

Then a smaller engine is needed reducing fuel consumption yet again. All
simple stuff that can be done tomorrow.

Parasite engine ancillaries can take one third of the HP from an engine.
Removing them and having a mechanism that charges the battery by waste
heat and kinetic energy is the answer to make these useless inefficient
crocks last a few more years before EVs take over fully.

And all you need to do

Effing senile fool.

On Sep 25, 2:23*pm, charles wrote:
In article
,
* *harry wrote:









On Sep 24, 5:24 pm, John Williamson
wrote:
harry wrote:
On Sep 24, 10:49 am, "Dave Plowman (News)"
wrote:
Of course there are alternatives. But in the event of oil running
out those alternatives will massively shoot up in price. Making
solar panels even more uneconomic.
.

When the oil runs outbecomes rare/expensive and all energy costs more,
solar panels will be even more viable because they need no oil to run.

At the same time as they become more expensive to make and buy due to
the increased cost of the energy used to make them.
If you build an oil fired power station you need oil to build it and
oil to run it.
With a renewable energy source you might need oil to build it and then
nothing.
That is what TurNiP can't/won't get his fat head round.
My PV panels will last 25 years without further expense.

Keep that statement in mind when they fail before that. *Even if the panels
don't the control gear will.

The drop in efficiency is less than 1%/year.

assuming you get up to clean them on a regular basis.

Unnecessary unless they are (near) horizontal. The rain washes them
clean.
They will still be producing free energy when fossil fuels cost ten
times what they are now.

"tony sayer" wrote in message
...
In article , Doctor Drivel invalid@not-
for-mail.invalid scribeth thus

"Dave Plowman (News)" wrote in message
...
In article
,
harry wrote:
Volkswagen have been experimenting with thermpiles in the exhaust to
make electricity and thus eliminating the alternator.

Crikey. An alternator is actually a very efficient device. Sounds like
they're clutching at straws.

NO, using waste heat to produce electricity . Run a 100A alternator off
an
electric motor.

Eh?, Where or what is powering is err umm rotary converter system?..

Read again.

harry wrote:
On Sep 24, 10:49 am, "Dave Plowman (News)"
wrote:
In article
,
harry wrote:

Volkswagen have been experimenting with thermpiles in the exhaust to
make electricity and thus eliminating the alternator.

Crikey. An alternator is actually a very efficient device. Sounds
like they're clutching at straws.

An automotive alternator is very inefficient. And not having it
removes a parasitic load from the IC engine.

Harry fantastic, you got it! Unlike some other seniles. An alternator can
take 9-15hp off an engine. Remove it, the mechanical parasitical loads like
oil pump, water pump, a/c, and the HP of an engine will rise substantially.
Then the engines can be downsized reducing fuel consumption again.

Just having an alternator with a clutch that cuts out when accelerating mean
the engine can be downsized and acceleration improved. Also the starter
motors can be downsized as well (cheaper & less weight and power drawn from
the battery). All this is easy to do, like the next model update could have
it all - Instead of a 1600cc the engine could be 1300cc.

charles wrote:
In article
,
harry wrote:
On Sep 24, 10:49 am, "Dave Plowman (News)"
wrote:
In article
,
harry wrote:

Volkswagen have been experimenting with thermpiles in the exhaust
to make electricity and thus eliminating the alternator.

Crikey. An alternator is actually a very efficient device. Sounds
like they're clutching at straws.

An automotive alternator is very inefficient. And not having it
removes a parasitic load from the IC engine.

but how else would you run lights, etc?

Read back on Harry's posts. ....and then mine.

The Natural Philosopher wrote:
harry wrote:
On Sep 24, 10:49 am, "Dave Plowman (News)"
wrote:
In article
,
harry wrote:

Volkswagen have been experimenting with thermpiles in the exhaust
to make electricity and thus eliminating the alternator.
Crikey. An alternator is actually a very efficient device. Sounds
like they're clutching at straws.

