• Driving Too Slow

    From Ed Lee@21:1/5 to All on Tue Jan 18 08:25:06 2022
    For Maximum EV Efficiency, Stick to 25 Miles an Hour, Ignore Angry Drivers and POLICE.

    https://www.wsj.com/articles/ev-electric-car-battery-charge-hypermiler-11642517385

    I was driving around 40 MPH on right lane of a highway (speed limit unknown) and got pull over for driving too slow. I told him that i was running low on charges and won't make it to the charger any faster. He escort me for a little while and left.

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From jlarkin@highlandsniptechnology.com@21:1/5 to edward.ming.lee@gmail.com on Tue Jan 18 08:54:29 2022
    On Tue, 18 Jan 2022 08:25:06 -0800 (PST), Ed Lee
    <edward.ming.lee@gmail.com> wrote:

    For Maximum EV Efficiency, Stick to 25 Miles an Hour, Ignore Angry Drivers and POLICE.

    https://www.wsj.com/articles/ev-electric-car-battery-charge-hypermiler-11642517385

    That is an obsession. A rude and dangerous one on a public highway. I
    think that some fraction of electric vehicles serve cheapness
    obsessions.


    I was driving around 40 MPH on right lane of a highway (speed limit unknown) and got pull over for driving too slow. I told him that i was running low on charges and won't make it to the charger any faster. He escort me for a little while and left.

    It's much worse on a long mountain uphill in a blizzard. You can't
    even afford to run the heater.

    Driving 40 mph, and waiting around for a car to recharge, suggests
    that your time isn't worth much.



    --

    I yam what I yam - Popeye

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Ed Lee@21:1/5 to jla...@highlandsniptechnology.com on Tue Jan 18 09:10:57 2022
    On Tuesday, January 18, 2022 at 8:54:39 AM UTC-8, jla...@highlandsniptechnology.com wrote:
    On Tue, 18 Jan 2022 08:25:06 -0800 (PST), Ed Lee
    <edward....@gmail.com> wrote:

    For Maximum EV Efficiency, Stick to 25 Miles an Hour, Ignore Angry Drivers and POLICE.

    https://www.wsj.com/articles/ev-electric-car-battery-charge-hypermiler-11642517385
    That is an obsession. A rude and dangerous one on a public highway. I
    think that some fraction of electric vehicles serve cheapness
    obsessions.

    I was driving around 40 MPH on right lane of a highway (speed limit unknown) and got pull over for driving too slow. I told him that i was running low on charges and won't make it to the charger any faster. He escort me for a little while and left.
    It's much worse on a long mountain uphill in a blizzard. You can't
    even afford to run the heater.

    Driving 40 mph, and waiting around for a car to recharge, suggests
    that your time isn't worth much.


    People are driving and rushing to die too fast. The explosive covid cases are partly due to people moving too fast and too mobile.

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Lasse Langwadt Christensen@21:1/5 to All on Tue Jan 18 09:22:00 2022
    tirsdag den 18. januar 2022 kl. 18.11.02 UTC+1 skrev Ed Lee:
    On Tuesday, January 18, 2022 at 8:54:39 AM UTC-8, jla...@highlandsniptechnology.com wrote:
    On Tue, 18 Jan 2022 08:25:06 -0800 (PST), Ed Lee
    <edward....@gmail.com> wrote:

    For Maximum EV Efficiency, Stick to 25 Miles an Hour, Ignore Angry Drivers and POLICE.

    https://www.wsj.com/articles/ev-electric-car-battery-charge-hypermiler-11642517385
    That is an obsession. A rude and dangerous one on a public highway. I
    think that some fraction of electric vehicles serve cheapness
    obsessions.

    I was driving around 40 MPH on right lane of a highway (speed limit unknown) and got pull over for driving too slow. I told him that i was running low on charges and won't make it to the charger any faster. He escort me for a little while and left.
    It's much worse on a long mountain uphill in a blizzard. You can't
    even afford to run the heater.

    Driving 40 mph, and waiting around for a car to recharge, suggests
    that your time isn't worth much.

    People are driving and rushing to die too fast. The explosive covid cases are partly due to people moving too fast and too mobile.

    and you want to make that worse by driving slow causing an unexpected and much more dangerous speed difference?

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From bitrex@21:1/5 to jlarkin@highlandsniptechnology.com on Tue Jan 18 12:30:36 2022
    On 1/18/2022 11:54 AM, jlarkin@highlandsniptechnology.com wrote:
    On Tue, 18 Jan 2022 08:25:06 -0800 (PST), Ed Lee
    <edward.ming.lee@gmail.com> wrote:

    For Maximum EV Efficiency, Stick to 25 Miles an Hour, Ignore Angry Drivers and POLICE.

    https://www.wsj.com/articles/ev-electric-car-battery-charge-hypermiler-11642517385

    That is an obsession. A rude and dangerous one on a public highway. I
    think that some fraction of electric vehicles serve cheapness
    obsessions.

    The WSJ found one pathological person who does this, and now we have
    confirmed two.


    I was driving around 40 MPH on right lane of a highway (speed limit unknown) and got pull over for driving too slow. I told him that i was running low on charges and won't make it to the charger any faster. He escort me for a little while and left.

    It's much worse on a long mountain uphill in a blizzard. You can't
    even afford to run the heater.

    Driving 40 mph, and waiting around for a car to recharge, suggests
    that your time isn't worth much.


    I never see anyone doing anything but hauling ass in their Bolts or
    Teslas or Mach Es around here, same as everyone else. I saw a Mitsubishi
    Mirage doing almost 90 the other day, it has three cylinders.

    Anyway, the average sale price of a new EV is about 55 grand and prices
    lately, like most other types of vehicle, only seem to go upwards.

    Owning and driving a personal car in general isn't what you do to "save
    money" it's a money-sink to a greater or lesser degree, any way you
    slice it.

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Ed Lee@21:1/5 to lang...@fonz.dk on Tue Jan 18 09:31:31 2022
    On Tuesday, January 18, 2022 at 9:22:04 AM UTC-8, lang...@fonz.dk wrote:
    tirsdag den 18. januar 2022 kl. 18.11.02 UTC+1 skrev Ed Lee:
    On Tuesday, January 18, 2022 at 8:54:39 AM UTC-8, jla...@highlandsniptechnology.com wrote:
    On Tue, 18 Jan 2022 08:25:06 -0800 (PST), Ed Lee
    <edward....@gmail.com> wrote:

    For Maximum EV Efficiency, Stick to 25 Miles an Hour, Ignore Angry Drivers and POLICE.

    https://www.wsj.com/articles/ev-electric-car-battery-charge-hypermiler-11642517385
    That is an obsession. A rude and dangerous one on a public highway. I think that some fraction of electric vehicles serve cheapness
    obsessions.

    I was driving around 40 MPH on right lane of a highway (speed limit unknown) and got pull over for driving too slow. I told him that i was running low on charges and won't make it to the charger any faster. He escort me for a little while and left.
    It's much worse on a long mountain uphill in a blizzard. You can't
    even afford to run the heater.

    Driving 40 mph, and waiting around for a car to recharge, suggests
    that your time isn't worth much.

    People are driving and rushing to die too fast. The explosive covid cases are partly due to people moving too fast and too mobile.
    and you want to make that worse by driving slow causing an unexpected and much more dangerous speed difference?

    If they want to go fast, they can always take the left. The right lane should always be slower.

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From jlarkin@highlandsniptechnology.com@21:1/5 to bitrex on Tue Jan 18 09:41:57 2022
    On Tue, 18 Jan 2022 12:30:36 -0500, bitrex <user@example.net> wrote:

    On 1/18/2022 11:54 AM, jlarkin@highlandsniptechnology.com wrote:
    On Tue, 18 Jan 2022 08:25:06 -0800 (PST), Ed Lee
    <edward.ming.lee@gmail.com> wrote:

    For Maximum EV Efficiency, Stick to 25 Miles an Hour, Ignore Angry Drivers and POLICE.

    https://www.wsj.com/articles/ev-electric-car-battery-charge-hypermiler-11642517385

    That is an obsession. A rude and dangerous one on a public highway. I
    think that some fraction of electric vehicles serve cheapness
    obsessions.

    The WSJ found one pathological person who does this, and now we have >confirmed two.


    I was driving around 40 MPH on right lane of a highway (speed limit unknown) and got pull over for driving too slow. I told him that i was running low on charges and won't make it to the charger any faster. He escort me for a little while and left.

    It's much worse on a long mountain uphill in a blizzard. You can't
    even afford to run the heater.

    Driving 40 mph, and waiting around for a car to recharge, suggests
    that your time isn't worth much.


    I never see anyone doing anything but hauling ass in their Bolts or
    Teslas or Mach Es around here, same as everyone else. I saw a Mitsubishi >Mirage doing almost 90 the other day, it has three cylinders.

    Anyway, the average sale price of a new EV is about 55 grand and prices >lately, like most other types of vehicle, only seem to go upwards.

    Owning and driving a personal car in general isn't what you do to "save >money" it's a money-sink to a greater or lesser degree, any way you
    slice it.

    Depends on what one's time is worth. I save about 2 hours a day by
    driving to work.



    --

    I yam what I yam - Popeye

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From bitrex@21:1/5 to Ed Lee on Tue Jan 18 12:57:32 2022
    On 1/18/2022 11:25 AM, Ed Lee wrote:
    For Maximum EV Efficiency, Stick to 25 Miles an Hour, Ignore Angry Drivers and POLICE.

    https://www.wsj.com/articles/ev-electric-car-battery-charge-hypermiler-11642517385

    I was driving around 40 MPH on right lane of a highway (speed limit unknown) and got pull over for driving too slow. I told him that i was running low on charges and won't make it to the charger any faster. He escort me for a little while and left.

    I couldn't read the article but I guarantee 95% of the people pissing
    the rest of humanity off trying to see how many miles they can pull with
    their toy on public roads are retired engineers, ham radio operators,
    and other miscreants.

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Ralph Mowery@21:1/5 to All on Tue Jan 18 13:33:50 2022
    In article <ss70ir$m0s$2@dont-email.me>, spamjunk@blueyonder.co.uk
    says...

    ... if the heaters even work! https://canada.autonews.com/electric-vehicles/tesla-heating-system-being-probed-canada-following-cold-weather-complaints

    and unpleasant anecdotes https://teslanorth.com/2022/01/06/tesla-heat-pumps-keep-failing-in-extreme-cold-weather/



    Seems they are using heat pumps. I don't know about the ones in the
    cars,but the ones in the homes do not work well at all when it is much
    below 20 deg F. They are trying to operate the cars at zero and below.

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Tom Gardner@21:1/5 to jlarkin@highlandsniptechnology.com on Tue Jan 18 18:23:23 2022
    On 18/01/22 16:54, jlarkin@highlandsniptechnology.com wrote:
    On Tue, 18 Jan 2022 08:25:06 -0800 (PST), Ed Lee <edward.ming.lee@gmail.com> wrote:

    For Maximum EV Efficiency, Stick to 25 Miles an Hour, Ignore Angry Drivers >> and POLICE.

    https://www.wsj.com/articles/ev-electric-car-battery-charge-hypermiler-11642517385


    That is an obsession. A rude and dangerous one on a public highway. I think that some fraction of electric vehicles serve cheapness obsessions.


    I was driving around 40 MPH on right lane of a highway (speed limit
    unknown) and got pull over for driving too slow. I told him that i was
    running low on charges and won't make it to the charger any faster. He
    escort me for a little while and left.

    It's much worse on a long mountain uphill in a blizzard. You can't even afford to run the heater.

    ... if the heaters even work! https://canada.autonews.com/electric-vehicles/tesla-heating-system-being-probed-canada-following-cold-weather-complaints

    and unpleasant anecdotes https://teslanorth.com/2022/01/06/tesla-heat-pumps-keep-failing-in-extreme-cold-weather/

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From John S@21:1/5 to Ed Lee on Tue Jan 18 12:36:27 2022
    On 1/18/2022 11:31 AM, Ed Lee wrote:
    On Tuesday, January 18, 2022 at 9:22:04 AM UTC-8, lang...@fonz.dk wrote:
    tirsdag den 18. januar 2022 kl. 18.11.02 UTC+1 skrev Ed Lee:
    On Tuesday, January 18, 2022 at 8:54:39 AM UTC-8, jla...@highlandsniptechnology.com wrote:
    On Tue, 18 Jan 2022 08:25:06 -0800 (PST), Ed Lee
    <edward....@gmail.com> wrote:

    For Maximum EV Efficiency, Stick to 25 Miles an Hour, Ignore Angry Drivers and POLICE.

    https://www.wsj.com/articles/ev-electric-car-battery-charge-hypermiler-11642517385
    That is an obsession. A rude and dangerous one on a public highway. I
    think that some fraction of electric vehicles serve cheapness
    obsessions.

    I was driving around 40 MPH on right lane of a highway (speed limit unknown) and got pull over for driving too slow. I told him that i was running low on charges and won't make it to the charger any faster. He escort me for a little while and left.
    It's much worse on a long mountain uphill in a blizzard. You can't
    even afford to run the heater.

    Driving 40 mph, and waiting around for a car to recharge, suggests
    that your time isn't worth much.

    People are driving and rushing to die too fast. The explosive covid cases are partly due to people moving too fast and too mobile.
    and you want to make that worse by driving slow causing an unexpected and much more dangerous speed difference?

    If they want to go fast, they can always take the left. The right lane should always be slower.

    If a cop pulls you over for driving too slow, it's because he thought
    you were a hazard to other motorists. Proof was his escort service. If
    you can't keep up with traffic either get off the road or get a car
    which will.

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From bitrex@21:1/5 to Tom Gardner on Tue Jan 18 13:46:33 2022
    On 1/18/2022 1:23 PM, Tom Gardner wrote:
    On 18/01/22 16:54, jlarkin@highlandsniptechnology.com wrote:
    On Tue, 18 Jan 2022 08:25:06 -0800 (PST), Ed Lee
    <edward.ming.lee@gmail.com>
    wrote:

    For Maximum EV Efficiency, Stick to 25 Miles an Hour, Ignore Angry
    Drivers
    and POLICE.

    https://www.wsj.com/articles/ev-electric-car-battery-charge-hypermiler-11642517385



    That is an obsession. A rude and dangerous one on a public highway. I
    think
    that some fraction of electric vehicles serve cheapness obsessions.


    I was driving around 40 MPH on right lane of a highway (speed limit
    unknown) and got pull over for driving too slow.  I told him that i was >>> running low on charges and won't make it to the charger any faster.  He >>> escort me for a little while and left.

    It's much worse on a long mountain uphill in a blizzard. You can't even
    afford to run the heater.

    ... if the heaters even work! https://canada.autonews.com/electric-vehicles/tesla-heating-system-being-probed-canada-following-cold-weather-complaints


    and unpleasant anecdotes https://teslanorth.com/2022/01/06/tesla-heat-pumps-keep-failing-in-extreme-cold-weather/


    My Volt has a convenient inline-four battery charger & space heater for
    when it gets down into the single digits.

    For whatever reason maybe due to the high compression ratio and
    relatively high RPM it runs at when used this way when the engine is
    cold it blows enormous clouds of condensation when it starts up at those temperatures, almost like laying a smokescreen. Sort of amusing coming
    from an "electric vehicle"

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Dave Platt@21:1/5 to edward.ming.lee@gmail.com on Tue Jan 18 12:10:15 2022
    In article <5ffdd3aa-a770-4fde-bf84-af3c0e08ef40n@googlegroups.com>,
    Ed Lee <edward.ming.lee@gmail.com> wrote:
    For Maximum EV Efficiency, Stick to 25 Miles an Hour, Ignore Angry Drivers and POLICE.

    https://www.wsj.com/articles/ev-electric-car-battery-charge-hypermiler-11642517385

    I was driving around 40 MPH on right lane of a highway (speed limit unknown) and got pull over for driving too slow. I told him that i was running low on
    charges and won't make it to the charger any faster. He escort me for a little while and left.

    At the very least, if you're driving significantly slower than the
    general flow of traffic, you should have your hazard flashers on.
    Otherwise, you're at a higher risk of being rear-ended by a
    less-than-attentive driver.

    Even that may not be legal. Here in California, the Vehicle Code says
    "No person shall drive or operate on a highway at such a slow speed as
    to impede or block the normal reasonable movement of traffic, unless
    the reduced speed is necessary for safe operation because of a grade,
    or compliance in the law."

    So, driving slowly (and impeding other drivers), because you don't
    want to run down your battery, is a violation, and you can be ticketed
    for it. If you ignore the angry drivers and the police, you may end up
    needing to explain the case to a judge, in court.

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Rick C@21:1/5 to bitrex on Tue Jan 18 13:11:07 2022
    On Tuesday, January 18, 2022 at 12:57:39 PM UTC-5, bitrex wrote:
    On 1/18/2022 11:25 AM, Ed Lee wrote:
    For Maximum EV Efficiency, Stick to 25 Miles an Hour, Ignore Angry Drivers and POLICE.

    https://www.wsj.com/articles/ev-electric-car-battery-charge-hypermiler-11642517385

    I was driving around 40 MPH on right lane of a highway (speed limit unknown) and got pull over for driving too slow. I told him that i was running low on charges and won't make it to the charger any faster. He escort me for a little while and left.
    I couldn't read the article but I guarantee 95% of the people pissing
    the rest of humanity off trying to see how many miles they can pull with their toy on public roads are retired engineers, ham radio operators,
    and other miscreants.

    I think this is a problem that is hugely overstated. I see people driving whatever speed they want in whatever sort of car they want to drive. This is not a problem unique to EVs in any way. In Puerto Rico the problem is even worse. The right lane on
    many highways can run out without warning. Lane ending signs are so rare that when I saw one I wanted to stop and take a picture of it to show people what it means. The left lane can run out as well... again without warning. The result is the middle
    lane is often the default lane for drivers of all speeds. It's not unusual to see someone driving 40 MPH in the middle lane of a 60 MPH highway with cars passing on both sides. lol

    Maybe Ed should move to Puerto Rico where he would feel more in the right place... oh, except there are very few chargers. But then you can live in the middle of the island and nowhere is more than 60 miles away, well, as the crow flies anyhow. I think
    you can take a ferry to one of the nearby islands, but you can save your battery while the ferry paddles.

    --

    Rick C.

    - Get 1,000 miles of free Supercharging
    - Tesla referral code - https://ts.la/richard11209

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Rick C@21:1/5 to John S on Tue Jan 18 13:19:18 2022
    On Tuesday, January 18, 2022 at 1:36:40 PM UTC-5, John S wrote:
    On 1/18/2022 11:31 AM, Ed Lee wrote:
    On Tuesday, January 18, 2022 at 9:22:04 AM UTC-8, lang...@fonz.dk wrote:
    tirsdag den 18. januar 2022 kl. 18.11.02 UTC+1 skrev Ed Lee:
    On Tuesday, January 18, 2022 at 8:54:39 AM UTC-8, jla...@highlandsniptechnology.com wrote:
    On Tue, 18 Jan 2022 08:25:06 -0800 (PST), Ed Lee
    <edward....@gmail.com> wrote:

    For Maximum EV Efficiency, Stick to 25 Miles an Hour, Ignore Angry Drivers and POLICE.

    https://www.wsj.com/articles/ev-electric-car-battery-charge-hypermiler-11642517385
    That is an obsession. A rude and dangerous one on a public highway. I >>>> think that some fraction of electric vehicles serve cheapness
    obsessions.

    I was driving around 40 MPH on right lane of a highway (speed limit unknown) and got pull over for driving too slow. I told him that i was running low on charges and won't make it to the charger any faster. He escort me for a little while and
    left.
    It's much worse on a long mountain uphill in a blizzard. You can't
    even afford to run the heater.

    Driving 40 mph, and waiting around for a car to recharge, suggests
    that your time isn't worth much.

    People are driving and rushing to die too fast. The explosive covid cases are partly due to people moving too fast and too mobile.
    and you want to make that worse by driving slow causing an unexpected and much more dangerous speed difference?

    If they want to go fast, they can always take the left. The right lane should always be slower.
    If a cop pulls you over for driving too slow, it's because he thought
    you were a hazard to other motorists. Proof was his escort service. If
    you can't keep up with traffic either get off the road or get a car
    which will.

    Ed is pretty silly with his car. He is conducting social experiments to see how much abuse he can tolerate when he heaps it on himself. He takes trips where he doesn't know where he will charge and ends up using 120V outlets charging every 40 miles or
    so. It is nothing other than what most people would call insane. So driving 40 in a highway is nothing out of character for him. Sooner or later he is guaranteed to cause some sort of accident doing that. People simply are not expect anyone to be
    driving that slow and aren't paying close enough attention to avoid hitting him. I wonder if he turns on his flashers?

    --

    Rick C.

    -- Get 1,000 miles of free Supercharging
    -- Tesla referral code - https://ts.la/richard11209

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Rick C@21:1/5 to bitrex on Tue Jan 18 13:21:26 2022
    On Tuesday, January 18, 2022 at 1:46:40 PM UTC-5, bitrex wrote:

    My Volt has a convenient inline-four battery charger & space heater for
    when it gets down into the single digits.

    For whatever reason maybe due to the high compression ratio and
    relatively high RPM it runs at when used this way when the engine is
    cold it blows enormous clouds of condensation when it starts up at those temperatures, almost like laying a smokescreen. Sort of amusing coming
    from an "electric vehicle"

    What was the weirdness you described for controlling the regeneration braking you talked about once? I recall a "paddle" you flipped repeatedly or something.

    --

    Rick C.

    -+ Get 1,000 miles of free Supercharging
    -+ Tesla referral code - https://ts.la/richard11209

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Rick C@21:1/5 to Ralph Mowery on Tue Jan 18 13:15:45 2022
    On Tuesday, January 18, 2022 at 1:33:59 PM UTC-5, Ralph Mowery wrote:
    In article <ss70ir$m0s$2...@dont-email.me>, spam...@blueyonder.co.uk
    says...

    ... if the heaters even work! https://canada.autonews.com/electric-vehicles/tesla-heating-system-being-probed-canada-following-cold-weather-complaints

    and unpleasant anecdotes https://teslanorth.com/2022/01/06/tesla-heat-pumps-keep-failing-in-extreme-cold-weather/


    Seems they are using heat pumps. I don't know about the ones in the
    cars,but the ones in the homes do not work well at all when it is much
    below 20 deg F. They are trying to operate the cars at zero and below.

    That's actually not quite correct. The issue is in cold temps the output of a heat pump is less while the demand for heat is greater. So at some point the heat pump is simply not large enough to supply the required heat. If you install a larger heat
    pump (what was done in my father's house) it will work well down to zero Fahrenheit. I know because it had an outdoor thermostat and I tried tweaking it down. I never found a condition where it would not keep the house warm and our temps were down to
    low twenties at least. This winter we are seeing a lot of low teens at night here. Brrrr... Time to head back to Puerto Rico.

    --

    Rick C.

    + Get 1,000 miles of free Supercharging
    + Tesla referral code - https://ts.la/richard11209

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Ed Lee@21:1/5 to gnuarm.del...@gmail.com on Tue Jan 18 13:25:45 2022
    On Tuesday, January 18, 2022 at 1:19:22 PM UTC-8, gnuarm.del...@gmail.com wrote:
    On Tuesday, January 18, 2022 at 1:36:40 PM UTC-5, John S wrote:
    On 1/18/2022 11:31 AM, Ed Lee wrote:
    On Tuesday, January 18, 2022 at 9:22:04 AM UTC-8, lang...@fonz.dk wrote:
    tirsdag den 18. januar 2022 kl. 18.11.02 UTC+1 skrev Ed Lee:
    On Tuesday, January 18, 2022 at 8:54:39 AM UTC-8, jla...@highlandsniptechnology.com wrote:
    On Tue, 18 Jan 2022 08:25:06 -0800 (PST), Ed Lee
    <edward....@gmail.com> wrote:

    For Maximum EV Efficiency, Stick to 25 Miles an Hour, Ignore Angry Drivers and POLICE.

    https://www.wsj.com/articles/ev-electric-car-battery-charge-hypermiler-11642517385
    That is an obsession. A rude and dangerous one on a public highway. I >>>> think that some fraction of electric vehicles serve cheapness
    obsessions.

    I was driving around 40 MPH on right lane of a highway (speed limit unknown) and got pull over for driving too slow. I told him that i was running low on charges and won't make it to the charger any faster. He escort me for a little while and
    left.
    It's much worse on a long mountain uphill in a blizzard. You can't >>>> even afford to run the heater.

    Driving 40 mph, and waiting around for a car to recharge, suggests >>>> that your time isn't worth much.

    People are driving and rushing to die too fast. The explosive covid cases are partly due to people moving too fast and too mobile.
    and you want to make that worse by driving slow causing an unexpected and much more dangerous speed difference?

    If they want to go fast, they can always take the left. The right lane should always be slower.
    If a cop pulls you over for driving too slow, it's because he thought
    you were a hazard to other motorists. Proof was his escort service. If
    you can't keep up with traffic either get off the road or get a car
    which will.
    Ed is pretty silly with his car. He is conducting social experiments to see how much abuse he can tolerate when he heaps it on himself. He takes trips where he doesn't know where he will charge and ends up using 120V outlets charging every 40 miles or
    so. It is nothing other than what most people would call insane. So driving 40 in a highway is nothing out of character for him. Sooner or later he is guaranteed to cause some sort of accident doing that. People simply are not expect anyone to be driving
    that slow and aren't paying close enough attention to avoid hitting him. I wonder if he turns on his flashers?

    Sometimes, but flasher makes it hard to signal turns. Of course, it can be fixed if i design the flasher/signal system. If i signal turns, it should automatically stop the other light.

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Rick C@21:1/5 to Ed Lee on Tue Jan 18 14:09:23 2022
    On Tuesday, January 18, 2022 at 4:25:49 PM UTC-5, Ed Lee wrote:
    On Tuesday, January 18, 2022 at 1:19:22 PM UTC-8, gnuarm.del...@gmail.com wrote:
    Ed is pretty silly with his car. He is conducting social experiments to see how much abuse he can tolerate when he heaps it on himself. He takes trips where he doesn't know where he will charge and ends up using 120V outlets charging every 40 miles
    or so. It is nothing other than what most people would call insane. So driving 40 in a highway is nothing out of character for him. Sooner or later he is guaranteed to cause some sort of accident doing that. People simply are not expect anyone to be
    driving that slow and aren't paying close enough attention to avoid hitting him. I wonder if he turns on his flashers?
    Sometimes, but flasher makes it hard to signal turns. Of course, it can be fixed if i design the flasher/signal system. If i signal turns, it should automatically stop the other light.

    If you are on a road where you need flashers, no one is going to notice if you don't signal a turn. They are going to be dodging you already. Put the turn signal on and a cop can't complain that the turn signal was also flashing with the 4 way flashers.
    You followed the letter of the law.

    --

    Rick C.

    +- Get 1,000 miles of free Supercharging
    +- Tesla referral code - https://ts.la/richard11209

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From bitrex@21:1/5 to Rick C on Tue Jan 18 18:14:08 2022
    On 1/18/2022 4:21 PM, Rick C wrote:
    On Tuesday, January 18, 2022 at 1:46:40 PM UTC-5, bitrex wrote:

    My Volt has a convenient inline-four battery charger & space heater for
    when it gets down into the single digits.

    For whatever reason maybe due to the high compression ratio and
    relatively high RPM it runs at when used this way when the engine is
    cold it blows enormous clouds of condensation when it starts up at those
    temperatures, almost like laying a smokescreen. Sort of amusing coming
    from an "electric vehicle"

    What was the weirdness you described for controlling the regeneration braking you talked about once? I recall a "paddle" you flipped repeatedly or something.


    Ya it has a paddle under the cruise control button-area, on the back of
    the steering wheel for "regeneration on demand", if your foot's off the accelerator you press that and it'll engage regeneration only and not
    the wheel brakes. The Bolt has it also. It's not pressure-sensitive it
    just seems to ramp in intensity over a about a second or two, to full-on
    if you hold it down.

    Or you can just leave the car in "L" and do the one-pedal driving-thing
    but I've never liked that style, it feels weird to have to push the
    "gas" to go down a hill, and my foot gets tired after a while. I'm on
    the highway on cruise control about 75% of the time, anyway.

    But it's not a complete substitute for the foot-brake and can behave in
    ways you wouldn't expect from the foot-brake sometimes, like if you
    momentarily lose traction from a pothole or patch of ice it seems to
    instantly disengage and you lunge forwards which can be pretty jarring
    when it happens.

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From John S@21:1/5 to bitrex on Tue Jan 18 17:38:12 2022
    On 1/18/2022 5:14 PM, bitrex wrote:
    On 1/18/2022 4:21 PM, Rick C wrote:
    On Tuesday, January 18, 2022 at 1:46:40 PM UTC-5, bitrex wrote:

    My Volt has a convenient inline-four battery charger & space heater for
    when it gets down into the single digits.

    For whatever reason maybe due to the high compression ratio and
    relatively high RPM it runs at when used this way when the engine is
    cold it blows enormous clouds of condensation when it starts up at those >>> temperatures, almost like laying a smokescreen. Sort of amusing coming
    from an "electric vehicle"

    What was the weirdness you described for controlling the regeneration
    braking you talked about once?  I recall a "paddle" you flipped
    repeatedly or something.


    Ya it has a paddle under the cruise control button-area, on the back of
    the steering wheel for "regeneration on demand", if your foot's off the accelerator you press that and it'll engage regeneration only and not
    the wheel brakes. The Bolt has it also. It's not pressure-sensitive it
    just seems to ramp in intensity over a about a second or two, to full-on
    if you hold it down.

    Or you can just leave the car in "L" and do the one-pedal driving-thing
    but I've never liked that style, it feels weird to have to push the
    "gas" to go down a hill, and my foot gets tired after a while. I'm on
    the highway on cruise control about 75% of the time, anyway.

    But it's not a complete substitute for the foot-brake and can behave in
    ways you wouldn't expect from the foot-brake sometimes, like if you momentarily lose traction from a pothole or patch of ice it seems to instantly disengage and you lunge forwards which can be pretty jarring
    when it happens.

    Do you have cruise control?

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Rick C@21:1/5 to bitrex on Tue Jan 18 16:31:43 2022
    On Tuesday, January 18, 2022 at 6:14:17 PM UTC-5, bitrex wrote:
    On 1/18/2022 4:21 PM, Rick C wrote:
    On Tuesday, January 18, 2022 at 1:46:40 PM UTC-5, bitrex wrote:

    My Volt has a convenient inline-four battery charger & space heater for >> when it gets down into the single digits.

    For whatever reason maybe due to the high compression ratio and
    relatively high RPM it runs at when used this way when the engine is
    cold it blows enormous clouds of condensation when it starts up at those >> temperatures, almost like laying a smokescreen. Sort of amusing coming
    from an "electric vehicle"

    What was the weirdness you described for controlling the regeneration braking you talked about once? I recall a "paddle" you flipped repeatedly or something.

    Ya it has a paddle under the cruise control button-area, on the back of
    the steering wheel for "regeneration on demand", if your foot's off the accelerator you press that and it'll engage regeneration only and not
    the wheel brakes. The Bolt has it also. It's not pressure-sensitive it
    just seems to ramp in intensity over a about a second or two, to full-on
    if you hold it down.

    Or you can just leave the car in "L" and do the one-pedal driving-thing

    What is "L"? What else does it do other than make the regen work from the gas pedal?


    but I've never liked that style, it feels weird to have to push the
    "gas" to go down a hill, and my foot gets tired after a while. I'm on
    the highway on cruise control about 75% of the time, anyway.

    Your foot gets tired from stepping on the accelerator pedal?


    But it's not a complete substitute for the foot-brake and can behave in
    ways you wouldn't expect from the foot-brake sometimes, like if you momentarily lose traction from a pothole or patch of ice it seems to instantly disengage and you lunge forwards which can be pretty jarring
    when it happens.

    I've never seen that happen in my car. When you say it disengages, you mean momentarily, just for an instant? Yeah, that would be a little disturbing until you get used to it. That reminds me of the leaf spring rollup my brother's MG would do on a
    fast takeoff. It just lasts for a moment so if you ignore it everything straightens out. I think the Tesla simply prevents the wheels from rotating too much so once over the the slick spot it resumes normally as if nothing happened. I don't know how
    the traction control actually works, I just know I've never been able to make the car go squirrelly, even if I want to. I'm accustomed to being able to put a car or truck into a four wheel drift on ramps. I think I did that once with the Tesla, but it
    was very hard to do and I won't be trying it again. You really have to hit the ramp fast and hard. With the very low center of gravity it is amazingly well behaved on the road. Body roll is essentially gone.

    --

    Rick C.

    ++ Get 1,000 miles of free Supercharging
    ++ Tesla referral code - https://ts.la/richard11209

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From bitrex@21:1/5 to Rick C on Tue Jan 18 22:36:49 2022
    On 1/18/2022 7:31 PM, Rick C wrote:
    On Tuesday, January 18, 2022 at 6:14:17 PM UTC-5, bitrex wrote:
    On 1/18/2022 4:21 PM, Rick C wrote:
    On Tuesday, January 18, 2022 at 1:46:40 PM UTC-5, bitrex wrote:

    My Volt has a convenient inline-four battery charger & space heater for >>>> when it gets down into the single digits.

    For whatever reason maybe due to the high compression ratio and
    relatively high RPM it runs at when used this way when the engine is
    cold it blows enormous clouds of condensation when it starts up at those >>>> temperatures, almost like laying a smokescreen. Sort of amusing coming >>>> from an "electric vehicle"

    What was the weirdness you described for controlling the regeneration braking you talked about once? I recall a "paddle" you flipped repeatedly or something.

    Ya it has a paddle under the cruise control button-area, on the back of
    the steering wheel for "regeneration on demand", if your foot's off the
    accelerator you press that and it'll engage regeneration only and not
    the wheel brakes. The Bolt has it also. It's not pressure-sensitive it
    just seems to ramp in intensity over a about a second or two, to full-on
    if you hold it down.

    Or you can just leave the car in "L" and do the one-pedal driving-thing

    What is "L"? What else does it do other than make the regen work from the gas pedal?

    Putting it in "L" makes it apply full regeneration every time you lift
    off the accelerator.

    but I've never liked that style, it feels weird to have to push the
    "gas" to go down a hill, and my foot gets tired after a while. I'm on
    the highway on cruise control about 75% of the time, anyway.

    Your foot gets tired from stepping on the accelerator pedal?

    I definitely find the car rapidly slowing down every time I lift off it
    an irritating and fatiguing way to drive around, yeah.

    But it's not a complete substitute for the foot-brake and can behave in
    ways you wouldn't expect from the foot-brake sometimes, like if you
    momentarily lose traction from a pothole or patch of ice it seems to
    instantly disengage and you lunge forwards which can be pretty jarring
    when it happens.

    I've never seen that happen in my car. When you say it disengages, you mean momentarily, just for an instant? Yeah, that would be a little disturbing until you get used to it. That reminds me of the leaf spring rollup my brother's MG would do on a
    fast takeoff. It just lasts for a moment so if you ignore it everything straightens out. I think the Tesla simply prevents the wheels from rotating too much so once over the the slick spot it resumes normally as if nothing happened. I don't know how
    the traction control actually works, I just know I've never been able to make the car go squirrelly, even if I want to. I'm accustomed to being able to put a car or truck into a four wheel drift on ramps. I think I did that once with the Tesla, but it
    was very hard to do and I won't be trying it again. You really have to hit the ramp fast and hard. With the very low center of gravity it is amazingly well behaved on the road. Body roll is essentially gone.


    Yeah the times it's occurred it's so fast I don't even notice if the TC
    is engaging or not when it happens, the car is decelerating as normal by regeneration, hit a big bump a certain way and you can tell the regen is
    just gone and you're flying free, and then it re-asserts itself about a half-second later.

    No I can't make the Volt get out from under me or do anything very unpredictable with the TC on doing tests reasonable to do on public thoroughfares like trying to make it drift into an empty parking lot on
    packed snow at reasonable speed, where there's no great hazard if it
    doesn't recover well, the TC is like "no you can't do that" and the car
    stays pointed more-or-less where I point it.

    I don't do unreasonable tests because I don't have a track membership or anywhere to really fling it around in private. The TC and ABS have saved
    my butt in real-world driving on a couple occasions but the TC lamp
    almost never comes on when I'm not trying to make it do so like above on
    packed snow, if it does it usually means I done fucked up.

    On some older GM cars when you turned the TC off it was really off. On
    newer cars in general the Volt included it's never really off when it's
    "off" it just switches to some less-aggressive control law.

    The first gen was apparently more like the old days with the TC off but
    the second gen is tuned by Bosch, zee Germans don't do do zis it is
    alvays in zee control.

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From bitrex@21:1/5 to Dave Platt on Tue Jan 18 23:05:22 2022
    On 1/18/2022 3:10 PM, Dave Platt wrote:
    In article <5ffdd3aa-a770-4fde-bf84-af3c0e08ef40n@googlegroups.com>,
    Ed Lee <edward.ming.lee@gmail.com> wrote:
    For Maximum EV Efficiency, Stick to 25 Miles an Hour, Ignore Angry Drivers and POLICE.

    https://www.wsj.com/articles/ev-electric-car-battery-charge-hypermiler-11642517385

    I was driving around 40 MPH on right lane of a highway (speed limit unknown) and got pull over for driving too slow. I told him that i was running low on
    charges and won't make it to the charger any faster. He escort me for a little while and left.

    At the very least, if you're driving significantly slower than the
    general flow of traffic, you should have your hazard flashers on.
    Otherwise, you're at a higher risk of being rear-ended by a less-than-attentive driver.

    Even that may not be legal. Here in California, the Vehicle Code says
    "No person shall drive or operate on a highway at such a slow speed as
    to impede or block the normal reasonable movement of traffic, unless
    the reduced speed is necessary for safe operation because of a grade,
    or compliance in the law."

    So, driving slowly (and impeding other drivers), because you don't
    want to run down your battery, is a violation, and you can be ticketed
    for it. If you ignore the angry drivers and the police, you may end up needing to explain the case to a judge, in court.

    Judges in traffic court in the US tend to give you like 15 seconds to
    explain yourself there's 75 other people there the one morning a week
    they do it in even a small city like e.g. Providence RI.

    "So you received a ticket for driving too slow and impeding traffic why
    were you doing that?"

    "Well you see I was driving that way to get better fuel economy in my
    hybrid vehicle but I dispute the claim that I was in any way impeding
    traffic by d..."

    "So you admit you were doing that"

    "Yes bu..."

    "Thank you for coming you have a 30 day extension to remit payment, you
    may also pay cash or credit at the window outside today. Next!"

    Last time I was there of the 50 people ahead of me I think one guy got
    off and maybe 4 including myself got reduced fines for various reasons.
    You have to show up with something better than just an explanation to
    get off if a police officer says you were in the wrong, here.

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Rick C@21:1/5 to bitrex on Tue Jan 18 20:07:22 2022
    On Tuesday, January 18, 2022 at 10:36:57 PM UTC-5, bitrex wrote:
    On 1/18/2022 7:31 PM, Rick C wrote:
    On Tuesday, January 18, 2022 at 6:14:17 PM UTC-5, bitrex wrote:
    On 1/18/2022 4:21 PM, Rick C wrote:
    On Tuesday, January 18, 2022 at 1:46:40 PM UTC-5, bitrex wrote:

    My Volt has a convenient inline-four battery charger & space heater for >>>> when it gets down into the single digits.

    For whatever reason maybe due to the high compression ratio and
    relatively high RPM it runs at when used this way when the engine is >>>> cold it blows enormous clouds of condensation when it starts up at those
    temperatures, almost like laying a smokescreen. Sort of amusing coming >>>> from an "electric vehicle"

    What was the weirdness you described for controlling the regeneration braking you talked about once? I recall a "paddle" you flipped repeatedly or something.

    Ya it has a paddle under the cruise control button-area, on the back of >> the steering wheel for "regeneration on demand", if your foot's off the >> accelerator you press that and it'll engage regeneration only and not
    the wheel brakes. The Bolt has it also. It's not pressure-sensitive it
    just seems to ramp in intensity over a about a second or two, to full-on >> if you hold it down.

    Or you can just leave the car in "L" and do the one-pedal driving-thing

    What is "L"? What else does it do other than make the regen work from the gas pedal?
    Putting it in "L" makes it apply full regeneration every time you lift
    off the accelerator.

    So it doesn't vary the engine braking with the position of the accelerator? Does "L" do anything else? I can't figure what "L" is supposed to stand for.


    but I've never liked that style, it feels weird to have to push the
    "gas" to go down a hill, and my foot gets tired after a while. I'm on
    the highway on cruise control about 75% of the time, anyway.

    Your foot gets tired from stepping on the accelerator pedal?
    I definitely find the car rapidly slowing down every time I lift off it
    an irritating and fatiguing way to drive around, yeah.

    Well, yeah, if it is only full engine braking with no control, that would suck. The Tesla gives you continuous control over engine braking and engine acceleration with the same movement of the accelerator, one continuous control. It's actually
    excellent and is one of the things that make driving the car so pleasurable. That and the autopilot.


    But it's not a complete substitute for the foot-brake and can behave in >> ways you wouldn't expect from the foot-brake sometimes, like if you
    momentarily lose traction from a pothole or patch of ice it seems to
    instantly disengage and you lunge forwards which can be pretty jarring
    when it happens.

    I've never seen that happen in my car. When you say it disengages, you mean momentarily, just for an instant? Yeah, that would be a little disturbing until you get used to it. That reminds me of the leaf spring rollup my brother's MG would do on a
    fast takeoff. It just lasts for a moment so if you ignore it everything straightens out. I think the Tesla simply prevents the wheels from rotating too much so once over the the slick spot it resumes normally as if nothing happened. I don't know how the
    traction control actually works, I just know I've never been able to make the car go squirrelly, even if I want to. I'm accustomed to being able to put a car or truck into a four wheel drift on ramps. I think I did that once with the Tesla, but it was
    very hard to do and I won't be trying it again. You really have to hit the ramp fast and hard. With the very low center of gravity it is amazingly well behaved on the road. Body roll is essentially gone.

    Yeah the times it's occurred it's so fast I don't even notice if the TC
    is engaging or not when it happens, the car is decelerating as normal by regeneration, hit a big bump a certain way and you can tell the regen is just gone and you're flying free, and then it re-asserts itself about a half-second later.

    I think you have to expect that. If the wheels lose grip on the road any braking isn't going to work smoothly. I've noticed that in ICE vehicles.


    No I can't make the Volt get out from under me or do anything very unpredictable with the TC on doing tests reasonable to do on public thoroughfares like trying to make it drift into an empty parking lot on packed snow at reasonable speed, where there's no great hazard if it
    doesn't recover well, the TC is like "no you can't do that" and the car stays pointed more-or-less where I point it.

    I don't do unreasonable tests because I don't have a track membership or anywhere to really fling it around in private. The TC and ABS have saved
    my butt in real-world driving on a couple occasions but the TC lamp
    almost never comes on when I'm not trying to make it do so like above on packed snow, if it does it usually means I done fucked up.

    On some older GM cars when you turned the TC off it was really off. On
    newer cars in general the Volt included it's never really off when it's "off" it just switches to some less-aggressive control law.

    The first gen was apparently more like the old days with the TC off but
    the second gen is tuned by Bosch, zee Germans don't do do zis it is
    alvays in zee control.

    I don't even know how to turn TC off in the Tesla, but I'm sure there's a setting for it. I've never wanted to do that although I used to take my pickup into snowed parking lots to do donuts and would not mind trying it with the Tesla.

    --

    Rick C.

    --- Get 1,000 miles of free Supercharging
    --- Tesla referral code - https://ts.la/richard11209

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From bitrex@21:1/5 to Rick C on Tue Jan 18 23:42:01 2022
    On 1/18/2022 11:07 PM, Rick C wrote:

    What is "L"? What else does it do other than make the regen work from the gas pedal?
    Putting it in "L" makes it apply full regeneration every time you lift
    off the accelerator.

