http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Windbelt
I feel sure he'll love this one.

On 27/01/2013 18:20, harry wrote:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Windbelt
I feel sure he'll love this one.

I'm sure he won't waste his time discussing it. Mature Wikipedia posts
are a very valuable resource. This one is so immature it is not worth
reading.

On 27/01/13 18:20, harry wrote:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Windbelt
I feel sure he'll love this one.

" One prototype has powered two LEDs, a radio, and a clock (separately)
using wind generated from a household fan"

right so push a couple of hundred watts into the fan, and get out 120mW?


YOu really are clueles harruy.

The Betz limit governs how much energy you can get OUT of the air, and
the swept area of the device used to get it times the wind speed cubed
determines the power IN it.

No amount of technical chicanery and snake oil will get more


--
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.

On 27/01/13 18:48, newshound wrote:
On 27/01/2013 18:20, harry wrote:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Windbelt
I feel sure he'll love this one.

I'm sure he won't waste his time discussing it. Mature Wikipedia posts
are a very valuable resource. This one is so immature it is not worth
reading.


well it was worth making the simple point that you cant do better than
physics says you can, irrespective of the technology.

So much green snake oil implies that some new technology will be MUCH
BETTER than existing mature (or in fact, in the case of wind - museum
class) technology.

People who believe thus display merely their utter ignorance of physics.


--
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.

On 27/01/2013 18:20, harry wrote:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Windbelt
I feel sure he'll love this one.


Ok, so who has read "The subways of tazoo"?

Andy

Andy Champ wrote:
On 27/01/2013 18:20, harry wrote:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Windbelt
I feel sure he'll love this one.


Ok, so who has read "The subways of tazoo"?

Holds hand up.
--
Tciao for Now!

John.

On 27/01/2013 19:26, The Natural Philosopher wrote:
On 27/01/13 18:20, harry wrote:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Windbelt
I feel sure he'll love this one.

" One prototype has powered two LEDs, a radio, and a clock (separately)
using wind generated from a household fan"

right so push a couple of hundred watts into the fan, and get out 120mW?


YOu really are clueles harruy.

The Betz limit governs how much energy you can get OUT of the air, and
the swept area of the device used to get it times the wind speed cubed
determines the power IN it.

No amount of technical chicanery and snake oil will get more

Add to which that most of the problems with wind power result from its
intermittency, and its low power density. Not something a better turbine
can do much about.

--
Cheers,

John.

/================================================== ===============\
| Internode Ltd - http://www.internode.co.uk |
|-----------------------------------------------------------------|
| John Rumm - john(at)internode(dot)co(dot)uk |
\================================================= ================/

Huge wrote:
On 2013-01-27, Andy Champ wrote:
On 27/01/2013 18:20, harry wrote:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Windbelt
I feel sure he'll love this one.


Ok, so who has read "The subways of tazoo"?

FX: Waves.

Big SF fan, me. Loved the Unorthodox Engineers stuff.

AOL

Also the Tau Transportation series that started with Lambda-1.

--
€¢DarWin|
_/ _/

On Sun, 27 Jan 2013 19:29:40 +0000, The Natural Philosopher wrote:

So much green snake oil implies that some new technology will be MUCH
BETTER than existing mature (or in fact, in the case of wind - museum
class) technology.

People who believe thus display merely their utter ignorance of
physics.

Whilst I agree in general and the energy availabilty from this thing is
miniscule it could have applications in places that don't need much
energy. It is mechanically much simpler than a rotational
turbine/generator. Thinking that todays ultra effcient LEDs could run for
a very long time with a rechargeable battery (or just a several Farad
capacitor) charged from one of these. I'm thinking of indicator type LED,
these chuck out plenty of light for naff all current. I dropped one down
to 50uA (micro Amps) and it was still too bright as an indicator. If the
choice is no light or enough to see by...

I wonder how much noise it produces? I'm sure we've all heard a ratchet
strap on a truck vibrating in the wind...