An automotive alternator is very inefficient. And not having it
removes a parasitic load from the IC engine.

Its very efficient. Probably 80% or better.

You never got it.

harry wrote:
On Sep 24, 5:19 pm, The Natural Philosopher
wrote:
harry wrote:
On Sep 24, 10:49 am, "Dave Plowman (News)"
wrote:
In article
,
harry wrote:

Volkswagen have been experimenting with thermpiles in the exhaust
to make electricity and thus eliminating the alternator.
Crikey. An alternator is actually a very efficient device. Sounds
like they're clutching at straws.

An automotive alternator is very inefficient. And not having it
removes a parasitic load from the IC engine.

Its very efficient. Probably 80% or better.

Wrong as usual TurNiP.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Alterna...ve_alternators

Efficiency of automotive alternators is limited by fan cooling loss,
bearing loss, iron loss, copper loss, and the voltage drop in the
diode bridges. At partial load efficiency is between 50-62% depending
on the size of alternator and varies with alternator speed.[8] This is
similar to very small high-performance permanent magnet alternators,
such as those used for bicycle lighting systems, which achieve an
efficiency around 60%.

Spot on Harry. You are doing well.

Dave Plowman (News) wrote:
In article
,
harry wrote:
Its very efficient. Probably 80% or better.

Wrong as usual TurNiP.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Alterna...ve_alternators

Efficiency of automotive alternators is limited by fan cooling loss,
bearing loss, iron loss, copper loss, and the voltage drop in the
diode bridges. At partial load efficiency is between 50-62% depending
on the size of alternator and varies with alternator speed.[8] This
is similar to very small high-performance permanent magnet
alternators, such as those used for bicycle lighting systems, which
achieve an efficiency around 60%.

What's the efficiency of your solar panels, Harry?

This senile one thinks solar panels are alternators on cars.

harry wrote:
On Sep 25, 11:32 am, "Dave Plowman (News)"
wrote:
In article
,
harry wrote:

Its very efficient. Probably 80% or better.

Wrong as usual TurNiP.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Alterna...ve_alternators
Efficiency of automotive alternators is limited by fan cooling loss,
bearing loss, iron loss, copper loss, and the voltage drop in the
diode bridges. At partial load efficiency is between 50-62%
depending on the size of alternator and varies with alternator
speed.[8] This is similar to very small high-performance permanent
magnet alternators, such as those used for bicycle lighting
systems, which achieve an efficiency around 60%.

What's the efficiency of your solar panels, Harry?


Around 11%.
But neither here nor there as sunshine is free. You have to pay for
petrol etc.
You can buy ones of around 14% (Cost more).
There are ones in the laboratory of around 40%.
Early days yet.

All solar panels are 100% efficient as the energy you get is free.

Dave Plowman (News) wrote:
In article ,
Doctor Drivel wrote:
Having all ancillaries electric also gives great control. The oil
pressure can be carefully controlled. Variations in pressure can
detect bearing wear and give a readout to the driver.

We now know what car you drive.

This man is senile.

harry wrote:

The main benefit of an electric oil pump is that you can start it
before starting the IC engine so reducing wear to almost nil.

Harry, many others. It can reduce the HP draw from the engine improving
fuel economy greatly. It gives the right pressure at all times being
variable speed. It can detect bearing wear. I think they are essential. BMW
use them on some engines.

harry wrote:

No need to rest on laurels. Engines could normally last a million
miles.
Most wear occurs on startup. Wear reduces efficiency.

But electric motors could last longer than that.
The batteries are the problem.

Spot on Harry!

Dave Plowman (News) wrote:
In article
,
harry wrote:
And engine wear is a problem these days? Most cars go to the
scrapyard on their original engine.


No need to rest on laurels. Engines could normally last a million
miles.
Most wear occurs on startup. Wear reduces efficiency.