    So it doesn't vary the engine braking with the position of the accelerator? Does "L" do anything else? I can't figure what "L" is supposed to stand for.

    It does vary with accelerator position but I haven't driven a Tesla so I
    can't say how or if it feels different. Probably. "L" is a throwback to
    the "Low" gear in a gas car and I do use it on steep hills where it
    functions about like that. Other people drive it in "L" all the time and
    like it that way and they can drive it with one pedal successfully, I've
    never gotten accustomed to it though.

    e and you're flying free, and then it re-asserts itself about a
    half-second later.

    I think you have to expect that. If the wheels lose grip on the road any braking isn't going to work smoothly. I've noticed that in ICE vehicles.

    Regeneration-only braking using the paddle seems to instantly disengage
    if one of the two drive wheels slips badly or goes airborne off a bump
    for a moment which is definitely disconcerting compared to having four
    wheels with mechanical brakes engaged, never had a car fully disengage
    all four disc brakes cuz one wheel bounced off a bump, lol.

    It has something to do with the particulars of the Voltec series-hybrid
    FWD gearset and how it links to the motor-generators I expect, it can't regenerate when only one drive wheel is making contact.

    I don't even know how to turn TC off in the Tesla, but I'm sure there's a setting for it. I've never wanted to do that although I used to take my pickup into snowed parking lots to do donuts and would not mind trying it with the Tesla.


    Nobody reads the manuals no mo...:-(

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From bitrex@21:1/5 to bitrex on Tue Jan 18 23:46:48 2022
    On 1/18/2022 11:42 PM, bitrex wrote:

    Regeneration-only braking using the paddle seems to instantly disengage
    if one of the two drive wheels slips badly or goes airborne off a bump
    for a moment which is definitely disconcerting compared to having four
    wheels with mechanical brakes engaged, never had a car fully disengage
    all four disc brakes cuz one wheel bounced off a bump, lol.

    It has something to do with the particulars of the Voltec series-hybrid
    FWD gearset and how it links to the motor-generators I expect, it can't regenerate when only one drive wheel is making contact.

    FWIW I've never had it do this when using the pedal-brake lightly
    instead, I expect the computer is like "uh oh!" and engages the
    mechanical brakes momentarily to compensate.

    I don't think it lights the traction control indicator either, you
    really have to abuse the car to get it to light up IME, when engaged
    it's always doing stuff silently I expect.

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Martin Brown@21:1/5 to Dave Platt on Wed Jan 19 10:06:18 2022
    On 18/01/2022 20:10, Dave Platt wrote:
    In article <5ffdd3aa-a770-4fde-bf84-af3c0e08ef40n@googlegroups.com>,
    Ed Lee <edward.ming.lee@gmail.com> wrote:
    For Maximum EV Efficiency, Stick to 25 Miles an Hour, Ignore Angry Drivers and POLICE.

    https://www.wsj.com/articles/ev-electric-car-battery-charge-hypermiler-11642517385

    I was driving around 40 MPH on right lane of a highway (speed limit unknown) and got pull over for driving too slow. I told him that i was running low on
    charges and won't make it to the charger any faster. He escort me for a little while and left.

    Why didn't you know the speed limit?
    Sounds like you shouldn't even be allowed on the road.

    At the very least, if you're driving significantly slower than the
    general flow of traffic, you should have your hazard flashers on.
    Otherwise, you're at a higher risk of being rear-ended by a less-than-attentive driver.

    Moving traffic offence in the UK to drive with your hazard warning
    lights on although plenty of people do it :( Not enough traffic police.

    I have had to limp along at 50mph (runflat after a blowout) on a UK
    motorway nominal speed limit 70mph and typical average speed 80mph.
    50mph is slower than HGVs speed limit in the inside lane and so really
    quite dangerous. I got off the motorway at the earliest opportunity and
    then limped home on slower old roads where 50mph is adequate most times.

    Where I live farm tractors regularly get rear ended by HGVs on fast dual carriageways despite having many yellow flashing lights on them.

    Even that may not be legal. Here in California, the Vehicle Code says
    "No person shall drive or operate on a highway at such a slow speed as
    to impede or block the normal reasonable movement of traffic, unless
    the reduced speed is necessary for safe operation because of a grade,
    or compliance in the law."

    How do they move large cranes and great chunks of wind turbine about
    then? In the UK it isn't that uncommon to see whole railway carriages
    being moved slowly by road and on the motorway (utter madness).

    They are usually accompanied by "wide load" warning vehicles front and
    rear. But not all wide loads are these days. Those that take a lane and
    a half cause absolute chaos around them on busy motorways.

    So, driving slowly (and impeding other drivers), because you don't
    want to run down your battery, is a violation, and you can be ticketed
    for it. If you ignore the angry drivers and the police, you may end up needing to explain the case to a judge, in court.

    Near the range limit of the vehicle you may not have any choice if you
    are to reach the next working charger.

    However, the vehicle must have the aerodynamics of a brick if there is a noticeable range difference between 40mph and 50mph. I only see
    significant drag affecting fuel economy at 55+. I guess resistive losses
    hurt an EV more but I'm surprised that it is quite so bad!

    The *big* problem in the UK is that there are plenty of non working
    chargers shown as working on the various apps! Many tales of woe even in
    the south where they are relatively plentiful. Up north you are stuffed.

    The supercharging hubs they have built are unable to get supply so are
    nothing more than useless boondoggles. This one near me is useless:

    https://www.yorkpress.co.uk/news/19839979.yorks-flagship-electric-vehicle-charging-hub-still-not-open/

    It's a joke. Opening was cancelled yet again. No electricity!
    (which is a bit of a serious problem for a charging station)

    --
    Regards,
    Martin Brown

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Ed Lee@21:1/5 to Martin Brown on Wed Jan 19 06:44:58 2022
    On Wednesday, January 19, 2022 at 2:06:26 AM UTC-8, Martin Brown wrote:
    On 18/01/2022 20:10, Dave Platt wrote:
    In article <5ffdd3aa-a770-4fde...@googlegroups.com>,
    Ed Lee <edward....@gmail.com> wrote:
    For Maximum EV Efficiency, Stick to 25 Miles an Hour, Ignore Angry Drivers and POLICE.

    https://www.wsj.com/articles/ev-electric-car-battery-charge-hypermiler-11642517385

    I was driving around 40 MPH on right lane of a highway (speed limit unknown) and got pull over for driving too slow. I told him that i was running low on
    charges and won't make it to the charger any faster. He escort me for a little while and left.
    Why didn't you know the speed limit?
    Sounds like you shouldn't even be allowed on the road.

    It was dark and I didn't have night vision goggle on. It was a rural highway, may be 45MPH or 50MPH.

    At the very least, if you're driving significantly slower than the
    general flow of traffic, you should have your hazard flashers on. Otherwise, you're at a higher risk of being rear-ended by a less-than-attentive driver.
    Moving traffic offence in the UK to drive with your hazard warning
    lights on although plenty of people do it :( Not enough traffic police.

    I have had to limp along at 50mph (runflat after a blowout) on a UK
    motorway nominal speed limit 70mph and typical average speed 80mph.
    50mph is slower than HGVs speed limit in the inside lane and so really
    quite dangerous. I got off the motorway at the earliest opportunity and
    then limped home on slower old roads where 50mph is adequate most times.

    Where I live farm tractors regularly get rear ended by HGVs on fast dual carriageways despite having many yellow flashing lights on them.
    Even that may not be legal. Here in California, the Vehicle Code says
    "No person shall drive or operate on a highway at such a slow speed as
    to impede or block the normal reasonable movement of traffic, unless
    the reduced speed is necessary for safe operation because of a grade,
    or compliance in the law."
    How do they move large cranes and great chunks of wind turbine about
    then? In the UK it isn't that uncommon to see whole railway carriages
    being moved slowly by road and on the motorway (utter madness).

    They are usually accompanied by "wide load" warning vehicles front and
    rear. But not all wide loads are these days. Those that take a lane and
    a half cause absolute chaos around them on busy motorways.
    So, driving slowly (and impeding other drivers), because you don't
    want to run down your battery, is a violation, and you can be ticketed
    for it. If you ignore the angry drivers and the police, you may end up needing to explain the case to a judge, in court.
    Near the range limit of the vehicle you may not have any choice if you
    are to reach the next working charger.

    However, the vehicle must have the aerodynamics of a brick if there is a noticeable range difference between 40mph and 50mph. I only see
    significant drag affecting fuel economy at 55+. I guess resistive losses
    hurt an EV more but I'm surprised that it is quite so bad!

    My car drops into 25MPH turtle mode when the battery is very low. I guess the manufacturer knows something about efficiency at low speed.


    The *big* problem in the UK is that there are plenty of non working
    chargers shown as working on the various apps! Many tales of woe even in
    the south where they are relatively plentiful. Up north you are stuffed.

    The supercharging hubs they have built are unable to get supply so are nothing more than useless boondoggles. This one near me is useless:

    https://www.yorkpress.co.uk/news/19839979.yorks-flagship-electric-vehicle-charging-hub-still-not-open/

    It's a joke. Opening was cancelled yet again. No electricity!
    (which is a bit of a serious problem for a charging station)

    Yes, i had to redirect from a non-working charger.

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Martin Brown@21:1/5 to Ed Lee on Wed Jan 19 15:29:02 2022
    On 19/01/2022 14:44, Ed Lee wrote:
    On Wednesday, January 19, 2022 at 2:06:26 AM UTC-8, Martin Brown wrote:
    On 18/01/2022 20:10, Dave Platt wrote:
    In article <5ffdd3aa-a770-4fde...@googlegroups.com>,
    Ed Lee <edward....@gmail.com> wrote:
    For Maximum EV Efficiency, Stick to 25 Miles an Hour, Ignore Angry Drivers and POLICE.

    https://www.wsj.com/articles/ev-electric-car-battery-charge-hypermiler-11642517385

    I was driving around 40 MPH on right lane of a highway (speed limit unknown) and got pull over for driving too slow. I told him that i was running low on
    charges and won't make it to the charger any faster. He escort me for a little while and left.
    Why didn't you know the speed limit?
    Sounds like you shouldn't even be allowed on the road.

    It was dark and I didn't have night vision goggle on. It was a rural highway, may be 45MPH or 50MPH.

    But surely you could remember which sign you went past last?

    Don't US signs have glass beads in the matrix so that you get to see
    road signs in headlights as you approach? Or do EV's not have them?

    UK you need to know the rules as "derestricted" is a white disk with a
    diagonal black line across it. ISTR US speed limits are all numbers.

    However, the vehicle must have the aerodynamics of a brick if there is a
    noticeable range difference between 40mph and 50mph. I only see
    significant drag affecting fuel economy at 55+. I guess resistive losses
    hurt an EV more but I'm surprised that it is quite so bad!

    My car drops into 25MPH turtle mode when the battery is very low. I guess the manufacturer knows something about efficiency at low speed.

    I can see that the lower the battery discharge rate the longer it will
    last but the drag coefficient of the vehicle must be insanely high for
    that to matter at such low speeds. It makes very good sense to limit acceleration when the battery is on its last legs but the vehicle should
    be able to do a bit more than 25mph without taking too much of a hit.

    Once it is rolling you merely have to replace the energy lost to
    friction and drag to maintain a given speed. Drag forces scale with
    velocity squared so it seems very conservative to limit to 25mph.

    I don't doubt that <25mph absolutely maximises the remaining vehicle
    range on low battery if you live long enough to actually get there.

    The *big* problem in the UK is that there are plenty of non working
    chargers shown as working on the various apps! Many tales of woe even in
    the south where they are relatively plentiful. Up north you are stuffed.

    The supercharging hubs they have built are unable to get supply so are
    nothing more than useless boondoggles. This one near me is useless:

    https://www.yorkpress.co.uk/news/19839979.yorks-flagship-electric-vehicle-charging-hub-still-not-open/

    It's a joke. Opening was cancelled yet again. No electricity!
    (which is a bit of a serious problem for a charging station)

    Yes, i had to redirect from a non-working charger.

    So non-functional public chargers is an issue in the US too?

    --
    Regards,
    Martin Brown

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Tom Gardner@21:1/5 to Martin Brown on Wed Jan 19 17:04:08 2022
    On 19/01/22 10:06, Martin Brown wrote:
    On 18/01/2022 20:10, Dave Platt wrote:
    In article <5ffdd3aa-a770-4fde-bf84-af3c0e08ef40n@googlegroups.com>,
    Ed Lee  <edward.ming.lee@gmail.com> wrote:
    For Maximum EV Efficiency, Stick to 25 Miles an Hour, Ignore Angry Drivers >>> and POLICE.

    https://www.wsj.com/articles/ev-electric-car-battery-charge-hypermiler-11642517385


    I was driving around 40 MPH on right lane of a highway (speed limit unknown)
    and got pull over for driving too slow.  I told him that i was running low on
    charges and won't make it to the charger any faster.  He escort me for a >>> little while and left.

    Why didn't you know the speed limit?
    Sounds like you shouldn't even be allowed on the road.

    At the very least, if you're driving significantly slower than the
    general flow of traffic, you should have your hazard flashers on.
    Otherwise, you're at a higher risk of being rear-ended by a
    less-than-attentive driver.

    Moving traffic offence in the UK to drive with your hazard warning lights on although plenty of people do it :( Not enough traffic police.

    With the "new" exception, because everybody does it and it is sendible...

    Rule 116
    Hazard warning lights. These may be used when your vehicle is stationary, to warn that it is temporarily obstructing traffic. Never use them as an excuse for
    dangerous or illegal parking. You MUST NOT use hazard warning lights while driving or being towed unless you are on a motorway or unrestricted dual carriageway and you need to warn drivers behind you of a hazard or obstruction ahead. Only use them for long enough to ensure that your warning has been observed.


    However, the vehicle must have the aerodynamics of a brick if there is a noticeable range difference between 40mph and 50mph. I only see significant drag
    affecting fuel economy at 55+. I guess resistive losses hurt an EV more but I'm
    surprised that it is quite so bad!

    For a first order approximation ignoring rolling resistance,
    I would expect the difference to be proportional to v²,
    i.e. 64%.

    Measurements for a Prius show 31kW/100km at (64km/h) and
    36kW/100km at (64km/h), i.e. 86% From Fig A12 https://withouthotair.com/cA/page_260.shtml


    The *big* problem in the UK is that there are plenty of non working chargers shown as working on the various apps! Many tales of woe even in the south where
    they are relatively plentiful. Up north you are stuffed.

    The supercharging hubs they have built are unable to get supply so are nothing
    more than useless boondoggles. This one near me is useless:

    https://www.yorkpress.co.uk/news/19839979.yorks-flagship-electric-vehicle-charging-hub-still-not-open/


    It's a joke. Opening was cancelled yet again. No electricity!
    (which is a bit of a serious problem for a charging station)

    For comparison, ISTR petrol pumps "charge" cars at 500kW :)
    If we ever get batteries that can accept charge at that rate,
    it will be 2000cars for every GW of generation.

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From jlarkin@highlandsniptechnology.com@21:1/5 to spamjunk@blueyonder.co.uk on Wed Jan 19 09:16:16 2022
    On Wed, 19 Jan 2022 17:04:08 +0000, Tom Gardner
    <spamjunk@blueyonder.co.uk> wrote:

    On 19/01/22 10:06, Martin Brown wrote:
    On 18/01/2022 20:10, Dave Platt wrote:
    In article <5ffdd3aa-a770-4fde-bf84-af3c0e08ef40n@googlegroups.com>,
    Ed Lee <edward.ming.lee@gmail.com> wrote:
    For Maximum EV Efficiency, Stick to 25 Miles an Hour, Ignore Angry Drivers >>>> and POLICE.

    https://www.wsj.com/articles/ev-electric-car-battery-charge-hypermiler-11642517385


    I was driving around 40 MPH on right lane of a highway (speed limit unknown)
    and got pull over for driving too slow. I told him that i was running low on
    charges and won't make it to the charger any faster. He escort me for a >>>> little while and left.

    Why didn't you know the speed limit?
    Sounds like you shouldn't even be allowed on the road.

    At the very least, if you're driving significantly slower than the
    general flow of traffic, you should have your hazard flashers on.
    Otherwise, you're at a higher risk of being rear-ended by a
    less-than-attentive driver.

    Moving traffic offence in the UK to drive with your hazard warning lights on >> although plenty of people do it :( Not enough traffic police.

    With the "new" exception, because everybody does it and it is sendible...

    Rule 116
    Hazard warning lights. These may be used when your vehicle is stationary, to >warn that it is temporarily obstructing traffic. Never use them as an excuse for
    dangerous or illegal parking. You MUST NOT use hazard warning lights while >driving or being towed unless you are on a motorway or unrestricted dual >carriageway and you need to warn drivers behind you of a hazard or obstruction >ahead. Only use them for long enough to ensure that your warning has been observed.


    However, the vehicle must have the aerodynamics of a brick if there is a
    noticeable range difference between 40mph and 50mph. I only see significant drag
    affecting fuel economy at 55+. I guess resistive losses hurt an EV more but I'm
    surprised that it is quite so bad!

    For a first order approximation ignoring rolling resistance,
    I would expect the difference to be proportional to v,
    i.e. 64%.

    Measurements for a Prius show 31kW/100km at (64km/h) and
    36kW/100km at (64km/h), i.e. 86% From Fig A12 >https://withouthotair.com/cA/page_260.shtml


    The *big* problem in the UK is that there are plenty of non working chargers >> shown as working on the various apps! Many tales of woe even in the south where
    they are relatively plentiful. Up north you are stuffed.

    The supercharging hubs they have built are unable to get supply so are nothing
    more than useless boondoggles. This one near me is useless:

    https://www.yorkpress.co.uk/news/19839979.yorks-flagship-electric-vehicle-charging-hub-still-not-open/


    It's a joke. Opening was cancelled yet again. No electricity!
    (which is a bit of a serious problem for a charging station)

    For comparison, ISTR petrol pumps "charge" cars at 500kW :)
    If we ever get batteries that can accept charge at that rate,
    it will be 2000cars for every GW of generation.

    Some of our local governments (Berkeley, of course) have outlawed any
    new natural gas installations. They want all electric, all renewable
    power.



    --

    I yam what I yam - Popeye

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Tom Del Rosso@21:1/5 to jlarkin@highlandsniptechnology.com on Wed Jan 19 19:30:11 2022
    jlarkin@highlandsniptechnology.com wrote:

    It's much worse on a long mountain uphill in a blizzard. You can't
    even afford to run the heater.

    It doesn't matter because you won't have any type of car when they
    finally ban ICE with no intention of building the 200GW of generator
    capacity needed to replace them with EV's. Hopefully they'll establish a
    bus route up that mountain.


    --
    Defund the Thought Police

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Rick C@21:1/5 to Martin Brown on Wed Jan 19 18:07:05 2022
    On Wednesday, January 19, 2022 at 5:06:26 AM UTC-5, Martin Brown wrote:

    The *big* problem in the UK is that there are plenty of non working
    chargers shown as working on the various apps! Many tales of woe even in
    the south where they are relatively plentiful. Up north you are stuffed.

    The supercharging hubs they have built are unable to get supply so are nothing more than useless boondoggles. This one near me is useless:

    https://www.yorkpress.co.uk/news/19839979.yorks-flagship-electric-vehicle-charging-hub-still-not-open/

    It's a joke. Opening was cancelled yet again. No electricity!
    (which is a bit of a serious problem for a charging station)

    The article talks about "legal agreements" rather than actual access to the grid. You make it sound as if they simply don't have a grid for them to connect to. Do you have more details on just what the issue is?

    I've seen no small number of Tesla Superchargers held up after all the work is done because new requirements were added by the inspectors. In one case that had dragged on for months the last issue pointed out after everything else had been failed and
    fixed... one at a time... was about stickers that explained the emergency disconnect was on a different level of the parking deck.

    --

    Rick C.

    -+- Get 1,000 miles of free Supercharging
    -+- Tesla referral code - https://ts.la/richard11209

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Rick C@21:1/5 to bitrex on Wed Jan 19 17:58:44 2022
    On Tuesday, January 18, 2022 at 11:42:08 PM UTC-5, bitrex wrote:
    On 1/18/2022 11:07 PM, Rick C wrote:

    What is "L"? What else does it do other than make the regen work from the gas pedal?
    Putting it in "L" makes it apply full regeneration every time you lift
    off the accelerator.

    So it doesn't vary the engine braking with the position of the accelerator? Does "L" do anything else? I can't figure what "L" is supposed to stand for.
    It does vary with accelerator position but I haven't driven a Tesla so I can't say how or if it feels different. Probably. "L" is a throwback to
    the "Low" gear in a gas car and I do use it on steep hills where it functions about like that. Other people drive it in "L" all the time and like it that way and they can drive it with one pedal successfully, I've never gotten accustomed to it though.

    It can't possibly work like the Tesla where there is nearly nothing to get used to. It is such a natural feeling it took me maybe two days to adjust my expectations and not dump my foot off the accelerator when I want to slow down. I move between the
    Tesla and conventional cars just fine although I do miss the smoothly controllable engine braking. I think the strength of the braking is limited by the amount you can charge the battery which varies. That's another reason to not charge up to 100%
    because much above 90% the regen is very weak.

    I was driving the Kia today and while I don't dislike it, it does make me miss the feel of the Tesla. I certainly hope other EV makers are able to provide that same aspect of the Tesla experience. It's like no other car I've ever driven, although I've
    not driven other EVs.


    e and you're flying free, and then it re-asserts itself about a
    half-second later.

    I think you have to expect that. If the wheels lose grip on the road any braking isn't going to work smoothly. I've noticed that in ICE vehicles.
    Regeneration-only braking using the paddle seems to instantly disengage
    if one of the two drive wheels slips badly or goes airborne off a bump
    for a moment which is definitely disconcerting compared to having four wheels with mechanical brakes engaged, never had a car fully disengage
    all four disc brakes cuz one wheel bounced off a bump, lol.

    It has something to do with the particulars of the Voltec series-hybrid
    FWD gearset and how it links to the motor-generators I expect, it can't regenerate when only one drive wheel is making contact.
    I don't even know how to turn TC off in the Tesla, but I'm sure there's a setting for it. I've never wanted to do that although I used to take my pickup into snowed parking lots to do donuts and would not mind trying it with the Tesla.

    Nobody reads the manuals no mo...:-(

    I literally don't have the time as every update would require a reread.

    --

    Rick C.

    --+ Get 1,000 miles of free Supercharging
    --+ Tesla referral code - https://ts.la/richard11209

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Rick C@21:1/5 to Martin Brown on Wed Jan 19 18:14:28 2022
    On Wednesday, January 19, 2022 at 10:29:09 AM UTC-5, Martin Brown wrote:
    On 19/01/2022 14:44, Ed Lee wrote:
    On Wednesday, January 19, 2022 at 2:06:26 AM UTC-8, Martin Brown wrote:
    On 18/01/2022 20:10, Dave Platt wrote:
    In article <5ffdd3aa-a770-4fde...@googlegroups.com>,
    Ed Lee <edward....@gmail.com> wrote:
    For Maximum EV Efficiency, Stick to 25 Miles an Hour, Ignore Angry Drivers and POLICE.

    https://www.wsj.com/articles/ev-electric-car-battery-charge-hypermiler-11642517385

    I was driving around 40 MPH on right lane of a highway (speed limit unknown) and got pull over for driving too slow. I told him that i was running low on
    charges and won't make it to the charger any faster. He escort me for a little while and left.
    Why didn't you know the speed limit?
    Sounds like you shouldn't even be allowed on the road.

    It was dark and I didn't have night vision goggle on. It was a rural highway, may be 45MPH or 50MPH.
    But surely you could remember which sign you went past last?

    Don't US signs have glass beads in the matrix so that you get to see
    road signs in headlights as you approach? Or do EV's not have them?

    UK you need to know the rules as "derestricted" is a white disk with a diagonal black line across it. ISTR US speed limits are all numbers.
    However, the vehicle must have the aerodynamics of a brick if there is a >> noticeable range difference between 40mph and 50mph. I only see
    significant drag affecting fuel economy at 55+. I guess resistive losses >> hurt an EV more but I'm surprised that it is quite so bad!

    My car drops into 25MPH turtle mode when the battery is very low. I guess the manufacturer knows something about efficiency at low speed.
    I can see that the lower the battery discharge rate the longer it will
    last but the drag coefficient of the vehicle must be insanely high for
    that to matter at such low speeds. It makes very good sense to limit acceleration when the battery is on its last legs but the vehicle should
    be able to do a bit more than 25mph without taking too much of a hit.

    It's not a matter of efficiency, it's an issue of damage to the battery. They have to monitor each cell to make sure they are not being discharged below zero. This is at the very end of the battery capacity. I think in the Tesla this happens when you
    are below a couple of percent. One guy took his car down to I think it was 13 mile range trying to reach the charger and pulled over for some reason. He was videoing the dash and while sitting it went from 13 miles to 0 miles. I think the guy had an
    inkling this would happen as he doesn't video the dash by default and had no reason to pull over as I recall. Most likely this was the car renormalizing at the low end. It also needs to do this on occasion on the high end to have an accurate range
    estimate.

    As to the non-working chargers, I've only ever seen an individual failed charger at Tesla sites. Never seen a site down.

    --

    Rick C.

    -++ Get 1,000 miles of free Supercharging
    -++ Tesla referral code - https://ts.la/richard11209

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From DecadentLinuxUserNumeroUno@decadenc@21:1/5 to Ed Lee on Thu Jan 20 03:45:48 2022
    Ed Lee <edward.ming.lee@gmail.com> wrote in news:5ffdd3aa-a770-4fde-bf84-af3c0e08ef40n@googlegroups.com:

    For Maximum EV Efficiency, Stick to 25 Miles an Hour, Ignore Angry
    Drivers and POLICE.

    https://www.wsj.com/articles/ev-electric-car-battery-charge-hypermi ler-11642517385

    I was driving around 40 MPH on right lane of a highway (speed
    limit unknown) and got pull over for driving too slow. I told him
    that i was running low on charges and won't make it to the charger
    any faster. He escort me for a little while and left.


    Up to about 40 mph the only thing the car has to overcome is rolling resistance, especially if it has a low cd / sleek design body. Up
    above that wind resistance plays a bigger factor even on the sleek
    models. It does not matter what the drivetrain power source is.

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From DecadentLinuxUserNumeroUno@decadenc@21:1/5 to Dave Platt on Thu Jan 20 03:54:14 2022
    dplatt@coop.radagast.org (Dave Platt) wrote in news:7ejjbi-lsk32.ln1@coop.radagast.org:


    Even that may not be legal. Here in California, the Vehicle Code
    says "No person shall drive or operate on a highway at such a slow
    speed as to impede or block the normal reasonable movement of
    traffic, unless the reduced speed is necessary for safe operation
    because of a grade, or compliance in the law."


    Cali is friggin weird. They don't write a speeding ticket. They
    write you up for "too fast for conditions" and that way it matters not
    what the posted speed is. And if it is too fast you could eat a
    reckless operation criminal charge.

    The speed limit represents an UPPER limit in most places. In many if
    not most. In today's 'idiots in a hurry' world, even traveling at the
    speed limit you end up with idiots crawling up your ass, acting like
    you are holding them up. Driving in town like they are on a highway.

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Tom Gardner@21:1/5 to Rick C on Thu Jan 20 08:57:20 2022
    On 20/01/22 02:07, Rick C wrote:
    On Wednesday, January 19, 2022 at 5:06:26 AM UTC-5, Martin Brown wrote:

    The *big* problem in the UK is that there are plenty of non working
    chargers shown as working on the various apps! Many tales of woe even in
    the south where they are relatively plentiful. Up north you are stuffed.

    The supercharging hubs they have built are unable to get supply so are
    nothing more than useless boondoggles. This one near me is useless:

    https://www.yorkpress.co.uk/news/19839979.yorks-flagship-electric-vehicle-charging-hub-still-not-open/

    It's a joke. Opening was cancelled yet again. No electricity!
    (which is a bit of a serious problem for a charging station)

    The article talks about "legal agreements" rather than actual access to the grid. You make it sound as if they simply don't have a grid for them to connect to. Do you have more details on just what the issue is?

    I don't have knowledge of this particular case, but "legal agreement"
    could mean anything. A couple of options are:
    - insufficient local capacity in the network to charge 30 cars
    at full rate
    - arguments about who pays for a network upgrade to allow that
    - rights of way problems for upgrading
    - etc

    It wouldn't surprise me if it had been constructed where space
    is available, and guessing there weren't other problems.


    I've seen no small number of Tesla Superchargers held up after all the work is done because new requirements were added by the inspectors. In one case that had dragged on for months the last issue pointed out after everything else had been failed and fixed... one at a time... was about stickers that explained the emergency disconnect was on a different level of the parking deck.

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Martin Brown@21:1/5 to Rick C on Thu Jan 20 08:59:03 2022
    On 20/01/2022 02:07, Rick C wrote:
    On Wednesday, January 19, 2022 at 5:06:26 AM UTC-5, Martin Brown wrote:

    The *big* problem in the UK is that there are plenty of non working
    chargers shown as working on the various apps! Many tales of woe even in
    the south where they are relatively plentiful. Up north you are stuffed.

    The supercharging hubs they have built are unable to get supply so are
    nothing more than useless boondoggles. This one near me is useless:

    https://www.yorkpress.co.uk/news/19839979.yorks-flagship-electric-vehicle-charging-hub-still-not-open/

    It's a joke. Opening was cancelled yet again. No electricity!
    (which is a bit of a serious problem for a charging station)

    The article talks about "legal agreements" rather than actual access to the grid. You make it sound as if they simply don't have a grid for them to connect to. Do you have more details on just what the issue is?

    Who pays for connecting it up and the supply tariffs when they do.

    I've seen no small number of Tesla Superchargers held up after all the work is done because new requirements were added by the inspectors. In one case that had dragged on for months the last issue pointed out after everything else had been failed and
    fixed... one at a time... was about stickers that explained the emergency disconnect was on a different level of the parking deck.

    Basically in London and the SE there is enough physical infrastructure
    for EVs to make sense (but almost zero electricity generating capacity).

    In the North I would have to drive around 50 miles (a long way in the
    UK) to my nearest public supercharger. The physically nearest private
    one is about 5 miles away at a very high end country house hotel. Snag
    is they expect you to dine there and stay the night to have use of it.

    Rural mains is nowhere near the capacity needed to handle everyone with
    a nightly 7kW load. Several larger farms and businesses around me have
    their own diesel generator kit because the local network cannot supply
    all of the electricity they need to operate at some times of year.

    --
    Regards,
    Martin Brown

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Rick C@21:1/5 to Tom Gardner on Thu Jan 20 03:28:03 2022
    On Thursday, January 20, 2022 at 3:57:27 AM UTC-5, Tom Gardner wrote:
    On 20/01/22 02:07, Rick C wrote:
    On Wednesday, January 19, 2022 at 5:06:26 AM UTC-5, Martin Brown wrote:

    The *big* problem in the UK is that there are plenty of non working
    chargers shown as working on the various apps! Many tales of woe even in >> the south where they are relatively plentiful. Up north you are stuffed. >>
    The supercharging hubs they have built are unable to get supply so are
    nothing more than useless boondoggles. This one near me is useless:

    https://www.yorkpress.co.uk/news/19839979.yorks-flagship-electric-vehicle-charging-hub-still-not-open/

    It's a joke. Opening was cancelled yet again. No electricity!
    (which is a bit of a serious problem for a charging station)

    The article talks about "legal agreements" rather than actual access to the grid. You make it sound as if they simply don't have a grid for them to connect to. Do you have more details on just what the issue is?
    I don't have knowledge of this particular case, but "legal agreement"
    could mean anything. A couple of options are:
    - insufficient local capacity in the network to charge 30 cars
    at full rate
    - arguments about who pays for a network upgrade to allow that
    - rights of way problems for upgrading
    - etc

    Ok, but you are just making this up as you go. No basis for any of it.


    It wouldn't surprise me if it had been constructed where space
    is available, and guessing there weren't other problems.

    What surprises you if of little relevance.

    --

    Rick C.

    +-- Get 1,000 miles of free Supercharging
    +-- Tesla referral code - https://ts.la/richard11209

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Rick C@21:1/5 to Martin Brown on Thu Jan 20 03:41:30 2022
    On Thursday, January 20, 2022 at 3:59:11 AM UTC-5, Martin Brown wrote:
    On 20/01/2022 02:07, Rick C wrote:
    On Wednesday, January 19, 2022 at 5:06:26 AM UTC-5, Martin Brown wrote:

    The *big* problem in the UK is that there are plenty of non working
    chargers shown as working on the various apps! Many tales of woe even in >> the south where they are relatively plentiful. Up north you are stuffed. >>
    The supercharging hubs they have built are unable to get supply so are
    nothing more than useless boondoggles. This one near me is useless:

    https://www.yorkpress.co.uk/news/19839979.yorks-flagship-electric-vehicle-charging-hub-still-not-open/

    It's a joke. Opening was cancelled yet again. No electricity!
    (which is a bit of a serious problem for a charging station)

    The article talks about "legal agreements" rather than actual access to the grid. You make it sound as if they simply don't have a grid for them to connect to. Do you have more details on just what the issue is?
    Who pays for connecting it up and the supply tariffs when they do.

    Why are you asking me???


    I've seen no small number of Tesla Superchargers held up after all the work is done because new requirements were added by the inspectors. In one case that had dragged on for months the last issue pointed out after everything else had been failed and
    fixed... one at a time... was about stickers that explained the emergency disconnect was on a different level of the parking deck.

    Basically in London and the SE there is enough physical infrastructure
    for EVs to make sense (but almost zero electricity generating capacity).

    In the North I would have to drive around 50 miles (a long way in the
    UK) to my nearest public supercharger. The physically nearest private
    one is about 5 miles away at a very high end country house hotel. Snag
    is they expect you to dine there and stay the night to have use of it.

    Rural mains is nowhere near the capacity needed to handle everyone with
    a nightly 7kW load. Several larger farms and businesses around me have
    their own diesel generator kit because the local network cannot supply
    all of the electricity they need to operate at some times of year.

    There are a lot of people who want to be experts on why EVs are not possible in their area. I think the UK may be a place where this is partly true, just not for the reasons you seem to think. In many ways the UK seems like a third world country with a
    power grid that is more fragile than what we have in Puerto Rico. But mostly this is not relevant. Here are some facts.

    The "grid" doesn't need to support a "nightly 7 kW load" for every EV. In the US, drivers average 30 miles a day. I think the UK is about the same. That is a grand total of less than 8 kWh or less than a single space heater for around 6 hours (in the
    US they are 1.44 kW). In the US you could charge this on a 120V outlet. No, if every home in the US added this nightly load, it would have zero impact on the grid other than to help amortize the fixed costs of maintaining the "grid" lowering everyone's
    bills a bit. I don't think I've heard as much resistance to EVs from anywhere as I do from the UK. Instead of spouting absurd numbers, why don't people in the UK *think* about the issue instead of blabbing how hard it will be to use EVs or to power
    them from renewable sources? Is the UK as resistant to every technological advance?

    --

    Rick C.

    +-+ Get 1,000 miles of free Supercharging
    +-+ Tesla referral code - https://ts.la/richard11209

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Arnie Dwyer (ex Jan Frank)@21:1/5 to Martin Brown on Thu Jan 20 12:37:23 2022
    Martin Brown <'''newspam'''@nonad.co.uk> wrote:

    Basically in London and the SE there is enough physical infrastructure
    for EVs to make sense (but almost zero electricity generating capacity).

    In the North I would have to drive around 50 miles (a long way in the
    UK) to my nearest public supercharger. The physically nearest private
    one is about 5 miles away at a very high end country house hotel. Snag
    is they expect you to dine there and stay the night to have use of it.

    Rural mains is nowhere near the capacity needed to handle everyone with
    a nightly 7kW load. Several larger farms and businesses around me have
    their own diesel generator kit because the local network cannot supply
    all of the electricity they need to operate at some times of year.

    So you have to continue using ICE? How are you going to sustain population growth, let alone meet your global warming commitments?

    Quote:

    "The government has a commitment to reduce greenhouse gas emissions by the United Kingdom by 50% on 1990 levels by 2025 and to net zero by 2050. In
    May 2019, Parliament declared a 'climate change emergency', however this
    does not legally compel the government to act."

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Climate_change_in_the_United_Kingdom

    Sounds like someone needs to start looking at Molten Salt Reactors. These
    run at atmospheric pressure and don't need the huge containment vessels of conventional nuclear reactors, so they are much faster and cheaper to build
    and operate:

    Thorium Lifters Could Power Civilization for BILLIONS of Years! https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=74iiaXIVtZI

    Molten-Salt Reactor Choices - Kirk Sorensen of Flibe Energy https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mz49CB8XGQo

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From John Larkin@21:1/5 to fizzbintuesday@that-google-mail-dom on Thu Jan 20 10:38:32 2022
    On Wed, 19 Jan 2022 19:30:11 -0500, "Tom Del Rosso" <fizzbintuesday@that-google-mail-domain.com> wrote:

    jlarkin@highlandsniptechnology.com wrote:

    It's much worse on a long mountain uphill in a blizzard. You can't
    even afford to run the heater.

    It doesn't matter because you won't have any type of car when they
    finally ban ICE with no intention of building the 200GW of generator
    capacity needed to replace them with EV's. Hopefully they'll establish a
    bus route up that mountain.

    Once the power grids start to collapse, and people can't charge their
    Teslas or heat their homes in the winter (which is happening already)
    there will be an anti-renewable political reaction.

    Of course, experts tell us we'll all be dead in nine years.

    --

    If a man will begin with certainties, he shall end with doubts,
    but if he will be content to begin with doubts he shall end in certainties. Francis Bacon

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Martin Brown@21:1/5 to Rick C on Thu Jan 20 20:03:03 2022
    On 20/01/2022 11:41, Rick C wrote:
    On Thursday, January 20, 2022 at 3:59:11 AM UTC-5, Martin Brown wrote:
    On 20/01/2022 02:07, Rick C wrote:
    On Wednesday, January 19, 2022 at 5:06:26 AM UTC-5, Martin Brown wrote: >>>>
    The *big* problem in the UK is that there are plenty of non working
    chargers shown as working on the various apps! Many tales of woe even in >>>> the south where they are relatively plentiful. Up north you are stuffed. >>>>
    The supercharging hubs they have built are unable to get supply so are >>>> nothing more than useless boondoggles. This one near me is useless:

    https://www.yorkpress.co.uk/news/19839979.yorks-flagship-electric-vehicle-charging-hub-still-not-open/

    It's a joke. Opening was cancelled yet again. No electricity!
    (which is a bit of a serious problem for a charging station)

    The article talks about "legal agreements" rather than actual access to the grid. You make it sound as if they simply don't have a grid for them to connect to. Do you have more details on just what the issue is?
    Who pays for connecting it up and the supply tariffs when they do.

    Why are you asking me???

    That is the answer to the question of "why they are still not
    operational?". They cannot agree commercial contract terms between the
    energy supplier and the owner of the site with the chargers on!

    UK electricity supply is a mess with zillions of electricity "suppliers"
    who do nothing but bill consumers. They are going bust at the moment
    left, right and centre since they have no generation capacity and by a
    peculiar price cap law are forced to sell electricity at a lower price
    than they are paying for it. I know this sounds like something from
    "Alice in Wonderland" but I assure you it is true. More than 30 UK
    "electricity suppliers" have gone bust in the last 3 months.

    https://www.forbes.com/uk/advisor/energy/failed-uk-energy-suppliers-update/

    It is complete madness - they are merely clueless book keepers not
    electricity suppliers. Electricity generation is a separate business.

    I've seen no small number of Tesla Superchargers held up after all the work is done because new requirements were added by the inspectors. In one case that had dragged on for months the last issue pointed out after everything else had been failed and
    fixed... one at a time... was about stickers that explained the emergency disconnect was on a different level of the parking deck.

    Basically in London and the SE there is enough physical infrastructure
    for EVs to make sense (but almost zero electricity generating capacity).

    In the North I would have to drive around 50 miles (a long way in the
    UK) to my nearest public supercharger. The physically nearest private
    one is about 5 miles away at a very high end country house hotel. Snag
    is they expect you to dine there and stay the night to have use of it.

    Rural mains is nowhere near the capacity needed to handle everyone with
    a nightly 7kW load. Several larger farms and businesses around me have
    their own diesel generator kit because the local network cannot supply
    all of the electricity they need to operate at some times of year.

    There are a lot of people who want to be experts on why EVs are not possible in their area. I think the UK may be a place where this is partly true, just not for the reasons you seem to think. In many ways the UK seems like a third world country with
    a power grid that is more fragile than what we have in Puerto Rico. But mostly this is not relevant. Here are some facts.

    The "grid" doesn't need to support a "nightly 7 kW load" for every EV. In the US, drivers average 30 miles a day. I think the UK is about the same. That is a grand total of less than 8 kWh or less than a single space heater for around 6 hours (in
    the US they are 1.44 kW). In the US you could charge this on a 120V outlet. No, if every home in the US added this nightly load, it would have zero impact on the grid other than to help amortize the fixed costs of maintaining the "grid" lowering
    everyone's bills a bit. I don't think I've heard as much resistance to EVs from anywhere as I do from the UK. Instead of spouting absurd numbers, why don't people in the UK *think* about the issue instead of blabbing how hard it will be to use EVs or
    to power them from renewable sources? Is the UK as resistant to every technological advance?

    UK can barely make enough electricity to stay warm at this time of year.
    We are pretty much reliant on French nuclear generation and continental interconnectors if it is a grey windless day. Too bad if it is cold in
    France at the same time - they will serve their own needs first.

    Successive governments have prevaricated on new nuclear and now the shit
    is about to hit the fan. I have to agree that the UK infrastructure is
    at near third world levels with the recent large scale outage in the
    North of England as classic demonstration of just how low we have sunk.

    Today's news is they have just refused planning permission for another
    badly needed interconnector. You couldn't make it up!

    https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/kwarteng-turns-down-aquind-channel-energy-cable-at-centre-of-donor-row-jtbn3xtmv

    They have been paying large users to shutdown heavily energy intensive production during winter months for a few years now. The rot really set
    in when Centrica closed the gas storage buffer in Yorkshire in 2017

    https://www.theguardian.com/business/2017/jun/20/uk-gas-storage-prices-rough-british-gas-centrica

    That leaves UK electricity generation after the dash for gas incredibly
    exposed to the spot market price for natural gas (now extortionate).

    --
    Regards,
    Martin Brown

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Lasse Langwadt Christensen@21:1/5 to All on Thu Jan 20 12:09:07 2022
    torsdag den 20. januar 2022 kl. 19.38.44 UTC+1 skrev John Larkin:
    On Wed, 19 Jan 2022 19:30:11 -0500, "Tom Del Rosso" <fizzbin...@that-google-mail-domain.com> wrote:

    jla...@highlandsniptechnology.com wrote:

    It's much worse on a long mountain uphill in a blizzard. You can't
    even afford to run the heater.

    It doesn't matter because you won't have any type of car when they
    finally ban ICE with no intention of building the 200GW of generator >capacity needed to replace them with EV's. Hopefully they'll establish a >bus route up that mountain.
    Once the power grids start to collapse, and people can't charge their
    Teslas or heat their homes in the winter (which is happening already)
    there will be an anti-renewable political reaction.

    kinda started already, on one hand people complaint politician don't take global warming serious and are not ambitious enough pushing for green energy and at the same time people complain that the politicians don't reduce the tax on energy now that energy has had a large increase in price

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Jim Jackson@21:1/5 to John Larkin on Thu Jan 20 19:29:58 2022
    On 2022-01-20, John Larkin <jlarkin@highland_atwork_technology.com> wrote:

    Of course, experts tell us we'll all be dead in nine years.

    I've missed that one. Which experts and references please?

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Rick C@21:1/5 to lang...@fonz.dk on Thu Jan 20 21:40:33 2022
    On Thursday, January 20, 2022 at 3:09:12 PM UTC-5, lang...@fonz.dk wrote:
    torsdag den 20. januar 2022 kl. 19.38.44 UTC+1 skrev John Larkin:
    On Wed, 19 Jan 2022 19:30:11 -0500, "Tom Del Rosso" <fizzbin...@that-google-mail-domain.com> wrote:

    jla...@highlandsniptechnology.com wrote:

    It's much worse on a long mountain uphill in a blizzard. You can't
    even afford to run the heater.