--
Cheers
Dave.

In message
,
harry writes
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Windbelt
I feel sure he'll love this one.

Harry, you have SO missed the problem with wind

when it doesn't blow, you get no output

It cannot, therefore, be depended on in any way, shape or form to
generate power

However you want to dress it up, the argument is the same



--
geoff

On Sun, 27 Jan 2013 22:45:52 +0000, Huge wrote:

On 2013-01-27, Andy Champ wrote:
On 27/01/2013 18:20, harry wrote:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Windbelt I feel sure he'll love this one.


Ok, so who has read "The subways of tazoo"?

FX: Waves.

Big SF fan, me. Loved the Unorthodox Engineers stuff.

+1. Only wish there were more. I also loved the one with the tiny planet
orbiting the surface of another one at virtually zero height.


--
Use the BIG mirror service in the UK: http://www.mirrorservice.org
My posts (including this one) are my copyright and if @diy_forums on
Twitter wish to tweet them they can pay me £30 a post
*lightning surge protection* - a w_tom conductor

On 28/01/2013 1:51 p.m., geoff wrote:
In message
,
harry writes
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Windbelt
I feel sure he'll love this one.

Harry, you have SO missed the problem with wind

when it doesn't blow, you get no output

It cannot, therefore, be depended on in any way, shape or form to
generate power

However you want to dress it up, the argument is the same




That doesn't make sense. Power is still power, even when it is not
continuously generated. The cost of wind power might make it
infeasible, but that's another issue.

Gib Bogle wrote:
On 28/01/2013 1:51 p.m., geoff wrote:
In message
,
harry writes
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Windbelt
I feel sure he'll love this one.

Harry, you have SO missed the problem with wind

when it doesn't blow, you get no output

It cannot, therefore, be depended on in any way, shape or form to
generate power

However you want to dress it up, the argument is the same




That doesn't make sense. Power is still power, even when it is not
continuously generated. The cost of wind power might make it
infeasible, but that's another issue.

The problem with a source of power which is intermittent and cannot be
scheduled is that you need to have some other form of 100% reliable
power on standby.

Tide power and hydroelectricity have predictable operating times, so no
standby is needed while they are operating except for breakdowns, wind
can go from zero to full and back to zero again on a timescale measured
in minutes, so for a gigawatt of wind power, you need a gigawatt of
fossil fuel generator on hot standby, up to temperature and turning, but
not generating. This is why wind power saves little in CO2 emissions.

It's almost the same problem with solar power, although you only need
about 50% of the installed solar power base on standby during daylight
hours, with the added disadvantage that solar power stops working
effectively just before sunset until just after dawn, so the standby
plant needs to be half installed capacity during the day, but at full
power during the night, all ignoring differing demand profiles at
different times, which make the situation worse as far as generation
efficiency goes.

--
Tciao for Now!

John.

"Over a lifetime of 20 years, it is expected to produce 100-200 Wh, or
1 mW average.[5]"

Will that be sufficient to offset the energy used to construct it and
transport it to the site of use, added to the energy required to
dispose of it at end-of-life?

On Sun, 27 Jan 2013 10:20:50 -0800 (PST), harry
wrote:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Windbelt
I feel sure he'll love this one.
--
================================================== =======
Please always reply to ng as the email in this post's
header does not exist. Or use a contact address at:
http://www.macfh.co.uk/JavaJive/JavaJive.html
http://www.macfh.co.uk/Macfarlane/Macfarlane.html

Java Jive wrote:

wrote:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Windbelt

"Over a lifetime of 20 years, it is expected to produce 100-200 Wh, or
1 mW average.[5]"

Will that be sufficient to offset the energy used to construct it and
transport it to the site of use, added to the energy required to
dispose of it at end-of-life?

2p worth of mains electricity over 20 years, even with harry's fantasy
pricing of 50p/unit by the next decade, call it 10p worth.