Can you give some figures

snip babble by a senile person

harry wrote:
On Sep 24, 5:24 pm, John Williamson
wrote:
harry wrote:
On Sep 24, 10:49 am, "Dave Plowman (News)"
wrote:
Of course there are alternatives. But in the event of oil running
out those alternatives will massively shoot up in price. Making
solar panels even more uneconomic.
.

When the oil runs outbecomes rare/expensive and all energy costs
more, solar panels will be even more viable because they need no
oil to run.

At the same time as they become more expensive to make and buy due to
the increased cost of the energy used to make them.

If you build an oil fired power station you need oil to build it and
oil to run it.

With a renewable energy source you might need oil to build it and then
nothing.
That is what TurNiP can't/won't get his fat head round.

You are right Harry. The senile Jocko will never get it as he has gone too
far. A hospice is the only thing for him.

My PV panels will last 25 years without further expense. The drop in
efficiency is less than 1%/year.

Spot on Harry.

harry wrote:
On Sep 25, 11:40 am, Tim Streater wrote:
In article
,

harry wrote:
With a renewable energy source you might need oil to build it and then
nothing.
Not nothing, harry. You need backup for when it's dark or there is no
wind.

Possibly the Aussies might make solar work with their molten salt heat
storage, which powers the gennies overnight. But then they have billyuns
of sq miles of desert and *reliable* sunshine. And it still remains to
be seen how it compares to nuclear, neither am I sure how well it'd work
in winter.

--
Tim

"That excessive bail ought not to be required, nor excessive fines imposed,
nor cruel and unusual punishments inflicted" -- Bill of Rights 1689

Early days yet. We need as many different technologies as possible.
We need the smart grid.

Like we need a hole in our heads.

There will be a backup, gas turbine eg
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pembroke_Power_Station
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Connah%..._Power_Station
Can be quickly started and high turndown ratio.
Renewable energy is about saving fuel. Capital costs will be higher
but so will the cost of energy in general.
And we're all going to have to use less.


--
Ineptocracy

(in-ep-toc-ra-cy) €“ a system of government where the least capable to
lead are elected by the least capable of producing, and where the
members of society least likely to sustain themselves or succeed, are
rewarded with goods and services paid for by the confiscated wealth of a
diminishing number of producers.

harry wrote:
On Sep 25, 12:11 pm, The Other Mike
wrote:
On Mon, 24 Sep 2012 09:03:53 -0700 (PDT), harry
wrote:

When the oil runs outbecomes rare/expensive and all energy costs more,
solar panels will be even more viable because they need no oil to run.
At that point you will find solar panels get stoned to death alongside those
previously receiving the FIT payment.

Welcome to the new stone age, caused by thousands of money grabbing greedy
*******s like you.

--

Well you are a sad, dullwitted, head in the sand *******.

No harry, that's you.

You just can't get your head round the fact that there is no
alternative.


To nuclear power? No there isn't. In the medium term.
renewables will be dead in 5 years.





--
Ineptocracy

(in-ep-toc-ra-cy) €“ a system of government where the least capable to
lead are elected by the least capable of producing, and where the
members of society least likely to sustain themselves or succeed, are
rewarded with goods and services paid for by the confiscated wealth of a
diminishing number of producers.

Doctor Drivel wrote:

I am a know witless poohead.

I agree.

In article ,
Doctor Drivel wrote:
harry wrote:

No need to rest on laurels. Engines could normally last a million
miles.
Most wear occurs on startup. Wear reduces efficiency.

But electric motors could last longer than that.
The batteries are the problem.

Spot on Harry!

The grand alliance. Dribble and Harry.

--
*I see you've set aside this special time to humiliate yourself in public

Dave Plowman London SW
To e-mail, change noise into sound.

On Sep 25, 6:44*pm, The Natural Philosopher
wrote:
harry wrote:
On Sep 25, 12:11 pm, The Other Mike
wrote:
On Mon, 24 Sep 2012 09:03:53 -0700 (PDT), harry
wrote:

When the oil runs outbecomes rare/expensive and all energy costs more,
solar panels will be even more viable because they need no oil to run..
At that point you will find solar panels get stoned to death alongside those
previously receiving the FIT payment.