    It doesn't matter because you won't have any type of car when they >finally ban ICE with no intention of building the 200GW of generator >capacity needed to replace them with EV's. Hopefully they'll establish a >bus route up that mountain.
    Once the power grids start to collapse, and people can't charge their Teslas or heat their homes in the winter (which is happening already)
    there will be an anti-renewable political reaction.
    kinda started already, on one hand people complaint politician don't take global warming serious and are not ambitious enough pushing for green energy and at the same time people complain that the politicians don't reduce the tax
    on energy now that energy has had a large increase in price

    Probably not the same people. What energy prices have increased? Seems to me pretty much all fuels and energies have been stable for some time now, no? Maybe that's just the US?

    --

    Rick C.

    +++ Get 1,000 miles of free Supercharging
    +++ Tesla referral code - https://ts.la/richard11209

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Rick C@21:1/5 to Martin Brown on Thu Jan 20 21:38:45 2022
    On Thursday, January 20, 2022 at 3:03:14 PM UTC-5, Martin Brown wrote:
    On 20/01/2022 11:41, Rick C wrote:
    On Thursday, January 20, 2022 at 3:59:11 AM UTC-5, Martin Brown wrote:
    On 20/01/2022 02:07, Rick C wrote:
    On Wednesday, January 19, 2022 at 5:06:26 AM UTC-5, Martin Brown wrote: >>>>
    The *big* problem in the UK is that there are plenty of non working >>>> chargers shown as working on the various apps! Many tales of woe even in
    the south where they are relatively plentiful. Up north you are stuffed.

    The supercharging hubs they have built are unable to get supply so are >>>> nothing more than useless boondoggles. This one near me is useless: >>>>
    https://www.yorkpress.co.uk/news/19839979.yorks-flagship-electric-vehicle-charging-hub-still-not-open/

    It's a joke. Opening was cancelled yet again. No electricity!
    (which is a bit of a serious problem for a charging station)

    The article talks about "legal agreements" rather than actual access to the grid. You make it sound as if they simply don't have a grid for them to connect to. Do you have more details on just what the issue is?
    Who pays for connecting it up and the supply tariffs when they do.

    Why are you asking me???
    That is the answer to the question of "why they are still not
    operational?". They cannot agree commercial contract terms between the energy supplier and the owner of the site with the chargers on!

    I'm sorry, you are just being silly about all this. "Tariffs" and the rest of the contracts were signed before any construction was begun. Why do you make up such things rather than just saying you don't know any more details?


    UK electricity supply is a mess with zillions of electricity "suppliers"
    who do nothing but bill consumers. They are going bust at the moment
    left, right and centre since they have no generation capacity and by a peculiar price cap law are forced to sell electricity at a lower price
    than they are paying for it. I know this sounds like something from
    "Alice in Wonderland" but I assure you it is true. More than 30 UK "electricity suppliers" have gone bust in the last 3 months.

    I don't really care. Nothing to do with me or EVs.


    It is complete madness - they are merely clueless book keepers not electricity suppliers. Electricity generation is a separate business.
    I've seen no small number of Tesla Superchargers held up after all the work is done because new requirements were added by the inspectors. In one case that had dragged on for months the last issue pointed out after everything else had been failed
    and fixed... one at a time... was about stickers that explained the emergency disconnect was on a different level of the parking deck.

    Basically in London and the SE there is enough physical infrastructure
    for EVs to make sense (but almost zero electricity generating capacity). >>
    In the North I would have to drive around 50 miles (a long way in the
    UK) to my nearest public supercharger. The physically nearest private
    one is about 5 miles away at a very high end country house hotel. Snag
    is they expect you to dine there and stay the night to have use of it.

    Rural mains is nowhere near the capacity needed to handle everyone with >> a nightly 7kW load. Several larger farms and businesses around me have
    their own diesel generator kit because the local network cannot supply
    all of the electricity they need to operate at some times of year.

    There are a lot of people who want to be experts on why EVs are not possible in their area. I think the UK may be a place where this is partly true, just not for the reasons you seem to think. In many ways the UK seems like a third world country with
    a power grid that is more fragile than what we have in Puerto Rico. But mostly this is not relevant. Here are some facts.

    The "grid" doesn't need to support a "nightly 7 kW load" for every EV. In the US, drivers average 30 miles a day. I think the UK is about the same. That is a grand total of less than 8 kWh or less than a single space heater for around 6 hours (in the
    US they are 1.44 kW). In the US you could charge this on a 120V outlet. No, if every home in the US added this nightly load, it would have zero impact on the grid other than to help amortize the fixed costs of maintaining the "grid" lowering everyone's
    bills a bit. I don't think I've heard as much resistance to EVs from anywhere as I do from the UK. Instead of spouting absurd numbers, why don't people in the UK *think* about the issue instead of blabbing how hard it will be to use EVs or to power them
    from renewable sources? Is the UK as resistant to every technological advance?
    UK can barely make enough electricity to stay warm at this time of year.

    Yeah, I've heard. I made the mistake of getting into a discussion about EVs in a UK ham radio group. There were those who thought EVs are impossible in the UK for many, many reasons including the impossibility of finding a way to charge in the sense of
    "where do you put all the outlets"? They sent me pictures of cars parked half on sidewalks as the norm making curb side charging impractical as if that was very commonplace. Then of course some calculated every kW EVs would need as adding to the peak
    use times all the while acknowledging there are many who, for better rates, heat bricks off peak for heating, all the while claiming this was terrible for some reason. It was hugely emotional and many were clearly angry that a Yank was telling them it
    was possible. Ok, so I agree, the UK is so backward that EVs are not practical.


    We are pretty much reliant on French nuclear generation and continental interconnectors if it is a grey windless day. Too bad if it is cold in France at the same time - they will serve their own needs first.

    I thought the cross channel electric connections were rather limited.


    Successive governments have prevaricated on new nuclear and now the shit
    is about to hit the fan. I have to agree that the UK infrastructure is
    at near third world levels with the recent large scale outage in the
    North of England as classic demonstration of just how low we have sunk.

    I've read quite a bit about UK nuclear construction, 1 very overrun project coming to fruition soon (for varying values of "soon") and talk of allowing construction overruns to be passed onto the consumer for future projects (no incentive to control
    overruns then). I prefer the US approach, let them either succeed or fail on their own. If nuclear can't compete, why subsidize it? It's not a nascent industry, just a money sink.


    Today's news is they have just refused planning permission for another
    badly needed interconnector. You couldn't make it up!

    https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/kwarteng-turns-down-aquind-channel-energy-cable-at-centre-of-donor-row-jtbn3xtmv

    Paywall...


    They have been paying large users to shutdown heavily energy intensive production during winter months for a few years now. The rot really set
    in when Centrica closed the gas storage buffer in Yorkshire in 2017

    https://www.theguardian.com/business/2017/jun/20/uk-gas-storage-prices-rough-british-gas-centrica

    That leaves UK electricity generation after the dash for gas incredibly exposed to the spot market price for natural gas (now extortionate).

    So storage at night and usage during the day is needed, eh? How much is the current bill for shutting plants? Maybe batteries would be profitable? Or instead of paying them to shut down, maybe change the billing to an increasing kWh rate with higher
    usage. In my home county the power company gave an aluminum refinery a break on electric prices (it's done by electrolysis, so some electron per atom of aluminum). Some years later the company was looking at a rate hike when the power company ended
    their price break. The company left for Canada I believe, much better energy costs there. I say good riddance. They used to emit fluorine which would kill dairy cows when they ate the grass.

    --

    Rick C.

    ++- Get 1,000 miles of free Supercharging
    ++- Tesla referral code - https://ts.la/richard11209

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Martin Brown@21:1/5 to Rick C on Fri Jan 21 11:47:14 2022
    On 21/01/2022 05:40, Rick C wrote:
    On Thursday, January 20, 2022 at 3:09:12 PM UTC-5, lang...@fonz.dk wrote:
    torsdag den 20. januar 2022 kl. 19.38.44 UTC+1 skrev John Larkin:
    On Wed, 19 Jan 2022 19:30:11 -0500, "Tom Del Rosso"
    <fizzbin...@that-google-mail-domain.com> wrote:

    jla...@highlandsniptechnology.com wrote:

    It's much worse on a long mountain uphill in a blizzard. You can't
    even afford to run the heater.

    It doesn't matter because you won't have any type of car when they
    finally ban ICE with no intention of building the 200GW of generator
    capacity needed to replace them with EV's. Hopefully they'll establish a >>>> bus route up that mountain.
    Once the power grids start to collapse, and people can't charge their
    Teslas or heat their homes in the winter (which is happening already)
    there will be an anti-renewable political reaction.
    kinda started already, on one hand people complaint politician don't take
    global warming serious and are not ambitious enough pushing for green energy >> and at the same time people complain that the politicians don't reduce the tax
    on energy now that energy has had a large increase in price

    Probably not the same people. What energy prices have increased?

    Natural gas prices have gone through the roof!
    Nearly an order of magnitude higher prices on the spot market.
    That is what is driving all the UK energy box shifters into bankruptcy.

    Seems to me pretty much all fuels and energies have been stable for some time now, no? Maybe that's just the US?

    This graph from a US source says otherwise:

    https://www.eia.gov/naturalgas/weekly/

    Natural gas prices have spiked this winter at between 7-10x what they
    were earlier last year and show every sign of going higher as users
    compete for the relatively small amounts available to buy for import.

    It could get a hell of a lot worse if Russia invades Ukraine and the
    West imposes trade sanctions. Then in a tit-for-tat measure Russia cuts
    off supply to the European gas pipeline(s). Mid-winter is not a good
    time to be without gas. So far the price is just incredibly high.

    So high in fact that some major UK industries shut down production
    completely which then caused a nationwide shortage of CO2. They had to
    be bribed by the government to restart fertiliser production and have
    been charging a massive premium off their customers ever since.

    https://www.ft.com/content/991db1b7-ab0e-49fb-999c-3bf5bef2a93a

    UK electricity production would fail within a week under that scenario.
    Most other European countries have larger natural gas buffer stocks.
    (a month or more)

    --
    Regards,
    Martin Brown

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Martin Brown@21:1/5 to Rick C on Fri Jan 21 11:24:27 2022
    On 21/01/2022 05:38, Rick C wrote:
    On Thursday, January 20, 2022 at 3:03:14 PM UTC-5, Martin Brown
    wrote:
    On 20/01/2022 11:41, Rick C wrote:
    On Thursday, January 20, 2022 at 3:59:11 AM UTC-5, Martin Brown
    wrote:
    On 20/01/2022 02:07, Rick C wrote:
    On Wednesday, January 19, 2022 at 5:06:26 AM UTC-5, Martin
    Brown wrote:

    The *big* problem in the UK is that there are plenty of non
    working chargers shown as working on the various apps! Many
    tales of woe even in the south where they are relatively
    plentiful. Up north you are stuffed.

    The supercharging hubs they have built are unable to get
    supply so are nothing more than useless boondoggles. This
    one near me is useless:

    https://www.yorkpress.co.uk/news/19839979.yorks-flagship-electric-vehicle-charging-hub-still-not-open/



    It's a joke. Opening was cancelled yet again. No electricity!
    (which is a bit of a serious problem for a charging
    station)

    The article talks about "legal agreements" rather than actual
    access to the grid. You make it sound as if they simply don't
    have a grid for them to connect to. Do you have more details
    on just what the issue is?
    Who pays for connecting it up and the supply tariffs when they
    do.

    Why are you asking me???

    That is the answer to the question of "why they are still not
    operational?". They cannot agree commercial contract terms between
    the energy supplier and the owner of the site with the chargers
    on!

    I'm sorry, you are just being silly about all this. "Tariffs" and
    the rest of the contracts were signed before any construction was
    begun. Why do you make up such things rather than just saying you
    don't know any more details?


    I'm sorry, you are just being silly about all this. "Tariffs" and
    the rest of the contracts were signed before any construction was
    begun. Why do you make up such things?

    Why don't you read the articles I linked to.

    This one from an earlier cancellation of opening last September spells
    it out in the first paragraph!

    https://www.yorkpress.co.uk/news/19555455.vehicle-charging-hub-york-still-shut---no-power/

    First three sentences quoted verbatim below in case it is paywalled from outside the UK:

    "A FLAGSHIP charging centre for electric vehicles - originally due to
    open on York’s outskirts in July - is still fenced off and closed
    following delays in connecting it to the electricity grid.

    Council officials said yesterday that they were still finalising
    commercial and contractual arrangements before the York HyperHub at
    Monks Cross could open later this year.

    The complex, situated at the entrance to the Monks Cross Park&Ride car
    park, will be one of the largest charging hubs in Northern England and
    will aim to act as a demonstration of best practice for the design of EV charging facilities."

    I find the last paragraph particularly ironic. It still *isn't* open and
    had another high profile *not*opening date pass very recently.

    UK electricity supply is a mess with zillions of electricity
    "suppliers" who do nothing but bill consumers. They are going bust
    at the moment left, right and centre since they have no generation
    capacity and by a peculiar price cap law are forced to sell
    electricity at a lower price than they are paying for it. I know
    this sounds like something from "Alice in Wonderland" but I assure
    you it is true. More than 30 UK "electricity suppliers" have gone
    bust in the last 3 months.

    I don't really care. Nothing to do with me or EVs.

    It has everything to do with EVs. If there isn't enough electricity to
    go around then there is no prospect of running all these EVs.

    UK can barely make enough electricity to stay warm at this time of
    year.

    Yeah, I've heard. I made the mistake of getting into a discussion
    about EVs in a UK ham radio group. There were those who thought EVs
    are impossible in the UK for many, many reasons including the
    impossibility of finding a way to charge in the sense of "where do
    you put all the outlets"? They sent me pictures of cars parked half
    on sidewalks as the norm making curb side charging impractical as if
    that was very commonplace.

    It is commonplace in most of the larger cities with terraced housing.
    Suburban streets with wider pavements (sidewalks) have been converted to carparking. Remember that a lot of UK housing was built long before
    owning a car was something the ordinary person could ever hope to do.

    Many smaller houses come with nowhere to park a car. Mid size houses
    don't come with enough space to park the number of cars a family might
    own. Paving over the entire front garden for parking is common. This
    causes interesting problems of flash flooding from runoff. We don't have separate fresh water storm drains so it makes sewage plants overflow.

    I hesitate to put a figure on it but perhaps as high as 25% terraced
    housing in many inner cities. Where I live there is a lot of space.

    Have you ever been to the UK? It is quite a crowded little island.

    Then of course some calculated every kW
    EVs would need as adding to the peak use times all the while
    acknowledging there are many who, for better rates, heat bricks off
    peak for heating, all the while claiming this was terrible for some
    reason. It was hugely emotional and many were clearly angry that a
    Yank was telling them it was possible. Ok, so I agree, the UK is so
    backward that EVs are not practical.

    UK electricity distribution is so backwards and now becoming unreliable
    due to them cutting back on maintenance and overheads (ie staff who
    actually know what they are doing). How else do you explain the recent
    nearly two week outage in parts of Northern England after storm Arwen
    (which really wasn't all that extreme). The network infrastructure has
    been allowed to decay by penny pinching bean counters in London.

    After our local 2 day outage we have been around and found several
    electricity poles on the edge of failing. They are either visibly loose
    in the ground, rotten or thinned down at shoulder height by beast
    rubbing against them so that a once 10" diameter pole is under 4".

    We are pretty much reliant on French nuclear generation and
    continental interconnectors if it is a grey windless day. Too bad
    if it is cold in France at the same time - they will serve their
    own needs first.

    I thought the cross channel electric connections were rather
    limited.

    They are relatively limited. More so at the moment one is down!
    But they are essential to UK supply integrity now.

    Successive governments have prevaricated on new nuclear and now the
    shit is about to hit the fan. I have to agree that the UK
    infrastructure is at near third world levels with the recent large
    scale outage in the North of England as classic demonstration of
    just how low we have sunk.

    I've read quite a bit about UK nuclear construction, 1 very overrun
    project coming to fruition soon (for varying values of "soon") and
    talk of allowing construction overruns to be passed onto the consumer
    for future projects (no incentive to control overruns then). I
    prefer the US approach, let them either succeed or fail on their own.
    If nuclear can't compete, why subsidize it? It's not a nascent
    industry, just a money sink.

    It is low carbon electricity if you can make it work.

    They have been paying large users to shutdown heavily energy
    intensive production during winter months for a few years now. The
    rot really set in when Centrica closed the gas storage buffer in
    Yorkshire in 2017

    https://www.theguardian.com/business/2017/jun/20/uk-gas-storage-prices-rough-british-gas-centrica



    That leaves UK electricity generation after the dash for gas incredibly
    exposed to the spot market price for natural gas (now
    extortionate).

    So storage at night and usage during the day is needed, eh? How much
    is the current bill for shutting plants? Maybe batteries would be profitable? Or instead of paying them to shut down, maybe change the
    billing to an increasing kWh rate with higher usage. In my home

    There is a pumped storage plant in Wales - one of the biggest in the
    world but it is still miniscule compared to total UK power usage.

    Australia has a battery farm somewhere that buffers peak load and is profitable. The only one I know of in the UK is a toy near Oxford.

    https://www.energy-storage.news/huge-achievement-as-50mw-battery-system-is-first-to-export-to-uk-grid-from-tertiary-connection/

    county the power company gave an aluminum refinery a break on
    electric prices (it's done by electrolysis, so some electron per atom
    of aluminum). Some years later the company was looking at a rate
    hike when the power company ended their price break. The company
    left for Canada I believe, much better energy costs there. I say

    UK has chloralkaline and aluminium (not sure if it is still there) as
    the consumers of last resort. The former can absorb vast amounts of
    power and isn't too upset if they get none at all. Makes them very
    favourable as a load balancing tool for the national grid. I think they
    get exceptionally good rates for accepting a very intermittent supply.

    We used to have a steel industry but there is almost nothing left.

    good riddance. They used to emit fluorine which would kill dairy
    cows when they ate the grass.

    Shouldn't they have been scrubbing their exhaust gasses through lime?
    CaF2 is about the most insoluble thing known.

    --
    Regards,
    Martin Brown

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Ralph Mowery@21:1/5 to All on Fri Jan 21 09:50:35 2022
    In article <8bb80dc1-dffe-44fe-9232-e211996c5e31n@googlegroups.com>, gnuarm.deletethisbit@gmail.com says...

    So storage at night and usage during the day is needed, eh? How much is the current bill for shutting plants? Maybe batteries would be profitable? Or instead of paying them to shut down, maybe change the billing to an increasing kWh rate with higher
    usage. In my home county the power company gave an aluminum refinery a break on electric prices (it's done by electrolysis, so some electron per atom of aluminum). Some years later the company was looking at a rate hike when the power company ended their price break. The company left for Canada I believe, much better energy
    costs there. I say good riddance. They used to emit fluorine which would kill dairy cows when they ate the grass.




    In my county in NC there was an aluminum plant that generated its own
    power. After about 30 years they shut down the smelting operation and
    started selling the power to the grid.

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From jlarkin@highlandsniptechnology.com@21:1/5 to langwadt@fonz.dk on Fri Jan 21 07:18:53 2022
    On Thu, 20 Jan 2022 12:09:07 -0800 (PST), Lasse Langwadt Christensen <langwadt@fonz.dk> wrote:

    torsdag den 20. januar 2022 kl. 19.38.44 UTC+1 skrev John Larkin:
    On Wed, 19 Jan 2022 19:30:11 -0500, "Tom Del Rosso"
    <fizzbin...@that-google-mail-domain.com> wrote:

    jla...@highlandsniptechnology.com wrote:

    It's much worse on a long mountain uphill in a blizzard. You can't
    even afford to run the heater.

    It doesn't matter because you won't have any type of car when they
    finally ban ICE with no intention of building the 200GW of generator
    capacity needed to replace them with EV's. Hopefully they'll establish a
    bus route up that mountain.
    Once the power grids start to collapse, and people can't charge their
    Teslas or heat their homes in the winter (which is happening already)
    there will be an anti-renewable political reaction.

    kinda started already, on one hand people complaint politician don't take >global warming serious and are not ambitious enough pushing for green energy >and at the same time people complain that the politicians don't reduce the tax >on energy now that energy has had a large increase in price


    On some days, California pays Arizona to take our excess solar power.
    On other days, we buy their coal-generated power.



    --

    I yam what I yam - Popeye

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From John Larkin@21:1/5 to jj@franjam.org.uk on Fri Jan 21 11:57:45 2022
    On Thu, 20 Jan 2022 19:29:58 -0000 (UTC), Jim Jackson
    <jj@franjam.org.uk> wrote:

    On 2022-01-20, John Larkin <jlarkin@highland_atwork_technology.com> wrote:

    Of course, experts tell us we'll all be dead in nine years.

    I've missed that one. Which experts and references please?


    https://news.yahoo.com/leonardo-dicaprio-puts-nine-ticking-184911367.html?guccounter=1&guce_referrer=aHR0cHM6Ly93d3cuZ29vZ2xlLmNvbS8&guce_referrer_sig=AQAAAJVqMhL5Spg2rXfNM-OJb6H2Ioh6lUxQfzhtrW4YEqiUP1wCkBlQ_
    qUVET3Nc1VIekV64L1eHcfN3NOh1qu5yfKCXMg6Noigr8DijOTil-ud7PmzQRXm1wKqKxSn8HeuStxEQRDA2XLPO6QG2ZD35RiKxzxWldQFqKA60ulX0yfu

    --

    If a man will begin with certainties, he shall end with doubts,
    but if he will be content to begin with doubts he shall end in certainties. Francis Bacon

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Cydrome Leader@21:1/5 to John Larkin on Fri Jan 21 20:46:49 2022
    John Larkin <jlarkin@highland_atwork_technology.com> wrote:
    On Wed, 19 Jan 2022 19:30:11 -0500, "Tom Del Rosso" <fizzbintuesday@that-google-mail-domain.com> wrote:

    jlarkin@highlandsniptechnology.com wrote:

    It's much worse on a long mountain uphill in a blizzard. You can't
    even afford to run the heater.

    It doesn't matter because you won't have any type of car when they
    finally ban ICE with no intention of building the 200GW of generator >>capacity needed to replace them with EV's. Hopefully they'll establish a >>bus route up that mountain.

    Once the power grids start to collapse, and people can't charge their
    Teslas or heat their homes in the winter (which is happening already)
    there will be an anti-renewable political reaction.

    Of course, experts tell us we'll all be dead in nine years.

    I had to reming some folks that were excited about electric only homes that have no gas (some sort of commiefornia and NYC movement) that their
    electric probably comes from gas and and mayber 18% coal, but with needing least 20% more than they'd need for on-site heating need due to transmission losses.

    It was crickets after that.

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From wmartin@21:1/5 to jlarkin@highlandsniptechnology.com on Fri Jan 21 12:47:59 2022
    On 1/21/22 07:18, jlarkin@highlandsniptechnology.com wrote:
    On Thu, 20 Jan 2022 12:09:07 -0800 (PST), Lasse Langwadt Christensen <langwadt@fonz.dk> wrote:

    torsdag den 20. januar 2022 kl. 19.38.44 UTC+1 skrev John Larkin:
    On Wed, 19 Jan 2022 19:30:11 -0500, "Tom Del Rosso"
    <fizzbin...@that-google-mail-domain.com> wrote:

    jla...@highlandsniptechnology.com wrote:

    It's much worse on a long mountain uphill in a blizzard. You can't
    even afford to run the heater.

    It doesn't matter because you won't have any type of car when they
    finally ban ICE with no intention of building the 200GW of generator
    capacity needed to replace them with EV's. Hopefully they'll establish a >>>> bus route up that mountain.
    Once the power grids start to collapse, and people can't charge their
    Teslas or heat their homes in the winter (which is happening already)
    there will be an anti-renewable political reaction.

    kinda started already, on one hand people complaint politician don't take >> global warming serious and are not ambitious enough pushing for green energy >> and at the same time people complain that the politicians don't reduce the tax
    on energy now that energy has had a large increase in price


    On some days, California pays Arizona to take our excess solar power.
    On other days, we buy their coal-generated power.



    Yeah, great business intellects run this state!

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From John Larkin@21:1/5 to presence@MUNGEpanix.com on Fri Jan 21 14:15:26 2022
    On Fri, 21 Jan 2022 20:46:49 -0000 (UTC), Cydrome Leader <presence@MUNGEpanix.com> wrote:

    John Larkin <jlarkin@highland_atwork_technology.com> wrote:
    On Wed, 19 Jan 2022 19:30:11 -0500, "Tom Del Rosso"
    <fizzbintuesday@that-google-mail-domain.com> wrote:

    jlarkin@highlandsniptechnology.com wrote:

    It's much worse on a long mountain uphill in a blizzard. You can't
    even afford to run the heater.

    It doesn't matter because you won't have any type of car when they >>>finally ban ICE with no intention of building the 200GW of generator >>>capacity needed to replace them with EV's. Hopefully they'll establish a >>>bus route up that mountain.

    Once the power grids start to collapse, and people can't charge their
    Teslas or heat their homes in the winter (which is happening already)
    there will be an anti-renewable political reaction.

    Of course, experts tell us we'll all be dead in nine years.

    I had to reming some folks that were excited about electric only homes that >have no gas (some sort of commiefornia and NYC movement) that their
    electric probably comes from gas and and mayber 18% coal, but with needing >least 20% more than they'd need for on-site heating need due to transmission >losses.

    It was crickets after that.


    Resistive electric heating would be terrible. A heat pump is better.

    Thermodynamically, a 1000c or whatever gas flame is inefficiently
    coupled to heat house air to 25c. An ideal steam generator and an
    ideal heat pump would be far more efficient use of gas.

    I don't know about the real life numbers.

    Instead of solar panels, we could have gas fired steam engines, where
    the discharge heat warms our domestic air and hot water, and we get
    free electricity from the otherwise wasted delta-t. That works when
    the sun is down.

    I considered adding a heat exchanger from our heater flue gas to the
    water heater inlet, but the payoff is small for the effort. In our
    climate, we don't run the heater a lot.

    --

    If a man will begin with certainties, he shall end with doubts,
    but if he will be content to begin with doubts he shall end in certainties. Francis Bacon

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Rick C@21:1/5 to Martin Brown on Fri Jan 21 15:31:13 2022
    On Friday, January 21, 2022 at 6:24:41 AM UTC-5, Martin Brown wrote:
    On 21/01/2022 05:38, Rick C wrote:
    On Thursday, January 20, 2022 at 3:03:14 PM UTC-5, Martin Brown
    wrote:
    On 20/01/2022 11:41, Rick C wrote:
    On Thursday, January 20, 2022 at 3:59:11 AM UTC-5, Martin Brown
    wrote:
    On 20/01/2022 02:07, Rick C wrote:
    On Wednesday, January 19, 2022 at 5:06:26 AM UTC-5, Martin
    Brown wrote:

    The *big* problem in the UK is that there are plenty of non
    working chargers shown as working on the various apps! Many
    tales of woe even in the south where they are relatively
    plentiful. Up north you are stuffed.

    The supercharging hubs they have built are unable to get
    supply so are nothing more than useless boondoggles. This
    one near me is useless:

    https://www.yorkpress.co.uk/news/19839979.yorks-flagship-electric-vehicle-charging-hub-still-not-open/



    It's a joke. Opening was cancelled yet again. No electricity!
    (which is a bit of a serious problem for a charging
    station)

    The article talks about "legal agreements" rather than actual
    access to the grid. You make it sound as if they simply don't
    have a grid for them to connect to. Do you have more details
    on just what the issue is?
    Who pays for connecting it up and the supply tariffs when they
    do.

    Why are you asking me???

    That is the answer to the question of "why they are still not
    operational?". They cannot agree commercial contract terms between
    the energy supplier and the owner of the site with the chargers
    on!

    I'm sorry, you are just being silly about all this. "Tariffs" and
    the rest of the contracts were signed before any construction was
    begun. Why do you make up such things rather than just saying you
    don't know any more details?


    I'm sorry, you are just being silly about all this. "Tariffs" and
    the rest of the contracts were signed before any construction was
    begun. Why do you make up such things?

    Why don't you read the articles I linked to.

    This one from an earlier cancellation of opening last September spells
    it out in the first paragraph!

    https://www.yorkpress.co.uk/news/19555455.vehicle-charging-hub-york-still-shut---no-power/

    First three sentences quoted verbatim below in case it is paywalled from outside the UK:

    "A FLAGSHIP charging centre for electric vehicles - originally due to
    open on York’s outskirts in July - is still fenced off and closed following delays in connecting it to the electricity grid.

    Council officials said yesterday that they were still finalising
    commercial and contractual arrangements before the York HyperHub at
    Monks Cross could open later this year.

    The complex, situated at the entrance to the Monks Cross Park&Ride car
    park, will be one of the largest charging hubs in Northern England and
    will aim to act as a demonstration of best practice for the design of EV charging facilities."

    I find the last paragraph particularly ironic. It still *isn't* open and
    had another high profile *not*opening date pass very recently.

    Where does that say anything about "tariffs"???

    Do you read what you write???

    They don't actually "spell out" anything. "were still finalizing commercial and contractual arrangements" is as close as they come. That could mean anything.

    In the US local utility rates are regulated by local boards, usually at the state level. Generation is a competitive matter with the freedom to buy from whom you want. I don't know exactly how they do things in the UK, but if they didn't have
    electrical supply lined up prior to constructing the facility, that is simply incompetent program management.

    If you read back though this discussion you have made unsupported statements several times and never followed through on demonstrating they are true. Now you cite an article that says what I said it said, they are finalizing "legal agreements", which
    you somehow interpret is setting tariffs, otherwise known as rates. This started with you claiming chargers were "unable to get supply". That's not the same thing as they were too incompetent to line up the electrical source before they started
    construction.


    UK electricity supply is a mess with zillions of electricity
    "suppliers" who do nothing but bill consumers. They are going bust
    at the moment left, right and centre since they have no generation
    capacity and by a peculiar price cap law are forced to sell
    electricity at a lower price than they are paying for it. I know
    this sounds like something from "Alice in Wonderland" but I assure
    you it is true. More than 30 UK "electricity suppliers" have gone
    bust in the last 3 months.

    I don't really care. Nothing to do with me or EVs.
    It has everything to do with EVs. If there isn't enough electricity to
    go around then there is no prospect of running all these EVs.

    LOL!!! All this time and you have learned NOTHING about EVs. Or maybe you are just a troll. Here, one more time I will explain it to you like you are a 10 year old.

    You can charge an EV from the same outlet you run your kettle on. Yup, I believe that is 3 kW which would allow you to add 120 miles in a 10 hour overnight charge which would come from excess capacity. I believe it would be no problem at all to add a
    higher current outlet if this doesn't suit you, but the average daily drive is only 30 miles. I expect a 120 mile overnight charge would suit the 99.9th percentile with no added generation, transmission or distribution.


    UK can barely make enough electricity to stay warm at this time of
    year.

    Yeah, I've heard. I made the mistake of getting into a discussion
    about EVs in a UK ham radio group. There were those who thought EVs
    are impossible in the UK for many, many reasons including the impossibility of finding a way to charge in the sense of "where do
    you put all the outlets"? They sent me pictures of cars parked half
    on sidewalks as the norm making curb side charging impractical as if
    that was very commonplace.
    It is commonplace in most of the larger cities with terraced housing. Suburban streets with wider pavements (sidewalks) have been converted to carparking. Remember that a lot of UK housing was built long before
    owning a car was something the ordinary person could ever hope to do.

    Many smaller houses come with nowhere to park a car. Mid size houses
    don't come with enough space to park the number of cars a family might
    own. Paving over the entire front garden for parking is common. This
    causes interesting problems of flash flooding from runoff. We don't have separate fresh water storm drains so it makes sewage plants overflow.

    I hesitate to put a figure on it but perhaps as high as 25% terraced
    housing in many inner cities. Where I live there is a lot of space.


    Ok, then no EVs for you. You can be the last customer of OPEC.


    Have you ever been to the UK? It is quite a crowded little island.
    Then of course some calculated every kW
    EVs would need as adding to the peak use times all the while
    acknowledging there are many who, for better rates, heat bricks off
    peak for heating, all the while claiming this was terrible for some reason. It was hugely emotional and many were clearly angry that a
    Yank was telling them it was possible. Ok, so I agree, the UK is so backward that EVs are not practical.
    UK electricity distribution is so backwards and now becoming unreliable
    due to them cutting back on maintenance and overheads (ie staff who
    actually know what they are doing). How else do you explain the recent nearly two week outage in parts of Northern England after storm Arwen
    (which really wasn't all that extreme). The network infrastructure has
    been allowed to decay by penny pinching bean counters in London.

    Yeah, I heard no shortage of stories about degrading cables with aluminum sheathing and many other problems.


    After our local 2 day outage we have been around and found several electricity poles on the edge of failing. They are either visibly loose
    in the ground, rotten or thinned down at shoulder height by beast
    rubbing against them so that a once 10" diameter pole is under 4".

    Yeah, it's pretty clear that the UK would totally fail if they had to fight the Battle of Brittan again.


    We are pretty much reliant on French nuclear generation and
    continental interconnectors if it is a grey windless day. Too bad
    if it is cold in France at the same time - they will serve their
    own needs first.

    I thought the cross channel electric connections were rather
    limited.
    They are relatively limited. More so at the moment one is down!
    But they are essential to UK supply integrity now.

    The UK seems hell bent on nuclear even though the current project is years late and billions over budget. I guess that's what you get when you turn to the French for technology. Maybe you should check in with the Chinese? Maybe they can help you?


    Successive governments have prevaricated on new nuclear and now the
    shit is about to hit the fan. I have to agree that the UK
    infrastructure is at near third world levels with the recent large
    scale outage in the North of England as classic demonstration of
    just how low we have sunk.

    I've read quite a bit about UK nuclear construction, 1 very overrun project coming to fruition soon (for varying values of "soon") and
    talk of allowing construction overruns to be passed onto the consumer
    for future projects (no incentive to control overruns then). I
    prefer the US approach, let them either succeed or fail on their own.
    If nuclear can't compete, why subsidize it? It's not a nascent
    industry, just a money sink.
    It is low carbon electricity if you can make it work.

    Hmmm... Yes, but that's the sticky wicket, innit? Can you tell I watch too much British TV? Doc Martin lately.


    They have been paying large users to shutdown heavily energy
    intensive production during winter months for a few years now. The
    rot really set in when Centrica closed the gas storage buffer in
    Yorkshire in 2017

    https://www.theguardian.com/business/2017/jun/20/uk-gas-storage-prices-rough-british-gas-centrica



    That leaves UK electricity generation after the dash for gas incredibly
    exposed to the spot market price for natural gas (now
    extortionate).

    So storage at night and usage during the day is needed, eh? How much
    is the current bill for shutting plants? Maybe batteries would be profitable? Or instead of paying them to shut down, maybe change the billing to an increasing kWh rate with higher usage. In my home
    There is a pumped storage plant in Wales - one of the biggest in the
    world but it is still miniscule compared to total UK power usage.

    It doesn't have to compare to the total generation or usage, just the amount you are saving by shutting down factories. Do you not understand what I'm saying? If you don't have enough, you need to build more. If you can add storage at a cost that is
    less than paying people to shut down, that saves money. Isn't that a very simple concept?


    Australia has a battery farm somewhere that buffers peak load and is profitable. The only one I know of in the UK is a toy near Oxford.

    https://www.energy-storage.news/huge-achievement-as-50mw-battery-system-is-first-to-export-to-uk-grid-from-tertiary-connection/

    The one in Australia has worked very well and I believe it was enlarged. I think other companies have also built them, but it's been a while, I maybe confusing this with other countries or even other continents.


    county the power company gave an aluminum refinery a break on
    electric prices (it's done by electrolysis, so some electron per atom
    of aluminum). Some years later the company was looking at a rate
    hike when the power company ended their price break. The company
    left for Canada I believe, much better energy costs there. I say
    UK has chloralkaline and aluminium (not sure if it is still there) as
    the consumers of last resort. The former can absorb vast amounts of
    power and isn't too upset if they get none at all. Makes them very favourable as a load balancing tool for the national grid. I think they
    get exceptionally good rates for accepting a very intermittent supply.

    We used to have a steel industry but there is almost nothing left.
    good riddance. They used to emit fluorine which would kill dairy
    cows when they ate the grass.
    Shouldn't they have been scrubbing their exhaust gasses through lime?
    CaF2 is about the most insoluble thing known.

    We have an expression the US, "stuff happens".

    --

    Rick C.

    ---- Get 1,000 miles of free Supercharging
    ---- Tesla referral code - https://ts.la/richard11209

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Tom Del Rosso@21:1/5 to John Larkin on Fri Jan 21 19:48:30 2022
    John Larkin wrote:
    On Fri, 21 Jan 2022 20:46:49 -0000 (UTC), Cydrome Leader <presence@MUNGEpanix.com> wrote:

    John Larkin <jlarkin@highland_atwork_technology.com> wrote:
    On Wed, 19 Jan 2022 19:30:11 -0500, "Tom Del Rosso"
    <fizzbintuesday@that-google-mail-domain.com> wrote:

    jlarkin@highlandsniptechnology.com wrote:

    It's much worse on a long mountain uphill in a blizzard. You can't
    even afford to run the heater.

    It doesn't matter because you won't have any type of car when they
    finally ban ICE with no intention of building the 200GW of
    generator capacity needed to replace them with EV's. Hopefully
    they'll establish a bus route up that mountain.

    Once the power grids start to collapse, and people can't charge
    their Teslas or heat their homes in the winter (which is happening
    already) there will be an anti-renewable political reaction.

    Of course, experts tell us we'll all be dead in nine years.

    I had to reming some folks that were excited about electric only
    homes that have no gas (some sort of commiefornia and NYC movement)
    that their electric probably comes from gas and and mayber 18% coal,
    but with needing least 20% more than they'd need for on-site heating
    need due to transmission losses.

    It was crickets after that.


    Resistive electric heating would be terrible. A heat pump is better.

    Thermodynamically, a 1000c or whatever gas flame is inefficiently
    coupled to heat house air to 25c. An ideal steam generator and an
    ideal heat pump would be far more efficient use of gas.

    I don't know about the real life numbers.

    Instead of solar panels, we could have gas fired steam engines, where
    the discharge heat warms our domestic air and hot water, and we get
    free electricity from the otherwise wasted delta-t. That works when
    the sun is down.

    I considered adding a heat exchanger from our heater flue gas to the
    water heater inlet, but the payoff is small for the effort. In our
    climate, we don't run the heater a lot.

    The reason you see steam rising from manholes, and sometimes cracks in
    the sidewalk, in Manhattan, is the island's central steam heat.
    Manhattan uses so much electricity that it needs several power plants
    around the perimeter of the island, which used to be oil fired but I
    think they're all gas now. The steam exits the turbines and is piped
    through the streets to heat buildings, clean dishes in retaurants, and I
    hear cheese makers use it somehow. I have no idea what they bill for it.

    --
    Defund the Thought Police

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Anthony William Sloman@21:1/5 to John Larkin on Fri Jan 21 17:47:17 2022
    On Saturday, January 22, 2022 at 9:17:38 AM UTC+11, John Larkin wrote:
    On Fri, 21 Jan 2022 20:46:49 -0000 (UTC), Cydrome Leader <pres...@MUNGEpanix.com> wrote:
    John Larkin <jlarkin@highland_atwork_technology.com> wrote:
    On Wed, 19 Jan 2022 19:30:11 -0500, "Tom Del Rosso" <fizzbin...@that-google-mail-domain.com> wrote:
    jla...@highlandsniptechnology.com wrote:

    <snip>

    Once the power grids start to collapse, and people can't charge their Teslas or heat their homes in the winter (which is happening already) there will be an anti-renewable political reaction.

    There might be an anti-in competence political reaction. There's no reason why renewable resources couldn't be exploited to generate all the power that he grid might be expected to need. You might need a fairly extensive grid with a lot of grid storage (
    batteries, pumped hydro and the like) to cope with the intermittent nature of most renewable resources

    Of course, experts tell us we'll all be dead in nine years.

    They don't, unless he means the kind of "expert" invented by climate change denial propagandists.

    I had to remind some folks that were excited about electric only homes that >have no gas (some sort of commiefornia and NYC movement) that their >electric probably comes from gas and and maybe 18% coal, but with needing >least 20% more than they'd need for on-site heating need due to transmission
    losses.

    That is currently true, to some extent. It's unlike to remain true. Recently South Australia ran for a week on renewable sources only - which is to say that renewable source supplied about 104% of the electricity used. Some of it got exported to
    adjacent states, and some of the time power was imported from place that generated it by burning gas. South Australia famously bought a Tesla grid battery a few years ago

    https://hornsdalepowerreserve.com.au/

    and they have bought another one since then.

    They are also buying a grid-scale vanadium flow battery (which ought to be a better technology, but isn't yet produced in volume - unlike Tesla's car batteries).

    https://arena.gov.au/news/first-grid-scale-flow-battery-to-be-built-in-south-australia/

    It was crickets after that.

    They knew that they were being lectured at by an ignorant halfwit?

    Resistive electric heating would be terrible. A heat pump is better.

    Thermodynamically, a 1000c or whatever gas flame is inefficiently
    coupled to heat house air to 25c. An ideal steam generator and an
    ideal heat pump would be far more efficient use of gas.

    I don't know about the real life numbers.

    Instead of solar panels, we could have gas fired steam engines, where
    the discharge heat warms our domestic air and hot water, and we get
    free electricity from the otherwise wasted delta-t. That works when
    the sun is down.

    It's called district heating, and is popular in Europe. It only works for the area close to the power station. In Nijmegen they coupled the garbage incinerator into that network.

    I considered adding a heat exchanger from our heater flue gas to the
    water heater inlet, but the payoff is small for the effort. In our
    climate, we don't run the heater a lot.

    Our central heating system in the Netherlands was gas-fired and produced both our hot water and the hot water that got circulated through our central heating radiators. The gas-fired boiler had a remarkably efficient heat exchange to get the heat from
    the gas it burned into the hot water that got circulated.

    --
    Bill Sloman, Sydney

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Rick C@21:1/5 to Ralph Mowery on Fri Jan 21 18:31:06 2022
    On Friday, January 21, 2022 at 9:50:44 AM UTC-5, Ralph Mowery wrote:
    In article <8bb80dc1-dffe-44fe...@googlegroups.com>,
    gnuarm.del...@gmail.com says...

    So storage at night and usage during the day is needed, eh? How much is the current bill for shutting plants? Maybe batteries would be profitable? Or instead of paying them to shut down, maybe change the billing to an increasing kWh rate with higher
    usage. In my home county the power company gave an aluminum refinery a break
    on electric prices (it's done by electrolysis, so some electron per atom of aluminum). Some years later the company was looking at a rate hike when the power company ended their price break. The company left for Canada I believe, much better energy
    costs there. I say good riddance. They used to emit fluorine which would kill
    dairy cows when they ate the grass.



    In my county in NC there was an aluminum plant that generated its own
    power. After about 30 years they shut down the smelting operation and started selling the power to the grid.

    Do they burn coal? Just curious.

    --

    Rick C.

    --+- Get 1,000 miles of free Supercharging
    --+- Tesla referral code - https://ts.la/richard11209

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Cydrome Leader@21:1/5 to John Larkin on Sat Jan 22 02:34:06 2022
    John Larkin <jlarkin@highland_atwork_technology.com> wrote:
    On Fri, 21 Jan 2022 20:46:49 -0000 (UTC), Cydrome Leader <presence@MUNGEpanix.com> wrote:

    John Larkin <jlarkin@highland_atwork_technology.com> wrote:
    On Wed, 19 Jan 2022 19:30:11 -0500, "Tom Del Rosso"
    <fizzbintuesday@that-google-mail-domain.com> wrote:

    jlarkin@highlandsniptechnology.com wrote:

    It's much worse on a long mountain uphill in a blizzard. You can't
    even afford to run the heater.