In message , Andy
Burns writes
Java Jive wrote:

wrote:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Windbelt

"Over a lifetime of 20 years, it is expected to produce 100-200 Wh, or
1 mW average.[5]"

Will that be sufficient to offset the energy used to construct it and
transport it to the site of use, added to the energy required to
dispose of it at end-of-life?

2p worth of mains electricity over 20 years, even with harry's fantasy
pricing of 50p/unit by the next decade, call it 10p worth.

Wiki doesn't show the design but I guess an aerofoil which could be
*inverted* at the end of each oscillation would have the best chance of
useful output. Probably invented by someone who has tried to sleep on a
moored yacht.

Not quite as esoteric as moving atoms by light rays:-)


--
Tim Lamb

" One prototype has powered two LEDs, a radio, and a clock (separately)
using wind generated from a household fan"

right so push a couple of hundred watts into the fan, and get out 120mW?


YOu really are clueles harruy.


you have it wrong,

You put the devise in front of harry's gob, and tell him you are thinking of
solar panels for your roof, he'll keep the thing powered for a few weeks
waffeling on about how much he loves his and how much money he is screwing
out of everyone else,

2p? Is that your estimate of the energy cost of manufacture and
disposal?

On Mon, 28 Jan 2013 10:32:39 +0000, Andy Burns
wrote:

Java Jive wrote:

"Over a lifetime of 20 years, it is expected to produce 100-200 Wh, or
1 mW average.[5]"

Will that be sufficient to offset the energy used to construct it and
transport it to the site of use, added to the energy required to
dispose of it at end-of-life?

2p worth of mains electricity over 20 years, even with harry's fantasy
pricing of 50p/unit by the next decade, call it 10p worth.
--
================================================== =======
Please always reply to ng as the email in this post's
header does not exist. Or use a contact address at:
http://www.macfh.co.uk/JavaJive/JavaJive.html
http://www.macfh.co.uk/Macfarlane/Macfarlane.html

In message , Gib Bogle
writes
On 28/01/2013 1:51 p.m., geoff wrote:
In message
,
harry writes
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Windbelt
I feel sure he'll love this one.

Harry, you have SO missed the problem with wind

when it doesn't blow, you get no output

It cannot, therefore, be depended on in any way, shape or form to
generate power

However you want to dress it up, the argument is the same




That doesn't make sense. Power is still power, even when it is not
continuously generated.

You are missing the point

There are those who would say we have (purely hypothetical figures, for
illustration only)

10GW Nuclear,
15GW Coal
4GW Biomass
6GW Wind

making a total of 35GW available power

This is, of course, not true - no wind and we only have 29GW available.
The danger is when politicians see the first figure as reliable and
factor it in to the base load calculations




The cost of wind power might make it infeasible, but that's another
issue.



--
geoff

On Jan 29, 12:02*am, geoff wrote:
In message , Gib Bogle
writes









On 28/01/2013 1:51 p.m., geoff wrote:
In message
,
harry writes
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Windbelt
I feel sure he'll love this one.

Harry, you have SO missed the problem with wind

when it doesn't blow, you get no output

It cannot, therefore, be depended on in any way, shape or form to
generate power

However you want to dress it up, the argument is the same

That doesn't make sense. *Power is still power, even when it is not
continuously generated.

You are missing the point

There are those who would say we have (purely hypothetical figures, for
illustration only)

10GW Nuclear,
15GW Coal
4GW Biomass
6GW Wind

making a total of 35GW available power

This is, of course, not true - no wind and we only have 29GW available.
The danger is when politicians see the first figure as reliable and
factor it in to the base load calculations

The cost of wind power might make it infeasible, but that's another
issue.

--
geoff

Tch tch. It's only a test device.
It's the sort of thing that might be useful for electricity generation
in remote places.

The first wind turbines were only a few inches in diameter.

There's a lot to be said for decentralised power generation using any
means.