Welcome to the new stone age, caused by thousands of money grabbing greedy
*******s like you.

--

Well you are a sad, dullwitted, *head in the sand *******.

No harry, that's you.

You just can't get your head round the fact that there is no
alternative.

To nuclear power? No there isn't. In the medium term.
renewables will be dead in 5 years.



--
Ineptocracy

(in-ep-toc’-ra-cy) – a system of government where the least capable to
lead are elected by the least capable of producing, and where the
members of society least likely to sustain themselves or succeed, are
rewarded with goods and services paid for by the confiscated wealth of a
diminishing number of producers.

Tch you are a halfwit.
It would take ten years to build a nuclear power station, but it's not
going to happen.

On Sep 25, 6:59*pm, Tim Streater wrote:
In article ,
*"Doctor *Drivel" wrote:









harry wrote:
On Sep 25, 11:32 am, "Dave Plowman (News)"
wrote:
In article
,
harry wrote:

Its very efficient. Probably 80% or better.

Wrong as usual TurNiP.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Alterna...ve_alternators
Efficiency of automotive alternators is limited by fan cooling loss,
bearing loss, iron loss, copper loss, and the voltage drop in the
diode bridges. At partial load efficiency is between 50-62%
depending on the size of alternator and varies with alternator
speed.[8] This is similar to very small high-performance permanent
magnet alternators, such as those used for bicycle lighting
systems, which achieve an efficiency around 60%.

What's the efficiency of your solar panels, Harry?

Around 11%.
But neither here nor there as sunshine is free. You have to pay for
petrol etc.
You can buy ones of around 14% (Cost more).
There are ones in the laboratory of around 40%.
Early days yet.

All solar panels are 100% efficient as the energy you get is free.

No, on your calculation it would make the efficiency = infinity.

--
Tim

"That excessive bail ought not to be required, nor excessive fines imposed,
nor cruel and unusual punishments inflicted" *-- *Bill of Rights 1689

There is no such thing as infinity efficiency. It ranges from 0%-100%
Sometimes it goes a little over 100% due to certain incompatible
measurement systems.

On Sep 25, 11:32*am, "Dave Plowman (News)"
wrote:
In article
,
* *harry wrote:

And engine wear is a problem these days? Most cars go to the scrapyard
on their original engine.

No need to rest on laurels. Engines could normally last a million
miles.
Most wear occurs on startup. *Wear reduces efficiency.

Can you give some figures about this? Most engines are more efficient
after thousands of miles use than when new.

But electric motors could last longer than that.

But the rest of the vehicle won't. And electric motors still have bearings
which can and will fail.

The batteries are the problem.

And likely always will be. Despite the hype. And the idiots who think they
already exist.

--
*Heart attacks... God's revenge for eating his animal friends

* * Dave Plowman * * * * * * * * London SW
* * * * * * * * * To e-mail, change noise into sound.

Electric motors have two bearings and easily changed at that.
How many are in an IC engine? Fifty? Sixty? More increases the chance
of failure.

On Sep 25, 12:11*pm, The Other Mike
wrote:
On Mon, 24 Sep 2012 09:03:53 -0700 (PDT), harry
wrote:

When the oil runs outbecomes rare/expensive and all energy costs more,
solar panels will be even more viable because they need no oil to run.

At that point you will find solar panels get stoned to death alongside those
previously receiving the FIT payment.

Welcome to the new stone age, caused by thousands of money grabbing greedy
*******s like you.

--

Caused by stupid waste of our resources. You only need look no further
than North Sea oil.

On Sep 25, 4:57*pm, Tim Streater wrote:
In article
,









*harry wrote:
On Sep 25, 11:32*am, "Dave Plowman (News)"
wrote:
In article
,
* *harry wrote:

Its very efficient. Probably 80% or better.