    It doesn't matter because you won't have any type of car when they >>>>finally ban ICE with no intention of building the 200GW of generator >>>>capacity needed to replace them with EV's. Hopefully they'll establish a >>>>bus route up that mountain.

    Once the power grids start to collapse, and people can't charge their
    Teslas or heat their homes in the winter (which is happening already)
    there will be an anti-renewable political reaction.

    Of course, experts tell us we'll all be dead in nine years.

    I had to reming some folks that were excited about electric only homes that >>have no gas (some sort of commiefornia and NYC movement) that their >>electric probably comes from gas and and mayber 18% coal, but with needing >>least 20% more than they'd need for on-site heating need due to transmission >>losses.

    It was crickets after that.


    Resistive electric heating would be terrible. A heat pump is better.

    that's what the green retards all want. Resistive heating, or the fantasy of heat pumps working anywhere in the US.

    Thermodynamically, a 1000c or whatever gas flame is inefficiently
    coupled to heat house air to 25c. An ideal steam generator and an
    ideal heat pump would be far more efficient use of gas.

    It's perfectly coupled to transfer massive amounts of heat. You sure won't
    be running any perfect steam boiler off 220F degree "flames".

    I don't know about the real life numbers.

    Instead of solar panels, we could have gas fired steam engines, where
    the discharge heat warms our domestic air and hot water, and we get
    free electricity from the otherwise wasted delta-t. That works when
    the sun is down.

    I hope you do realize modern gas fired furnaces are something like 95% efficient. There is no "waste" heat to gather, and if you do gather it's
    going to be of little use. The exhaust is so cool they run it though PVC
    pipes which are too flimbsy to even handle drinking water.

    I considered adding a heat exchanger from our heater flue gas to the
    water heater inlet, but the payoff is small for the effort. In our
    climate, we don't run the heater a lot.

    Bad idea, unless you want corrosion and CO in your living space.

    Granted this site is suspiciously professional and vague, but it's from the real emerson electric, so trusty as far as mega conglomerates with little interest in consumers goes.

    https://www.ac-heatingconnect.com/homeowners/hvac-midwest-whats-best-system-home/

    so is why we don't use heatpumps in the midwest. They're useless is the
    short story. Nothing produces massive amounts of cheap heat like burning gas
    in a furnace. Even if you could partially augment your heating with a
    heatpump, I doubt it would be cheaper than gas. Plus, furnaces are cheaper
    to replace than central air systems, and a heatpump is basically central
    air with some reversing valves to fail. Yeah, there are minisplit systems,
    but those are janky to start with, even as a pure AC unit.

    If you have the bucks, geothermal heatpumps are fine. I've seen a completely decked out system of the sort, but it was built by retired engineer, clearly
    as a "project" more than anything else. The up front costs must have been immense with something like a mile of buried tubing outside, somewhere.

    It's 22F outside here right now, so even if I had a heatpump, it would be frozen over ouside and the gas furnace would still be needed. They just
    don't make any sense here. Your geography and energy costs will vary. Energy here is cheap. We have all the electric and all the pipelines.

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Rick C@21:1/5 to bill....@ieee.org on Fri Jan 21 19:06:11 2022
    On Friday, January 21, 2022 at 8:47:22 PM UTC-5, bill....@ieee.org wrote:
    On Saturday, January 22, 2022 at 9:17:38 AM UTC+11, John Larkin wrote:
    I considered adding a heat exchanger from our heater flue gas to the
    water heater inlet, but the payoff is small for the effort. In our climate, we don't run the heater a lot.
    Our central heating system in the Netherlands was gas-fired and produced both our hot water and the hot water that got circulated through our central heating radiators. The gas-fired boiler had a remarkably efficient heat exchange to get the heat from
    the gas it burned into the hot water that got circulated.

    The only restriction on how much heat you can extract from a flame is the temperature required to make the flue gasses flow through the flue and the cost of the enhanced equipment to extract more of the heat. In power plants I've read they use as many
    as three sets of turbines to get as much energy as possible from the heat source. Each one optimized for a different temperature.

    The North Anna nuclear facility has a 1 MW generator on the dam that creates Lake Anna, the cooling pond for the nuclear reactors. Apparently it was required to justify the construction of the dam on that river, I was told. Go figure.

    https://www.dominionenergy.com/projects-and-facilities/hydroelectric-power-facilities-and-projects/north-anna-hydro-power-station

    I might be in that picture. I can't tell for sure, but I might be in the blue kayak behind two other kayaks in front of the dam.

    --

    Rick C.

    -+-- Get 1,000 miles of free Supercharging
    -+-- Tesla referral code - https://ts.la/richard11209

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Rick C@21:1/5 to John Larkin on Fri Jan 21 18:52:51 2022
    On Friday, January 21, 2022 at 5:17:38 PM UTC-5, John Larkin wrote:
    On Fri, 21 Jan 2022 20:46:49 -0000 (UTC), Cydrome Leader <pres...@MUNGEpanix.com> wrote:

    John Larkin <jlarkin@highland_atwork_technology.com> wrote:
    On Wed, 19 Jan 2022 19:30:11 -0500, "Tom Del Rosso"
    <fizzbin...@that-google-mail-domain.com> wrote:

    jla...@highlandsniptechnology.com wrote:

    It's much worse on a long mountain uphill in a blizzard. You can't
    even afford to run the heater.

    It doesn't matter because you won't have any type of car when they >>>finally ban ICE with no intention of building the 200GW of generator >>>capacity needed to replace them with EV's. Hopefully they'll establish a >>>bus route up that mountain.

    Once the power grids start to collapse, and people can't charge their
    Teslas or heat their homes in the winter (which is happening already)
    there will be an anti-renewable political reaction.

    Of course, experts tell us we'll all be dead in nine years.

    I had to reming some folks that were excited about electric only homes that >have no gas (some sort of commiefornia and NYC movement) that their >electric probably comes from gas and and mayber 18% coal, but with needing >least 20% more than they'd need for on-site heating need due to transmission
    losses.

    It was crickets after that.

    Resistive electric heating would be terrible. A heat pump is better.

    Thermodynamically, a 1000c or whatever gas flame is inefficiently
    coupled to heat house air to 25c. An ideal steam generator and an
    ideal heat pump would be far more efficient use of gas.

    A gas flame is 100% efficient in heating applications. WTF are you talking about "coupling"?

    Ideal things tend to be... ideal! Using a gas flame to power a generator which is used to run a heat pump has many inefficiencies. The question is if the heat pump can compensate. I think it is close to a break even, but only at relatively mild
    temperatures. As the temperature differential increases a heat pump requires more energy to move energy running up the electric bill.


    I don't know about the real life numbers.

    Exactly.


    Instead of solar panels, we could have gas fired steam engines, where
    the discharge heat warms our domestic air and hot water, and we get
    free electricity from the otherwise wasted delta-t. That works when
    the sun is down.

    I believe that is called cogeneration and is rather expensive. It is likely also less efficient than the utility. When done at the utility level it is called district heating, but requires some ugly piping to be installed. If not done when the
    community is built, it is above ground. Very ugly. The University of Maryland used that for many of their buildings. When something broke in the facility they would be down for a week or two. Yeah, 30°F outside and no heat in the dorms!

    It might work at night, but only when you the furnace runs or you turn on the hot water tap. I guess if you want to read by a lamp you can run the hot water in the shower. Or maybe you could install a few days worth of batteries to get you through a
    warm spell? Yeah, big batteries, that's much better than being on the grid!

    --

    Rick C.

    --++ Get 1,000 miles of free Supercharging
    --++ Tesla referral code - https://ts.la/richard11209

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Rick C@21:1/5 to Martin Brown on Fri Jan 21 18:30:02 2022
    On Friday, January 21, 2022 at 6:47:21 AM UTC-5, Martin Brown wrote:
    On 21/01/2022 05:40, Rick C wrote:
    On Thursday, January 20, 2022 at 3:09:12 PM UTC-5, lang...@fonz.dk wrote:
    torsdag den 20. januar 2022 kl. 19.38.44 UTC+1 skrev John Larkin:
    On Wed, 19 Jan 2022 19:30:11 -0500, "Tom Del Rosso"
    <fizzbin...@that-google-mail-domain.com> wrote:

    jla...@highlandsniptechnology.com wrote:

    It's much worse on a long mountain uphill in a blizzard. You can't >>>>> even afford to run the heater.

    It doesn't matter because you won't have any type of car when they
    finally ban ICE with no intention of building the 200GW of generator >>>> capacity needed to replace them with EV's. Hopefully they'll establish a
    bus route up that mountain.
    Once the power grids start to collapse, and people can't charge their >>> Teslas or heat their homes in the winter (which is happening already) >>> there will be an anti-renewable political reaction.
    kinda started already, on one hand people complaint politician don't take >> global warming serious and are not ambitious enough pushing for green energy
    and at the same time people complain that the politicians don't reduce the tax
    on energy now that energy has had a large increase in price

    Probably not the same people. What energy prices have increased?
    Natural gas prices have gone through the roof!
    Nearly an order of magnitude higher prices on the spot market.
    That is what is driving all the UK energy box shifters into bankruptcy.
    Seems to me pretty much all fuels and energies have been stable for some time now, no? Maybe that's just the US?
    This graph from a US source says otherwise:

    https://www.eia.gov/naturalgas/weekly/

    I guess you are not familiar with pricing. "Spot" prices are always the highest prices you can find. If you look at electrical prices you will find the utilities pay *huge* prices at peak times. This means nothing on my bill because it is already
    factored into the price of electricity. I think you don't pay spot market prices either. Your claim about a ten fold increase in spot market prices means nothing other than what is reflected in your energy rates. You know better, but you do tend to be
    a Henny Penny alarmist at times.


    Natural gas prices have spiked this winter at between 7-10x what they
    were earlier last year and show every sign of going higher as users
    compete for the relatively small amounts available to buy for import.

    I guess this is another way the UK is a third world country, not able to foresee their future and manage their way around problems. I thought Brittan had a tonne of wells in the North Sea pumping natural gas through the island? I guess the North sea
    isn't big enough.


    It could get a hell of a lot worse if Russia invades Ukraine and the
    West imposes trade sanctions. Then in a tit-for-tat measure Russia cuts
    off supply to the European gas pipeline(s). Mid-winter is not a good
    time to be without gas. So far the price is just incredibly high.

    Ah, yes. The spot market responds severely to such issues. Temporary though until the issues are resolved.


    So high in fact that some major UK industries shut down production completely which then caused a nationwide shortage of CO2. They had to
    be bribed by the government to restart fertiliser production and have
    been charging a massive premium off their customers ever since.

    https://www.ft.com/content/991db1b7-ab0e-49fb-999c-3bf5bef2a93a

    Can't get past the pay wall. But I think this is a joke, right? CO2 production???

    The very idea of a government "bribing" a company to produce material, when they can gouge on price, is insane. What sort of asylum is the UK again? Try that over here and we can use a law to require a company to operate. Why is there only one company?
    Why can't CO2 be imported? How about getting it from the air? It's presently 400 ppm and rising.


    UK electricity production would fail within a week under that scenario.
    Most other European countries have larger natural gas buffer stocks.
    (a month or more)

    I think it is time for everyone to leave the UK and have the last person turn out the lights.

    --

    Rick C.

    ---+ Get 1,000 miles of free Supercharging
    ---+ Tesla referral code - https://ts.la/richard11209

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Ralph Mowery@21:1/5 to All on Fri Jan 21 23:22:51 2022
    In article <ce65e413-ee49-4b20-92eb-7d7197ee50c4n@googlegroups.com>, gnuarm.deletethisbit@gmail.com says...

    In my county in NC there was an aluminum plant that generated its own power. After about 30 years they shut down the smelting operation and started selling the power to the grid.

    Do they burn coal? Just curious.




    They built a dam and used water power. Found out they could sell
    electricity for more than the aluminum profit.

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Anthony William Sloman@21:1/5 to Cydrome Leader on Fri Jan 21 22:05:05 2022
    On Saturday, January 22, 2022 at 1:34:12 PM UTC+11, Cydrome Leader wrote:
    John Larkin <jlarkin@highland_atwork_technology.com> wrote:
    On Fri, 21 Jan 2022 20:46:49 -0000 (UTC), Cydrome Leader <pres...@MUNGEpanix.com> wrote:
    John Larkin <jlarkin@highland_atwork_technology.com> wrote:
    On Wed, 19 Jan 2022 19:30:11 -0500, "Tom Del Rosso" <fizzbin...@that-google-mail-domain.com> wrote:
    jla...@highlandsniptechnology.com wrote:

    <snip>
    '
    Resistive electric heating would be terrible. A heat pump is better.
    that's what the green retards all want. Resistive heating, or the fantasy of heat pumps working anywhere in the US.

    The retard here is Cydrome Leader, who seems to think that here is only one kind of heat pump.

    With the right working fluid, and the right design, heat pumps can work anywhere or at least anywhere where anybody lives.

    If they are working a across a large temperature difference, you don't as many watts of heat per watt of electrical input as you do with a smaller difference, and they aren't as attractive, but they still work.

    Thermodynamically, a 1000c or whatever gas flame is inefficiently
    coupled to heat house air to 25c. An ideal steam generator and an
    ideal heat pump would be far more efficient use of gas.

    It's perfectly coupled to transfer massive amounts of heat. You sure won't be running any perfect steam boiler off 220F degree "flames".
    I don't know about the real life numbers.

    Instead of solar panels, we could have gas fired steam engines, where
    the discharge heat warms our domestic air and hot water, and we get
    free electricity from the otherwise wasted delta-t. That works when
    the sun is down.

    I hope you do realize modern gas fired furnaces are something like 95% efficient. There is no "waste" heat to gather, and if you do gather it's going to be of little use. The exhaust is so cool they run it though PVC pipes which are too flimsy to even handle drinking water.

    I considered adding a heat exchanger from our heater flue gas to the
    water heater inlet, but the payoff is small for the effort. In our climate, we don't run the heater a lot.

    Bad idea, unless you want corrosion and CO in your living space.

    The heat exchanger won't leak carbon monoxide. If you condense out water onto the flue gas side of you heat exchanger you do have to pick construction materials that won't corrode. With Cydrome Leader's design skills that might not happen, but it should,

    Granted this site is suspiciously professional and vague, but it's from the real emerson electric, so trusty as far as mega conglomerates with little interest in consumers goes.

    https://www.ac-heatingconnect.com/homeowners/hvac-midwest-whats-best-system-home/

    so is why we don't use heatpumps in the midwest. They're useless is the short story. Nothing produces massive amounts of cheap heat like burning gas in a furnace. Even if you could partially augment your heating with a heatpump, I doubt it would be cheaper than gas. Plus, furnaces are cheaper to replace than central air systems, and a heatpump is basically central
    air with some reversing valves to fail. Yeah, there are minisplit systems, but those are janky to start with, even as a pure AC unit.

    Or to put it more briefly, Cydrome Leader doesnm't know what he is talking about.

    If you have the bucks, geothermal heatpumps are fine. I've seen a completely decked out system of the sort, but it was built by retired engineer, clearly as a "project" more than anything else. The up front costs must have been immense with something like a mile of buried tubing outside, somewhere.

    It's 22F outside here right now, so even if I had a heatpump, it would be frozen over outside and the gas furnace would still be needed.

    Why wound it be "frozen over"? If it's cooler than the outside air it might pick up a layer of frost, but reversing the heat flow briefly to melt the frost for long enough for it to drip off is trivial to implement. As usual Cydrome Leader doesn't know
    enough about what he is talking about.

    They just don't make any sense here.

    If you haven't got much sense to start with

    Your geography and energy costs will vary. Energy here is cheap. We have all the electric and all the pipelines.

    But not all that many super-insulated houses. Cydrome Leader isn't the only local who hasn't got much sense.

    --
    Bill Sloman, Sydney

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Jasen Betts@21:1/5 to John Larkin on Sat Jan 22 05:40:48 2022
    On 2022-01-21, John Larkin <jlarkin@highland_atwork_technology.com> wrote:
    On Fri, 21 Jan 2022 20:46:49 -0000 (UTC), Cydrome Leader
    <presence@MUNGEpanix.com> wrote:

    John Larkin <jlarkin@highland_atwork_technology.com> wrote:
    On Wed, 19 Jan 2022 19:30:11 -0500, "Tom Del Rosso"
    <fizzbintuesday@that-google-mail-domain.com> wrote:

    jlarkin@highlandsniptechnology.com wrote:

    It's much worse on a long mountain uphill in a blizzard. You can't
    even afford to run the heater.

    It doesn't matter because you won't have any type of car when they >>>>finally ban ICE with no intention of building the 200GW of generator >>>>capacity needed to replace them with EV's. Hopefully they'll establish a >>>>bus route up that mountain.

    Once the power grids start to collapse, and people can't charge their
    Teslas or heat their homes in the winter (which is happening already)
    there will be an anti-renewable political reaction.

    Of course, experts tell us we'll all be dead in nine years.

    I had to reming some folks that were excited about electric only homes that >>have no gas (some sort of commiefornia and NYC movement) that their >>electric probably comes from gas and and mayber 18% coal, but with needing >>least 20% more than they'd need for on-site heating need due to transmission >>losses.

    It was crickets after that.


    Resistive electric heating would be terrible. A heat pump is better.

    Thermodynamically, a 1000c or whatever gas flame is inefficiently
    coupled to heat house air to 25c. An ideal steam generator and an
    ideal heat pump would be far more efficient use of gas.

    I don't know about the real life numbers.

    A codensing furnace is nearly 100% efficient, so coupling fossil-fuel
    heat directly to home air is a solved problem, with off-the-shelf
    solutions.

    Coefficient of performance for a typical heat pump is 2 to 4.5
    thermal power stations are about 30-60% efficient

    So it should be possiible to get more heat by burning fuel in a power
    station and using a heat pump.

    Instead of solar panels, we could have gas fired steam engines, where
    the discharge heat warms our domestic air and hot water, and we get
    free electricity from the otherwise wasted delta-t. That works when
    the sun is down.

    This is already a thing called "district heat".

    Solar molten salt thermal generation also works when the sun is down
    and produces waste heat. but unlike photovoltaic, it doesnt collect
    energy at all when it's cloudy (or when it's night obviously)

    I considered adding a heat exchanger from our heater flue gas to the
    water heater inlet, but the payoff is small for the effort. In our
    climate, we don't run the heater a lot.

    It would probably only a be a win when you're running the heat at the
    same time as the water. I guess you could use a thermal siphon (or a
    more bulky heat exchanger) and pre-heat a tank of water.

    --
    Jasen.

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Rick C@21:1/5 to Jasen Betts on Fri Jan 21 23:41:44 2022
    On Saturday, January 22, 2022 at 1:01:18 AM UTC-5, Jasen Betts wrote:
    On 2022-01-21, John Larkin <jlarkin@highland_atwork_technology.com> wrote:
    On Fri, 21 Jan 2022 20:46:49 -0000 (UTC), Cydrome Leader
    <pres...@MUNGEpanix.com> wrote:

    John Larkin <jlarkin@highland_atwork_technology.com> wrote:
    On Wed, 19 Jan 2022 19:30:11 -0500, "Tom Del Rosso"
    <fizzbin...@that-google-mail-domain.com> wrote:

    jla...@highlandsniptechnology.com wrote:

    It's much worse on a long mountain uphill in a blizzard. You can't >>>>> even afford to run the heater.

    It doesn't matter because you won't have any type of car when they >>>>finally ban ICE with no intention of building the 200GW of generator >>>>capacity needed to replace them with EV's. Hopefully they'll establish a >>>>bus route up that mountain.

    Once the power grids start to collapse, and people can't charge their >>> Teslas or heat their homes in the winter (which is happening already) >>> there will be an anti-renewable political reaction.

    Of course, experts tell us we'll all be dead in nine years.

    I had to reming some folks that were excited about electric only homes that
    have no gas (some sort of commiefornia and NYC movement) that their >>electric probably comes from gas and and mayber 18% coal, but with needing >>least 20% more than they'd need for on-site heating need due to transmission
    losses.

    It was crickets after that.


    Resistive electric heating would be terrible. A heat pump is better.

    Thermodynamically, a 1000c or whatever gas flame is inefficiently
    coupled to heat house air to 25c. An ideal steam generator and an
    ideal heat pump would be far more efficient use of gas.

    I don't know about the real life numbers.
    A codensing furnace is nearly 100% efficient, so coupling fossil-fuel
    heat directly to home air is a solved problem, with off-the-shelf
    solutions.

    Coefficient of performance for a typical heat pump is 2 to 4.5
    thermal power stations are about 30-60% efficient

    So it should be possiible to get more heat by burning fuel in a power station and using a heat pump.

    You didn't factor in the transportation cost of the electricity. The losses are not large, but it starts eating into the CoP margin. The real issue is the cost of the installation. A heat pump requires backup heat for when it's not very effective such
    as low temps but also for removing ice from the coils. To do that they run it in air conditioner mode and run the backup heat to keep the house from cooling off.

    Heat pumps are tricky to get a fix on their true effectiveness. The CoP only covers the normal operation of the heat pump basic function. In the US they invented a measure to factor in all inefficiencies called SEER. But there's no useful way to turn
    the SEER number into something technically useful other than just comparing it to the value for other units.


    Instead of solar panels, we could have gas fired steam engines, where
    the discharge heat warms our domestic air and hot water, and we get
    free electricity from the otherwise wasted delta-t. That works when
    the sun is down.
    This is already a thing called "district heat".

    Solar molten salt thermal generation also works when the sun is down
    and produces waste heat. but unlike photovoltaic, it doesnt collect
    energy at all when it's cloudy (or when it's night obviously)
    I considered adding a heat exchanger from our heater flue gas to the
    water heater inlet, but the payoff is small for the effort. In our climate, we don't run the heater a lot.
    It would probably only a be a win when you're running the heat at the
    same time as the water. I guess you could use a thermal siphon (or a
    more bulky heat exchanger) and pre-heat a tank of water.

    Yes, more complexity is great! To heat water in a tank, I would use solar heat to reduce the primary heating source. These can be very inexpensive and very cost effective.

    --

    Rick C.

    -++- Get 1,000 miles of free Supercharging
    -++- Tesla referral code - https://ts.la/richard11209

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Rick C@21:1/5 to Ralph Mowery on Fri Jan 21 23:32:29 2022
    On Friday, January 21, 2022 at 11:23:01 PM UTC-5, Ralph Mowery wrote:
    In article <ce65e413-ee49-4b20...@googlegroups.com>,
    gnuarm.del...@gmail.com says...

    In my county in NC there was an aluminum plant that generated its own power. After about 30 years they shut down the smelting operation and started selling the power to the grid.

    Do they burn coal? Just curious.



    They built a dam and used water power. Found out they could sell
    electricity for more than the aluminum profit.

    That would mean the electricity is so expensive if they had to buy it to make the aluminum they would lose money! Does no one in the UK make aluminum now?

    --

    Rick C.

    -+-+ Get 1,000 miles of free Supercharging
    -+-+ Tesla referral code - https://ts.la/richard11209

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Tom Gardner@21:1/5 to Rick C on Sat Jan 22 09:35:56 2022
    On 22/01/22 02:30, Rick C wrote:
    On Friday, January 21, 2022 at 6:47:21 AM UTC-5, Martin Brown wrote:
    So high in fact that some major UK industries shut down production
    completely which then caused a nationwide shortage of CO2. They had to
    be bribed by the government to restart fertiliser production and have
    been charging a massive premium off their customers ever since.

    https://www.ft.com/content/991db1b7-ab0e-49fb-999c-3bf5bef2a93a

    Can't get past the pay wall. But I think this is a joke, right? CO2 production???

    No joke. Widely publicised. Wide gaps on supermarket shelves
    where carbonated drinks should be displayed.

    I don't think it quite reached the stage of screwing meat production
    where CO2 is used to stun/kill the animals. Brexit and "reclaiming
    control of our borders was sufficient for that.


    The very idea of a government "bribing" a company to produce material, when they can gouge on price, is insane. What sort of asylum is the UK again?

    Deregulated with the aim of minimising prices (sotto voce: in the
    short term), and run by a court jester.

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Tom Gardner@21:1/5 to Rick C on Sat Jan 22 09:48:39 2022
    On 20/01/22 11:28, Rick C wrote:
    On Thursday, January 20, 2022 at 3:57:27 AM UTC-5, Tom Gardner wrote:
    On 20/01/22 02:07, Rick C wrote:
    On Wednesday, January 19, 2022 at 5:06:26 AM UTC-5, Martin Brown wrote: >>>>
    The *big* problem in the UK is that there are plenty of non working
    chargers shown as working on the various apps! Many tales of woe even in >>>> the south where they are relatively plentiful. Up north you are stuffed. >>>>
    The supercharging hubs they have built are unable to get supply so are >>>> nothing more than useless boondoggles. This one near me is useless:

    https://www.yorkpress.co.uk/news/19839979.yorks-flagship-electric-vehicle-charging-hub-still-not-open/

    It's a joke. Opening was cancelled yet again. No electricity!
    (which is a bit of a serious problem for a charging station)

    The article talks about "legal agreements" rather than actual access to the >>> grid. You make it sound as if they simply don't have a grid for them to
    connect to. Do you have more details on just what the issue is?
    I don't have knowledge of this particular case, but "legal agreement"
    could mean anything. A couple of options are:
    - insufficient local capacity in the network to charge 30 cars
    at full rate
    - arguments about who pays for a network upgrade to allow that
    - rights of way problems for upgrading
    - etc

    Ok, but you are just making this up as you go. No basis for any of it.

    No more than you do.

    At least _I_ clearly delineate the limits of my knowledge of
    the specific facts.

    Martin Brown clearly states where /you/ just make things up
    out of sheer ignorance. I have done the same in the past,
    and /eventually/ you began to concede that your personal
    experience does not translate into the rest of the world.

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Tom Gardner@21:1/5 to Rick C on Sat Jan 22 10:05:53 2022
    On 21/01/22 05:38, Rick C wrote:
    Yeah, I've heard. I made the mistake of getting into a discussion about EVs in a UK ham radio group. There were those who thought EVs are impossible in the UK for many, many reasons including the impossibility of finding a way to charge in the sense of "where do you put all the outlets"? They sent me pictures of cars parked half on sidewalks as the norm making curb side charging impractical as if that was very commonplace

    Oh, you have "forgotten" the pictures I posted when you
    previously claimed charging EVs was easy.

    A couple of examples from my local knowledge...

    Yesterday I was looking at houses for my daughter in Cardiff,
    the capital city of Wales. Here's one, where not only is parking
    outside the house illegal (see the zig-zag lines), but we had
    to park on a different street 100 yards away. https://www.google.co.uk/maps/@51.486144,-3.1470046,3a,75y,39.05h,87.19t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sjw4PVbayoLiJXAUEIcjjPg!2e0!7i16384!8i8192

    Here's another, in an expensive part of a city with large
    conservation areas. Please indicate how a top floor flat
    resident would charge their car. https://www.google.co.uk/maps/@51.4695176,-2.6173275,3a,75y,9.71h,98.29t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sw-bqPg3m9lsW_d_NOf_AXw!2e0!7i16384!8i8192

    My parent's house there /does/ have a driveway. That's a
    /major/ selling feature, and is worth a /lot/ of money.

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Tom Gardner@21:1/5 to Rick C on Sat Jan 22 10:14:11 2022
    On 21/01/22 23:31, Rick C wrote:
    LOL!!! All this time and you have learned NOTHING about EVs. Or maybe you are just a troll. Here, one more time I will explain it to you like you are a 10 year old.

    You can charge an EV from the same outlet you run your kettle on.

    You are the one who has learned nothing.

    In many parts of the UK your outlet would be hundreds of yards
    away on a different street, and often 100ft in the air. In such
    places there's little possibility of installing a public charging
    point due to lack of space on the pavement, number required,
    and sheer cost - let alone being in conservation areas.

    The same is true in many European cities, and I probably Asian
    cities.

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Tom Gardner@21:1/5 to All on Sat Jan 22 10:24:09 2022
    On 20/01/22 12:37, Arnie Dwyer (ex Jan Frank) wrote:
    Martin Brown <'''newspam'''@nonad.co.uk> wrote:

    Basically in London and the SE there is enough physical infrastructure
    for EVs to make sense (but almost zero electricity generating capacity).

    In the North I would have to drive around 50 miles (a long way in the
    UK) to my nearest public supercharger. The physically nearest private
    one is about 5 miles away at a very high end country house hotel. Snag
    is they expect you to dine there and stay the night to have use of it.

    Rural mains is nowhere near the capacity needed to handle everyone with
    a nightly 7kW load. Several larger farms and businesses around me have
    their own diesel generator kit because the local network cannot supply
    all of the electricity they need to operate at some times of year.

    So you have to continue using ICE? How are you going to sustain population growth, let alone meet your global warming commitments?

    That would require joined-up thinking and forward planning
    from politicians that believe free markets will solve all
    problems.

    Hence it is highly unlikely :(

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Anthony William Sloman@21:1/5 to gnuarm.del...@gmail.com on Sat Jan 22 02:37:59 2022
    On Saturday, January 22, 2022 at 6:41:48 PM UTC+11, gnuarm.del...@gmail.com wrote:
    On Saturday, January 22, 2022 at 1:01:18 AM UTC-5, Jasen Betts wrote:
    On 2022-01-21, John Larkin <jlarkin@highland_atwork_technology.com> wrote:
    On Fri, 21 Jan 2022 20:46:49 -0000 (UTC), Cydrome Leader <pres...@MUNGEpanix.com> wrote:
    John Larkin <jlarkin@highland_atwork_technology.com> wrote:
    On Wed, 19 Jan 2022 19:30:11 -0500, "Tom Del Rosso" <fizzbin...@that-google-mail-domain.com> wrote:
    jla...@highlandsniptechnology.com wrote:

    <snip>

    You didn't factor in the transportation cost of the electricity. The losses are not large, but it starts eating into the CoP margin. The real issue is the cost of the installation. A heat pump requires backup heat for when it's not very effective such
    as low temps but also for removing ice from the coils. To do that they run it in air conditioner mode and run the backup heat to keep the house from cooling off.

    Actually, they don't or at least they don't have to. In Australia most air-conditioning systems as touted as "reverse cycle systems". You can run the compressor in reverse so it while it can cool the house in summer, it can also be used to warm it in
    winter. This doesn't require any mechanical reconfiguration (or at least nothing that asks me to do more than select the right option on the controller). If you want to de-ice the coils you reverse-cycle it briefly. Cools the house a little in the
    process, but not for long enough for you to notice.

    <snip>

    --
    Bill Sloman, Sydney

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Tom Gardner@21:1/5 to Rick C on Sat Jan 22 10:21:22 2022
    On 22/01/22 07:32, Rick C wrote:
    On Friday, January 21, 2022 at 11:23:01 PM UTC-5, Ralph Mowery wrote:
    In article <ce65e413-ee49-4b20...@googlegroups.com>,
    gnuarm.del...@gmail.com says...

    In my county in NC there was an aluminum plant that generated its own
    power. After about 30 years they shut down the smelting operation and
    started selling the power to the grid.

    Do they burn coal? Just curious.



    They built a dam and used water power. Found out they could sell
    electricity for more than the aluminum profit.

    That would mean the electricity is so expensive if they had to buy it to
    make the aluminum they would lose money! Does no one in the UK make
    aluminum now?

    No.

    We import it from places with cheap hydro, e.g. Iceland.

    Three years ago, Britain’s last major aluminium smelter,
    Lynemouth, was closed. This followed the closure of the
    Anglesey plant in 2009.

    An industry, that used to boast of production figures of
    300,000 tonnes a year, is now reduced to the tiny Lochaber
    plant, rated at 43000 tonnes.

    The reasons for these closures was well documented at the time,
    and the major one was high energy costs, largely due to UK
    climate policies. https://notalotofpeopleknowthat.wordpress.com/2015/04/20/the-decline-of-the-uk-aluminium-industry/

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Martin Brown@21:1/5 to Rick C on Sat Jan 22 11:58:45 2022
    On 22/01/2022 07:32, Rick C wrote:
    On Friday, January 21, 2022 at 11:23:01 PM UTC-5, Ralph Mowery wrote:
    In article <ce65e413-ee49-4b20...@googlegroups.com>,
    gnuarm.del...@gmail.com says...

    In my county in NC there was an aluminum plant that generated its own
    power. After about 30 years they shut down the smelting operation and
    started selling the power to the grid.

    Do they burn coal? Just curious.

    They built a dam and used water power. Found out they could sell
    electricity for more than the aluminum profit.

    That would mean the electricity is so expensive if they had to buy it to make the aluminum they would lose money! Does no one in the UK make aluminum now?

    I think there may still be one plant operating in Scotland still limping
    along but they would be better off shutting it down and just selling the electricity right now!

    https://miningglobal.com/smart-mining/pound330m-purchase-sole-aluminium-smelter-uk-opens-door-industry

    It seems to be still operating according to Scotland info:

    https://www.scottish-places.info/features/featurefirst10539.html

    The last really big Alcan one in England closed down a decade ago. Not
    economic to make aluminium with UK electricity. They were a victim of
    the 2008 financial crisis recession backwash (orders down >80%).

    https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-tyne-17545827

    RTZ pulled the plug (literally). Steel making largely gone the same way.

    --
    Regards,
    Martin Brown

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Martin Brown@21:1/5 to Rick C on Sat Jan 22 11:42:18 2022
    On 22/01/2022 02:30, Rick C wrote:
    On Friday, January 21, 2022 at 6:47:21 AM UTC-5, Martin Brown wrote:
    On 21/01/2022 05:40, Rick C wrote:
    On Thursday, January 20, 2022 at 3:09:12 PM UTC-5,
    lang...@fonz.dk wrote:
    torsdag den 20. januar 2022 kl. 19.38.44 UTC+1 skrev John
    Larkin:
    On Wed, 19 Jan 2022 19:30:11 -0500, "Tom Del Rosso"
    <fizzbin...@that-google-mail-domain.com> wrote:

    jla...@highlandsniptechnology.com wrote:

    It's much worse on a long mountain uphill in a blizzard.
    You can't even afford to run the heater.

    It doesn't matter because you won't have any type of car
    when they finally ban ICE with no intention of building the
    200GW of generator capacity needed to replace them with
    EV's. Hopefully they'll establish a bus route up that
    mountain.
    Once the power grids start to collapse, and people can't
    charge their Teslas or heat their homes in the winter (which
    is happening already) there will be an anti-renewable
    political reaction.
    kinda started already, on one hand people complaint politician
    don't take global warming serious and are not ambitious enough
    pushing for green energy and at the same time people complain
    that the politicians don't reduce the tax on energy now that
    energy has had a large increase in price

    Probably not the same people. What energy prices have increased?
    Natural gas prices have gone through the roof! Nearly an order of
    magnitude higher prices on the spot market. That is what is driving
    all the UK energy box shifters into bankruptcy.
    Seems to me pretty much all fuels and energies have been stable
    for some time now, no? Maybe that's just the US?
    This graph from a US source says otherwise:

    https://www.eia.gov/naturalgas/weekly/

    I guess you are not familiar with pricing. "Spot" prices are always
    the highest prices you can find. If you look at electrical prices
    you will find the utilities pay *huge* prices at peak times. This
    means nothing on my bill because it is already factored into the
    price of electricity. I think you don't pay spot market prices
    either. Your claim about a ten fold increase in spot market prices
    means nothing other than what is reflected in your energy rates. You
    know better, but you do tend to be a Henny Penny alarmist at times.

    I am well familiar with pricing. I know that spot market prices are
    insanely high and *that* is what our government has committed us to for
    gas supply for electricity generation. They shut down the last decent
    sized UK gas storage facility about 5 years ago. They are quite
    literally buying on the spot market and paying over the odds to divert
    LNG tankers to the UK *right now*. I agree that it is insane, but it is
    exactly what you get by deregulating and short term profit motives.

    https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/household-bills-almost-certain-to-double-ovo-energy-boss-warns-vkcsblwb2

    Natural gas prices have spiked this winter at between 7-10x what
    they were earlier last year and show every sign of going higher as
    users compete for the relatively small amounts available to buy for
    import.

    I guess this is another way the UK is a third world country, not able
    to foresee their future and manage their way around problems. I
    thought Brittan had a tonne of wells in the North Sea pumping natural
    gas through the island? I guess the North sea isn't big enough.

    Nowhere near. They are buying LNG in tankers at *huge* expense.
    Buying on the spot market and having a JIT system for gas with virtually
    no buffer stock means they are absolutely at the mercy of price gougers. Strictly it isn't price gouging so much as what the market will stand!

    To many countries decarbonised in the dash for gas. Now that Russia has throttled back the gas supply to Europe there is insanely high demand
    for gas to keep the lights on at *any* price.

    It could get a hell of a lot worse if Russia invades Ukraine and
    the West imposes trade sanctions. Then in a tit-for-tat measure
    Russia cuts off supply to the European gas pipeline(s). Mid-winter
    is not a good time to be without gas. So far the price is just
    incredibly high.

    Ah, yes. The spot market responds severely to such issues.
    Temporary though until the issues are resolved.

    This doesn't look temporary. The whole of Europe will lose electricity
    if the shit hits the fan.

    France still has worthwhile nuclear capacity but the rest will be toast.


    So high in fact that some major UK industries shut down production
    completely which then caused a nationwide shortage of CO2. They had
    to be bribed by the government to restart fertiliser production and
    have been charging a massive premium off their customers ever
    since.

    https://www.ft.com/content/991db1b7-ab0e-49fb-999c-3bf5bef2a93a

    Can't get past the pay wall. But I think this is a joke, right? CO2 production???

    Not at all - it threatened food supplies for Xmas. They *had* to do
    something - the company wasn't prepared to run at a loss. It is yet
    another side effect of the insanely high gas prices.

    https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/explainers-58626935

    This one shouldn't be paywalled. BTW you can sometimes get around the
    paywalls by putting the appropriate search term into Google and reading
    it from their cache.

    Google "CO2 producer restart operations UK minister strikes deal"
    and the first link should be the article with a paywall free token
    appended although it might ask you a question first.

    The very idea of a government "bribing" a company to produce
    material, when they can gouge on price, is insane. What sort of
    asylum is the UK again? Try that over here and we can use a law to
    require a company to operate. Why is there only one company? Why
    can't CO2 be imported? How about getting it from the air? It's
    presently 400 ppm and rising.

    They get the food grade CO2 as a byproduct of fertiliser manufacture.
    Then the CO2 is used for production of fizzy pop and stunning animals
    for slaughter.

    UK electricity production would fail within a week under that
    scenario. Most other European countries have larger natural gas
    buffer stocks. (a month or more)

    I think it is time for everyone to leave the UK and have the last
    person turn out the lights.

    It hasn't failed yet but there is every reason to expect a spectacular
    and catastrophic failure of UK infrastructure before too much longer.

    We are stuck with a very dodgy conman as a Prime Minister who doesn't
    think any rules apply to him. His cabinet consists mostly of B-ark
    material so that his "Genius" may appear to shine all the brighter.

    Think Trump light and you get the general idea. His position is now in
    danger over the No 10 Partygate affair with garden parties held during
    the first lockdown (no one told him it was against the rules!).

    https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-59577129

    Even some Tory MPs have said that he should go. Government whips appear
    to have been blackmailing Tory MPs to back The Boris. That is now the
    subject of a police enquiry. (They are not called whips for nothing)

    https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-60093893

    The government is retaliating by trying to defund the BBC. We live in interesting times. Electing a populist demagogue is a very bad idea!

    --
    Regards,
    Martin Brown

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From David Brown@21:1/5 to John Larkin on Sat Jan 22 14:53:17 2022
    On 21/01/2022 23:15, John Larkin wrote:
    On Fri, 21 Jan 2022 20:46:49 -0000 (UTC), Cydrome Leader <presence@MUNGEpanix.com> wrote:

    John Larkin <jlarkin@highland_atwork_technology.com> wrote:
    On Wed, 19 Jan 2022 19:30:11 -0500, "Tom Del Rosso"
    <fizzbintuesday@that-google-mail-domain.com> wrote:

    jlarkin@highlandsniptechnology.com wrote:

    It's much worse on a long mountain uphill in a blizzard. You can't
    even afford to run the heater.

    It doesn't matter because you won't have any type of car when they
    finally ban ICE with no intention of building the 200GW of generator
    capacity needed to replace them with EV's. Hopefully they'll establish a >>>> bus route up that mountain.

    Once the power grids start to collapse, and people can't charge their
    Teslas or heat their homes in the winter (which is happening already)
    there will be an anti-renewable political reaction.

    Of course, experts tell us we'll all be dead in nine years.

    I had to reming some folks that were excited about electric only homes that >> have no gas (some sort of commiefornia and NYC movement) that their
    electric probably comes from gas and and mayber 18% coal, but with needing >> least 20% more than they'd need for on-site heating need due to transmission >> losses.

    It was crickets after that.


    Resistive electric heating would be terrible. A heat pump is better.

    Resistive heating is the baseline - it is 100% efficient, with all the electrical energy being turned into heat. Heat pumps do better -
    providing more heat energy where you want it (in the house) than the
    electrical energy in.

    Resistive heating is used all the time, all over the world, for all
    kinds of heating applications.


    Thermodynamically, a 1000c or whatever gas flame is inefficiently
    coupled to heat house air to 25c.

    That makes no sense. You can go from high temperature to low
    temperature with pretty close to perfect efficiency - it's the opposite direction that is inefficient.

    An ideal steam generator and an
    ideal heat pump would be far more efficient use of gas.


    There are no such things. (Have a little read-up on Carnot's law.)

    I don't know about the real life numbers.

    Instead of solar panels, we could have gas fired steam engines, where
    the discharge heat warms our domestic air and hot water, and we get
    free electricity from the otherwise wasted delta-t. That works when
    the sun is down.

    You can certainly use waste heat from thermoelectric generation for
    domestic heating. There are limits to the efficiency, but you would get
    more total useful energy from the same source fuel. Whether that is
    worth the costs involved in making the infrastructure and transporting
    the heat from source to homes is another matter. In most places the
    power stations are far from where that water could be used, and by the
    time you have got the useful energy out of the water it is no longer
    that hot. Remember, you have to physically transport the water. How do
    you intend to get the waste water at, say, 80°C a distance of 10 km
    without losing more than about 15°C along the way?


    I considered adding a heat exchanger from our heater flue gas to the
    water heater inlet, but the payoff is small for the effort. In our
    climate, we don't run the heater a lot.


    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Rick C@21:1/5 to Rick C on Sat Jan 22 07:01:37 2022
    On Saturday, January 22, 2022 at 9:58:49 AM UTC-5, Rick C wrote:
    On Saturday, January 22, 2022 at 4:48:46 AM UTC-5, Tom Gardner wrote:
    On 20/01/22 11:28, Rick C wrote:
    On Thursday, January 20, 2022 at 3:57:27 AM UTC-5, Tom Gardner wrote:
    On 20/01/22 02:07, Rick C wrote:
    On Wednesday, January 19, 2022 at 5:06:26 AM UTC-5, Martin Brown wrote: >>>>
    The *big* problem in the UK is that there are plenty of non working >>>> chargers shown as working on the various apps! Many tales of woe even in
    the south where they are relatively plentiful. Up north you are stuffed.

    The supercharging hubs they have built are unable to get supply so are >>>> nothing more than useless boondoggles. This one near me is useless: >>>>
    https://www.yorkpress.co.uk/news/19839979.yorks-flagship-electric-vehicle-charging-hub-still-not-open/

    It's a joke. Opening was cancelled yet again. No electricity!
    (which is a bit of a serious problem for a charging station)

    The article talks about "legal agreements" rather than actual access to the
    grid. You make it sound as if they simply don't have a grid for them to >>> connect to. Do you have more details on just what the issue is?
    I don't have knowledge of this particular case, but "legal agreement"
    could mean anything. A couple of options are:
    - insufficient local capacity in the network to charge 30 cars
    at full rate
    - arguments about who pays for a network upgrade to allow that
    - rights of way problems for upgrading
    - etc

    Ok, but you are just making this up as you go. No basis for any of it.