On 29/01/13 09:41, harry wrote:

There's a lot to be said for decentralised power generation using any
means.


Yes, mostly the statement 'it makes neither technical nor economic sense'

--
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.

On 29/01/13 10:07, Tim Streater wrote:
In article , geoff
wrote:

In message , Gib Bogle
writes
On 28/01/2013 1:51 p.m., geoff wrote:
In message
,
harry writes
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Windbelt
I feel sure he'll love this one.

Harry, you have SO missed the problem with wind

when it doesn't blow, you get no output

It cannot, therefore, be depended on in any way, shape or form to
generate power

However you want to dress it up, the argument is the same

That doesn't make sense. Power is still power, even when it is not
continuously generated.

You are missing the point

There are those who would say we have (purely hypothetical figures,
for illustration only)

10GW Nuclear,
15GW Coal
4GW Biomass
6GW Wind

making a total of 35GW available power

This is, of course, not true - no wind and we only have 29GW
available. The danger is when politicians see the first figure as
reliable and factor it in to the base load calculations

He's missing the point entirely. More interesting hypothetical figures
might be - since this seems to be where the Germans are heading:

20GW wind
20GW solar

so perhaps Mr Bogle could explain what happens when (a) it's nighttime
and (b) there is a high pressure over Northern Europe (= no wind
anywhere, so = no wind power generated).

Under those circs, total power available = 0.

they rely on the coal and imported French nuclear power.


--
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.

On 29/01/2013 09:41, harry wrote:

There's a lot to be said for decentralised power generation using any
means.



Tell that to the bloke on dialysis when your solar panels cloud over and
he dies.

On Tue, 29 Jan 2013 13:14:35 +0000, dennis@home wrote:

There's a lot to be said for decentralised power generation using any
means.

Tell that to the bloke on dialysis when your solar panels cloud over
and he dies.

That's his fault for not providing the required backup at his cost. Just
like the windmill/PV providers don't have to foot the cost of the backup
required for their windmills/PVs.

--
Cheers
Dave.

On 29/01/13 13:35, Dave Liquorice wrote:
On Tue, 29 Jan 2013 13:14:35 +0000, dennis@home wrote:

There's a lot to be said for decentralised power generation using any
means.

Tell that to the bloke on dialysis when your solar panels cloud over
and he dies.

That's his fault for not providing the required backup at his cost. Just
like the windmill/PV providers don't have to foot the cost of the backup
required for their windmills/PVs.

the hidden cost of providing dispatch to an undispatchable power source.

Someone Else's Problem.


--
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.

On Jan 29, 1:14*pm, "dennis@home"
wrote:
On 29/01/2013 09:41, harry wrote:

There's a lot to be said for decentralised power generation using any
means.

Tell that to the bloke on dialysis when your solar panels cloud over and
he dies.

You ARE a half wit.
Decentralised power systems are many small generators linked together.
So if a few go out it's no big deal.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Smart_g..._opportunities

"harry" wrote in message
...
On Jan 29, 12:02 am, geoff wrote:
In message , Gib Bogle
writes









On 28/01/2013 1:51 p.m., geoff wrote:
In message
,
harry writes
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Windbelt
I feel sure he'll love this one.

Harry, you have SO missed the problem with wind

when it doesn't blow, you get no output

It cannot, therefore, be depended on in any way, shape or form to
generate power

However you want to dress it up, the argument is the same

That doesn't make sense. Power is still power, even when it is not
continuously generated.

You are missing the point

There are those who would say we have (purely hypothetical figures, for
illustration only)

10GW Nuclear,
15GW Coal
4GW Biomass
6GW Wind

making a total of 35GW available power

This is, of course, not true - no wind and we only have 29GW available.
The danger is when politicians see the first figure as reliable and
factor it in to the base load calculations

The cost of wind power might make it infeasible, but that's another
issue.