Wrong as usual TurNiP.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Alterna...ve_alternators
Efficiency of automotive alternators is limited by fan cooling loss,
bearing loss, iron loss, copper loss, and the voltage drop in the
diode bridges. At partial load efficiency is between 50-62% depending
on the size of alternator and varies with alternator speed.[8] This is
similar to very small high-performance permanent magnet alternators,
such as those used for bicycle lighting systems, which achieve an
efficiency around 60%.

What's the efficiency of your solar panels, Harry?
Around 11%.
But neither here nor there as sunshine is free.

The oil in the ground is free, too, but that doesn't mean we should be
satisfied with a low extraction rate.

--
Tim

"That excessive bail ought not to be required, nor excessive fines imposed,
nor cruel and unusual punishments inflicted" *-- *Bill of Rights 1689


Sunshine is inexhaustable and in my garden. And no-one can cut my
supply off.

In article
,
harry wrote:

[Snip]

Sunshine is inexhaustable and in my garden. And no-one can cut my
supply off.

ever heard of clouds?

--
From KT24

Using a RISC OS computer running v5.18

"Tim Streater" wrote in message
...
In article ,
"Doctor Drivel" wrote:

Dave Plowman (News) wrote:
In article ,
Doctor Drivel wrote:
Having all ancillaries electric also gives great control. The oil
pressure can be carefully controlled. Variations in pressure can
detect bearing wear and give a readout to the driver.

We now know what car you drive.

This man is senile.

Yes, drivel drive a Trabby.

What a silly comment.

"Tim Streater" wrote in message
...
In article ,
"Doctor Drivel" wrote:

harry wrote:
On Sep 25, 11:32 am, "Dave Plowman (News)"
wrote:
In article
,
harry wrote:

Its very efficient. Probably 80% or better.

Wrong as usual TurNiP.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Alterna...ve_alternators
Efficiency of automotive alternators is limited by fan cooling loss,
bearing loss, iron loss, copper loss, and the voltage drop in the
diode bridges. At partial load efficiency is between 50-62%
depending on the size of alternator and varies with alternator
speed.[8] This is similar to very small high-performance permanent
magnet alternators, such as those used for bicycle lighting
systems, which achieve an efficiency around 60%.

What's the efficiency of your solar panels, Harry?


Around 11%.
But neither here nor there as sunshine is free. You have to pay for
petrol etc.
You can buy ones of around 14% (Cost more).
There are ones in the laboratory of around 40%.
Early days yet.

All solar panels are 100% efficient as the energy you get is free.

No, on your calculation it would make the efficiency = infinity.

Once again the energy you get is FREE.

harry wrote:

Tch you are a halfwit.
It would take ten years to build a nuclear power station, but it's not
going to happen.

harry. It has happened before and it is happening now. Finland
commissioned a new reactor because it was the cheapest way to generate
electricity.

whereas Vestas is laying off staff.. google "bankruptcy solar company"
or "solar power chapter 11" and you get PAGES of companies that have
taken government money, spent it, failed to make a profit and gone bust...

I know you dont like to be on the losing side of history harry, but
that's what happens when ypu try and pick a winner when you don't know
anything.



--
Ineptocracy

(in-ep-toc-ra-cy) €“ a system of government where the least capable to
lead are elected by the least capable of producing, and where the
members of society least likely to sustain themselves or succeed, are
rewarded with goods and services paid for by the confiscated wealth of a
diminishing number of producers.

harry wrote:
On Sep 25, 4:57 pm, Tim Streater wrote:


Sunshine is inexhaustable

It isnt.

and in my garden.

It isn't.

And no-one can cut my
supply off.

Yes they can, very easily.

Simply by building a solar farm somewhat to the south of you, high
eneough..haha

--
Ineptocracy

(in-ep-toc-ra-cy) €“ a system of government where the least capable to
lead are elected by the least capable of producing, and where the
members of society least likely to sustain themselves or succeed, are
rewarded with goods and services paid for by the confiscated wealth of a
diminishing number of producers.