    No more than you do.

    At least _I_ clearly delineate the limits of my knowledge of
    the specific facts.
    Except you didn't. You talked about "tariffs" and other nonsense which you simply made up.

    Stop the BS now!

    Sorry, I meant Martin Brown mentioned "tariffs", but you also created pure speculation which is nonsense.
    --

    Rick C.

    +--+ Get 1,000 miles of free Supercharging
    +--+ Tesla referral code - https://ts.la/richard11209

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Rick C@21:1/5 to Tom Gardner on Sat Jan 22 06:58:46 2022
    On Saturday, January 22, 2022 at 4:48:46 AM UTC-5, Tom Gardner wrote:
    On 20/01/22 11:28, Rick C wrote:
    On Thursday, January 20, 2022 at 3:57:27 AM UTC-5, Tom Gardner wrote:
    On 20/01/22 02:07, Rick C wrote:
    On Wednesday, January 19, 2022 at 5:06:26 AM UTC-5, Martin Brown wrote: >>>>
    The *big* problem in the UK is that there are plenty of non working
    chargers shown as working on the various apps! Many tales of woe even in >>>> the south where they are relatively plentiful. Up north you are stuffed. >>>>
    The supercharging hubs they have built are unable to get supply so are >>>> nothing more than useless boondoggles. This one near me is useless:

    https://www.yorkpress.co.uk/news/19839979.yorks-flagship-electric-vehicle-charging-hub-still-not-open/

    It's a joke. Opening was cancelled yet again. No electricity!
    (which is a bit of a serious problem for a charging station)

    The article talks about "legal agreements" rather than actual access to the
    grid. You make it sound as if they simply don't have a grid for them to >>> connect to. Do you have more details on just what the issue is?
    I don't have knowledge of this particular case, but "legal agreement"
    could mean anything. A couple of options are:
    - insufficient local capacity in the network to charge 30 cars
    at full rate
    - arguments about who pays for a network upgrade to allow that
    - rights of way problems for upgrading
    - etc

    Ok, but you are just making this up as you go. No basis for any of it.

    No more than you do.

    At least _I_ clearly delineate the limits of my knowledge of
    the specific facts.

    Except you didn't. You talked about "tariffs" and other nonsense which you simply made up.

    Stop the BS now!

    --

    Rick C.

    +--- Get 1,000 miles of free Supercharging
    +--- Tesla referral code - https://ts.la/richard11209

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Rick C@21:1/5 to Tom Gardner on Sat Jan 22 06:57:05 2022
    On Saturday, January 22, 2022 at 4:36:03 AM UTC-5, Tom Gardner wrote:
    On 22/01/22 02:30, Rick C wrote:
    On Friday, January 21, 2022 at 6:47:21 AM UTC-5, Martin Brown wrote:
    So high in fact that some major UK industries shut down production
    completely which then caused a nationwide shortage of CO2. They had to
    be bribed by the government to restart fertiliser production and have
    been charging a massive premium off their customers ever since.

    https://www.ft.com/content/991db1b7-ab0e-49fb-999c-3bf5bef2a93a

    Can't get past the pay wall. But I think this is a joke, right? CO2 production???
    No joke. Widely publicised. Wide gaps on supermarket shelves
    where carbonated drinks should be displayed.

    I don't think it quite reached the stage of screwing meat production
    where CO2 is used to stun/kill the animals. Brexit and "reclaiming
    control of our borders was sufficient for that.

    Why would it ever have any impact on anything? Is the UK incapable of changing gears and buying CO2 from other countries? Maybe you need a channel pipeline to transport it? LOL


    The very idea of a government "bribing" a company to produce material, when
    they can gouge on price, is insane. What sort of asylum is the UK again?
    Deregulated with the aim of minimising prices (sotto voce: in the
    short term), and run by a court jester.

    If it is deregulated no one is "running" it. Deregulation is fine as long as it's not a monopoly and there's no reason CF should have a monopoly. Didn't the UK travel the world establishing colonies? Now they are being mugged by a CO2 producer because
    the UK can't figure out how the ship in CO2? The world is laughing at this one!

    Ah, it all makes sense now. CF is a US company. Most likely the groundwork for this started when Trmp was in office setting the tone of ripping off everyone and anyone.

    Actually, I found an article about it and CF shut down production because the feedstock became expensive enough to make CO2 production unprofitable. I suppose CO2 prices had not risen. But if that is so, it means there are other sources of CO2 for the
    UK that are keeping the price down. Now this makes no sense at all. But here is the explanation, "The agreement with the company will last for three weeks whilst the CO2 market adapts to the global gas prices". So it is just a stop gap measure.

    Who coined the phrase, "Much Ado About Nothing"? I should have known.

    --

    Rick C.

    -+++ Get 1,000 miles of free Supercharging
    -+++ Tesla referral code - https://ts.la/richard11209

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Rick C@21:1/5 to bill....@ieee.org on Sat Jan 22 07:06:15 2022
    On Saturday, January 22, 2022 at 5:38:03 AM UTC-5, bill....@ieee.org wrote:
    On Saturday, January 22, 2022 at 6:41:48 PM UTC+11, gnuarm.del...@gmail.com wrote:
    On Saturday, January 22, 2022 at 1:01:18 AM UTC-5, Jasen Betts wrote:
    On 2022-01-21, John Larkin <jlarkin@highland_atwork_technology.com> wrote:
    On Fri, 21 Jan 2022 20:46:49 -0000 (UTC), Cydrome Leader <pres...@MUNGEpanix.com> wrote:
    John Larkin <jlarkin@highland_atwork_technology.com> wrote:
    On Wed, 19 Jan 2022 19:30:11 -0500, "Tom Del Rosso" <fizzbin...@that-google-mail-domain.com> wrote:
    jla...@highlandsniptechnology.com wrote:
    <snip>
    You didn't factor in the transportation cost of the electricity. The losses are not large, but it starts eating into the CoP margin. The real issue is the cost of the installation. A heat pump requires backup heat for when it's not very effective
    such as low temps but also for removing ice from the coils. To do that they run it in air conditioner mode and run the backup heat to keep the house from cooling off.
    Actually, they don't or at least they don't have to. In Australia most air-conditioning systems as touted as "reverse cycle systems". You can run the compressor in reverse so it while it can cool the house in summer, it can also be used to warm it in
    winter. This doesn't require any mechanical reconfiguration (or at least nothing that asks me to do more than select the right option on the controller). If you want to de-ice the coils you reverse-cycle it briefly. Cools the house a little in the
    process, but not for long enough for you to notice.

    You must keep the heat low in Australia then. Deicing does very much blow cool air through the home unless you aren't using forced air heat. No one likes cold air from their heating system, so they use auxiliary heat (usually straight resistance
    heating) to prevent this. I suppose Australians are tougher material or just can't afford the heating coils.

    --

    Rick C.

    +-+- Get 1,000 miles of free Supercharging
    +-+- Tesla referral code - https://ts.la/richard11209

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From jlarkin@highlandsniptechnology.com@21:1/5 to fizzbintuesday@that-google-mail-dom on Sat Jan 22 07:22:39 2022
    On Fri, 21 Jan 2022 19:48:30 -0500, "Tom Del Rosso" <fizzbintuesday@that-google-mail-domain.com> wrote:

    John Larkin wrote:
    On Fri, 21 Jan 2022 20:46:49 -0000 (UTC), Cydrome Leader
    <presence@MUNGEpanix.com> wrote:

    John Larkin <jlarkin@highland_atwork_technology.com> wrote:
    On Wed, 19 Jan 2022 19:30:11 -0500, "Tom Del Rosso"
    <fizzbintuesday@that-google-mail-domain.com> wrote:

    jlarkin@highlandsniptechnology.com wrote:

    It's much worse on a long mountain uphill in a blizzard. You can't >>>>>> even afford to run the heater.

    It doesn't matter because you won't have any type of car when they
    finally ban ICE with no intention of building the 200GW of
    generator capacity needed to replace them with EV's. Hopefully
    they'll establish a bus route up that mountain.

    Once the power grids start to collapse, and people can't charge
    their Teslas or heat their homes in the winter (which is happening
    already) there will be an anti-renewable political reaction.

    Of course, experts tell us we'll all be dead in nine years.

    I had to reming some folks that were excited about electric only
    homes that have no gas (some sort of commiefornia and NYC movement)
    that their electric probably comes from gas and and mayber 18% coal,
    but with needing least 20% more than they'd need for on-site heating
    need due to transmission losses.

    It was crickets after that.


    Resistive electric heating would be terrible. A heat pump is better.

    Thermodynamically, a 1000c or whatever gas flame is inefficiently
    coupled to heat house air to 25c. An ideal steam generator and an
    ideal heat pump would be far more efficient use of gas.

    I don't know about the real life numbers.

    Instead of solar panels, we could have gas fired steam engines, where
    the discharge heat warms our domestic air and hot water, and we get
    free electricity from the otherwise wasted delta-t. That works when
    the sun is down.

    I considered adding a heat exchanger from our heater flue gas to the
    water heater inlet, but the payoff is small for the effort. In our
    climate, we don't run the heater a lot.

    The reason you see steam rising from manholes, and sometimes cracks in
    the sidewalk, in Manhattan, is the island's central steam heat.
    Manhattan uses so much electricity that it needs several power plants
    around the perimeter of the island, which used to be oil fired but I
    think they're all gas now. The steam exits the turbines and is piped
    through the streets to heat buildings, clean dishes in retaurants, and I
    hear cheese makers use it somehow. I have no idea what they bill for it.

    I did some work on Moscow's hot water system, measuring the thermal
    energy in/out of a big site.

    Moscow was interesting. Most apartment buildings were overheated and unmeasured. When it got too hot, people would open their windows.



    --

    I yam what I yam - Popeye

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Tom Gardner@21:1/5 to Rick C on Sat Jan 22 15:28:53 2022
    On 22/01/22 15:01, Rick C wrote:
    On Saturday, January 22, 2022 at 9:58:49 AM UTC-5, Rick C wrote:
    On Saturday, January 22, 2022 at 4:48:46 AM UTC-5, Tom Gardner wrote:
    On 20/01/22 11:28, Rick C wrote:
    On Thursday, January 20, 2022 at 3:57:27 AM UTC-5, Tom Gardner wrote: >>>>> On 20/01/22 02:07, Rick C wrote:
    On Wednesday, January 19, 2022 at 5:06:26 AM UTC-5, Martin Brown wrote: >>>>>>>
    The *big* problem in the UK is that there are plenty of non working >>>>>>> chargers shown as working on the various apps! Many tales of woe even in
    the south where they are relatively plentiful. Up north you are stuffed.

    The supercharging hubs they have built are unable to get supply so are >>>>>>> nothing more than useless boondoggles. This one near me is useless: >>>>>>>
    https://www.yorkpress.co.uk/news/19839979.yorks-flagship-electric-vehicle-charging-hub-still-not-open/

    It's a joke. Opening was cancelled yet again. No electricity!
    (which is a bit of a serious problem for a charging station)

    The article talks about "legal agreements" rather than actual access to the
    grid. You make it sound as if they simply don't have a grid for them to >>>>>> connect to. Do you have more details on just what the issue is?
    I don't have knowledge of this particular case, but "legal agreement" >>>>> could mean anything. A couple of options are:
    - insufficient local capacity in the network to charge 30 cars
    at full rate
    - arguments about who pays for a network upgrade to allow that
    - rights of way problems for upgrading
    - etc

    Ok, but you are just making this up as you go. No basis for any of it.

    No more than you do.

    At least _I_ clearly delineate the limits of my knowledge of
    the specific facts.
    Except you didn't. You talked about "tariffs" and other nonsense which you simply made up.

    Stop the BS now!

    Sorry, I meant Martin Brown mentioned "tariffs", but you also created pure speculation which is nonsense.


    And hence my statements are correct, and you read faster than you
    are able to comprehend.

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From David Brown@21:1/5 to Rick C on Sat Jan 22 17:07:07 2022
    On 22/01/2022 15:57, Rick C wrote:
    On Saturday, January 22, 2022 at 4:36:03 AM UTC-5, Tom Gardner
    wrote:
    On 22/01/22 02:30, Rick C wrote:
    On Friday, January 21, 2022 at 6:47:21 AM UTC-5, Martin Brown
    wrote:
    So high in fact that some major UK industries shut down
    production completely which then caused a nationwide shortage
    of CO2. They had to be bribed by the government to restart
    fertiliser production and have been charging a massive premium
    off their customers ever since.

    https://www.ft.com/content/991db1b7-ab0e-49fb-999c-3bf5bef2a93a


    Can't get past the pay wall. But I think this is a joke, right?
    CO2 production???
    No joke. Widely publicised. Wide gaps on supermarket shelves where
    carbonated drinks should be displayed.

    I don't think it quite reached the stage of screwing meat
    production where CO2 is used to stun/kill the animals. Brexit and
    "reclaiming control of our borders was sufficient for that.

    Why would it ever have any impact on anything? Is the UK incapable
    of changing gears and buying CO2 from other countries? Maybe you
    need a channel pipeline to transport it? LOL


    The clown in charge in the UK has disconnected the country from the rest
    of the world. Yes, it should surely be possible to import CO₂ from
    other countries. But it would take them months to figure out the red
    tape involved and who should pay which tolls, tariffs or taxes. No
    European drivers will drive their trucks into the UK, and the UK doesn't
    have enough drivers to spare. And European suppliers would mostly be
    quite happy to let the UK suffer after the shitty way the UK government
    has treated the rest of Europe.

    The current government in the UK couldn't organise a piss-up in a
    brewery, and seem determined to screw up the country as much as possible
    while partying against the rules.

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Rick C@21:1/5 to Martin Brown on Sat Jan 22 07:29:00 2022
    On Saturday, January 22, 2022 at 6:42:28 AM UTC-5, Martin Brown wrote:
    On 22/01/2022 02:30, Rick C wrote:
    On Friday, January 21, 2022 at 6:47:21 AM UTC-5, Martin Brown wrote:
    On 21/01/2022 05:40, Rick C wrote:
    On Thursday, January 20, 2022 at 3:09:12 PM UTC-5,
    lang...@fonz.dk wrote:
    torsdag den 20. januar 2022 kl. 19.38.44 UTC+1 skrev John
    Larkin:
    On Wed, 19 Jan 2022 19:30:11 -0500, "Tom Del Rosso"
    <fizzbin...@that-google-mail-domain.com> wrote:

    jla...@highlandsniptechnology.com wrote:

    It's much worse on a long mountain uphill in a blizzard.
    You can't even afford to run the heater.

    It doesn't matter because you won't have any type of car
    when they finally ban ICE with no intention of building the
    200GW of generator capacity needed to replace them with
    EV's. Hopefully they'll establish a bus route up that
    mountain.
    Once the power grids start to collapse, and people can't
    charge their Teslas or heat their homes in the winter (which
    is happening already) there will be an anti-renewable
    political reaction.
    kinda started already, on one hand people complaint politician
    don't take global warming serious and are not ambitious enough
    pushing for green energy and at the same time people complain
    that the politicians don't reduce the tax on energy now that
    energy has had a large increase in price

    Probably not the same people. What energy prices have increased?
    Natural gas prices have gone through the roof! Nearly an order of
    magnitude higher prices on the spot market. That is what is driving
    all the UK energy box shifters into bankruptcy.
    Seems to me pretty much all fuels and energies have been stable
    for some time now, no? Maybe that's just the US?
    This graph from a US source says otherwise:

    https://www.eia.gov/naturalgas/weekly/

    I guess you are not familiar with pricing. "Spot" prices are always
    the highest prices you can find. If you look at electrical prices
    you will find the utilities pay *huge* prices at peak times. This
    means nothing on my bill because it is already factored into the
    price of electricity. I think you don't pay spot market prices
    either. Your claim about a ten fold increase in spot market prices
    means nothing other than what is reflected in your energy rates. You
    know better, but you do tend to be a Henny Penny alarmist at times.
    I am well familiar with pricing. I know that spot market prices are
    insanely high and *that* is what our government has committed us to for
    gas supply for electricity generation. They shut down the last decent
    sized UK gas storage facility about 5 years ago. They are quite
    literally buying on the spot market and paying over the odds to divert
    LNG tankers to the UK *right now*. I agree that it is insane, but it is exactly what you get by deregulating and short term profit motives.

    https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/household-bills-almost-certain-to-double-ovo-energy-boss-warns-vkcsblwb2

    Sounds like the third world to me where you are at the mercy of the wealthy countries for your existence.


    Natural gas prices have spiked this winter at between 7-10x what
    they were earlier last year and show every sign of going higher as
    users compete for the relatively small amounts available to buy for
    import.

    I guess this is another way the UK is a third world country, not able
    to foresee their future and manage their way around problems. I
    thought Brittan had a tonne of wells in the North Sea pumping natural
    gas through the island? I guess the North sea isn't big enough.
    Nowhere near. They are buying LNG in tankers at *huge* expense.
    Buying on the spot market and having a JIT system for gas with virtually
    no buffer stock means they are absolutely at the mercy of price gougers. Strictly it isn't price gouging so much as what the market will stand!

    To many countries decarbonised in the dash for gas. Now that Russia has throttled back the gas supply to Europe there is insanely high demand
    for gas to keep the lights on at *any* price.

    Yup, so Russia doesn't need an army anymore. They have pipelines! Glad we don't have that problem. I suppose we have to stay friendly with Canada or they might cut us off from Alaskan fuels.


    It could get a hell of a lot worse if Russia invades Ukraine and
    the West imposes trade sanctions. Then in a tit-for-tat measure
    Russia cuts off supply to the European gas pipeline(s). Mid-winter
    is not a good time to be without gas. So far the price is just
    incredibly high.

    Ah, yes. The spot market responds severely to such issues.
    Temporary though until the issues are resolved.
    This doesn't look temporary. The whole of Europe will lose electricity
    if the shit hits the fan.

    Not good for Russia either. The more they pull on that chain, the more the dependent countries find other sources. I recall the threat of cutting supply was real on several occasions. Maybe you need to invade Russia?


    France still has worthwhile nuclear capacity but the rest will be toast.

    You mean yesterday's left over, cold toast?


    So high in fact that some major UK industries shut down production
    completely which then caused a nationwide shortage of CO2. They had
    to be bribed by the government to restart fertiliser production and
    have been charging a massive premium off their customers ever
    since.

    https://www.ft.com/content/991db1b7-ab0e-49fb-999c-3bf5bef2a93a

    Can't get past the pay wall. But I think this is a joke, right? CO2 production???
    Not at all - it threatened food supplies for Xmas. They *had* to do
    something - the company wasn't prepared to run at a loss. It is yet
    another side effect of the insanely high gas prices.

    https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/explainers-58626935

    This is silly. Why can't anyone in the UK pick up a phone and call for CO2 home delivery from CO2 is us? WTF!!!??? IMPORT IT FFS!


    This one shouldn't be paywalled. BTW you can sometimes get around the paywalls by putting the appropriate search term into Google and reading
    it from their cache.

    Fug it.


    Google "CO2 producer restart operations UK minister strikes deal"
    and the first link should be the article with a paywall free token
    appended although it might ask you a question first.
    The very idea of a government "bribing" a company to produce
    material, when they can gouge on price, is insane. What sort of
    asylum is the UK again? Try that over here and we can use a law to
    require a company to operate. Why is there only one company? Why
    can't CO2 be imported? How about getting it from the air? It's
    presently 400 ppm and rising.
    They get the food grade CO2 as a byproduct of fertiliser manufacture.
    Then the CO2 is used for production of fizzy pop and stunning animals
    for slaughter.

    If you can't import CO2, then import the fizzy pop and dead cows! Even Puerto Rico can figure that out! They import much of what they eat (lots of dead cows and dead pigs). Not a problem, but then I suppose the UK is more third world than Puerto Rico.


    UK electricity production would fail within a week under that
    scenario. Most other European countries have larger natural gas
    buffer stocks. (a month or more)

    I think it is time for everyone to leave the UK and have the last
    person turn out the lights.
    It hasn't failed yet but there is every reason to expect a spectacular
    and catastrophic failure of UK infrastructure before too much longer.

    I bet no one told Hitler your weak point was CO2 production.


    We are stuck with a very dodgy conman as a Prime Minister who doesn't
    think any rules apply to him. His cabinet consists mostly of B-ark
    material so that his "Genius" may appear to shine all the brighter.

    Think Trump light and you get the general idea. His position is now in
    danger over the No 10 Partygate affair with garden parties held during
    the first lockdown (no one told him it was against the rules!).

    https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-59577129

    Even some Tory MPs have said that he should go. Government whips appear
    to have been blackmailing Tory MPs to back The Boris. That is now the
    subject of a police enquiry. (They are not called whips for nothing)

    https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-60093893

    The government is retaliating by trying to defund the BBC. We live in interesting times. Electing a populist demagogue is a very bad idea!

    Do you want us to share Biden with you? We might be better off with Harris anyway. But we are keeping Sen. Joe Manchin. That guy is a real pip!

    --

    Rick C.

    +-+- Get 1,000 miles of free Supercharging
    +-+- Tesla referral code - https://ts.la/richard11209

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Tom Gardner@21:1/5 to David Brown on Sat Jan 22 17:35:11 2022
    On 22/01/22 16:07, David Brown wrote:
    The current government in the UK couldn't organise a piss-up in a
    brewery, and seem determined to screw up the country as much as possible while partying against the rules.

    They can organise a piss up in Downing St, as their illegal
    parties demonstrate :(

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Rick C@21:1/5 to David Brown on Sat Jan 22 10:58:11 2022
    On Saturday, January 22, 2022 at 11:07:14 AM UTC-5, David Brown wrote:
    On 22/01/2022 15:57, Rick C wrote:
    On Saturday, January 22, 2022 at 4:36:03 AM UTC-5, Tom Gardner
    wrote:
    On 22/01/22 02:30, Rick C wrote:
    On Friday, January 21, 2022 at 6:47:21 AM UTC-5, Martin Brown
    wrote:
    So high in fact that some major UK industries shut down
    production completely which then caused a nationwide shortage
    of CO2. They had to be bribed by the government to restart
    fertiliser production and have been charging a massive premium
    off their customers ever since.

    https://www.ft.com/content/991db1b7-ab0e-49fb-999c-3bf5bef2a93a


    Can't get past the pay wall. But I think this is a joke, right?
    CO2 production???
    No joke. Widely publicised. Wide gaps on supermarket shelves where
    carbonated drinks should be displayed.

    I don't think it quite reached the stage of screwing meat
    production where CO2 is used to stun/kill the animals. Brexit and
    "reclaiming control of our borders was sufficient for that.

    Why would it ever have any impact on anything? Is the UK incapable
    of changing gears and buying CO2 from other countries? Maybe you
    need a channel pipeline to transport it? LOL

    The clown in charge in the UK has disconnected the country from the rest
    of the world. Yes, it should surely be possible to import CO₂ from
    other countries. But it would take them months to figure out the red
    tape involved and who should pay which tolls, tariffs or taxes. No
    European drivers will drive their trucks into the UK, and the UK doesn't have enough drivers to spare. And European suppliers would mostly be
    quite happy to let the UK suffer after the shitty way the UK government
    has treated the rest of Europe.

    The current government in the UK couldn't organise a piss-up in a
    brewery, and seem determined to screw up the country as much as possible while partying against the rules.

    Maybe we should lend them Trmp? Would that be an improvement? We certainly have no use for him, spare parts for an obsolete machine, eh?

    --

    Rick C.

    +-++ Get 1,000 miles of free Supercharging
    +-++ Tesla referral code - https://ts.la/richard11209

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Anthony William Sloman@21:1/5 to gnuarm.del...@gmail.com on Sat Jan 22 17:48:21 2022
    On Sunday, January 23, 2022 at 2:06:19 AM UTC+11, gnuarm.del...@gmail.com wrote:
    On Saturday, January 22, 2022 at 5:38:03 AM UTC-5, bill....@ieee.org wrote:
    On Saturday, January 22, 2022 at 6:41:48 PM UTC+11, gnuarm.del...@gmail.com wrote:
    On Saturday, January 22, 2022 at 1:01:18 AM UTC-5, Jasen Betts wrote:
    On 2022-01-21, John Larkin <jlarkin@highland_atwork_technology.com> wrote:
    On Fri, 21 Jan 2022 20:46:49 -0000 (UTC), Cydrome Leader <pres...@MUNGEpanix.com> wrote:
    John Larkin <jlarkin@highland_atwork_technology.com> wrote:
    On Wed, 19 Jan 2022 19:30:11 -0500, "Tom Del Rosso" <fizzbin...@that-google-mail-domain.com> wrote:
    jla...@highlandsniptechnology.com wrote:
    <snip>
    You didn't factor in the transportation cost of the electricity. The losses are not large, but it starts eating into the CoP margin. The real issue is the cost of the installation. A heat pump requires backup heat for when it's not very effective
    such as low temps but also for removing ice from the coils. To do that they run it in air conditioner mode and run the backup heat to keep the house from cooling off.
    Actually, they don't or at least they don't have to. In Australia most air-conditioning systems as touted as "reverse cycle systems". You can run the compressor in reverse so it while it can cool the house in summer, it can also be used to warm it in
    winter. This doesn't require any mechanical reconfiguration (or at least nothing that asks me to do more than select the right option on the controller). If you want to de-ice the coils you reverse-cycle it briefly. Cools the house a little in the
    process, but not for long enough for you to notice.

    You must keep the heat low in Australia then. Deicing does very much blow cool air through the home unless you aren't using forced air heat.

    You don't have to do it for long - just long enough to turn the bulky frost into water. If it then freezes to clear ice it doesn't insulate the outside heat exchange to any perceptible extent.

    No one likes cold air from their heating system,

    They don't get enough of it to notice.

    so they use auxiliary heat (usually straight resistance heating) to prevent this. I suppose Australians are tougher material or just can't afford the heating coils.

    I was making the point that heat pumps can work both ways. There are bits of Australia that get below freezing in winter, mostly skiing resorts, but I've not lived there.

    It has snowed three times in the town where I grew up - once in the eighteen years that I lived there and twice since then, and I did get to hear about it (though I was living in England when the second snow fall happened - an Australian post-doc I
    played hockey with told me about it).

    --
    Bill Sloman, Sydney

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Rick C@21:1/5 to bill....@ieee.org on Sat Jan 22 19:39:35 2022
    On Saturday, January 22, 2022 at 8:48:26 PM UTC-5, bill....@ieee.org wrote:
    On Sunday, January 23, 2022 at 2:06:19 AM UTC+11, gnuarm.del...@gmail.com wrote:
    On Saturday, January 22, 2022 at 5:38:03 AM UTC-5, bill....@ieee.org wrote:
    On Saturday, January 22, 2022 at 6:41:48 PM UTC+11, gnuarm.del...@gmail.com wrote:
    On Saturday, January 22, 2022 at 1:01:18 AM UTC-5, Jasen Betts wrote:
    On 2022-01-21, John Larkin <jlarkin@highland_atwork_technology.com> wrote:
    On Fri, 21 Jan 2022 20:46:49 -0000 (UTC), Cydrome Leader <pres...@MUNGEpanix.com> wrote:
    John Larkin <jlarkin@highland_atwork_technology.com> wrote:
    On Wed, 19 Jan 2022 19:30:11 -0500, "Tom Del Rosso" <fizzbin...@that-google-mail-domain.com> wrote:
    jla...@highlandsniptechnology.com wrote:
    <snip>
    You didn't factor in the transportation cost of the electricity. The losses are not large, but it starts eating into the CoP margin. The real issue is the cost of the installation. A heat pump requires backup heat for when it's not very effective
    such as low temps but also for removing ice from the coils. To do that they run it in air conditioner mode and run the backup heat to keep the house from cooling off.
    Actually, they don't or at least they don't have to. In Australia most air-conditioning systems as touted as "reverse cycle systems". You can run the compressor in reverse so it while it can cool the house in summer, it can also be used to warm it
    in winter. This doesn't require any mechanical reconfiguration (or at least nothing that asks me to do more than select the right option on the controller). If you want to de-ice the coils you reverse-cycle it briefly. Cools the house a little in the
    process, but not for long enough for you to notice.

    You must keep the heat low in Australia then. Deicing does very much blow cool air through the home unless you aren't using forced air heat.
    You don't have to do it for long - just long enough to turn the bulky frost into water. If it then freezes to clear ice it doesn't insulate the outside heat exchange to any perceptible extent.

    You are being silly now. You don't remove the ice in a few seconds. It takes a bit of time. Even so, no one likes having cold air blown on them in the winter time. You are talking as if this has to do with bringing down the temperature of the house,
    it doesn't. It has to do with the furnace blowing cold air rather than hot air. Cold drafts are something you try to prevent in cold weather.


    No one likes cold air from their heating system,
    They don't get enough of it to notice.

    In this country that is not the case. Maybe the temps never get cold enough downunder for this to matter. The original objection to heat pumps when they first started to be used much in the 70s or 80s was the fact that they don't blow warm air. An oil
    burner blows warm air that feels good. The heat pumps produced air that was barely above room temperature and felt cold because it was below body temp. They eventually reduced that so the air from the vents actually feel warm now. But when it first
    comes on it blows cold air until the system warms up. Better heat systems use a two speed fan that blows slowly at first to minimize this as well as continuing to blow after the pump is turned off to remove residual coil heat... without blowing air that
    feels cold.

    Suggesting that no one cares about the cold air that is *actually* cold, below room temperature cold is pure BS. Why else would they go to so much trouble to prevent blowing room temperature air from a heat pump much less colder air?


    so they use auxiliary heat (usually straight resistance heating) to prevent this. I suppose Australians are tougher material or just can't afford the heating coils.
    I was making the point that heat pumps can work both ways. There are bits of Australia that get below freezing in winter, mostly skiing resorts, but I've not lived there.

    Doesn't matter if the outside temps are below freezing. The heat pump coils have to be well colder than the outside air to work. The worst case is in a light rain, just above freezing. You can get a large build up of ice before the defrost cycle kicks
    in which takes time to remove.


    It has snowed three times in the town where I grew up - once in the eighteen years that I lived there and twice since then, and I did get to hear about it (though I was living in England when the second snow fall happened - an Australian post-doc I
    played hockey with told me about it).

    I'm glad you got to see snow. It's nice as long as you can stay home and not drive to work. Ice is much worse, but they usually close businesses when that happens. My CM in NC was closed Friday because of it.

    --

    Rick C.

    ++-- Get 1,000 miles of free Supercharging
    ++-- Tesla referral code - https://ts.la/richard11209

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Anthony William Sloman@21:1/5 to gnuarm.del...@gmail.com on Sat Jan 22 22:42:16 2022
    On Sunday, January 23, 2022 at 2:39:38 PM UTC+11, gnuarm.del...@gmail.com wrote:
    On Saturday, January 22, 2022 at 8:48:26 PM UTC-5, bill....@ieee.org wrote:
    On Sunday, January 23, 2022 at 2:06:19 AM UTC+11, gnuarm.del...@gmail.com wrote:
    On Saturday, January 22, 2022 at 5:38:03 AM UTC-5, bill....@ieee.org wrote:
    On Saturday, January 22, 2022 at 6:41:48 PM UTC+11, gnuarm.del...@gmail.com wrote:
    On Saturday, January 22, 2022 at 1:01:18 AM UTC-5, Jasen Betts wrote:
    On 2022-01-21, John Larkin <jlarkin@highland_atwork_technology.com> wrote:
    On Fri, 21 Jan 2022 20:46:49 -0000 (UTC), Cydrome Leader <pres...@MUNGEpanix.com> wrote:
    John Larkin <jlarkin@highland_atwork_technology.com> wrote:
    On Wed, 19 Jan 2022 19:30:11 -0500, "Tom Del Rosso" <fizzbin...@that-google-mail-domain.com> wrote:
    jla...@highlandsniptechnology.com wrote:
    <snip>
    You didn't factor in the transportation cost of the electricity. The losses are not large, but it starts eating into the CoP margin. The real issue is the cost of the installation. A heat pump requires backup heat for when it's not very
    effective such as low temps but also for removing ice from the coils. To do that they run it in air conditioner mode and run the backup heat to keep the house from cooling off.
    Actually, they don't or at least they don't have to. In Australia most air-conditioning systems as touted as "reverse cycle systems". You can run the compressor in reverse so it while it can cool the house in summer, it can also be used to warm
    it in winter. This doesn't require any mechanical reconfiguration (or at least nothing that asks me to do more than select the right option on the controller). If you want to de-ice the coils you reverse-cycle it briefly. Cools the house a little in the
    process, but not for long enough for you to notice.

    You must keep the heat low in Australia then. Deicing does very much blow cool air through the home unless you aren't using forced air heat.
    You don't have to do it for long - just long enough to turn the bulky frost into water. If it then freezes to clear ice it doesn't insulate the outside heat exchange to any perceptible extent.
    You are being silly now. You don't remove the ice in a few seconds.

    Clear ice isn't a problem - it's not a good insulator compared with the static boundary layer of air just above it. Fluffy frost is, because it reduces air circulation. There's not much water involved, so it doesn't take long to melt it down to liquid
    water which can run off.

    It takes a bit of time. Even so, no one likes having cold air blown on them in the winter time. You are talking as if this has to do with bringing down the temperature of the house, it doesn't. It has to do with the furnace blowing cold air rather than
    hot air.

    Heat pumps aren't furnaces. You've got to pump the gaseous working fluid out to the heat exchanger in the indoor room where it can condense and release heat into the room. If you don't want to use one of the room heat exchangers to boil off the
    refrigerant that has heated up the outside radiator, use one in a more isolated indoor space which you can let cool off a bit without worrying anybody, or maybe even a electric heater. Wittering on as if heat pumps work the same way as furnaces is a bit
    silly.

    Cold drafts are something you try to prevent in cold weather.

    No one likes cold air from their heating system,

    They don't get enough of it to notice.
    In this country that is not the case. Maybe the temps never get cold enough downunder for this to matter. The original objection to heat pumps when they first started to be used much in the 70s or 80s was the fact that they don't blow warm air. An oil
    burner blows warm air that feels good. The heat pumps produced air that was barely above room temperature and felt cold because it was below body temp.

    Wanting a heat pump to work the same way as a furnace is pretty silly.

    They eventually reduced that so the air from the vents actually feels warm now. But when it first comes on it blows cold air until the system warms up.

    Why would it need to blow air before the surface it was blowing the air over was condensing enough refrigerant to emit heat? That sounds like incompetent design (or somebody cheap-skating on temperature sensors).

    Better heat systems use a two speed fan that blows slowly at first to minimize this as well as continuing to blow after the pump is turned off to remove residual coil heat... without blowing air that feels cold.

    Even better systems would have an infinitely variable fan speed. You do seem to be talking about the limitations of cheap/incompetent design rather than anything fundamental

    Suggesting that no one cares about the cold air that is *actually* cold, below room temperature cold is pure BS. Why else would they go to so much trouble to prevent blowing room temperature air from a heat pump much less colder air?

    Because they hadn't thought about what they were doing ?

    so they use auxiliary heat (usually straight resistance heating) to prevent this. I suppose Australians are tougher material or just can't afford the heating coils.

    I was making the point that heat pumps can work both ways. There are bits of Australia that get below freezing in winter, mostly skiing resorts, but I've not lived there.

    Doesn't matter if the outside temps are below freezing. The heat pump coils have to be well colder than the outside air to work. The worst case is in a light rain, just above freezing. You can get a large build up of ice before the defrost cycle kicks
    in which takes time to remove.

    You might, if your system had been designed by an idiot.

    It has snowed three times in the town where I grew up - once in the eighteen years that I lived there and twice since then, and I did get to hear about it (though I was living in England when the second snow fall happened - an Australian post-doc I
    played hockey with told me about it).

    I'm glad you got to see snow. It's nice as long as you can stay home and not drive to work.

    I lived in the Netherlands for nineteen years. We typically got a snow cover for a week or so at least once every winter. I lived in the UK for 22 years, where snow falls are rarer, and more disruptive when they do happen

    Ice is much worse, but they usually close businesses when that happens. My CM in NC was closed Friday because of it.

    Snow cover has nasty habit of turning into sheet ice after people have driven across it. Main roads tend to be kept ice free, but it takes work and specialised equipment.

    --
    Bill Sloman, Sydney

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Cydrome Leader@21:1/5 to Anthony William Sloman on Sun Jan 23 07:10:52 2022
    Anthony William Sloman <bill.sloman@ieee.org> wrote:
    On Saturday, January 22, 2022 at 1:34:12 PM UTC+11, Cydrome Leader wrote:
    John Larkin <jlarkin@highland_atwork_technology.com> wrote:
    On Fri, 21 Jan 2022 20:46:49 -0000 (UTC), Cydrome Leader <pres...@MUNGEpanix.com> wrote:
    John Larkin <jlarkin@highland_atwork_technology.com> wrote:
    On Wed, 19 Jan 2022 19:30:11 -0500, "Tom Del Rosso" <fizzbin...@that-google-mail-domain.com> wrote:
    jla...@highlandsniptechnology.com wrote:

    <snip>
    '
    Resistive electric heating would be terrible. A heat pump is better.
    that's what the green retards all want. Resistive heating, or the fantasy of >> heat pumps working anywhere in the US.

    The retard here is Cydrome Leader, who seems to think that here is only one kind of heat pump.

    With the right working fluid, and the right design, heat pumps can work anywhere or at least anywhere where anybody lives.

    Dear Dumbass, go ahead and name two brands of heatpumps that provide at least 100kBTU of heating capacity with outdoor temps of negative F. Be sure to hand over the name of the authorized installers within say 25 miles of or zip code 60601. Thanks. I'll give them a call and get some quotes.



    If they are working a across a large temperature difference, you don't as many watts of heat per watt of electrical input as you do with a smaller difference, and they aren't as attractive, but they still work.

    Thermodynamically, a 1000c or whatever gas flame is inefficiently
    coupled to heat house air to 25c. An ideal steam generator and an
    ideal heat pump would be far more efficient use of gas.

    It's perfectly coupled to transfer massive amounts of heat. You sure won't >> be running any perfect steam boiler off 220F degree "flames".
    I don't know about the real life numbers.

    Instead of solar panels, we could have gas fired steam engines, where
    the discharge heat warms our domestic air and hot water, and we get
    free electricity from the otherwise wasted delta-t. That works when
    the sun is down.

    I hope you do realize modern gas fired furnaces are something like 95%
    efficient. There is no "waste" heat to gather, and if you do gather it's
    going to be of little use. The exhaust is so cool they run it though PVC
    pipes which are too flimsy to even handle drinking water.

    I considered adding a heat exchanger from our heater flue gas to the
    water heater inlet, but the payoff is small for the effort. In our
    climate, we don't run the heater a lot.

    Bad idea, unless you want corrosion and CO in your living space.

    The heat exchanger won't leak carbon monoxide. If you condense out water onto the flue gas side of you heat exchanger you do have to pick construction materials that won't corrode. With Cydrome Leader's design skills that might not happen, but it
    should,

    Granted this site is suspiciously professional and vague, but it's from the >> real emerson electric, so trusty as far as mega conglomerates with little
    interest in consumers goes.

    https://www.ac-heatingconnect.com/homeowners/hvac-midwest-whats-best-system-home/

    so is why we don't use heatpumps in the midwest. They're useless is the
    short story. Nothing produces massive amounts of cheap heat like burning gas >> in a furnace. Even if you could partially augment your heating with a
    heatpump, I doubt it would be cheaper than gas. Plus, furnaces are cheaper >> to replace than central air systems, and a heatpump is basically central
    air with some reversing valves to fail. Yeah, there are minisplit systems, >> but those are janky to start with, even as a pure AC unit.

    Or to put it more briefly, Cydrome Leader doesnm't know what he is talking about.

    Start with my challenge #1 and we'll work from there.

    If you have the bucks, geothermal heatpumps are fine. I've seen a completely >> decked out system of the sort, but it was built by retired engineer, clearly >> as a "project" more than anything else. The up front costs must have been
    immense with something like a mile of buried tubing outside, somewhere.

    It's 22F outside here right now, so even if I had a heatpump, it would be
    frozen over outside and the gas furnace would still be needed.

    Why wound it be "frozen over"? If it's cooler than the outside air it might pick up a layer of frost, but reversing the heat flow briefly to melt the frost for long enough for it to drip off is trivial to implement. As usual Cydrome Leader doesn't know enough about what he is talking about.

    I'd wager this old clown can't even describe the refrigeration cycle without help from ask jeeves or a trip to the library.

    They just don't make any sense here.

    If you haven't got much sense to start with

    Your geography and energy costs will vary. Energy here is cheap. We have all the electric and all the pipelines.

    But not all that many super-insulated houses. Cydrome Leader isn't the only local who hasn't got much sense.

    Cleary the mold in your super-insulated house has rotted your brain.

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Cydrome Leader@21:1/5 to Anthony William Sloman on Sun Jan 23 07:19:59 2022
    Anthony William Sloman <bill.sloman@ieee.org> wrote:
    On Saturday, January 22, 2022 at 6:41:48 PM UTC+11, gnuarm.del...@gmail.com wrote:
    On Saturday, January 22, 2022 at 1:01:18 AM UTC-5, Jasen Betts wrote:
    On 2022-01-21, John Larkin <jlarkin@highland_atwork_technology.com> wrote: >> > > On Fri, 21 Jan 2022 20:46:49 -0000 (UTC), Cydrome Leader <pres...@MUNGEpanix.com> wrote:
    John Larkin <jlarkin@highland_atwork_technology.com> wrote:
    On Wed, 19 Jan 2022 19:30:11 -0500, "Tom Del Rosso" <fizzbin...@that-google-mail-domain.com> wrote:
    jla...@highlandsniptechnology.com wrote:

    <snip>

    You didn't factor in the transportation cost of the electricity. The losses are not large, but it starts eating into the CoP margin. The real issue is the cost of the installation. A heat pump requires backup heat for when it's not very effective such
    as low temps but also for removing ice from the coils. To do that they run it in air conditioner mode and run the backup heat to keep the house from cooling off.

    Actually, they don't or at least they don't have to. In Australia most air-conditioning systems as touted as "reverse cycle systems". You can run the compressor in reverse so it while it can cool the house in summer, it

    Oh really? How do they run the compressor in reverse? flip the leads? Let's
    all take notes as the guru of heat pumps enlightens us once again.

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Cydrome Leader@21:1/5 to jlarkin@highlandsniptechnology.com on Sun Jan 23 07:34:49 2022
    jlarkin@highlandsniptechnology.com wrote:
    On Fri, 21 Jan 2022 19:48:30 -0500, "Tom Del Rosso" <fizzbintuesday@that-google-mail-domain.com> wrote:

    John Larkin wrote:
    On Fri, 21 Jan 2022 20:46:49 -0000 (UTC), Cydrome Leader
    <presence@MUNGEpanix.com> wrote:

    John Larkin <jlarkin@highland_atwork_technology.com> wrote:
    On Wed, 19 Jan 2022 19:30:11 -0500, "Tom Del Rosso"
    <fizzbintuesday@that-google-mail-domain.com> wrote:

    jlarkin@highlandsniptechnology.com wrote:

    It's much worse on a long mountain uphill in a blizzard. You can't >>>>>>> even afford to run the heater.

    It doesn't matter because you won't have any type of car when they >>>>>> finally ban ICE with no intention of building the 200GW of
    generator capacity needed to replace them with EV's. Hopefully
    they'll establish a bus route up that mountain.

    Once the power grids start to collapse, and people can't charge
    their Teslas or heat their homes in the winter (which is happening
    already) there will be an anti-renewable political reaction.

    Of course, experts tell us we'll all be dead in nine years.

    I had to reming some folks that were excited about electric only
    homes that have no gas (some sort of commiefornia and NYC movement)
    that their electric probably comes from gas and and mayber 18% coal,
    but with needing least 20% more than they'd need for on-site heating
    need due to transmission losses.

    It was crickets after that.


    Resistive electric heating would be terrible. A heat pump is better.