--
geoff

Tch tch. It's only a test device.
It's the sort of thing that might be useful for electricity generation
in remote places.

The first wind turbines were only a few inches in diameter.

There's a lot to be said for decentralised power generation using any
means.

Nope, nothing when its as poor as that.

On Tue, 29 Jan 2013 10:29:14 -0800 (PST), harry wrote:

There's a lot to be said for decentralised power generation using any
means.

Tell that to the bloke on dialysis when your solar panels cloud over
and he dies.

You ARE a half wit.
Decentralised power systems are many small generators linked together.
So if a few go out it's no big deal.

So how small are the clouds in your world? You get clouded out but yoru
semidetached neighbour isn't or the house across the street?

How far have you got to "transport" power to ensure that every where
stays powered?

--
Cheers
Dave.

On 29/01/2013 13:14, dennis@home wrote:
On 29/01/2013 09:41, harry wrote:

There's a lot to be said for decentralised power generation using any
means.



Tell that to the bloke on dialysis when your solar panels cloud over and
he dies.

The bloke on dialysis is likely OK - he'll have specced his panels to
feed his system OK on a cloudy day, and doesn't need to use it at night.

The one in the iron lung, OTOH...

Andy

On 29/01/2013 19:53, Dave Liquorice wrote:
On Tue, 29 Jan 2013 10:29:14 -0800 (PST), harry wrote:

There's a lot to be said for decentralised power generation using any
means.

Tell that to the bloke on dialysis when your solar panels cloud over
and he dies.

You ARE a half wit.
Decentralised power systems are many small generators linked together.
So if a few go out it's no big deal.

So how small are the clouds in your world? You get clouded out but yoru
semidetached neighbour isn't or the house across the street?

How far have you got to "transport" power to ensure that every where
stays powered?


Currently about 2000km.
It goes dark.

I suppose 27 million UPSes/gensets won't be very green but it would come
to that if 'arry has his way.

On 27/01/2013 20:19, John Williamson wrote:
Andy Champ wrote:
On 27/01/2013 18:20, harry wrote:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Windbelt
I feel sure he'll love this one.


Ok, so who has read "The subways of tazoo"?

Holds hand up.

No, but I have New Writings in SF vols 1 and 2 somewhere.

http://www.abebooks.co.uk/servlet/Se...ays +of+tazoo

Available in Abebooks, about £4 but £11 shipping from US or £15 shipping
from Australia

On 29/01/2013 22:50, newshound wrote:
On 27/01/2013 20:19, John Williamson wrote:
Andy Champ wrote:
On 27/01/2013 18:20, harry wrote:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Windbelt
I feel sure he'll love this one.


Ok, so who has read "The subways of tazoo"?

Holds hand up.

No, but I have New Writings in SF vols 1 and 2 somewhere.

http://www.abebooks.co.uk/servlet/Se...ays +of+tazoo


Available in Abebooks, about £4 but £11 shipping from US or £15 shipping
from Australia


Oops better still

http://docs4.chomikuj.pl/292548358,0...Colin-Kapp.pdf

About to put it on my tablet!

On 29/01/13 20:49, Andy Champ wrote:
On 29/01/2013 13:14, dennis@home wrote:
On 29/01/2013 09:41, harry wrote:

There's a lot to be said for decentralised power generation using any
means.



Tell that to the bloke on dialysis when your solar panels cloud over and
he dies.

The bloke on dialysis is likely OK - he'll have specced his panels to
feed his system OK on a cloudy day, and doesn't need to use it at night.


well a winter cloudy day is some 200 times less power than a sunny
summer day..


The one in the iron lung, OTOH...

Andy


--
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.

On Tue, 29 Jan 2013 22:50:56 +0000, newshound wrote:

On 27/01/2013 20:19, John Williamson wrote:
Andy Champ wrote:
On 27/01/2013 18:20, harry wrote:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Windbelt I feel sure he'll love this
one.


Ok, so who has read "The subways of tazoo"?