    Thermodynamically, a 1000c or whatever gas flame is inefficiently
    coupled to heat house air to 25c. An ideal steam generator and an
    ideal heat pump would be far more efficient use of gas.

    I don't know about the real life numbers.

    Instead of solar panels, we could have gas fired steam engines, where
    the discharge heat warms our domestic air and hot water, and we get
    free electricity from the otherwise wasted delta-t. That works when
    the sun is down.

    I considered adding a heat exchanger from our heater flue gas to the
    water heater inlet, but the payoff is small for the effort. In our
    climate, we don't run the heater a lot.

    The reason you see steam rising from manholes, and sometimes cracks in
    the sidewalk, in Manhattan, is the island's central steam heat.
    Manhattan uses so much electricity that it needs several power plants >>around the perimeter of the island, which used to be oil fired but I
    think they're all gas now. The steam exits the turbines and is piped >>through the streets to heat buildings, clean dishes in retaurants, and I >>hear cheese makers use it somehow. I have no idea what they bill for it.

    I did some work on Moscow's hot water system, measuring the thermal
    energy in/out of a big site.

    Moscow was interesting. Most apartment buildings were overheated and unmeasured. When it got too hot, people would open their windows.

    That's standard fare for any large steam heat setup- let everyone roast and open the windows.

    District heating is one this the commies have figured out. The mega heating plants in large Polish cities are fascinating.

    In Chicago there are still some interesting district heating and cooling
    plants in downtown. The large schools and hospitals maintain their own and
    some still do cogeneration as well. Once the operation is large enough there's no reason to not extract ALL the energy in any form you can.

    The difference between us and NYC is we have qualified engineers and maintenance people. The norm of steam blowing out of parking cones bolted to the streets in NYC is some third world nonsense only animals who can't figure out how to use dumpsters tolerate or accept.

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Anthony William Sloman@21:1/5 to Cydrome Leader on Sun Jan 23 02:01:07 2022
    On Sunday, January 23, 2022 at 6:34:56 PM UTC+11, Cydrome Leader wrote:
    jla...@highlandsniptechnology.com wrote:
    On Fri, 21 Jan 2022 19:48:30 -0500, "Tom Del Rosso" <fizzbin...@that-google-mail-domain.com> wrote:

    John Larkin wrote:
    On Fri, 21 Jan 2022 20:46:49 -0000 (UTC), Cydrome Leader
    <pres...@MUNGEpanix.com> wrote:

    John Larkin <jlarkin@highland_atwork_technology.com> wrote:
    On Wed, 19 Jan 2022 19:30:11 -0500, "Tom Del Rosso"
    <fizzbin...@that-google-mail-domain.com> wrote:

    jla...@highlandsniptechnology.com wrote:

    It's much worse on a long mountain uphill in a blizzard. You can't >>>>>>> even afford to run the heater.

    It doesn't matter because you won't have any type of car when they >>>>>> finally ban ICE with no intention of building the 200GW of
    generator capacity needed to replace them with EV's. Hopefully
    they'll establish a bus route up that mountain.

    Once the power grids start to collapse, and people can't charge
    their Teslas or heat their homes in the winter (which is happening >>>>> already) there will be an anti-renewable political reaction.

    Of course, experts tell us we'll all be dead in nine years.

    I had to reming some folks that were excited about electric only
    homes that have no gas (some sort of commiefornia and NYC movement) >>>> that their electric probably comes from gas and and mayber 18% coal, >>>> but with needing least 20% more than they'd need for on-site heating >>>> need due to transmission losses.

    It was crickets after that.


    Resistive electric heating would be terrible. A heat pump is better.

    Thermodynamically, a 1000c or whatever gas flame is inefficiently
    coupled to heat house air to 25c. An ideal steam generator and an
    ideal heat pump would be far more efficient use of gas.

    I don't know about the real life numbers.

    Instead of solar panels, we could have gas fired steam engines, where >>> the discharge heat warms our domestic air and hot water, and we get
    free electricity from the otherwise wasted delta-t. That works when
    the sun is down.

    I considered adding a heat exchanger from our heater flue gas to the
    water heater inlet, but the payoff is small for the effort. In our
    climate, we don't run the heater a lot.

    The reason you see steam rising from manholes, and sometimes cracks in >>the sidewalk, in Manhattan, is the island's central steam heat. >>Manhattan uses so much electricity that it needs several power plants >>around the perimeter of the island, which used to be oil fired but I >>think they're all gas now. The steam exits the turbines and is piped >>through the streets to heat buildings, clean dishes in retaurants, and I >>hear cheese makers use it somehow. I have no idea what they bill for it.

    I did some work on Moscow's hot water system, measuring the thermal
    energy in/out of a big site.

    Moscow was interesting. Most apartment buildings were overheated and unmeasured. When it got too hot, people would open their windows.
    That's standard fare for any large steam heat setup- let everyone roast and open the windows.

    It's a bit silly. Thermostatic radiator valves have been around since the 1980's at least - I had one in the mid-1980's from Honeywell that was electronic (battery operated) with an internal clock that could change the set point once or twice a day - so
    the bedroom was cool enough for sleeping at night, and not too chilly to get dressed in in the morning.

    District heating is one this the commies have figured out. The mega heating plants in large Polish cities are fascinating.

    Not just the commies. The West Germans and the Dutch do it too

    In Chicago there are still some interesting district heating and cooling plants in downtown. The large schools and hospitals maintain their own and some still do co-generation as well. Once the operation is large enough there's
    no reason to not extract ALL the energy in any form you can.

    The difference between us and NYC is we have qualified engineers and maintenance people. The norm of steam blowing out of parking cones bolted to the streets in NYC is some third world nonsense only animals who can't figure
    out how to use dumpsters tolerate or accept.

    There's probably not a shortage of qualified engineers or maintenance people in New York either. There may be a shortage of politicians willing to spend tax money on hiring them - the US isn't short of third world politicians, and Cydrome Leader sounds
    just like an example of the breed.

    --
    Bill Sloman, Sydney

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Anthony William Sloman@21:1/5 to Cydrome Leader on Sun Jan 23 02:09:21 2022
    On Sunday, January 23, 2022 at 6:20:38 PM UTC+11, Cydrome Leader wrote:
    Anthony William Sloman <bill....@ieee.org> wrote:
    On Saturday, January 22, 2022 at 6:41:48 PM UTC+11, gnuarm.del...@gmail.com wrote:
    On Saturday, January 22, 2022 at 1:01:18 AM UTC-5, Jasen Betts wrote:
    On 2022-01-21, John Larkin <jlarkin@highland_atwork_technology.com> wrote:
    On Fri, 21 Jan 2022 20:46:49 -0000 (UTC), Cydrome Leader <pres...@MUNGEpanix.com> wrote:
    John Larkin <jlarkin@highland_atwork_technology.com> wrote:
    On Wed, 19 Jan 2022 19:30:11 -0500, "Tom Del Rosso" <fizzbin...@that-google-mail-domain.com> wrote:
    jla...@highlandsniptechnology.com wrote:

    <snip>

    You didn't factor in the transportation cost of the electricity. The losses are not large, but it starts eating into the CoP margin. The real issue is the cost of the installation. A heat pump requires backup heat for when it's not very effective
    such as low temps but also for removing ice from the coils. To do that they run it in air conditioner mode and run the backup heat to keep the house from cooling off.

    Actually, they don't or at least they don't have to. In Australia most air-conditioning systems as touted as "reverse cycle systems". You can run the compressor in reverse so it while it can cool the house in summer, it.

    Oh really? How do they run the compressor in reverse? flip the leads? Let's all take notes as the guru of heat pumps enlightens us once again.

    There are all sort of options. Using a pair of valves to flip the intakes and outlets would work. If the compressor is being spun by a synchronous motor you could use electronics to make it spin in the opposite direction. I haven't dismanted my
    Mitsubishi reverse cycle air-conditioner to find out how they do it - it would invalidate my guarantee if I did, and I don't really need to know. Cydrome Leader does - he's advanced enough fatuous misconceptions to make it clear that he hasn't got a
    clue.

    --
    Bill Sloman, Sydney

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From David Brown@21:1/5 to Rick C on Sun Jan 23 12:49:20 2022
    On 22/01/2022 19:58, Rick C wrote:
    On Saturday, January 22, 2022 at 11:07:14 AM UTC-5, David Brown
    wrote:
    On 22/01/2022 15:57, Rick C wrote:
    On Saturday, January 22, 2022 at 4:36:03 AM UTC-5, Tom Gardner
    wrote:
    On 22/01/22 02:30, Rick C wrote:
    On Friday, January 21, 2022 at 6:47:21 AM UTC-5, Martin Brown
    wrote:
    So high in fact that some major UK industries shut down
    production completely which then caused a nationwide
    shortage of CO2. They had to be bribed by the government to
    restart fertiliser production and have been charging a
    massive premium off their customers ever since.

    https://www.ft.com/content/991db1b7-ab0e-49fb-999c-3bf5bef2a93a



    Can't get past the pay wall. But I think this is a joke,
    right? CO2 production???
    No joke. Widely publicised. Wide gaps on supermarket shelves
    where carbonated drinks should be displayed.

    I don't think it quite reached the stage of screwing meat
    production where CO2 is used to stun/kill the animals. Brexit
    and "reclaiming control of our borders was sufficient for that.


    Why would it ever have any impact on anything? Is the UK
    incapable of changing gears and buying CO2 from other countries?
    Maybe you need a channel pipeline to transport it? LOL

    The clown in charge in the UK has disconnected the country from the
    rest of the world. Yes, it should surely be possible to import CO₂
    from other countries. But it would take them months to figure out
    the red tape involved and who should pay which tolls, tariffs or
    taxes. No European drivers will drive their trucks into the UK, and
    the UK doesn't have enough drivers to spare. And European suppliers
    would mostly be quite happy to let the UK suffer after the shitty
    way the UK government has treated the rest of Europe.

    The current government in the UK couldn't organise a piss-up in a
    brewery, and seem determined to screw up the country as much as
    possible while partying against the rules.

    Maybe we should lend them Trmp? Would that be an improvement? We
    certainly have no use for him, spare parts for an obsolete machine,
    eh?


    Trump and Bojo have significant similarities. They are both
    narcissistic, have a complete disregard for the truth (it's not just
    that they lie - they really don't care if what they say is true or not),
    care nothing for their country or the people in it, view themselves as
    above the law, reward loyalty richly and punish (perceived) disloyalty
    harshly, and surround themselves with sycophants. They both consider themselves to be experts in all they do, and to know better than the
    /real/ experts. Both are evil bullies. Trump has a carefully managed
    hairdo designed to look like a dead squirrel lives on his head. Bojo
    has a carefully managed hairdo that would embarrass any self-respecting scarecrow. I could go on.

    But there are also differences - Bojo is actually quite intelligent,
    while Trump is a complete moron.

    You managed to get rid of Trump (though not his memory, legacy or
    groupies), the UK has still got Bojo. And Trump was more of a one-man catastrophe, while many of the UK's current problems stretch much
    further back - Brexit in particular was not of Bojo's creation. The
    Brexit referendum was before he was prime minister, and he was
    originally against it, until he figured out that he could gain political
    power by supporting it. (That's not to say that the USA does not also
    suffer from long-term social and political problems with roots far
    deeper than just the last presidency or two. If we try to dig up all
    the major troubles the USA and the UK have, we'll be here all day!)

    Overall, I don't think Trump would make the UK situation much worse -
    but he would not be capable of helping it either. Anyway, we have
    enough of his lying, cheating, tax-dodging and environmentally damaging
    golf courses already.

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Rick C@21:1/5 to bill....@ieee.org on Sun Jan 23 03:54:09 2022
    On Sunday, January 23, 2022 at 1:42:21 AM UTC-5, bill....@ieee.org wrote:
    On Sunday, January 23, 2022 at 2:39:38 PM UTC+11, gnuarm.del...@gmail.com wrote:
    On Saturday, January 22, 2022 at 8:48:26 PM UTC-5, bill....@ieee.org wrote:
    On Sunday, January 23, 2022 at 2:06:19 AM UTC+11, gnuarm.del...@gmail.com wrote:
    On Saturday, January 22, 2022 at 5:38:03 AM UTC-5, bill....@ieee.org wrote:
    On Saturday, January 22, 2022 at 6:41:48 PM UTC+11, gnuarm.del...@gmail.com wrote:
    On Saturday, January 22, 2022 at 1:01:18 AM UTC-5, Jasen Betts wrote:
    On 2022-01-21, John Larkin <jlarkin@highland_atwork_technology.com> wrote:
    On Fri, 21 Jan 2022 20:46:49 -0000 (UTC), Cydrome Leader <pres...@MUNGEpanix.com> wrote:
    John Larkin <jlarkin@highland_atwork_technology.com> wrote: >>> On Wed, 19 Jan 2022 19:30:11 -0500, "Tom Del Rosso" <fizzbin...@that-google-mail-domain.com> wrote:
    jla...@highlandsniptechnology.com wrote:
    <snip>
    You didn't factor in the transportation cost of the electricity. The losses are not large, but it starts eating into the CoP margin. The real issue is the cost of the installation. A heat pump requires backup heat for when it's not very
    effective such as low temps but also for removing ice from the coils. To do that they run it in air conditioner mode and run the backup heat to keep the house from cooling off.
    Actually, they don't or at least they don't have to. In Australia most air-conditioning systems as touted as "reverse cycle systems". You can run the compressor in reverse so it while it can cool the house in summer, it can also be used to warm
    it in winter. This doesn't require any mechanical reconfiguration (or at least nothing that asks me to do more than select the right option on the controller). If you want to de-ice the coils you reverse-cycle it briefly. Cools the house a little in the
    process, but not for long enough for you to notice.

    You must keep the heat low in Australia then. Deicing does very much blow cool air through the home unless you aren't using forced air heat.
    You don't have to do it for long - just long enough to turn the bulky frost into water. If it then freezes to clear ice it doesn't insulate the outside heat exchange to any perceptible extent.
    You are being silly now. You don't remove the ice in a few seconds.
    Clear ice isn't a problem - it's not a good insulator compared with the static boundary layer of air just above it. Fluffy frost is, because it reduces air circulation. There's not much water involved, so it doesn't take long to melt it down to liquid
    water which can run off.
    It takes a bit of time. Even so, no one likes having cold air blown on them in the winter time. You are talking as if this has to do with bringing down the temperature of the house, it doesn't. It has to do with the furnace blowing cold air rather
    than hot air.
    Heat pumps aren't furnaces. You've got to pump the gaseous working fluid out to the heat exchanger in the indoor room where it can condense and release heat into the room. If you don't want to use one of the room heat exchangers to boil off the
    refrigerant that has heated up the outside radiator, use one in a more isolated indoor space which you can let cool off a bit without worrying anybody, or maybe even a electric heater. Wittering on as if heat pumps work the same way as furnaces is a bit
    silly.

    You need to look up the definition of "furnace". A heat pump is a furnace. Either way, you are being silly about this, digging in your heels rather than discussing the issue. The point is a heat pump system is going to use the same air space for
    drawing heat for defrosting as it heats. Anything else would be prohibitively expensive to run the ductwork or dampers or other silly notions. Maybe they do such things downunder, but not in the civilized world. You mention electric heater... yes,
    that is what I said they do, they run the auxiliary heat (often electric resistance heating) to prevent blowing cold air on the occupants. I'm glad you finally understand and can now stop wittering on.


    Cold drafts are something you try to prevent in cold weather.

    No one likes cold air from their heating system,

    They don't get enough of it to notice.
    In this country that is not the case. Maybe the temps never get cold enough downunder for this to matter. The original objection to heat pumps when they first started to be used much in the 70s or 80s was the fact that they don't blow warm air. An
    oil burner blows warm air that feels good. The heat pumps produced air that was barely above room temperature and felt cold because it was below body temp.
    Wanting a heat pump to work the same way as a furnace is pretty silly.

    They eventually reduced that so the air from the vents actually feels warm now. But when it first comes on it blows cold air until the system warms up.

    Why would it need to blow air before the surface it was blowing the air over was condensing enough refrigerant to emit heat? That sounds like incompetent design (or somebody cheap-skating on temperature sensors).

    Because they try to meet price points, yes, being cheap because people buy on price, not obscure technical details. Besides we are talking about defrosting where the coils start cold and get colder.


    Better heat systems use a two speed fan that blows slowly at first to minimize this as well as continuing to blow after the pump is turned off to remove residual coil heat... without blowing air that feels cold.
    Even better systems would have an infinitely variable fan speed. You do seem to be talking about the limitations of cheap/incompetent design rather than anything fundamental

    Lol! You actually don't know much about this do you? This is not one of your millikelvin devices. They actually have to sell these systems. I am talking about what is used in homes, not research experiments.


    Suggesting that no one cares about the cold air that is *actually* cold, below room temperature cold is pure BS. Why else would they go to so much trouble to prevent blowing room temperature air from a heat pump much less colder air?
    Because they hadn't thought about what they were doing ?
    so they use auxiliary heat (usually straight resistance heating) to prevent this. I suppose Australians are tougher material or just can't afford the heating coils.

    I was making the point that heat pumps can work both ways. There are bits of Australia that get below freezing in winter, mostly skiing resorts, but I've not lived there.

    Doesn't matter if the outside temps are below freezing. The heat pump coils have to be well colder than the outside air to work. The worst case is in a light rain, just above freezing. You can get a large build up of ice before the defrost cycle
    kicks in which takes time to remove.
    You might, if your system had been designed by an idiot.

    Ok, you have stopped talking about the issues and now are insulting anyone and everyone involved without addressing any of the technical issues.

    Sometimes I wonder if this is about mental decline as you age. You do seem to have a regular pattern of discussing facts, followed by entrenchment and restating the same facts (rather than a better discussion of new facts others have pointed out),
    followed by insults. What is going on that you can't just discuss the issues rationally rather than getting defensive and lashing out?

    --

    Rick C.

    ++-+ Get 1,000 miles of free Supercharging
    ++-+ Tesla referral code - https://ts.la/richard11209

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Anthony William Sloman@21:1/5 to gnuarm.del...@gmail.com on Sun Jan 23 06:14:27 2022
    On Sunday, January 23, 2022 at 10:54:13 PM UTC+11, gnuarm.del...@gmail.com wrote:
    On Sunday, January 23, 2022 at 1:42:21 AM UTC-5, bill....@ieee.org wrote:
    On Sunday, January 23, 2022 at 2:39:38 PM UTC+11, gnuarm.del...@gmail.com wrote:
    On Saturday, January 22, 2022 at 8:48:26 PM UTC-5, bill....@ieee.org wrote:
    On Sunday, January 23, 2022 at 2:06:19 AM UTC+11, gnuarm.del...@gmail.com wrote:
    On Saturday, January 22, 2022 at 5:38:03 AM UTC-5, bill....@ieee.org wrote:
    On Saturday, January 22, 2022 at 6:41:48 PM UTC+11, gnuarm.del...@gmail.com wrote:
    On Saturday, January 22, 2022 at 1:01:18 AM UTC-5, Jasen Betts wrote:
    On 2022-01-21, John Larkin <jlarkin@highland_atwork_technology.com> wrote:
    On Fri, 21 Jan 2022 20:46:49 -0000 (UTC), Cydrome Leader <pres...@MUNGEpanix.com> wrote:
    John Larkin <jlarkin@highland_atwork_technology.com> wrote: >>> On Wed, 19 Jan 2022 19:30:11 -0500, "Tom Del Rosso" <fizzbin...@that-google-mail-domain.com> wrote:
    jla...@highlandsniptechnology.com wrote:
    <snip>
    You didn't factor in the transportation cost of the electricity. The losses are not large, but it starts eating into the CoP margin. The real issue is the cost of the installation. A heat pump requires backup heat for when it's not very
    effective such as low temps but also for removing ice from the coils. To do that they run it in air conditioner mode and run the backup heat to keep the house from cooling off.
    Actually, they don't or at least they don't have to. In Australia most air-conditioning systems as touted as "reverse cycle systems". You can run the compressor in reverse so it while it can cool the house in summer, it can also be used to
    warm it in winter. This doesn't require any mechanical reconfiguration (or at least nothing that asks me to do more than select the right option on the controller). If you want to de-ice the coils you reverse-cycle it briefly. Cools the house a little in
    the process, but not for long enough for you to notice.

    You must keep the heat low in Australia then. Deicing does very much blow cool air through the home unless you aren't using forced air heat.
    You don't have to do it for long - just long enough to turn the bulky frost into water. If it then freezes to clear ice it doesn't insulate the outside heat exchange to any perceptible extent.
    You are being silly now. You don't remove the ice in a few seconds.

    Clear ice isn't a problem - it's not a good insulator compared with the static boundary layer of air just above it. Fluffy frost is, because it reduces air circulation. There's not much water involved, so it doesn't take long to melt it down to
    liquid water which can run off.

    It takes a bit of time. Even so, no one likes having cold air blown on them in the winter time. You are talking as if this has to do with bringing down the temperature of the house, it doesn't. It has to do with the furnace blowing cold air rather
    than hot air.

    Heat pumps aren't furnaces. You've got to pump the gaseous working fluid out to the heat exchanger in the indoor room where it can condense and release heat into the room. If you don't want to use one of the room heat exchangers to boil off the
    refrigerant that has heated up the outside radiator, use one in a more isolated indoor space which you can let cool off a bit without worrying anybody, or maybe even a electric heater. Wittering on as if heat pumps work the same way as furnaces is a bit
    silly.

    You need to look up the definition of "furnace".

    "a container that is heated to a very high temperature, so that substances that are put inside it, such as metal, will melt or burn"

    Americans also use the term to cover "an appliance fired by gas or oil in which air or water is heated to be circulated throughout a building in a heating system"
    which is a bit strange. You can talk about electric furnaces, but the core meaning is an enclosed area which gets hot.

    A heat pump compresses a compressible (and eventually condensable) gas, but the heat transfer takes place where the working fluid condenses or evaporates, which isn't inside the compressor, which is the core of the heat pump, but no kind of furnace.

    A heat pump is a furnace.

    You may like to think so, but you happen to be wrong.

    Either way, you are being silly about this, digging in your heels rather than discussing the issue. The point is a heat pump system is going to use the same air space for drawing heat for defrosting as it heats.

    It doesn't have to. Our air-conditioning system has three different heat exchangers inside the apartment - one in the living room and the other two in the bedrooms, and one outside which acts as the heat sink or source. Which one might get cooled to warm
    up the outdoor heat exchanger would be a matter of choice.

    Anything else would be prohibitively expensive to run the ductwork or dampers or other silly notions.

    All three indoor heat exchanges have their own pipework to the compressor and the outdoor heat exchanger, and separate controls that regulate (at least potentially) different temperatures for each target room . They wouldn't be any use if they didn't.

    I don't know what kind of antiquate relic you think are talking about.

    Maybe they do such things down under, but not in the civilized world.

    It's a Mitsubishi system, imported from Japan (which is sort of up over from us). I think you can get similar systems from Siemens, made in Germany. What you seem to be saying is that the US isn't part of the civilised world - which is easy enough to
    believe after Trump. After all, you don't even have universal health care.

    You mention electric heater... yes, that is what I said they do, they run the auxiliary heat (often electric resistance heating) to prevent blowing cold air on the occupants.

    It's a clumsy option, and a bit wasteful. but it would work. It certainly isn't essential, which is what you seem to want to claim.

    I'm glad you finally understand and can now stop wittering on.

    Cold drafts are something you try to prevent in cold weather.

    No one likes cold air from their heating system,

    They don't get enough of it to notice.

    In this country that is not the case. Maybe the temps never get cold enough downunder for this to matter. The original objection to heat pumps when they first started to be used much in the 70s or 80s was the fact that they don't blow warm air. An
    oil burner blows warm air that feels good. The heat pumps produced air that was barely above room temperature and felt cold because it was below body temp.

    Wanting a heat pump to work the same way as a furnace is pretty silly.

    They eventually reduced that so the air from the vents actually feels warm now. But when it first comes on it blows cold air until the system warms up.

    Why would it need to blow air before the surface it was blowing the air over was condensing enough refrigerant to emit heat? That sounds like incompetent design (or somebody cheap-skating on temperature sensors).

    Because they try to meet price points, yes, being cheap because people buy on price, not obscure technical details. Besides we are talking about defrosting where the coils start cold and get colder.

    People buy on performance as well as price. I saw one firm go to the wall in a few years because the boss was more interested in making his machine easier to sell than reliable in use. One of his engineers got a job someplace else and got the chance to
    put something together that worked just as well and kept on working, and ended up with 98% of the market (according to Mike Engelhardt of LTSpice fame, who'd worked for him before he joined Linear Technology). I got stuck with developing something that
    was easier to sell because it worked better, and while we got the better performance, we didn't get it fast enough.

    Better heat systems use a two speed fan that blows slowly at first to minimize this as well as continuing to blow after the pump is turned off to remove residual coil heat... without blowing air that feels cold.

    Even better systems would have an infinitely variable fan speed. You do seem to be talking about the limitations of cheap/incompetent design rather than anything fundamental.

    Lol! You actually don't know much about this do you? This is not one of your millikelvin devices. They actually have to sell these systems. I am talking about what is used in homes, not research experiments.

    I'm talking about the commercial system we got installed in our apartment a few years ago. There's nothing remotely researchy about it. And my milli-kevlin system was sold for doing routine lab-work, year in, year out. We swapped out the pumped coolant
    circulation for a heat pipe because the heat pipe kept on working for longer without needing any attention (as is mentioned in the paper).

    Suggesting that no one cares about the cold air that is *actually* cold, below room temperature cold is pure BS. Why else would they go to so much trouble to prevent blowing room temperature air from a heat pump much less colder air?

    Because they hadn't thought about what they were doing?

    so they use auxiliary heat (usually straight resistance heating) to prevent this. I suppose Australians are tougher material or just can't afford the heating coils.

    I was making the point that heat pumps can work both ways. There are bits of Australia that get below freezing in winter, mostly skiing resorts, but I've not lived there.

    Doesn't matter if the outside temps are below freezing. The heat pump coils have to be well colder than the outside air to work. The worst case is in a light rain, just above freezing. You can get a large build up of ice before the defrost cycle
    kicks in which takes time to remove.

    You might, if your system had been designed by an idiot.

    Ok, you have stopped talking about the issues and now are insulting anyone and everyone involved without addressing any of the technical issues.

    You don't seem to understand how heat pumps work, or where the heat actually gets transferred. This does show up in what you post, and I am obliged to comment on it.

    Sometimes I wonder if this is about mental decline as you age.

    This often comes up when somebody is failing to follow an argument. Flyguy seem to think that everybody except him is senile.

    You do seem to have a regular pattern of discussing facts, followed by entrenchment and restating the same facts (rather than a better discussion of new facts others have pointed out), followed by insults.

    Where is the "new fact" that you pointed out? You seem fixed on confusing a heat pump with a burner ( or "furnace" in your slightly odd vocabulary), and seem unwilling to think about where the heat transfers actually take place in a heat-pump based
    system.

    What is going on that you can't just discuss the issues rationally rather than getting defensive and lashing out?

    The problem is that you won't think about what's actually going on, and don't want to realise that your original take on the situation was a somewhat over-simplified.

    --
    Bill Sloman, Sydney

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Cydrome Leader@21:1/5 to Anthony William Sloman on Sun Jan 23 17:58:44 2022
    Anthony William Sloman <bill.sloman@ieee.org> wrote:
    On Sunday, January 23, 2022 at 6:20:38 PM UTC+11, Cydrome Leader wrote:
    Anthony William Sloman <bill....@ieee.org> wrote:
    On Saturday, January 22, 2022 at 6:41:48 PM UTC+11, gnuarm.del...@gmail.com wrote:
    On Saturday, January 22, 2022 at 1:01:18 AM UTC-5, Jasen Betts wrote:
    On 2022-01-21, John Larkin <jlarkin@highland_atwork_technology.com> wrote:
    On Fri, 21 Jan 2022 20:46:49 -0000 (UTC), Cydrome Leader <pres...@MUNGEpanix.com> wrote:
    John Larkin <jlarkin@highland_atwork_technology.com> wrote:
    On Wed, 19 Jan 2022 19:30:11 -0500, "Tom Del Rosso" <fizzbin...@that-google-mail-domain.com> wrote:
    jla...@highlandsniptechnology.com wrote:

    <snip>

    You didn't factor in the transportation cost of the electricity. The losses are not large, but it starts eating into the CoP margin. The real issue is the cost of the installation. A heat pump requires backup heat for when it's not very effective
    such as low temps but also for removing ice from the coils. To do that they run it in air conditioner mode and run the backup heat to keep the house from cooling off.

    Actually, they don't or at least they don't have to. In Australia most
    air-conditioning systems as touted as "reverse cycle systems". You can run >> > the compressor in reverse so it while it can cool the house in summer, it. >>
    Oh really? How do they run the compressor in reverse? flip the leads? Let's >> all take notes as the guru of heat pumps enlightens us once again.

    There are all sort of options. Using a pair of valves to flip the
    intakes and outlets would work. If the compressor is being spun by a synchronous motor you could use electronics to make it spin in the
    opposite direction. I haven't dismanted my Mitsubishi reverse cycle air-conditioner to find out how they do it - it would invalidate my
    guarantee if I did, and I don't really need to know. Cydrome Leader does
    - he's advanced enough fatuous misconceptions to make it clear that he
    hasn't got a clue.

    --
    Bill Sloman, Sydney

    Well, the expert has spoken. There might be a synchronous motor in the compressor and some magic electronics to spin it the other direction.

    Ignore the reversing valve I mentioned originally, that must be one of my misconceptions about parts extra parts to fail in the heating or cooling months.

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Rick C@21:1/5 to bill....@ieee.org on Sun Jan 23 10:00:32 2022
    On Sunday, January 23, 2022 at 9:14:31 AM UTC-5, bill....@ieee.org wrote:
    On Sunday, January 23, 2022 at 10:54:13 PM UTC+11, gnuarm.del...@gmail.com wrote:
    On Sunday, January 23, 2022 at 1:42:21 AM UTC-5, bill....@ieee.org wrote:
    On Sunday, January 23, 2022 at 2:39:38 PM UTC+11, gnuarm.del...@gmail.com wrote:
    On Saturday, January 22, 2022 at 8:48:26 PM UTC-5, bill....@ieee.org wrote:
    On Sunday, January 23, 2022 at 2:06:19 AM UTC+11, gnuarm.del...@gmail.com wrote:
    On Saturday, January 22, 2022 at 5:38:03 AM UTC-5, bill....@ieee.org wrote:
    On Saturday, January 22, 2022 at 6:41:48 PM UTC+11, gnuarm.del...@gmail.com wrote:
    On Saturday, January 22, 2022 at 1:01:18 AM UTC-5, Jasen Betts wrote:
    On 2022-01-21, John Larkin <jlarkin@highland_atwork_technology.com> wrote:
    On Fri, 21 Jan 2022 20:46:49 -0000 (UTC), Cydrome Leader <pres...@MUNGEpanix.com> wrote:
    John Larkin <jlarkin@highland_atwork_technology.com> wrote:
    On Wed, 19 Jan 2022 19:30:11 -0500, "Tom Del Rosso" <fizzbin...@that-google-mail-domain.com> wrote:
    jla...@highlandsniptechnology.com wrote:
    <snip>
    You didn't factor in the transportation cost of the electricity. The losses are not large, but it starts eating into the CoP margin. The real issue is the cost of the installation. A heat pump requires backup heat for when it's not very
    effective such as low temps but also for removing ice from the coils. To do that they run it in air conditioner mode and run the backup heat to keep the house from cooling off.
    Actually, they don't or at least they don't have to. In Australia most air-conditioning systems as touted as "reverse cycle systems". You can run the compressor in reverse so it while it can cool the house in summer, it can also be used to
    warm it in winter. This doesn't require any mechanical reconfiguration (or at least nothing that asks me to do more than select the right option on the controller). If you want to de-ice the coils you reverse-cycle it briefly. Cools the house a little in
    the process, but not for long enough for you to notice.

    You must keep the heat low in Australia then. Deicing does very much blow cool air through the home unless you aren't using forced air heat.
    You don't have to do it for long - just long enough to turn the bulky frost into water. If it then freezes to clear ice it doesn't insulate the outside heat exchange to any perceptible extent.
    You are being silly now. You don't remove the ice in a few seconds.

    Clear ice isn't a problem - it's not a good insulator compared with the static boundary layer of air just above it. Fluffy frost is, because it reduces air circulation. There's not much water involved, so it doesn't take long to melt it down to
    liquid water which can run off.

    It takes a bit of time. Even so, no one likes having cold air blown on them in the winter time. You are talking as if this has to do with bringing down the temperature of the house, it doesn't. It has to do with the furnace blowing cold air
    rather than hot air.

    Heat pumps aren't furnaces. You've got to pump the gaseous working fluid out to the heat exchanger in the indoor room where it can condense and release heat into the room. If you don't want to use one of the room heat exchangers to boil off the
    refrigerant that has heated up the outside radiator, use one in a more isolated indoor space which you can let cool off a bit without worrying anybody, or maybe even a electric heater. Wittering on as if heat pumps work the same way as furnaces is a bit
    silly.

    You need to look up the definition of "furnace".
    "a container that is heated to a very high temperature, so that substances that are put inside it, such as metal, will melt or burn"

    In case you aren't familiar with dictionaries, they often list more than one definition to cover all cases of usage.

    "a piece of equipment for heating a building"

    I could go on, but I'm sure you know how to use the Internet thing even if only to support your view.


    Americans also use the term to cover "an appliance fired by gas or oil in which air or water is heated to be circulated throughout a building in a heating system"

    Indeed, perhaps you are not aware I am in the US. So you acknowledge my use of the word, thank you.


    which is a bit strange. You can talk about electric furnaces, but the core meaning is an enclosed area which gets hot.

    A heat pump compresses a compressible (and eventually condensable) gas, but the heat transfer takes place where the working fluid condenses or evaporates, which isn't inside the compressor, which is the core of the heat pump, but no kind of furnace.

    Dear god! You really would be hot and heavy in the Angels on the head of a pin argument! Anything to save face I suppose. No one is calling the compressor or the evaporator or any other part of the furnace, but rather the heating system as a whole is
    the furnace.


    A heat pump is a furnace.
    You may like to think so, but you happen to be wrong.

    Except that you just acknowledged this is correct. Your quote, "an appliance fired by gas or oil in which air or water is heated to be circulated throughout a building in a heating system". We are talking about a furnace that heats air to be circulated
    throughout a building. Just to be pedantic since you are being absurd about this, "in a heating system" is poorly constructed but meant to modify "is heated" as in "...is heated in a heating system...". Perhaps that is where you get the mistaken idea
    that a heat pump is not referred to as a furnace when you can read in simple English, even simple enough for you to understand, the term furnace can be applied to any "appliance" that heats air or water to heat a home.


    Either way, you are being silly about this, digging in your heels rather than discussing the issue. The point is a heat pump system is going to use the same air space for drawing heat for defrosting as it heats.
    It doesn't have to. Our air-conditioning system has three different heat exchangers inside the apartment - one in the living room and the other two in the bedrooms, and one outside which acts as the heat sink or source. Which one might get cooled to
    warm up the outdoor heat exchanger would be a matter of choice.

    You can babble about any fantasy system you wish, but which ever the system uses would cool the house. Which one have you selected?


    Anything else would be prohibitively expensive to run the ductwork or dampers or other silly notions.
    All three indoor heat exchanges have their own pipework to the compressor and the outdoor heat exchanger, and separate controls that regulate (at least potentially) different temperatures for each target room . They wouldn't be any use if they didn't.

    So how does your system work to deice? Where does it get the heat?


    I don't know what kind of antiquate relic you think are talking about.

    It's called forced air heating and cooling which is the less expensive than multiple heat exchangers. Since this is the dominant form of home heating for the last 60 years, that is the default. I installed a new heat pump some years ago for about $6,
    000. A friend who was selling a house built in '45 or '35, I forget which, had a steam heat system which had to be replaced. They installed a system like you describe for $17,000. Yeah, a huge difference. That was the second system, the first system
    never controlled the temperature correctly.

    In Puerto Rico there are the units that look like window air conditioners, but typically mounted in the wall. However better homes have ductless 'mini-split' as you have with an outside compressor (to reduce noise) and inside convectors. They typically
    have a 1 to 1 connection since the reason they are used is the simpler installation over a ducted system. A 1 to many installation would require long runs of the copper tubing.

    https://lirp.cdn-website.com/06950d65/dms3rep/multi/opt/1329e7d8-7652-45cd-ad1e-929293040210-673w.jpg

    This is the sort of mess you end up with in more dense apartments.


    Maybe they do such things down under, but not in the civilized world.

    I'll tell the people in the US what you think... not! No one cares... if this group is any example, no one in the world cares. You seem to come here for a perverse sense of pleasure from pointless arguments, like this one.


    It's a Mitsubishi system, imported from Japan (which is sort of up over from us). I think you can get similar systems from Siemens, made in Germany. What you seem to be saying is that the US isn't part of the civilised world - which is easy enough to
    believe after Trump. After all, you don't even have universal health care.

    I'm saying we use HVAC systems that are suitable for our needs and budgets, not systems to please arrogant idiots who think they know more than they do. Something you have in common with Larkin.


    You mention electric heater... yes, that is what I said they do, they run the auxiliary heat (often electric resistance heating) to prevent blowing cold air on the occupants.
    It's a clumsy option, and a bit wasteful. but it would work. It certainly isn't essential, which is what you seem to want to claim.

    If you have no auxiliary heat, then I guess you give up the ghost when the temperature drops below your system's cut off temperature.


    I'm glad you finally understand and can now stop wittering on.

    Cold drafts are something you try to prevent in cold weather.

    No one likes cold air from their heating system,

    They don't get enough of it to notice.

    In this country that is not the case. Maybe the temps never get cold enough downunder for this to matter. The original objection to heat pumps when they first started to be used much in the 70s or 80s was the fact that they don't blow warm air.
    An oil burner blows warm air that feels good. The heat pumps produced air that was barely above room temperature and felt cold because it was below body temp.

    Wanting a heat pump to work the same way as a furnace is pretty silly.

    They eventually reduced that so the air from the vents actually feels warm now. But when it first comes on it blows cold air until the system warms up.

    Why would it need to blow air before the surface it was blowing the air over was condensing enough refrigerant to emit heat? That sounds like incompetent design (or somebody cheap-skating on temperature sensors).

    Because they try to meet price points, yes, being cheap because people buy on price, not obscure technical details. Besides we are talking about defrosting where the coils start cold and get colder.
    People buy on performance as well as price. I saw one firm go to the wall in a few years because the boss was more interested in making his machine easier to sell than reliable in use. One of his engineers got a job someplace else and got the chance to
    put something together that worked just as well and kept on working, and ended up with 98% of the market (according to Mike Engelhardt of LTSpice fame, who'd worked for him before he joined Linear Technology). I got stuck with developing something that
    was easier to sell because it worked better, and while we got the better performance, we didn't get it fast enough.

    Yeah, reliable has nothing to do with what we have been discussing.


    Better heat systems use a two speed fan that blows slowly at first to minimize this as well as continuing to blow after the pump is turned off to remove residual coil heat... without blowing air that feels cold.

    Even better systems would have an infinitely variable fan speed. You do seem to be talking about the limitations of cheap/incompetent design rather than anything fundamental.

    Lol! You actually don't know much about this do you? This is not one of your millikelvin devices. They actually have to sell these systems. I am talking about what is used in homes, not research experiments.
    I'm talking about the commercial system we got installed in our apartment a few years ago. There's nothing remotely researchy about it. And my milli-kevlin system was sold for doing routine lab-work, year in, year out. We swapped out the pumped coolant
    circulation for a heat pipe because the heat pipe kept on working for longer without needing any attention (as is mentioned in the paper).

    You don't say what you paid for it. Most likely there was no way to install a central HVAC unit. If they aren't there you'd have to install ducts which are not well suited to homes if they weren't designed in. So once you start with a split system,
    you are stuck with it.


    Suggesting that no one cares about the cold air that is *actually* cold, below room temperature cold is pure BS. Why else would they go to so much trouble to prevent blowing room temperature air from a heat pump much less colder air?

    Because they hadn't thought about what they were doing?

    so they use auxiliary heat (usually straight resistance heating) to prevent this. I suppose Australians are tougher material or just can't afford the heating coils.

    I was making the point that heat pumps can work both ways. There are bits of Australia that get below freezing in winter, mostly skiing resorts, but I've not lived there.

    Doesn't matter if the outside temps are below freezing. The heat pump coils have to be well colder than the outside air to work. The worst case is in a light rain, just above freezing. You can get a large build up of ice before the defrost cycle
    kicks in which takes time to remove.

    You might, if your system had been designed by an idiot.

    Ok, you have stopped talking about the issues and now are insulting anyone and everyone involved without addressing any of the technical issues.
    You don't seem to understand how heat pumps work, or where the heat actually gets transferred. This does show up in what you post, and I am obliged to comment on it.

    Yeah, you seem to think this, but you've said nothing of value. You are entering your ad hominem zone, so it's probably time to give up trying to have a conversation with you.


    Sometimes I wonder if this is about mental decline as you age.
    This often comes up when somebody is failing to follow an argument. Flyguy seem to think that everybody except him is senile.

    Well, in your case the comment is not from any particulars of this discussion, but observation of your debating technique and the choice and tenacity of your arguments. Perhaps you are worried about your cognitive decline, so rather than banging 18 year
    olds, you come here to duke it out with anyone and everyone as if that proves something other than the fact that you have a problem. Or maybe for you, this is like a kid pulling the wings off flies? I dunno. I'm just pointing out your MO.


    You do seem to have a regular pattern of discussing facts, followed by entrenchment and restating the same facts (rather than a better discussion of new facts others have pointed out), followed by insults.
    Where is the "new fact" that you pointed out? You seem fixed on confusing a heat pump with a burner ( or "furnace" in your slightly odd vocabulary), and seem unwilling to think about where the heat transfers actually take place in a heat-pump based
    system.

    See, this is a perfect example. In spite of ample evidence, you persist in thinking the use of the term furnace is not correct for heat pumps. Is that obsessive or compulsive? I tend to confuse the two.


    What is going on that you can't just discuss the issues rationally rather than getting defensive and lashing out?
    The problem is that you won't think about what's actually going on, and don't want to realise that your original take on the situation was a somewhat over-simplified.

    There is a perfect example of what I am talking about that you replied to!!!

    Whatever. I'm not your therapist. Have a nice conversation with the keyboard. I won't bother reading this thread anymore. There's no one here left to talk to.

    --

    Rick C.

    +++- Get 1,000 miles of free Supercharging
    +++- Tesla referral code - https://ts.la/richard11209

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Anthony William Sloman@21:1/5 to gnuarm.del...@gmail.com on Sun Jan 23 18:08:51 2022
    On Monday, January 24, 2022 at 5:00:35 AM UTC+11, gnuarm.del...@gmail.com wrote:
    On Sunday, January 23, 2022 at 9:14:31 AM UTC-5, bill....@ieee.org wrote:
    On Sunday, January 23, 2022 at 10:54:13 PM UTC+11, gnuarm.del...@gmail.com wrote:
    On Sunday, January 23, 2022 at 1:42:21 AM UTC-5, bill....@ieee.org wrote:
    On Sunday, January 23, 2022 at 2:39:38 PM UTC+11, gnuarm.del...@gmail.com wrote:
    On Saturday, January 22, 2022 at 8:48:26 PM UTC-5, bill....@ieee.org wrote:
    On Sunday, January 23, 2022 at 2:06:19 AM UTC+11, gnuarm.del...@gmail.com wrote:
    On Saturday, January 22, 2022 at 5:38:03 AM UTC-5, bill....@ieee.org wrote:
    On Saturday, January 22, 2022 at 6:41:48 PM UTC+11, gnuarm.del...@gmail.com wrote:
    On Saturday, January 22, 2022 at 1:01:18 AM UTC-5, Jasen Betts wrote:
    On 2022-01-21, John Larkin <jlarkin@highland_atwork_technology.com> wrote:
    On Fri, 21 Jan 2022 20:46:49 -0000 (UTC), Cydrome Leader <pres...@MUNGEpanix.com> wrote:
    John Larkin <jlarkin@highland_atwork_technology.com> wrote:
    On Wed, 19 Jan 2022 19:30:11 -0500, "Tom Del Rosso" <fizzbin...@that-google-mail-domain.com> wrote:
    jla...@highlandsniptechnology.com wrote:

    <snip>

    It takes a bit of time. Even so, no one likes having cold air blown on them in the winter time. You are talking as if this has to do with bringing down the temperature of the house, it doesn't. It has to do with the furnace blowing cold air
    rather than hot air.

    Heat pumps aren't furnaces. You've got to pump the gaseous working fluid out to the heat exchanger in the indoor room where it can condense and release heat into the room. If you don't want to use one of the room heat exchangers to boil off the
    refrigerant that has heated up the outside radiator, use one in a more isolated indoor space which you can let cool off a bit without worrying anybody, or maybe even a electric heater. Wittering on as if heat pumps work the same way as furnaces is a bit
    silly.

    You need to look up the definition of "furnace".

    "a container that is heated to a very high temperature, so that substances that are put inside it, such as metal, will melt or burn"
    In case you aren't familiar with dictionaries, they often list more than one definition to cover all cases of usage.

    "a piece of equipment for heating a building"

    I could go on, but I'm sure you know how to use the Internet thing even if only to support your view.

    Americans also use the term to cover "an appliance fired by gas or oil in which air or water is heated to be circulated throughout a building in a heating system"
    Indeed, perhaps you are not aware I am in the US. So you acknowledge my use of the word, thank you.

    So you claim that I can't use a dictionary, then immediately afterwards acknowledge that I have. This is a Flyguy-level performance.

    which is a bit strange. You can talk about electric furnaces, but the core meaning is an enclosed area which gets hot.

    A heat pump compresses a compressible (and eventually condensable) gas, but the heat transfer takes place where the working fluid condenses or evaporates, which isn't inside the compressor, which is the core of the heat pump, but no kind of furnace.

    Dear god! You really would be hot and heavy in the Angels on the head of a pin argument! Anything to save face I suppose. No one is calling the compressor or the evaporator or any other part of the furnace, but rather the heating system as a whole is
    the furnace.

    It isn't. If you track the meaning back to the source of the word, the furnace is the bit that gets hot in which the circulating fluid is heated up.

    A heat pump is a furnace.

    You may like to think so, but you happen to be wrong.
    Except that you just acknowledged this is correct. Your quote, "an appliance fired by gas or oil in which air or water is heated to be circulated throughout a building in a heating system".

    A heat pump based system isn't fired by oil or gas. Americans seem to use "furnace" where more sensible people would use "burner", but a heat pump doesn't "burn" anything and the heat is released (or absorbed) in the heat exchangers where the working
    fluid is evaporated or condensed, not in the compressor.

    We are talking about a furnace that heats air to be circulated throughout a building.

    We aren't. Heat pump systems circulate their working fluid which isn't air - as either gas or liquid and the heat transfer happens when the fluid changes from gas to liquid or back again (which does happen in different places).

    Just to be pedantic since you are being absurd about this, "in a heating system" is poorly constructed but meant to modify "is heated" as in "...is heated in a heating system...". Perhaps that is where you get the mistaken idea that a heat pump is not
    referred to as a furnace when you can read in simple English, even simple enough for you to understand, the term furnace can be applied to any "appliance" that heats air or water to heat a home.

    It can be - by people who aren't quite a literate as they ought to be.

    Either way, you are being silly about this, digging in your heels rather than discussing the issue. The point is a heat pump system is going to use the same air space for drawing heat for defrosting as it heats.

    It doesn't have to. Our air-conditioning system has three different heat exchangers inside the apartment - one in the living room and the other two in the bedrooms, and one outside which acts as the heat sink or source. Which one might get cooled to
    warm up the outdoor heat exchanger would be a matter of choice.

    You can babble about any fantasy system you wish, but which ever the system uses would cool the house. Which one have you selected?

    Our air-conditioning system heats and cools three individual rooms. A third heat exchanger out on the balcony cools or heats the rest of the universe with the heat we are sucking in or dumping.

    Anything else would be prohibitively expensive to run the ductwork or dampers or other silly notions.

    All three indoor heat exchanges have their own pipework to the compressor and the outdoor heat exchanger, and separate controls that regulate (at least potentially) different temperatures for each target room . They wouldn't be any use if they didn't.

    So how does your system work to deice? Where does it get the heat?

    It doesn't. There's no need to de-ice the outside heat exchanger in Sydney. If it had to it could get it from any one of the three room units.

    I don't know what kind of antiquate relic you think are talking about.

    It's called forced air heating and cooling which is the less expensive than multiple heat exchangers.

    But less flexible. Our circulating water home heating in the UK and the Netherlands had (and has) thermostatic valves on each radiator so that we can set a different temperature for each room. We had a battery operated Honeywell thermostatic valve which
    could vary our bedroom temperature with time of day - colder when were trying to sleep and warmer when we were getting out of bed.

    Since this is the dominant form of home heating for the last 60 years, that is the default.

    Not where I've lived.

    I installed a new heat pump some years ago for about $6,000. A friend who was selling a house built in '45 or '35, I forget which, had a steam heat system which had to be replaced. They installed a system like you describe for $17,000. Yeah, a huge
    difference. That was the second system, the first system never controlled the temperature correctly.

    People will pay more for a system that does what they want it to do.

    In Puerto Rico there are the units that look like window air conditioners, but typically mounted in the wall. However better homes have ductless 'mini-split' as you have with an outside compressor (to reduce noise) and inside convectors. They typically
    have a 1 to 1 connection since the reason they are used is the simpler installation over a ducted system. A 1 to many installation would require long runs of the copper tubing.

    Ours didn't.

    https://lirp.cdn-website.com/06950d65/dms3rep/multi/opt/1329e7d8-7652-45cd-ad1e-929293040210-673w.jpg

    This is the sort of mess you end up with in more dense apartments.

    That why we've got a single outside heat exchange, hidden behind the solid-walled bit of the balcony. If the neighbours can't see it they can't complain about the mess. We wouldn't have been aliowed to put it in if they could have.

    Maybe they do such things down under, but not in the civilized world.

    I'll tell the people in the US what you think... not! No one cares... if this group is any example, no one in the world cares. You seem to come here for a perverse sense of pleasure from pointless arguments, like this one.

    It's a Mitsubishi system, imported from Japan (which is sort of up over from us). I think you can get similar systems from Siemens, made in Germany. What you seem to be saying is that the US isn't part of the civilised world - which is easy enough to
    believe after Trump. After all, you don't even have universal health care.

    I'm saying we use HVAC systems that are suitable for our needs and budgets, not systems to please arrogant idiots who think they know more than they do.

    What we've got is a perfectly ordinary system for Australia. We got quotes for much the same system from several different suppliers, and nobody acted as if we were being unusual or extravagant. You may be saying that the median American is actually
    poor than the median Australian, which is true.

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_wealth_per_adult

    The median wealth per adult in Australia is $US 238,072, while it is $US 79,274. The mean wealth in the US at 505,421 is slightly higher than the mean wealth in Australia 477,306, but the US does go in for gross economic inequality

    Something you have in common with Larkin.

    Not exactly. I do know quite a bit more than Larkin, and I do seem to know more than you do about this subject. As a candidate for the title of arrogant idiot I'm not really in the hunt.

    You mention electric heater... yes, that is what I said they do, they run the auxiliary heat (often electric resistance heating) to prevent blowing cold air on the occupants.

    It's a clumsy option, and a bit wasteful. but it would work. It certainly isn't essential, which is what you seem to want to claim.

    If you have no auxiliary heat, then I guess you give up the ghost when the temperature drops below your system's cut off temperature.

    You really don't understand what heat pumps do, do you.

    <snipped the rest which seems to contain even more personal abuse and even less content than your efforts above>

    --
    Bill Sloman, Sydney

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Anthony William Sloman@21:1/5 to Cydrome Leader on Sun Jan 23 18:16:31 2022
    On Monday, January 24, 2022 at 4:58:51 AM UTC+11, Cydrome Leader wrote:
    Anthony William Sloman <bill....@ieee.org> wrote:
    On Sunday, January 23, 2022 at 6:20:38 PM UTC+11, Cydrome Leader wrote:
    Anthony William Sloman <bill....@ieee.org> wrote:
    On Saturday, January 22, 2022 at 6:41:48 PM UTC+11, gnuarm.del...@gmail.com wrote:
    On Saturday, January 22, 2022 at 1:01:18 AM UTC-5, Jasen Betts wrote: >> >> > On 2022-01-21, John Larkin <jlarkin@highland_atwork_technology.com> wrote:
    On Fri, 21 Jan 2022 20:46:49 -0000 (UTC), Cydrome Leader <pres...@MUNGEpanix.com> wrote:
    John Larkin <jlarkin@highland_atwork_technology.com> wrote:
    On Wed, 19 Jan 2022 19:30:11 -0500, "Tom Del Rosso" <fizzbin...@that-google-mail-domain.com> wrote:
    jla...@highlandsniptechnology.com wrote:

    <snip>

    You didn't factor in the transportation cost of the electricity. The losses are not large, but it starts eating into the CoP margin. The real issue is the cost of the installation. A heat pump requires backup heat for when it's not very effective
    such as low temps but also for removing ice from the coils. To do that they run it in air conditioner mode and run the backup heat to keep the house from cooling off.

    Actually, they don't or at least they don't have to. In Australia most >> > air-conditioning systems as touted as "reverse cycle systems". You can run
    the compressor in reverse so it while it can cool the house in summer, it.

    Oh really? How do they run the compressor in reverse? flip the leads? Let's
    all take notes as the guru of heat pumps enlightens us once again.

    There are all sort of options. Using a pair of valves to flip the
    intakes and outlets would work. If the compressor is being spun by a synchronous motor you could use electronics to make it spin in the opposite direction. I haven't dismanted my Mitsubishi reverse cycle air-conditioner to find out how they do it - it would invalidate my guarantee if I did, and I don't really need to know. Cydrome Leader does
    - he's advanced enough fatuous misconceptions to make it clear that he hasn't got a clue.

    Well, the expert has spoken. There might be a synchronous motor in the compressor and some magic electronics to spin it the other direction.

    Thinking about what the compressor has to do with the gas stream it is compressing suggests that it wouldn't be a good idea to run it in reverse.
    The electronics to do that would be pretty trivial - you wouldn't need to add any extra parts or compromise the reliabilitly.

    Ignore the reversing valve I mentioned originally, that must be one of my misconceptions about parts extra parts to fail in the heating or cooling months.

    Mechanical parts do fail more frequently than well-designed electronics. They do wear.

    --
    Bill Sloman, Sydney

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Martin Brown@21:1/5 to Rick C on Mon Jan 24 11:39:18 2022
    On 21/01/2022 23:31, Rick C wrote:
    On Friday, January 21, 2022 at 6:24:41 AM UTC-5, Martin Brown wrote:
    On 21/01/2022 05:38, Rick C wrote:
    On Thursday, January 20, 2022 at 3:03:14 PM UTC-5, Martin Brown
    wrote:
    On 20/01/2022 11:41, Rick C wrote:
    On Thursday, January 20, 2022 at 3:59:11 AM UTC-5, Martin Brown
    wrote:
    On 20/01/2022 02:07, Rick C wrote:
    On Wednesday, January 19, 2022 at 5:06:26 AM UTC-5, Martin
    Brown wrote:

    The *big* problem in the UK is that there are plenty of non
    working chargers shown as working on the various apps! Many
    tales of woe even in the south where they are relatively
    plentiful. Up north you are stuffed.

    The supercharging hubs they have built are unable to get
    supply so are nothing more than useless boondoggles. This
    one near me is useless:

    https://www.yorkpress.co.uk/news/19839979.yorks-flagship-electric-vehicle-charging-hub-still-not-open/



    It's a joke. Opening was cancelled yet again. No electricity!
    (which is a bit of a serious problem for a charging
    station)

    The article talks about "legal agreements" rather than actual
    access to the grid. You make it sound as if they simply don't
    have a grid for them to connect to. Do you have more details
    on just what the issue is?
    Who pays for connecting it up and the supply tariffs when they
    do.

    Why are you asking me???

    That is the answer to the question of "why they are still not
    operational?". They cannot agree commercial contract terms between
    the energy supplier and the owner of the site with the chargers
    on!

    I'm sorry, you are just being silly about all this. "Tariffs" and
    the rest of the contracts were signed before any construction was
    begun. Why do you make up such things rather than just saying you
    don't know any more details?


    I'm sorry, you are just being silly about all this. "Tariffs" and
    the rest of the contracts were signed before any construction was
    begun. Why do you make up such things?

    Why don't you read the articles I linked to.

    This one from an earlier cancellation of opening last September spells
    it out in the first paragraph!

    https://www.yorkpress.co.uk/news/19555455.vehicle-charging-hub-york-still-shut---no-power/

    First three sentences quoted verbatim below in case it is paywalled from
    outside the UK:

    "A FLAGSHIP charging centre for electric vehicles - originally due to
    open on York’s outskirts in July - is still fenced off and closed
    following delays in connecting it to the electricity grid.

    Council officials said yesterday that they were still finalising
    commercial and contractual arrangements before the York HyperHub at
    Monks Cross could open later this year.

    The complex, situated at the entrance to the Monks Cross Park&Ride car
    park, will be one of the largest charging hubs in Northern England and
    will aim to act as a demonstration of best practice for the design of EV
    charging facilities."

    I find the last paragraph particularly ironic. It still *isn't* open and
    had another high profile *not*opening date pass very recently.

    Where does that say anything about "tariffs"???

    WTF do you think finalising commercial and contractual arrangements
    means? The whole thing got bogged down because the price of electricity
    was changing so fast that many suppliers were going bust.

    Do you read what you write???

    Can you read?

    They don't actually "spell out" anything. "were still finalizing commercial and contractual arrangements" is as close as they come. That could mean anything.

    It means they can't agree who pays for what and an acceptable tariff for electricity supply. It is in the interests of the supplier to hold out
    since the price of electricity is rising by the day.

    Domestic consumers are protected (for now) by a price cap. When it runs
    out in April (or their supplier goes bust) there will be a massive readjustement of +50% perhaps more.

    In the US local utility rates are regulated by local boards, usually at the state level. Generation is a competitive matter with the freedom to buy from whom you want. I don't know exactly how they do things in the UK, but if they didn't have
    electrical supply lined up prior to constructing the facility, that is simply incompetent program management.

    Quite probably a bit of both. But as things stand UK electricity
    suppliers with very few exceptions have *NO* generating capacity at all
    - they are clueless middlemen billing operations. Wonderful effect of deregulation of the electricity market.

    It is roughly split into the people who make it, the regional
    infrastructure operators and the people who bulk buy electricity and
    sell it on. Many of the latter were also operating on the spot market
    and so have been comprehensively wiped out by the gas price shocks.

    If you read back though this discussion you have made unsupported statements several times and never followed through on demonstrating they are true. Now you cite an article that says what I said it said, they are finalizing "legal agreements", which
    you somehow interpret is setting tariffs, otherwise known as rates. This started with you claiming chargers were "unable to get supply". That's not the same thing as they were too incompetent to line up the electrical source before they started
    construction.

    They remain unable to get supply. That is pretty damn fundamental.

    UK electricity supply is a mess with zillions of electricity
    "suppliers" who do nothing but bill consumers. They are going bust
    at the moment left, right and centre since they have no generation
    capacity and by a peculiar price cap law are forced to sell
    electricity at a lower price than they are paying for it. I know
    this sounds like something from "Alice in Wonderland" but I assure
    you it is true. More than 30 UK "electricity suppliers" have gone
    bust in the last 3 months.

    I don't really care. Nothing to do with me or EVs.
    It has everything to do with EVs. If there isn't enough electricity to
    go around then there is no prospect of running all these EVs.

    LOL!!! All this time and you have learned NOTHING about EVs. Or maybe you are just a troll. Here, one more time I will explain it to you like you are a 10 year old.

    It is you who are determined to remain clueless.

    You can charge an EV from the same outlet you run your kettle on. Yup, I believe that is 3 kW which would allow you to add 120 miles in a 10 hour overnight charge which would come from excess capacity. I believe it would be no problem at all to add a
    higher current outlet if this doesn't suit you, but the average daily drive is only 30 miles. I expect a 120 mile overnight charge would suit the 99.9th percentile with no added generation, transmission or distribution.

    You obviously cannot do sums either.

    So storage at night and usage during the day is needed, eh? How much
    is the current bill for shutting plants? Maybe batteries would be
    profitable? Or instead of paying them to shut down, maybe change the
    billing to an increasing kWh rate with higher usage. In my home
    There is a pumped storage plant in Wales - one of the biggest in the
    world but it is still miniscule compared to total UK power usage.

    It doesn't have to compare to the total generation or usage, just the amount you are saving by shutting down factories. Do you not understand what I'm saying? If you don't have enough, you need to build more. If you can add storage at a cost that is
    less than paying people to shut down, that saves money. Isn't that a very simple concept?

    You can't build enough storage to handle the high energy users. Most of
    the really high power kilns run 24/7 so they need continuous supply.
    Worse still much of it can be seriously damaged if dropped off supply
    suddenly and kilns are allowed to cool beyond a certain point.

    Australia has a battery farm somewhere that buffers peak load and is
    profitable. The only one I know of in the UK is a toy near Oxford.

    https://www.energy-storage.news/huge-achievement-as-50mw-battery-system-is-first-to-export-to-uk-grid-from-tertiary-connection/

    The one in Australia has worked very well and I believe it was enlarged. I think other companies have also built them, but it's been a while, I maybe confusing this with other countries or even other continents.

    It can work to handle silly dynamic spike loads like half time of the
    World cup or Wimbledon for example, but they represent a drop in all the
    worlds oceans when compared to the really big industrial users.

    --
    Regards,
    Martin Brown

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Rick C@21:1/5 to Martin Brown on Mon Jan 24 07:39:18 2022
    On Monday, January 24, 2022 at 6:39:26 AM UTC-5, Martin Brown wrote:
    On 21/01/2022 23:31, Rick C wrote:
    On Friday, January 21, 2022 at 6:24:41 AM UTC-5, Martin Brown wrote:
    On 21/01/2022 05:38, Rick C wrote:
    On Thursday, January 20, 2022 at 3:03:14 PM UTC-5, Martin Brown
    wrote:
    On 20/01/2022 11:41, Rick C wrote:
    On Thursday, January 20, 2022 at 3:59:11 AM UTC-5, Martin Brown
    wrote:
    On 20/01/2022 02:07, Rick C wrote:
    On Wednesday, January 19, 2022 at 5:06:26 AM UTC-5, Martin
    Brown wrote:

    The *big* problem in the UK is that there are plenty of non >>>>>>>> working chargers shown as working on the various apps! Many >>>>>>>> tales of woe even in the south where they are relatively
    plentiful. Up north you are stuffed.

    The supercharging hubs they have built are unable to get
    supply so are nothing more than useless boondoggles. This
    one near me is useless:

    https://www.yorkpress.co.uk/news/19839979.yorks-flagship-electric-vehicle-charging-hub-still-not-open/



    It's a joke. Opening was cancelled yet again. No electricity!
    (which is a bit of a serious problem for a charging
    station)

    The article talks about "legal agreements" rather than actual >>>>>>> access to the grid. You make it sound as if they simply don't >>>>>>> have a grid for them to connect to. Do you have more details
    on just what the issue is?
    Who pays for connecting it up and the supply tariffs when they
    do.

    Why are you asking me???

    That is the answer to the question of "why they are still not
    operational?". They cannot agree commercial contract terms between
    the energy supplier and the owner of the site with the chargers
    on!

    I'm sorry, you are just being silly about all this. "Tariffs" and
    the rest of the contracts were signed before any construction was
    begun. Why do you make up such things rather than just saying you
    don't know any more details?


    I'm sorry, you are just being silly about all this. "Tariffs" and
    the rest of the contracts were signed before any construction was
    begun. Why do you make up such things?

    Why don't you read the articles I linked to.

    This one from an earlier cancellation of opening last September spells
    it out in the first paragraph!

    https://www.yorkpress.co.uk/news/19555455.vehicle-charging-hub-york-still-shut---no-power/

    First three sentences quoted verbatim below in case it is paywalled from >> outside the UK:

    "A FLAGSHIP charging centre for electric vehicles - originally due to
    open on York’s outskirts in July - is still fenced off and closed
    following delays in connecting it to the electricity grid.

    Council officials said yesterday that they were still finalising
    commercial and contractual arrangements before the York HyperHub at
    Monks Cross could open later this year.

    The complex, situated at the entrance to the Monks Cross Park&Ride car
    park, will be one of the largest charging hubs in Northern England and
    will aim to act as a demonstration of best practice for the design of EV >> charging facilities."

    I find the last paragraph particularly ironic. It still *isn't* open and >> had another high profile *not*opening date pass very recently.

    Where does that say anything about "tariffs"???

    WTF do you think finalising commercial and contractual arrangements
    means? The whole thing got bogged down because the price of electricity
    was changing so fast that many suppliers were going bust.

    The article says nothing about that. Sorry, appeal rejected. Do you have any evidence of what you wrote about the issue being pricing?

    See, I have a hard time imagining a business spending a boatload of money on a project before they had the details ironed out. If you don't know what you have to pay for electricity, you can't know if your venture will be profitable. Who is going to
    sink a couple of million dollars into a venture before they know how profitable it will be... oh, I know! The UK nuclear power industry!!! Now they are talking about making the rate payers partners, not in the profits, but in the cost overruns. Yeah,
    a great business community.


    Do you read what you write???

    Can you read?

    Yes, and you have acknowledged what you claim was not written. It is you reading what is not written.


    They don't actually "spell out" anything. "were still finalizing commercial and contractual arrangements" is as close as they come. That could mean anything.

    It means they can't agree who pays for what and an acceptable tariff for electricity supply. It is in the interests of the supplier to hold out
    since the price of electricity is rising by the day.

    Show me how that follows? Why would anyone start construction before such fundamental details are spelled out? They wouldn't.


    Domestic consumers are protected (for now) by a price cap. When it runs
    out in April (or their supplier goes bust) there will be a massive readjustement of +50% perhaps more.

    In the US local utility rates are regulated by local boards, usually at the state level. Generation is a competitive matter with the freedom to buy from whom you want. I don't know exactly how they do things in the UK, but if they didn't have
    electrical supply lined up prior to constructing the facility, that is simply incompetent program management.

    Quite probably a bit of both. But as things stand UK electricity
    suppliers with very few exceptions have *NO* generating capacity at all
    - they are clueless middlemen billing operations. Wonderful effect of deregulation of the electricity market.

    Not at all relevant to the issue of arranging electrical power.


    It is roughly split into the people who make it, the regional
    infrastructure operators and the people who bulk buy electricity and
    sell it on. Many of the latter were also operating on the spot market
    and so have been comprehensively wiped out by the gas price shocks.

    If you read back though this discussion you have made unsupported statements several times and never followed through on demonstrating they are true. Now you cite an article that says what I said it said, they are finalizing "legal agreements", which
    you somehow interpret is setting tariffs, otherwise known as rates. This started with you claiming chargers were "unable to get supply". That's not the same thing as they were too incompetent to line up the electrical source before they started
    construction.

    They remain unable to get supply. That is pretty damn fundamental.

    So you claim. "were still finalizing commercial and contractual arrangements" does not imply anything about supply.


    UK electricity supply is a mess with zillions of electricity
    "suppliers" who do nothing but bill consumers. They are going bust
    at the moment left, right and centre since they have no generation
    capacity and by a peculiar price cap law are forced to sell
    electricity at a lower price than they are paying for it. I know
    this sounds like something from "Alice in Wonderland" but I assure
    you it is true. More than 30 UK "electricity suppliers" have gone
    bust in the last 3 months.

    I don't really care. Nothing to do with me or EVs.
    It has everything to do with EVs. If there isn't enough electricity to
    go around then there is no prospect of running all these EVs.

    LOL!!! All this time and you have learned NOTHING about EVs. Or maybe you are just a troll. Here, one more time I will explain it to you like you are a 10 year old.

    It is you who are determined to remain clueless.

    You can charge an EV from the same outlet you run your kettle on. Yup, I believe that is 3 kW which would allow you to add 120 miles in a 10 hour overnight charge which would come from excess capacity. I believe it would be no problem at all to add a
    higher current outlet if this doesn't suit you, but the average daily drive is only 30 miles. I expect a 120 mile overnight charge would suit the 99.9th percentile with no added generation, transmission or distribution.

    You obviously cannot do sums either.

    So you failed the same class since you can't show anything to contradict this. It is well known that for the general public, EVs are easy to keep charged and use relatively little power. As long as everyone doesn't start charging in the evening peak
    time, there's no undue load on the system. No new generating plants are needed. No new transmission is needed. Since the UK uses 240V and can provide a bit higher power to a standard outlet, that will adequately home charge EVs in 99.9% of cases.

    Please show me I'm wrong. How you get that extension cord to the EV is up to you. I can't fix all your problems. ;)


    So storage at night and usage during the day is needed, eh? How much
    is the current bill for shutting plants? Maybe batteries would be
    profitable? Or instead of paying them to shut down, maybe change the
    billing to an increasing kWh rate with higher usage. In my home
    There is a pumped storage plant in Wales - one of the biggest in the
    world but it is still miniscule compared to total UK power usage.

    It doesn't have to compare to the total generation or usage, just the amount you are saving by shutting down factories. Do you not understand what I'm saying? If you don't have enough, you need to build more. If you can add storage at a cost that is
    less than paying people to shut down, that saves money. Isn't that a very simple concept?

    You can't build enough storage to handle the high energy users. Most of
    the really high power kilns run 24/7 so they need continuous supply.
    Worse still much of it can be seriously damaged if dropped off supply suddenly and kilns are allowed to cool beyond a certain point.

    Even more reason to have storage. Your claim of not being able to have enough storage skirts the issue. If you are paying more to shut down the businesses than it would cost to build the storage, then build the damn storage!!! You don't need 24/7
    storage. You only need the amount you are short of generating at peak times. Is that not clear? Think of the kettles going on at a world cup commercial. It's like that, but smaller.


    Australia has a battery farm somewhere that buffers peak load and is
    profitable. The only one I know of in the UK is a toy near Oxford.

    https://www.energy-storage.news/huge-achievement-as-50mw-battery-system-is-first-to-export-to-uk-grid-from-tertiary-connection/

    The one in Australia has worked very well and I believe it was enlarged. I think other companies have also built them, but it's been a while, I maybe confusing this with other countries or even other continents.

    It can work to handle silly dynamic spike loads like half time of the
    World cup or Wimbledon for example, but they represent a drop in all the worlds oceans when compared to the really big industrial users.

    Lol! You literally can't follow the reasoning. Whatever. I am amazed at how the British have done so much over the centuries, but now seem to be at the end of their rope, unable to solve the simplest of problems like providing electrical power to
    their country. Oh, well. Another empire lost and a third world country created.

    --

    Rick C.

    ++++ Get 1,000 miles of free Supercharging
    ++++ Tesla referral code - https://ts.la/richard11209

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Joe Gwinn@21:1/5 to All on Mon Jan 24 12:08:23 2022
    On Mon, 24 Jan 2022 11:39:18 +0000, Martin Brown >
    [snip]
    It means they can't agree who pays for what and an acceptable tariff for >electricity supply. It is in the interests of the supplier to hold out
    since the price of electricity is rising by the day.

    Domestic consumers are protected (for now) by a price cap. When it runs
    out in April (or their supplier goes bust) there will be a massive >readjustement of +50% perhaps more.

    This exact same kind of thing occurred in 2000-2001 in California.

    .<https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2000%E2%80%9301_California_electricity_crisis>

    California had price controls on the retail price of electricity, and
    no limits on the wholesale price of electricity. What can go wrong?

    Joe Gwinn

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From John Larkin@21:1/5 to edward.ming.lee@gmail.com on Mon Jan 24 14:37:53 2022
    On Tue, 18 Jan 2022 08:25:06 -0800 (PST), Ed Lee
    <edward.ming.lee@gmail.com> wrote:

    For Maximum EV Efficiency, Stick to 25 Miles an Hour, Ignore Angry Drivers and POLICE.

    https://www.wsj.com/articles/ev-electric-car-battery-charge-hypermiler-11642517385

    I was driving around 40 MPH on right lane of a highway (speed limit unknown) and got pull over for driving too slow. I told him that i was running low on charges and won't make it to the charger any faster. He escort me for a little while and left.

    Walking is becoming a hazard too. This is two cases in a single block:

    https://www.dropbox.com/s/gi14nqa2hqej6vi/Charging_1.jpg?raw=1

    https://www.dropbox.com/s/zehxbz00u2qxb8t/Charging_2.jpg?raw=1

    --

    If a man will begin with certainties, he shall end with doubts,
    but if he will be content to begin with doubts he shall end in certainties. Francis Bacon

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Rick C@21:1/5 to John Larkin on Mon Jan 24 15:09:40 2022
    On Monday, January 24, 2022 at 5:38:04 PM UTC-5, John Larkin wrote:
    On Tue, 18 Jan 2022 08:25:06 -0800 (PST), Ed Lee
    <edward....@gmail.com> wrote:

    For Maximum EV Efficiency, Stick to 25 Miles an Hour, Ignore Angry Drivers and POLICE.

    https://www.wsj.com/articles/ev-electric-car-battery-charge-hypermiler-11642517385

    I was driving around 40 MPH on right lane of a highway (speed limit unknown) and got pull over for driving too slow. I told him that i was running low on charges and won't make it to the charger any faster. He escort me for a little while and left.

    Walking is becoming a hazard too. This is two cases in a single block:

    https://www.dropbox.com/s/gi14nqa2hqej6vi/Charging_1.jpg?raw=1

    https://www.dropbox.com/s/zehxbz00u2qxb8t/Charging_2.jpg?raw=1

    I see the van is on leveling blocks. One looks like a hose rather than an electric cord. Maybe he's filling a water bed.

    Some people are afraid of everything. I guess that happens when you get old and everything is a fall hazard.

    --

    Rick C.

    ----- Get 1,000 miles of free Supercharging
    ----- Tesla referral code - https://ts.la/richard11209

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From John Larkin@21:1/5 to langwadt@fonz.dk on Mon Jan 24 15:44:38 2022
    On Mon, 24 Jan 2022 15:34:49 -0800 (PST), Lasse Langwadt Christensen <langwadt@fonz.dk> wrote:

    tirsdag den 25. januar 2022 kl. 00.09.44 UTC+1 skrev gnuarm.del...@gmail.com: >> On Monday, January 24, 2022 at 5:38:04 PM UTC-5, John Larkin wrote:
    On Tue, 18 Jan 2022 08:25:06 -0800 (PST), Ed Lee
    <edward....@gmail.com> wrote:

    For Maximum EV Efficiency, Stick to 25 Miles an Hour, Ignore Angry Drivers and POLICE.

    https://www.wsj.com/articles/ev-electric-car-battery-charge-hypermiler-11642517385

    I was driving around 40 MPH on right lane of a highway (speed limit unknown) and got pull over for driving too slow. I told him that i was running low on charges and won't make it to the charger any faster. He escort me for a little while and left.

    Walking is becoming a hazard too. This is two cases in a single block:

    https://www.dropbox.com/s/gi14nqa2hqej6vi/Charging_1.jpg?raw=1

    https://www.dropbox.com/s/zehxbz00u2qxb8t/Charging_2.jpg?raw=1
    I see the van is on leveling blocks. One looks like a hose rather than an electric cord. Maybe he's filling a water bed.

    I suspect it is water and electricity and someone is living in it, and the blocks is to make the floor level when parked sideways on a hill


    That block has a stunning view of downtown, especially at night. I can
    imagine people not looking where they are walking.

    --

    If a man will begin with certainties, he shall end with doubts,
    but if he will be content to begin with doubts he shall end in certainties. Francis Bacon

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Lasse Langwadt Christensen@21:1/5 to All on Mon Jan 24 15:34:49 2022
    tirsdag den 25. januar 2022 kl. 00.09.44 UTC+1 skrev gnuarm.del...@gmail.com:
    On Monday, January 24, 2022 at 5:38:04 PM UTC-5, John Larkin wrote:
    On Tue, 18 Jan 2022 08:25:06 -0800 (PST), Ed Lee
    <edward....@gmail.com> wrote:

    For Maximum EV Efficiency, Stick to 25 Miles an Hour, Ignore Angry Drivers and POLICE.

    https://www.wsj.com/articles/ev-electric-car-battery-charge-hypermiler-11642517385

    I was driving around 40 MPH on right lane of a highway (speed limit unknown) and got pull over for driving too slow. I told him that i was running low on charges and won't make it to the charger any faster. He escort me for a little while and left.

    Walking is becoming a hazard too. This is two cases in a single block:

    https://www.dropbox.com/s/gi14nqa2hqej6vi/Charging_1.jpg?raw=1

    https://www.dropbox.com/s/zehxbz00u2qxb8t/Charging_2.jpg?raw=1
    I see the van is on leveling blocks. One looks like a hose rather than an electric cord. Maybe he's filling a water bed.

    I suspect it is water and electricity and someone is living in it, and the blocks is to make the floor level when parked sideways on a hill

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Tom Gardner@21:1/5 to John Larkin on Tue Jan 25 00:40:00 2022
    On 24/01/22 22:37, John Larkin wrote:
    On Tue, 18 Jan 2022 08:25:06 -0800 (PST), Ed Lee <edward.ming.lee@gmail.com> wrote:

    For Maximum EV Efficiency, Stick to 25 Miles an Hour, Ignore Angry Drivers >> and POLICE.

    https://www.wsj.com/articles/ev-electric-car-battery-charge-hypermiler-11642517385
    I was driving around 40 MPH on right lane of a highway (speed limit unknown)
    and got pull over for driving too slow. I told him that i was running low on >> charges and won't make it to the charger any faster. He escort me for a
    little while and left.

    Walking is becoming a hazard too. This is two cases in a single block: https://www.dropbox.com/s/gi14nqa2hqej6vi/Charging_1.jpg?raw=1 https://www.dropbox.com/s/zehxbz00u2qxb8t/Charging_2.jpg?raw=1

    Somebody tried that not too far from me, in a conservation area
    full of houses converted into flats.

    He gave it up as impractical, and sold his EV.

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From John Larkin@21:1/5 to spamjunk@blueyonder.co.uk on Mon Jan 24 17:08:24 2022
    On Tue, 25 Jan 2022 00:40:00 +0000, Tom Gardner
    <spamjunk@blueyonder.co.uk> wrote:

    On 24/01/22 22:37, John Larkin wrote:
    On Tue, 18 Jan 2022 08:25:06 -0800 (PST), Ed Lee <edward.ming.lee@gmail.com> >> wrote:

    For Maximum EV Efficiency, Stick to 25 Miles an Hour, Ignore Angry Drivers >>> and POLICE.

    https://www.wsj.com/articles/ev-electric-car-battery-charge-hypermiler-11642517385
    I was driving around 40 MPH on right lane of a highway (speed limit unknown)
    and got pull over for driving too slow. I told him that i was running low
    on >> charges and won't make it to the charger any faster. He escort me for a
    little while and left.

    Walking is becoming a hazard too. This is two cases in a single block:
    https://www.dropbox.com/s/gi14nqa2hqej6vi/Charging_1.jpg?raw=1
    https://www.dropbox.com/s/zehxbz00u2qxb8t/Charging_2.jpg?raw=1

    Somebody tried that not too far from me, in a conservation area
    full of houses converted into flats.

    He gave it up as impractical, and sold his EV.

    In the first pic one might ask why he didn't pull the car into his
    garage to charge it.

    The answer is that around here, about half the garages are so full of
    junk that no car can fit inside.

    --

    If a man will begin with certainties, he shall end with doubts,
    but if he will be content to begin with doubts he shall end in certainties. Francis Bacon

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Ed Lee@21:1/5 to John Larkin on Mon Jan 24 17:15:06 2022
    On Monday, January 24, 2022 at 5:08:34 PM UTC-8, John Larkin wrote:
    On Tue, 25 Jan 2022 00:40:00 +0000, Tom Gardner
    <spam...@blueyonder.co.uk> wrote:

    On 24/01/22 22:37, John Larkin wrote:
    On Tue, 18 Jan 2022 08:25:06 -0800 (PST), Ed Lee <edward....@gmail.com> >> wrote:

    For Maximum EV Efficiency, Stick to 25 Miles an Hour, Ignore Angry Drivers
    and POLICE.

    https://www.wsj.com/articles/ev-electric-car-battery-charge-hypermiler-11642517385
    I was driving around 40 MPH on right lane of a highway (speed limit unknown)
    and got pull over for driving too slow. I told him that i was running low
    on >> charges and won't make it to the charger any faster. He escort me for a
    little while and left.

    Walking is becoming a hazard too. This is two cases in a single block:
    https://www.dropbox.com/s/gi14nqa2hqej6vi/Charging_1.jpg?raw=1
    https://www.dropbox.com/s/zehxbz00u2qxb8t/Charging_2.jpg?raw=1

    Somebody tried that not too far from me, in a conservation area
    full of houses converted into flats.

    He gave it up as impractical, and sold his EV.
    In the first pic one might ask why he didn't pull the car into his
    garage to charge it.

    Leave the link for at least something like this:

    https://www.staples.com/Staples-6-Cord-Cover-Gray/product_2093411?ci_src=17588969&ci_sku=2093411&KPID=2093411&cid=PS:GS:RE:RP:NB:FALSE:TXT:SV:Open:1679103750:60732599210:&gclid=Cj0KCQiAubmPBhCyARIsAJWNpiMadxS2tLTGqsdVmcHcdF9d0i_f_
    xykuobK7qdzedRg8bxEb1sN39MaAv9gEALw_wcB

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Rick C@21:1/5 to Ed Lee on Mon Jan 24 17:58:03 2022
    On Monday, January 24, 2022 at 8:15:11 PM UTC-5, Ed Lee wrote:

    https://www.staples.com/Staples-6-Cord-Cover-Gray/product_2093411?ci_src=17588969&ci_sku=2093411&KPID=2093411&cid=PS:GS:RE:RP:NB:FALSE:TXT:SV:Open:1679103750:60732599210:&gclid=Cj0KCQiAubmPBhCyARIsAJWNpiMadxS2tLTGqsdVmcHcdF9d0i_f_
    xykuobK7qdzedRg8bxEb1sN39MaAv9gEALw_wcB

    Funny how they add these insanely long random codes to URLs. This works just as well. Anyone know what they are doing?

    https://www.staples.com/Staples-6-Cord-Cover-Gray/product_2093411

    --

    Rick C.

    ---++ Get 1,000 miles of free Supercharging
    ---++ Tesla referral code - https://ts.la/richard11209

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Rick C@21:1/5 to Ed Lee on Mon Jan 24 17:55:38 2022
    On Monday, January 24, 2022 at 8:15:11 PM UTC-5, Ed Lee wrote:
    On Monday, January 24, 2022 at 5:08:34 PM UTC-8, John Larkin wrote:
    On Tue, 25 Jan 2022 00:40:00 +0000, Tom Gardner
    <spam...@blueyonder.co.uk> wrote:

    On 24/01/22 22:37, John Larkin wrote:
    On Tue, 18 Jan 2022 08:25:06 -0800 (PST), Ed Lee <edward....@gmail.com> >> wrote:

    For Maximum EV Efficiency, Stick to 25 Miles an Hour, Ignore Angry Drivers
    and POLICE.

    https://www.wsj.com/articles/ev-electric-car-battery-charge-hypermiler-11642517385
    I was driving around 40 MPH on right lane of a highway (speed limit unknown)
    and got pull over for driving too slow. I told him that i was running low
    on >> charges and won't make it to the charger any faster. He escort me for a
    little while and left.

    Walking is becoming a hazard too. This is two cases in a single block: >> https://www.dropbox.com/s/gi14nqa2hqej6vi/Charging_1.jpg?raw=1
    https://www.dropbox.com/s/zehxbz00u2qxb8t/Charging_2.jpg?raw=1

    Somebody tried that not too far from me, in a conservation area
    full of houses converted into flats.

    He gave it up as impractical, and sold his EV.
    In the first pic one might ask why he didn't pull the car into his
    garage to charge it.
    Leave the link for at least something like this:

    https://www.staples.com/Staples-6-Cord-Cover-Gray/product_2093411?ci_src=17588969&ci_sku=2093411&KPID=2093411&cid=PS:GS:RE:RP:NB:FALSE:TXT:SV:Open:1679103750:60732599210:&gclid=Cj0KCQiAubmPBhCyARIsAJWNpiMadxS2tLTGqsdVmcHcdF9d0i_f_
    xykuobK7qdzedRg8bxEb1sN39MaAv9gEALw_wcB

    I like the way they make it gray so it isn't too obvious. lol The flat I'm in this week is actually very nice, on the town plaza, second floor with spacious rooms. The bathroom floor is raised almost an inch though and just a step function, no ramp,
    no marking. The first night I walked in the bathroom I actually stubbed my toe. Who expects an inch step in the bathroom??? Like the cord cover, it needs some color to make it visible. I guess you pay more attention to this stuff when you get older.

    --

    Rick C.

    ---+- Get 1,000 miles of free Supercharging
    ---+- Tesla referral code - https://ts.la/richard11209

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Rick C@21:1/5 to John Larkin on Mon Jan 24 17:47:50 2022
    On Monday, January 24, 2022 at 6:44:49 PM UTC-5, John Larkin wrote:
    On Mon, 24 Jan 2022 15:34:49 -0800 (PST), Lasse Langwadt Christensen <lang...@fonz.dk> wrote:

    tirsdag den 25. januar 2022 kl. 00.09.44 UTC+1 skrev gnuarm.del...@gmail.com:
    On Monday, January 24, 2022 at 5:38:04 PM UTC-5, John Larkin wrote:
    On Tue, 18 Jan 2022 08:25:06 -0800 (PST), Ed Lee
    <edward....@gmail.com> wrote:

    For Maximum EV Efficiency, Stick to 25 Miles an Hour, Ignore Angry Drivers and POLICE.

    https://www.wsj.com/articles/ev-electric-car-battery-charge-hypermiler-11642517385

    I was driving around 40 MPH on right lane of a highway (speed limit unknown) and got pull over for driving too slow. I told him that i was running low on charges and won't make it to the charger any faster. He escort me for a little while and
    left.

    Walking is becoming a hazard too. This is two cases in a single block: >> >
    https://www.dropbox.com/s/gi14nqa2hqej6vi/Charging_1.jpg?raw=1

    https://www.dropbox.com/s/zehxbz00u2qxb8t/Charging_2.jpg?raw=1
    I see the van is on leveling blocks. One looks like a hose rather than an electric cord. Maybe he's filling a water bed.

    I suspect it is water and electricity and someone is living in it, and the blocks is to make the floor level when parked sideways on a hill

    That block has a stunning view of downtown, especially at night. I can imagine people not looking where they are walking.

    Where I'm from the sidewalks were built in colonial times and we still have bricks in many spots. Where they replaced the bricks with concrete it heaves from tree roots. Anyone who doesn't watch where they walk is asking for trouble. So too is it with
    life.

    I'm actually very surprised Larkin is complaining about this. It sounds more like something he would claim was a silly fear based approach to life. I wonder what Larkin would say if someone fell on this sidewalk while taking a selfie?

    --

    Rick C.

    ----+ Get 1,000 miles of free Supercharging
    ----+ Tesla referral code - https://ts.la/richard11209

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From DecadentLinuxUserNumeroUno@decadenc@21:1/5 to All on Tue Jan 25 02:59:45 2022
    Rick C <gnuarm.deletethisbit@gmail.com> wrote in news:40852cdd-8f75-43d7-b5e8-5c6d2f9947cbn@googlegroups.com:

    snip!

    I like the way they make it gray so it isn't too obvious. lol
    The flat I'm in this week is actually very nice, on the town
    plaza, second floor with spacious rooms. The bathroom floor is
    raised almost an inch though and just a step function, no ramp, no
    marking. The first night I walked in the bathroom I actually
    stubbed my toe. Who expects an inch step in the bathroom???
    Like the cord cover, it needs some color to make it visible. I
    guess you pay more attention to this stuff when you get older.