Holds hand up.

No, but I have New Writings in SF vols 1 and 2 somewhere.

http://www.abebooks.co.uk/servlet/SearchResults?
bt.x=71&bt.y=12&sts=t&tn=the+subways+of+tazoo

Available in Abebooks, about £4 but £11 shipping from US or £15 shipping
from Australia

Would be nice to get the book with all of teh stories in: "Unorthodox
Engineers". But people want silly money for them; I'll have to lock mine
in the safe!

(£115 seems to be the cheapest)
--
Use the BIG mirror service in the UK: http://www.mirrorservice.org
My posts (including this one) are my copyright and if @diy_forums on
Twitter wish to tweet them they can pay me £30 a post
*lightning surge protection* - a w_tom conductor

On Jan 29, 7:53*pm, "Dave Liquorice"
wrote:
On Tue, 29 Jan 2013 10:29:14 -0800 (PST), harry wrote:
There's a lot to be said for decentralised power generation using any
means.

Tell that to the bloke on dialysis when your solar panels cloud over
and he dies.

You ARE a half wit.
Decentralised power systems are many small generators linked together.
So if a few go out it's no big deal.

So how small are the clouds in your world? You get clouded out but yoru
semidetached neighbour isn't or the house across the street?

How far have you got to "transport" power to ensure that every where
stays powered?

--
Cheers
Dave.

Clouds come in many sizes.

The advantage with local power generation is that power
is mostly used locally so the transmission grid can be smaller and
there are less transmission losses.
The power generators don't all have to be the same sort, in fact the
more diverse, the better..

Read the link on mypost and try to comprehend.

On Jan 29, 11:08*pm, The Natural Philosopher
wrote:
On 29/01/13 20:49, Andy Champ wrote:

On 29/01/2013 13:14, dennis@home wrote:
On 29/01/2013 09:41, harry wrote:

There's a lot to be said for decentralised power generation using any
means.

Tell that to the bloke on dialysis when your solar panels cloud over and
he dies.

The bloke on dialysis is likely OK - he'll have specced his panels to
feed his system OK on a cloudy day, and doesn't need to use it at night..

well a winter cloudy day is some 200 times less power than a sunny
summer day..

Talking from your usual position of total ignorance I see.

On 30/01/2013 10:14, harry wrote:
On Jan 29, 7:53 pm, "Dave Liquorice"
wrote:
On Tue, 29 Jan 2013 10:29:14 -0800 (PST), harry wrote:
There's a lot to be said for decentralised power generation using any
means.

Tell that to the bloke on dialysis when your solar panels cloud over
and he dies.

You ARE a half wit.
Decentralised power systems are many small generators linked together.
So if a few go out it's no big deal.

So how small are the clouds in your world? You get clouded out but yoru
semidetached neighbour isn't or the house across the street?

How far have you got to "transport" power to ensure that every where
stays powered?

--
Cheers
Dave.

Clouds come in many sizes.

The advantage with local power generation is that power
is mostly used locally so the transmission grid can be smaller and
there are less transmission losses.

Lovely in theory, but with the current interpretation of that (i.e.
biased toward solar and wind), there is little control over the time of
generation and hence little ability to dispatch it at a time that would
actually be of benefit. How much of your PV output will assist tonight's
demand surge? I suspect its a nice round figure unless you have a street
light nearby.

The power generators don't all have to be the same sort, in fact the
more diverse, the better..

and what do we get instead? lots of wind and hot air...

Even with CHP gas boilers its marginal given they simply shift
generation to gas, and do so with less efficiency than a CCGT supplying
via the grid.

Read the link on mypost and try to comprehend.

What's that, a new social network?


--
Cheers,

John.

/================================================== ===============\
| Internode Ltd - http://www.internode.co.uk |
|-----------------------------------------------------------------|
| John Rumm - john(at)internode(dot)co(dot)uk |
\================================================= ================/

On 30/01/13 10:14, harry wrote:
On Jan 29, 7:53 pm, "Dave Liquorice"
wrote:
On Tue, 29 Jan 2013 10:29:14 -0800 (PST), harry wrote:
There's a lot to be said for decentralised power generation using any
means.

Tell that to the bloke on dialysis when your solar panels cloud over
and he dies.

You ARE a half wit.
Decentralised power systems are many small generators linked together.
So if a few go out it's no big deal.

So how small are the clouds in your world? You get clouded out but yoru
semidetached neighbour isn't or the house across the street?

How far have you got to "transport" power to ensure that every where
stays powered?

--
Cheers
Dave.

Clouds come in many sizes.

The advantage with local power generation is that power
is mostly used locally so the transmission grid can be smaller and
there are less transmission losses.
The power generators don't all have to be the same sort, in fact the
more diverse, the better..


Typical oversimplification from someone who can barely grasp the
essentials, let alone the detail.

Strange to relate, real engineers, as opposed to armchair mechanics,
have to do - and did when the CEGB planned the grid- balance te cost of
a lot of small power stations and less grid, with the cost of a few
larger power stations and more grid.

Ther are huge costs and energy inefficiencies associated with micro
generation.

Which why we all have to pay harry 50p a unit for his microgenerated
crap that no one wants or needs.

Instead of 5p for coal.

Every time the wind blows or the sun comes out, your electricity bill
goes up because of harry and the other freeloading troughing rent
seekers of the renewable industry.

And every time a wind turbine that averages 300KW breaks it takes as
many people driving as many cars to fix as it does to fix a run bearing
in a 300MW alternator in a conventional power station..

So only 1000 times as many people and cars and fuel involved in fixing
it. Oh, and they need fixing about 10 times as often, so make that
10,000 times more.

Green jobs have to be paid for.


Read the link on mypost and try to comprehend.



--
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.

On 30/01/13 10:16, harry wrote:
On Jan 29, 11:08 pm, The Natural Philosopher
wrote:
On 29/01/13 20:49, Andy Champ wrote:

On 29/01/2013 13:14, dennis@home wrote:
On 29/01/2013 09:41, harry wrote:

There's a lot to be said for decentralised power generation using any
means.

Tell that to the bloke on dialysis when your solar panels cloud over and
he dies.

The bloke on dialysis is likely OK - he'll have specced his panels to
feed his system OK on a cloudy day, and doesn't need to use it at night.

well a winter cloudy day is some 200 times less power than a sunny
summer day..

Talking from your usual position of total ignorance I see.

Not really.

the average winter insolation. AVERAGE. is one tenth of the average
summer insolation.

http://www.contemporaryenergy.co.uk/solarmap.htm

If you look at the peak insolation in summer, its about 10 times that.
So make that 100 times between average winter and peak summer.

multiply by 2 for cloud cover and that's 200 times less on a cloudy
winter day than on a bright sunny summer one.




--
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.

On Jan 30, 1:42*pm, The Natural Philosopher
wrote:
On 30/01/13 13:29, John Rumm wrote: On 30/01/2013 10:55, The Natural Philosopher wrote:

So only 1000 times as many people and cars and fuel involved in fixing
it. Oh, and they need fixing about 10 times as often, so make that
10,000 times more.

Green jobs have to be paid for.

I always wonder why the wind industry seems to think that promoting
their own inefficiency (i.e. we create lots of jobs) is in some way
laudable. Missing the point that energy supply should be a means to an
end, and not a taxpayer funded job creation scheme.

But the Left regards government as entirely there to support taxpayer
funded job creation schemes, and the big corporates regard it as a tax
payer funded way to ensure only their products, no matter how
inefficient, is the only one that meets regulations.

If harry didn't own a Priapus (or is that Drivel) it would be a Trabant.

Nah Nah. I have just bought an electric car.
In summer can charge it off my solar panels.