    Chop a big 8 x 10 inch box out of the slab in the garage and core
    drill under the walkway and exit at the curb. Put caps on it to keep
    it clear when not using it. So, probably two inches would do, eh?

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From DecadentLinuxUserNumeroUno@decadenc@21:1/5 to John Larkin on Tue Jan 25 02:33:52 2022
    John Larkin <jlarkin@highland_atwork_technology.com> wrote in news:cdauugh6aruictihj5kq4jvde2vbactqio@4ax.com:

    On Tue, 18 Jan 2022 08:25:06 -0800 (PST), Ed Lee
    <edward.ming.lee@gmail.com> wrote:

    For Maximum EV Efficiency, Stick to 25 Miles an Hour, Ignore Angry
    Drivers and POLICE.

    https://www.wsj.com/articles/ev-electric-car-battery-charge-hypermi >>ler-11642517385

    I was driving around 40 MPH on right lane of a highway (speed
    limit unknown) and got pull over for driving too slow. I told him
    that i was running low on charges and won't make it to the charger
    any faster. He escort me for a little while and left.

    Walking is becoming a hazard too. This is two cases in a single
    block:

    https://www.dropbox.com/s/gi14nqa2hqej6vi/Charging_1.jpg?raw=1

    https://www.dropbox.com/s/zehxbz00u2qxb8t/Charging_2.jpg?raw=1


    The second one is not an EV. He is charging his batteries and the
    second cord is to make use of power while the circuit normally
    connecte to the batteries is offline.

    The first one says to me that the guy stuffed his garage full of
    something other than a bare spot for his car to sit on. If it is
    another car, that is the one to park on the street. Unless it is a
    'fancy car' or such.

    It would seem that a structure of two beams would make a device
    that carries the cord above the sidewalk and drops it down to the
    car. And the top ,ount and car mount hold it rigid (enough).

    I think there is a product there. Big, soft, valved suction cup
    for the end that goes down to the car and a hard mounted "jack" up on
    the wall for the top beam to "plug" into. One could even incorporate
    the cord for specific vehicles into it. My idea. You saw and read
    about it here first.

    And oh looky, no longer a code violation!

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From DecadentLinuxUserNumeroUno@decadenc@21:1/5 to Ed Lee on Tue Jan 25 02:56:45 2022
    Ed Lee <edward.ming.lee@gmail.com> wrote in news:a68f7eb6-425d-4f32-9b30-3f45eda0c119n@googlegroups.com:

    On Monday, January 24, 2022 at 5:08:34 PM UTC-8, John Larkin
    wrote:
    On Tue, 25 Jan 2022 00:40:00 +0000, Tom Gardner
    <spam...@blueyonder.co.uk> wrote:

    On 24/01/22 22:37, John Larkin wrote:
    On Tue, 18 Jan 2022 08:25:06 -0800 (PST), Ed Lee
    <edward....@gmail.com

    wrote:

    For Maximum EV Efficiency, Stick to 25 Miles an Hour, Ignore
    Angry Dr
    ivers
    and POLICE.

    https://www.wsj.com/articles/ev-electric-car-battery-charge-hy
    permile
    r-11642517385
    I was driving around 40 MPH on right lane of a highway
    (speed limi
    t unknown)
    and got pull over for driving too slow. I told him that i
    was runnin
    g low
    on >> charges and won't make it to the charger any faster. He
    escort me
    for a
    little while and left.

    Walking is becoming a hazard too. This is two cases in a
    single block:

    https://www.dropbox.com/s/gi14nqa2hqej6vi/Charging_1.jpg?raw=1
    https://www.dropbox.com/s/zehxbz00u2qxb8t/Charging_2.jpg?raw=1

    Somebody tried that not too far from me, in a conservation area
    full of houses converted into flats.

    He gave it up as impractical, and sold his EV.
    In the first pic one might ask why he didn't pull the car into
    his garage to charge it.

    Leave the link for at least something like this:

    https://www.staples.com/Staples-6-Cord-Cover-Gray/product_2093411?c i_src=17588969&ci_sku=2093411&KPID=2093411&cid=PS:GS:RE:RP:NB:FALSE :TXT:SV:Open:1679103750:60732599210:&gclid=Cj0KCQiAubmPBhCyARIsAJWN piMadxS2tLTGqsdVmcHcdF9d0i_f_xykuobK7qdzedRg8bxEb1sN39MaAv9gEALw_wc
    B


    Might make code in a factory floor setting, but not on a public
    walkway. It would technically be up to code, but I guarantee the
    city won't go for it.

    So as long as it is temporary and the user pulls it up when
    complete, leaving no remnant, it might get "ignored".

    Still it would be ideal to simply elevate it and fashion a device
    to support the new routing out over the walkway. Still temporary
    only.

    Find it at Office Depot as they are closing stores and you might
    find it cheaper.

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From jlarkin@highlandsniptechnology.com@21:1/5 to edward.ming.lee@gmail.com on Mon Jan 24 19:52:47 2022
    On Mon, 24 Jan 2022 17:15:06 -0800 (PST), Ed Lee
    <edward.ming.lee@gmail.com> wrote:

    On Monday, January 24, 2022 at 5:08:34 PM UTC-8, John Larkin wrote:
    On Tue, 25 Jan 2022 00:40:00 +0000, Tom Gardner
    <spam...@blueyonder.co.uk> wrote:

    On 24/01/22 22:37, John Larkin wrote:
    On Tue, 18 Jan 2022 08:25:06 -0800 (PST), Ed Lee <edward....@gmail.com> >> >> wrote:

    For Maximum EV Efficiency, Stick to 25 Miles an Hour, Ignore Angry Drivers
    and POLICE.

    https://www.wsj.com/articles/ev-electric-car-battery-charge-hypermiler-11642517385
    I was driving around 40 MPH on right lane of a highway (speed limit unknown)
    and got pull over for driving too slow. I told him that i was running low
    on >> charges and won't make it to the charger any faster. He escort me for a
    little while and left.

    Walking is becoming a hazard too. This is two cases in a single block:
    https://www.dropbox.com/s/gi14nqa2hqej6vi/Charging_1.jpg?raw=1
    https://www.dropbox.com/s/zehxbz00u2qxb8t/Charging_2.jpg?raw=1

    Somebody tried that not too far from me, in a conservation area
    full of houses converted into flats.

    He gave it up as impractical, and sold his EV.
    In the first pic one might ask why he didn't pull the car into his
    garage to charge it.

    Leave the link for at least something like this:

    https://www.staples.com/Staples-6-Cord-Cover-Gray/product_2093411?ci_src=17588969&ci_sku=2093411&KPID=2093411&cid=PS:GS:RE:RP:NB:FALSE:TXT:SV:Open:1679103750:60732599210:&gclid=Cj0KCQiAubmPBhCyARIsAJWNpiMadxS2tLTGqsdVmcHcdF9d0i_f_
    xykuobK7qdzedRg8bxEb1sN39MaAv9gEALw_wcB

    What, spend almost $15 to be a good neighbor?

    The owner of that car was in a bad mood, having to pay for
    electricity. For some odd reason he couldn't use a free charging
    station.



    --

    I yam what I yam - Popeye

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Cydrome Leader@21:1/5 to Anthony William Sloman on Tue Jan 25 05:09:33 2022
    Anthony William Sloman <bill.sloman@ieee.org> wrote:
    On Monday, January 24, 2022 at 4:58:51 AM UTC+11, Cydrome Leader wrote:
    Anthony William Sloman <bill....@ieee.org> wrote:
    On Sunday, January 23, 2022 at 6:20:38 PM UTC+11, Cydrome Leader wrote:
    Anthony William Sloman <bill....@ieee.org> wrote:
    On Saturday, January 22, 2022 at 6:41:48 PM UTC+11, gnuarm.del...@gmail.com wrote:
    On Saturday, January 22, 2022 at 1:01:18 AM UTC-5, Jasen Betts wrote: >> >> >> > On 2022-01-21, John Larkin <jlarkin@highland_atwork_technology.com> wrote:
    On Fri, 21 Jan 2022 20:46:49 -0000 (UTC), Cydrome Leader <pres...@MUNGEpanix.com> wrote:
    John Larkin <jlarkin@highland_atwork_technology.com> wrote:
    On Wed, 19 Jan 2022 19:30:11 -0500, "Tom Del Rosso" <fizzbin...@that-google-mail-domain.com> wrote:
    jla...@highlandsniptechnology.com wrote:

    <snip>

    You didn't factor in the transportation cost of the electricity. The losses are not large, but it starts eating into the CoP margin. The real issue is the cost of the installation. A heat pump requires backup heat for when it's not very
    effective such as low temps but also for removing ice from the coils. To do that they run it in air conditioner mode and run the backup heat to keep the house from cooling off.

    Actually, they don't or at least they don't have to. In Australia most >> >> > air-conditioning systems as touted as "reverse cycle systems". You can run
    the compressor in reverse so it while it can cool the house in summer, it.

    Oh really? How do they run the compressor in reverse? flip the leads? Let's
    all take notes as the guru of heat pumps enlightens us once again.

    There are all sort of options. Using a pair of valves to flip the
    intakes and outlets would work. If the compressor is being spun by a
    synchronous motor you could use electronics to make it spin in the
    opposite direction. I haven't dismanted my Mitsubishi reverse cycle
    air-conditioner to find out how they do it - it would invalidate my
    guarantee if I did, and I don't really need to know. Cydrome Leader does >> > - he's advanced enough fatuous misconceptions to make it clear that he
    hasn't got a clue.

    Well, the expert has spoken. There might be a synchronous motor in the
    compressor and some magic electronics to spin it the other direction.

    Thinking about what the compressor has to do with the gas stream it is compressing suggests that it wouldn't be a good idea to run it in reverse.
    The electronics to do that would be pretty trivial - you wouldn't need to add any extra parts or compromise the reliabilitly.

    Ignore the reversing valve I mentioned originally, that must be one of my misconceptions about parts extra parts to fail in the heating or cooling months.

    Mechanical parts do fail more frequently than well-designed electronics.
    They do wear.

    Surprise, heat pumps are almost entirely mechanical, and not even slightly
    user servicable.

    And for the audience, no, they do not reverse the spin on a motor to
    switch from heating to cooling or vice versa.

    Here's a casual heat pump repair video skillfully trimmed to 16 minutes

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QMDIx3MqmJM

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Anthony William Sloman@21:1/5 to Cydrome Leader on Mon Jan 24 21:46:51 2022
    On Tuesday, January 25, 2022 at 4:09:39 PM UTC+11, Cydrome Leader wrote:
    Anthony William Sloman <bill....@ieee.org> wrote:
    On Monday, January 24, 2022 at 4:58:51 AM UTC+11, Cydrome Leader wrote:
    Anthony William Sloman <bill....@ieee.org> wrote:
    On Sunday, January 23, 2022 at 6:20:38 PM UTC+11, Cydrome Leader wrote: >> >> Anthony William Sloman <bill....@ieee.org> wrote:
    On Saturday, January 22, 2022 at 6:41:48 PM UTC+11, gnuarm.del...@gmail.com wrote:
    On Saturday, January 22, 2022 at 1:01:18 AM UTC-5, Jasen Betts wrote:
    On 2022-01-21, John Larkin <jlarkin@highland_atwork_technology.com> wrote:
    On Fri, 21 Jan 2022 20:46:49 -0000 (UTC), Cydrome Leader <pres...@MUNGEpanix.com> wrote:
    John Larkin <jlarkin@highland_atwork_technology.com> wrote:
    On Wed, 19 Jan 2022 19:30:11 -0500, "Tom Del Rosso" <fizzbin...@that-google-mail-domain.com> wrote:
    jla...@highlandsniptechnology.com wrote:

    <snip>

    You didn't factor in the transportation cost of the electricity. The losses are not large, but it starts eating into the CoP margin. The real issue is the cost of the installation. A heat pump requires backup heat for when it's not very
    effective such as low temps but also for removing ice from the coils. To do that they run it in air conditioner mode and run the backup heat to keep the house from cooling off.

    Actually, they don't or at least they don't have to. In Australia most
    air-conditioning systems as touted as "reverse cycle systems". You can run
    the compressor in reverse so it while it can cool the house in summer, it.

    Oh really? How do they run the compressor in reverse? flip the leads? Let's
    all take notes as the guru of heat pumps enlightens us once again.

    There are all sort of options. Using a pair of valves to flip the
    intakes and outlets would work. If the compressor is being spun by a
    synchronous motor you could use electronics to make it spin in the
    opposite direction. I haven't dismanted my Mitsubishi reverse cycle
    air-conditioner to find out how they do it - it would invalidate my
    guarantee if I did, and I don't really need to know. Cydrome Leader does
    - he's advanced enough fatuous misconceptions to make it clear that he >> > hasn't got a clue.

    Well, the expert has spoken. There might be a synchronous motor in the
    compressor and some magic electronics to spin it the other direction.

    Thinking about what the compressor has to do with the gas stream it is compressing suggests that it wouldn't be a good idea to run it in reverse.
    The electronics to do that would be pretty trivial - you wouldn't need to add any extra parts or compromise the reliability.

    Ignore the reversing valve I mentioned originally, that must be one of my misconceptions about parts extra parts to fail in the heating or cooling months.

    Mechanical parts do fail more frequently than well-designed electronics. They do wear.

    Surprise, heat pumps are almost entirely mechanical, and not even slightly user servicable.

    But their control systems contain the usual amounts of electronics. it's a lot easier and cheaper to set up a user-interface with an LCD display, and put the valve actuators next to the valves, and control them over some kind of serial link.

    And for the audience, no, they do not reverse the spin on a motor to switch from heating to cooling or vice versa.

    They could have done. It isn't exactly difficult. Thinking about the gas volume changes through the compressor suggests that it wouldn't have been good way to go, but bad engineers get all sorts of silly ideas into their heads, and it can be difficult to
    change their minds.

    Here's a casual heat pump repair video skillfully trimmed to 16 minutes

    But who wants to spend 16 minutes watching a video? And US air-conditioning systems are sold into a relatively impoverished mass market. People from better-off countries are more interested in learning about more up-market systems - not something that
    has been minimally adapted from a gas-fired ducted air home heating system (which seems to be what Rick C wants to talk about).

    --
    Bill Sloman, Sydney

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Jasen Betts@21:1/5 to Ed Lee on Tue Jan 25 06:37:09 2022
    On 2022-01-25, Ed Lee <edward.ming.lee@gmail.com> wrote:
    On Monday, January 24, 2022 at 5:08:34 PM UTC-8, John Larkin wrote:
    On Tue, 25 Jan 2022 00:40:00 +0000, Tom Gardner
    <spam...@blueyonder.co.uk> wrote:

    On 24/01/22 22:37, John Larkin wrote:
    On Tue, 18 Jan 2022 08:25:06 -0800 (PST), Ed Lee <edward....@gmail.com> >> >> wrote:

    For Maximum EV Efficiency, Stick to 25 Miles an Hour, Ignore Angry Drivers
    and POLICE.

    https://www.wsj.com/articles/ev-electric-car-battery-charge-hypermiler-11642517385
    I was driving around 40 MPH on right lane of a highway (speed limit unknown)
    and got pull over for driving too slow. I told him that i was running low
    on >> charges and won't make it to the charger any faster. He escort me for a
    little while and left.

    Walking is becoming a hazard too. This is two cases in a single block:
    https://www.dropbox.com/s/gi14nqa2hqej6vi/Charging_1.jpg?raw=1
    https://www.dropbox.com/s/zehxbz00u2qxb8t/Charging_2.jpg?raw=1

    Somebody tried that not too far from me, in a conservation area
    full of houses converted into flats.

    He gave it up as impractical, and sold his EV.
    In the first pic one might ask why he didn't pull the car into his
    garage to charge it.

    Leave the link for at least something like this:

    https://www.staples.com/Staples-6-Cord-Cover-Gray/product_2093411

    yeah, but pick one that's actually large enough to fit the cable.

    what do the rules say about parking in that spot anyway?



    --
    Jasen.

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From David Brown@21:1/5 to Rick C on Tue Jan 25 09:24:13 2022
    On 25/01/2022 02:58, Rick C wrote:
    On Monday, January 24, 2022 at 8:15:11 PM UTC-5, Ed Lee wrote:

    https://www.staples.com/Staples-6-Cord-Cover-Gray/product_2093411?ci_src=17588969&ci_sku=2093411&KPID=2093411&cid=PS:GS:RE:RP:NB:FALSE:TXT:SV:Open:1679103750:60732599210:&gclid=Cj0KCQiAubmPBhCyARIsAJWNpiMadxS2tLTGqsdVmcHcdF9d0i_f_
    xykuobK7qdzedRg8bxEb1sN39MaAv9gEALw_wcB

    Funny how they add these insanely long random codes to URLs. This works just as well. Anyone know what they are doing?

    https://www.staples.com/Staples-6-Cord-Cover-Gray/product_2093411


    I've no idea for this particular example, but sometimes these extra
    parameters are used to hold options such as filters or selection or
    display options for pages. They might hold preferences for currency or country. They might also hold a cookie code for a server-side session
    tracker - that lets you have a "session" on the webside without any
    local cookies (and without the pointless "this site uses cookies - do
    you accept that?" nonsense).

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Rick C@21:1/5 to Jasen Betts on Tue Jan 25 00:55:34 2022
    On Tuesday, January 25, 2022 at 3:00:57 AM UTC-4, Jasen Betts wrote:
    On 2022-01-25, Ed Lee <edward....@gmail.com> wrote:
    On Monday, January 24, 2022 at 5:08:34 PM UTC-8, John Larkin wrote:
    On Tue, 25 Jan 2022 00:40:00 +0000, Tom Gardner
    <spam...@blueyonder.co.uk> wrote:

    On 24/01/22 22:37, John Larkin wrote:
    On Tue, 18 Jan 2022 08:25:06 -0800 (PST), Ed Lee <edward....@gmail.com> >> >> wrote:

    For Maximum EV Efficiency, Stick to 25 Miles an Hour, Ignore Angry Drivers
    and POLICE.

    https://www.wsj.com/articles/ev-electric-car-battery-charge-hypermiler-11642517385
    I was driving around 40 MPH on right lane of a highway (speed limit unknown)
    and got pull over for driving too slow. I told him that i was running low
    on >> charges and won't make it to the charger any faster. He escort me for a
    little while and left.

    Walking is becoming a hazard too. This is two cases in a single block: >> >> https://www.dropbox.com/s/gi14nqa2hqej6vi/Charging_1.jpg?raw=1
    https://www.dropbox.com/s/zehxbz00u2qxb8t/Charging_2.jpg?raw=1

    Somebody tried that not too far from me, in a conservation area
    full of houses converted into flats.

    He gave it up as impractical, and sold his EV.
    In the first pic one might ask why he didn't pull the car into his
    garage to charge it.

    Leave the link for at least something like this:

    https://www.staples.com/Staples-6-Cord-Cover-Gray/product_2093411
    yeah, but pick one that's actually large enough to fit the cable.

    Cables are designed to dissipate the heat from the current carried. If you encase it in the plastic sleeve it might overheat. A friend designed furniture for offices and had to respect all sorts of regulations about that sort of thing.

    --

    Rick C.

    --+-+ Get 1,000 miles of free Supercharging
    --+-+ Tesla referral code - https://ts.la/richard11209

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From David Brown@21:1/5 to jlarkin@highlandsniptechnology.com on Tue Jan 25 09:26:46 2022
    On 25/01/2022 04:52, jlarkin@highlandsniptechnology.com wrote:

    What, spend almost $15 to be a good neighbor?

    The owner of that car was in a bad mood, having to pay for
    electricity. For some odd reason he couldn't use a free charging
    station.


    There's no such thing as a "free charging station". There might be circumstances where you get someone else to pay for it, but it is /not/
    free.

    (I agree that $15 does not seem much to pay to be a good neighbour.)

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Rick C@21:1/5 to DecadentLinux...@decadence.org on Tue Jan 25 00:50:22 2022
    On Monday, January 24, 2022 at 10:34:02 PM UTC-4, DecadentLinux...@decadence.org wrote:
    John Larkin <jlarkin@highland_atwork_technology.com> wrote in news:cdauugh6aruictihj...@4ax.com:
    On Tue, 18 Jan 2022 08:25:06 -0800 (PST), Ed Lee
    <edward....@gmail.com> wrote:

    For Maximum EV Efficiency, Stick to 25 Miles an Hour, Ignore Angry >>Drivers and POLICE.

    https://www.wsj.com/articles/ev-electric-car-battery-charge-hypermi >>ler-11642517385

    I was driving around 40 MPH on right lane of a highway (speed
    limit unknown) and got pull over for driving too slow. I told him
    that i was running low on charges and won't make it to the charger
    any faster. He escort me for a little while and left.

    Walking is becoming a hazard too. This is two cases in a single
    block:

    https://www.dropbox.com/s/gi14nqa2hqej6vi/Charging_1.jpg?raw=1

    https://www.dropbox.com/s/zehxbz00u2qxb8t/Charging_2.jpg?raw=1

    The second one is not an EV. He is charging his batteries and the
    second cord is to make use of power while the circuit normally
    connecte to the batteries is offline.

    The first one says to me that the guy stuffed his garage full of
    something other than a bare spot for his car to sit on. If it is
    another car, that is the one to park on the street. Unless it is a
    'fancy car' or such.

    It would seem that a structure of two beams would make a device
    that carries the cord above the sidewalk and drops it down to the
    car. And the top ,ount and car mount hold it rigid (enough).

    I think there is a product there. Big, soft, valved suction cup
    for the end that goes down to the car and a hard mounted "jack" up on
    the wall for the top beam to "plug" into. One could even incorporate
    the cord for specific vehicles into it. My idea. You saw and read
    about it here first.

    And oh looky, no longer a code violation!

    A guy in the EU sells a light, metal arm that parks against the wall and swings out to support the cord. I don't know if it's long enough to reach across the side walk. There's also the cord length issue, but I suppose the EVSE cable can be used with
    an extension.

    --

    Rick C.

    --+-- Get 1,000 miles of free Supercharging
    --+-- Tesla referral code - https://ts.la/richard11209

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Rick C@21:1/5 to David Brown on Tue Jan 25 00:58:50 2022
    On Tuesday, January 25, 2022 at 4:26:52 AM UTC-4, David Brown wrote:
    On 25/01/2022 04:52, jla...@highlandsniptechnology.com wrote:

    What, spend almost $15 to be a good neighbor?

    The owner of that car was in a bad mood, having to pay for
    electricity. For some odd reason he couldn't use a free charging
    station.

    There's no such thing as a "free charging station". There might be circumstances where you get someone else to pay for it, but it is /not/
    free.

    What a silly point. Applying your thought to every use of the word "free" would allow us to eliminate the word "free" from the dictionary! (along with many other words)

    --

    Rick C.

    --++- Get 1,000 miles of free Supercharging
    --++- Tesla referral code - https://ts.la/richard11209

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From David Brown@21:1/5 to Rick C on Tue Jan 25 14:02:58 2022
    On 25/01/2022 09:58, Rick C wrote:
    On Tuesday, January 25, 2022 at 4:26:52 AM UTC-4, David Brown wrote:
    On 25/01/2022 04:52, jla...@highlandsniptechnology.com wrote:

    What, spend almost $15 to be a good neighbor?

    The owner of that car was in a bad mood, having to pay for
    electricity. For some odd reason he couldn't use a free charging
    station.

    There's no such thing as a "free charging station". There might be
    circumstances where you get someone else to pay for it, but it is /not/
    free.

    What a silly point. Applying your thought to every use of the word "free" would allow us to eliminate the word "free" from the dictionary! (along with many other words)


    Perhaps I misunderstood John Larkin's comment here. I took his "free"
    to mean "zero cost" - some people /do/ get zero-cost car charging at
    their place of work, and then it is quite relevant that it is paid for
    by your employer. It is also relevant that most people do not have
    access to zero-cost charging - precisely because /someone/ has to pay
    for it, and it's not cheap.

    But maybe he wrote "free" meaning "not occupied".

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Martin Brown@21:1/5 to Rick C on Tue Jan 25 14:27:52 2022
    On 24/01/2022 15:39, Rick C wrote:
    On Monday, January 24, 2022 at 6:39:26 AM UTC-5, Martin Brown wrote:
    On 21/01/2022 23:31, Rick C wrote:
    On Friday, January 21, 2022 at 6:24:41 AM UTC-5, Martin Brown wrote:
    [snip]
    https://www.yorkpress.co.uk/news/19555455.vehicle-charging-hub-york-still-shut---no-power/

    First three sentences quoted verbatim below in case it is paywalled from >>>> outside the UK:

    "A FLAGSHIP charging centre for electric vehicles - originally due to
    open on York’s outskirts in July - is still fenced off and closed
    following delays in connecting it to the electricity grid.

    Council officials said yesterday that they were still finalising
    commercial and contractual arrangements before the York HyperHub at
    Monks Cross could open later this year.

    The complex, situated at the entrance to the Monks Cross Park&Ride car >>>> park, will be one of the largest charging hubs in Northern England and >>>> will aim to act as a demonstration of best practice for the design of EV >>>> charging facilities."

    I find the last paragraph particularly ironic. It still *isn't* open and >>>> had another high profile *not*opening date pass very recently.

    Where does that say anything about "tariffs"???

    WTF do you think finalising commercial and contractual arrangements
    means? The whole thing got bogged down because the price of electricity
    was changing so fast that many suppliers were going bust.

    The article says nothing about that. Sorry, appeal rejected. Do you have any evidence of what you wrote about the issue being pricing?

    That the gas price to produce electricity in the UK has increased
    massively +300% in the past 6 months and energy "suppliers" are going
    bust left right and centre. They are tight lipped about the exact
    reasons why they do not have electrical supply to their boondoggle but
    it was due to come into service last June and has just failed to open
    yet again!

    See, I have a hard time imagining a business spending a boatload of money on a project before they had the details ironed out. If you don't know what you have to pay for electricity, you can't know if your venture will be profitable. Who is going to
    sink a couple of million dollars into a venture before they know how profitable it will be... oh, I know! The UK nuclear power industry!!! Now they are talking about making the rate payers partners, not in the profits, but in the cost overruns. Yeah,
    a great business community.

    I am not. EU development funds and a greenish council not very bright
    about high technology is a recipe for this sort of thing to happen.

    https://www.york.gov.uk/hyperhubs

    Note that they were claiming at the outset to sell electricity by the
    kWh at 20p (fast) and 25p (superfast) when it was announced. It is no
    longer clear if there will be anyone willing to sell to them at that
    price or right now enough electricity for it to function at all.
    They don't actually "spell out" anything. "were still finalizing commercial and contractual arrangements" is as close as they come. That could mean anything.

    It means they can't agree who pays for what and an acceptable tariff for
    electricity supply. It is in the interests of the supplier to hold out
    since the price of electricity is rising by the day.

    Show me how that follows? Why would anyone start construction before such fundamental details are spelled out? They wouldn't.

    They already have done. That or their preferred cheapest possible
    electricity supplier has already gone to the wall. Suppliers going bust
    has thrown many UK households thrown into a pool where some other larger supplier takes over supply gives them a much less favourable variable
    tariff that more nearly reflects current price to supply.
    (even then they are all losing money hand over fist right now)

    Almost no electricity supply companies can make any money on domestic
    sale of electricity. The cost to make electricity (apart from hydro) is
    higher than the capped retail sale price to consumers. It is a mad house!

    The only suppliers operating on a sound financial basis in the UK at
    present have either nuclear or hydro as well as gas generating capacity
    in their portfolio and are cross subsidising the loss making retail arm
    from that. Industry is screaming blue murder they pay full price.

    Those that merely buy and sell gas/electricity are failing spectacularly
    and it isn't over yet. A few more go down with each week that passes.
    They won't get a chance to up their capped prices until April now.


    Domestic consumers are protected (for now) by a price cap. When it runs
    out in April (or their supplier goes bust) there will be a massive
    readjustement of +50% perhaps more.

    In the US local utility rates are regulated by local boards, usually at the state level. Generation is a competitive matter with the freedom to buy from whom you want. I don't know exactly how they do things in the UK, but if they didn't have
    electrical supply lined up prior to constructing the facility, that is simply incompetent program management.

    Quite probably a bit of both. But as things stand UK electricity
    suppliers with very few exceptions have *NO* generating capacity at all
    - they are clueless middlemen billing operations. Wonderful effect of
    deregulation of the electricity market.

    Not at all relevant to the issue of arranging electrical power.

    Actually it is critical to arranging electrical power. You have to buy
    it from someone who is still in business when the hardware is complete.
    There have been so many failures in the UK supply industry that it has
    become chaotic - especially if you want the lowest possible price.

    https://www.forbes.com/uk/advisor/energy/failed-uk-energy-suppliers-update/

    It is the lowest cost box shifters that have failed first.

    It is roughly split into the people who make it, the regional
    infrastructure operators and the people who bulk buy electricity and
    sell it on. Many of the latter were also operating on the spot market
    and so have been comprehensively wiped out by the gas price shocks.

    If you read back though this discussion you have made unsupported statements several times and never followed through on demonstrating they are true. Now you cite an article that says what I said it said, they are finalizing "legal agreements", which
    you somehow interpret is setting tariffs, otherwise known as rates. This started with you claiming chargers were "unable to get supply". That's not the same thing as they were too incompetent to line up the electrical source before they started
    construction.

    They remain unable to get supply. That is pretty damn fundamental.

    So you claim. "were still finalizing commercial and contractual arrangements" does not imply anything about supply.

    So why has it taken the so long? The physical kit was all installed for
    the opening last June but then it was cancelled with a few days notice
    and rescheduled for this month. Then it was cancelled with a few days
    notice. Rinse and repeat. Some exemplar of how to do a superhub!

    --
    Regards,
    Martin Brown

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From jlarkin@highlandsniptechnology.com@21:1/5 to david.brown@hesbynett.no on Tue Jan 25 08:15:01 2022
    On Tue, 25 Jan 2022 14:02:58 +0100, David Brown
    <david.brown@hesbynett.no> wrote:

    On 25/01/2022 09:58, Rick C wrote:
    On Tuesday, January 25, 2022 at 4:26:52 AM UTC-4, David Brown wrote:
    On 25/01/2022 04:52, jla...@highlandsniptechnology.com wrote:

    What, spend almost $15 to be a good neighbor?

    The owner of that car was in a bad mood, having to pay for
    electricity. For some odd reason he couldn't use a free charging
    station.

    There's no such thing as a "free charging station". There might be
    circumstances where you get someone else to pay for it, but it is /not/
    free.

    What a silly point. Applying your thought to every use of the word "free" would allow us to eliminate the word "free" from the dictionary! (along with many other words)


    Perhaps I misunderstood John Larkin's comment here. I took his "free"
    to mean "zero cost" - some people /do/ get zero-cost car charging at
    their place of work, and then it is quite relevant that it is paid for
    by your employer. It is also relevant that most people do not have
    access to zero-cost charging - precisely because /someone/ has to pay
    for it, and it's not cheap.

    But maybe he wrote "free" meaning "not occupied".


    You furriners don't understand perfectly good American. It should be a
    required college course in your distant lands.



    --

    I yam what I yam - Popeye

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Dimiter_Popoff@21:1/5 to Martin Brown on Tue Jan 25 17:43:16 2022
    On 1/25/2022 16:27, Martin Brown wrote:
    ....
    The only suppliers operating on a sound financial basis in the UK at
    present have either nuclear or hydro as well as gas generating capacity
    in their portfolio and are cross subsidising the loss making retail arm
    from that. Industry is screaming blue murder they pay full price.


    This is quickly becoming a worldwide disaster, after decades of playing
    with subsidized windmills, rooftops and other nonsense instead of
    building enough nuclear what else could we expect.
    In Bulgaria, they are "building" a second nuclear plant for over 30
    years now, must have spent zillions on "consulting" to practically
    zero results, other than ongoing wrestling who is to build it.
    Consequently an energy crisis.

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From jlarkin@highlandsniptechnology.com@21:1/5 to usenet@revmaps.no-ip.org on Tue Jan 25 08:27:22 2022
    On Tue, 25 Jan 2022 06:37:09 -0000 (UTC), Jasen Betts <usenet@revmaps.no-ip.org> wrote:

    On 2022-01-25, Ed Lee <edward.ming.lee@gmail.com> wrote:
    On Monday, January 24, 2022 at 5:08:34 PM UTC-8, John Larkin wrote:
    On Tue, 25 Jan 2022 00:40:00 +0000, Tom Gardner
    <spam...@blueyonder.co.uk> wrote:

    On 24/01/22 22:37, John Larkin wrote:
    On Tue, 18 Jan 2022 08:25:06 -0800 (PST), Ed Lee <edward....@gmail.com> >>> >> wrote:

    For Maximum EV Efficiency, Stick to 25 Miles an Hour, Ignore Angry Drivers
    and POLICE.

    https://www.wsj.com/articles/ev-electric-car-battery-charge-hypermiler-11642517385
    I was driving around 40 MPH on right lane of a highway (speed limit unknown)
    and got pull over for driving too slow. I told him that i was running low
    on >> charges and won't make it to the charger any faster. He escort me for a
    little while and left.

    Walking is becoming a hazard too. This is two cases in a single block: >>> >> https://www.dropbox.com/s/gi14nqa2hqej6vi/Charging_1.jpg?raw=1
    https://www.dropbox.com/s/zehxbz00u2qxb8t/Charging_2.jpg?raw=1

    Somebody tried that not too far from me, in a conservation area
    full of houses converted into flats.

    He gave it up as impractical, and sold his EV.
    In the first pic one might ask why he didn't pull the car into his
    garage to charge it.

    Leave the link for at least something like this:

    https://www.staples.com/Staples-6-Cord-Cover-Gray/product_2093411

    yeah, but pick one that's actually large enough to fit the cable.

    what do the rules say about parking in that spot anyway?

    It's legal to park in your own driveway.

    That block has 90 degree parking and street cleaning two mornings a
    week. You can't block the sidewalk. The meter maids are brutal. I come
    in late those days so I can park on that side of the freeway and get a
    little exercise. I walk over Fallen Bridge, over the freeway to work.
    The previous bridge did in fact fall.

    https://www.dropbox.com/s/t71ma0b5v41m2ho/Crossover.JPG?raw=1





    --

    I yam what I yam - Popeye

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From David Brown@21:1/5 to jlarkin@highlandsniptechnology.com on Tue Jan 25 18:14:36 2022
    On 25/01/2022 17:15, jlarkin@highlandsniptechnology.com wrote:
    On Tue, 25 Jan 2022 14:02:58 +0100, David Brown
    <david.brown@hesbynett.no> wrote:

    On 25/01/2022 09:58, Rick C wrote:
    On Tuesday, January 25, 2022 at 4:26:52 AM UTC-4, David Brown wrote:
    On 25/01/2022 04:52, jla...@highlandsniptechnology.com wrote:

    What, spend almost $15 to be a good neighbor?

    The owner of that car was in a bad mood, having to pay for
    electricity. For some odd reason he couldn't use a free charging
    station.

    There's no such thing as a "free charging station". There might be
    circumstances where you get someone else to pay for it, but it is /not/ >>>> free.

    What a silly point. Applying your thought to every use of the word "free" would allow us to eliminate the word "free" from the dictionary! (along with many other words)


    Perhaps I misunderstood John Larkin's comment here. I took his "free"
    to mean "zero cost" - some people /do/ get zero-cost car charging at
    their place of work, and then it is quite relevant that it is paid for
    by your employer. It is also relevant that most people do not have
    access to zero-cost charging - precisely because /someone/ has to pay
    for it, and it's not cheap.

    But maybe he wrote "free" meaning "not occupied".


    You furriners don't understand perfectly good American. It should be a required college course in your distant lands.


    I can usually understand most of what 'merkins write, though I cannot understand why you want to wear your pants on the outside, or use such half-hearted swear words. (Except Samuel Jackson - he's got the hang of
    it!)

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From jlarkin@highlandsniptechnology.com@21:1/5 to david.brown@hesbynett.no on Tue Jan 25 10:07:10 2022
    On Tue, 25 Jan 2022 18:14:36 +0100, David Brown
    <david.brown@hesbynett.no> wrote:

    On 25/01/2022 17:15, jlarkin@highlandsniptechnology.com wrote:
    On Tue, 25 Jan 2022 14:02:58 +0100, David Brown
    <david.brown@hesbynett.no> wrote:

    On 25/01/2022 09:58, Rick C wrote:
    On Tuesday, January 25, 2022 at 4:26:52 AM UTC-4, David Brown wrote:
    On 25/01/2022 04:52, jla...@highlandsniptechnology.com wrote:

    What, spend almost $15 to be a good neighbor?

    The owner of that car was in a bad mood, having to pay for
    electricity. For some odd reason he couldn't use a free charging
    station.

    There's no such thing as a "free charging station". There might be
    circumstances where you get someone else to pay for it, but it is /not/ >>>>> free.

    What a silly point. Applying your thought to every use of the word "free" would allow us to eliminate the word "free" from the dictionary! (along with many other words)


    Perhaps I misunderstood John Larkin's comment here. I took his "free"
    to mean "zero cost" - some people /do/ get zero-cost car charging at
    their place of work, and then it is quite relevant that it is paid for
    by your employer. It is also relevant that most people do not have
    access to zero-cost charging - precisely because /someone/ has to pay
    for it, and it's not cheap.

    But maybe he wrote "free" meaning "not occupied".


    You furriners don't understand perfectly good American. It should be a
    required college course in your distant lands.


    I can usually understand most of what 'merkins write, though I cannot >understand why you want to wear your pants on the outside, or use such >half-hearted swear words. (Except Samuel Jackson - he's got the hang of
    it!)

    I never understood why "bloody" is a swear word in some remote
    islands.



    --

    I yam what I yam - Popeye

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Rick C@21:1/5 to David Brown on Tue Jan 25 13:14:38 2022
    On Tuesday, January 25, 2022 at 9:03:23 AM UTC-4, David Brown wrote:
    On 25/01/2022 09:58, Rick C wrote:
    On Tuesday, January 25, 2022 at 4:26:52 AM UTC-4, David Brown wrote:
    On 25/01/2022 04:52, jla...@highlandsniptechnology.com wrote:

    What, spend almost $15 to be a good neighbor?

    The owner of that car was in a bad mood, having to pay for
    electricity. For some odd reason he couldn't use a free charging
    station.

    There's no such thing as a "free charging station". There might be
    circumstances where you get someone else to pay for it, but it is /not/ >> free.

    What a silly point. Applying your thought to every use of the word "free" would allow us to eliminate the word "free" from the dictionary! (along with many other words)

    Perhaps I misunderstood John Larkin's comment here. I took his "free"
    to mean "zero cost" - some people /do/ get zero-cost car charging at
    their place of work, and then it is quite relevant that it is paid for
    by your employer. It is also relevant that most people do not have
    access to zero-cost charging - precisely because /someone/ has to pay
    for it, and it's not cheap.

    But maybe he wrote "free" meaning "not occupied".

    I think you don't understand Larkin's post. It was intended to denigrate EV owners as if they all expect "free" charging as in "free beer". So he did mean exactly "free" to the EV owner and costs to anyone else being irrelevant in this context.

    Actually, I find free charging everywhere I go. First there are the free chargers provided by many businesses and cities/counties. These are typically level 2 chargers which cost very little to operate. They are often as free as free parking because
    the cost is about the same. Free beer is harder to find. In my case my charging is provided for free by Tesla as it came with the car. You can protest that it was paid for in the price of the car, blah, blah, blah, but in reality it wasn't. They had
    discontinued free charging with the cars, but had a promotion where you go free charging if you were referred by someone. The price of the car did not change when they started the promotion or when it ended. So clearly there was nothing added to the
    price for the "free" charging.

    --

    Rick C.

    --+++ Get 1,000 miles of free Supercharging
    --+++ Tesla referral code - https://ts.la/richard11209

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Rick C@21:1/5 to Dimiter Popoff on Tue Jan 25 13:19:32 2022
    On Tuesday, January 25, 2022 at 11:43:24 AM UTC-4, Dimiter Popoff wrote:
    On 1/25/2022 16:27, Martin Brown wrote:
    ....
    The only suppliers operating on a sound financial basis in the UK at present have either nuclear or hydro as well as gas generating capacity
    in their portfolio and are cross subsidising the loss making retail arm from that. Industry is screaming blue murder they pay full price.

    This is quickly becoming a worldwide disaster, after decades of playing
    with subsidized windmills, rooftops and other nonsense instead of
    building enough nuclear what else could we expect.
    In Bulgaria, they are "building" a second nuclear plant for over 30
    years now, must have spent zillions on "consulting" to practically
    zero results, other than ongoing wrestling who is to build it.
    Consequently an energy crisis.

    So you think nuclear is the solution to the energy problem other than the fact that it is prohibitively expensive to build it?

    In the UK the present nuclear generation plant being built is not going to return the profit the money bags expected. So in the future the UK government is going to allow them to pass all risk to the rate payers and they can plan and build nuclear
    projects as inefficiently as they wish!

    Yes, what a grand idea!

    --

    Rick C.

    -+--+ Get 1,000 miles of free Supercharging
    -+--+ Tesla referral code - https://ts.la/richard11209

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Rick C@21:1/5 to Martin Brown on Tue Jan 25 13:16:36 2022
    On Tuesday, January 25, 2022 at 10:28:01 AM UTC-4, Martin Brown wrote:
    On 24/01/2022 15:39, Rick C wrote:
    On Monday, January 24, 2022 at 6:39:26 AM UTC-5, Martin Brown wrote:
    On 21/01/2022 23:31, Rick C wrote:
    On Friday, January 21, 2022 at 6:24:41 AM UTC-5, Martin Brown wrote: [snip]
    https://www.yorkpress.co.uk/news/19555455.vehicle-charging-hub-york-still-shut---no-power/

    First three sentences quoted verbatim below in case it is paywalled from
    outside the UK:

    "A FLAGSHIP charging centre for electric vehicles - originally due to >>>> open on York’s outskirts in July - is still fenced off and closed >>>> following delays in connecting it to the electricity grid.

    Council officials said yesterday that they were still finalising
    commercial and contractual arrangements before the York HyperHub at >>>> Monks Cross could open later this year.

    The complex, situated at the entrance to the Monks Cross Park&Ride car >>>> park, will be one of the largest charging hubs in Northern England and >>>> will aim to act as a demonstration of best practice for the design of EV
    charging facilities."

    I find the last paragraph particularly ironic. It still *isn't* open and
    had another high profile *not*opening date pass very recently.

    Where does that say anything about "tariffs"???

    WTF do you think finalising commercial and contractual arrangements
    means? The whole thing got bogged down because the price of electricity >> was changing so fast that many suppliers were going bust.

    The article says nothing about that. Sorry, appeal rejected. Do you have any evidence of what you wrote about the issue being pricing?
    That the gas price to produce electricity in the UK has increased
    massively +300% in the past 6 months and energy "suppliers" are going
    bust left right and centre. They are tight lipped about the exact
    reasons why they do not have electrical supply to their boondoggle but
    it was due to come into service last June and has just failed to open
    yet again!

    See, I have a hard time imagining a business spending a boatload of money on a project before they had the details ironed out. If you don't know what you have to pay for electricity, you can't know if your venture will be profitable. Who is going to
    sink a couple of million dollars into a venture before they know how profitable it will be... oh, I know! The UK nuclear power industry!!! Now they are talking about making the rate payers partners, not in the profits, but in the cost overruns. Yeah, a
    great business community.

    I am not. EU development funds and a greenish council not very bright
    about high technology is a recipe for this sort of thing to happen.

    https://www.york.gov.uk/hyperhubs

    Note that they were claiming at the outset to sell electricity by the
    kWh at 20p (fast) and 25p (superfast) when it was announced. It is no
    longer clear if there will be anyone willing to sell to them at that
    price or right now enough electricity for it to function at all.
    They don't actually "spell out" anything. "were still finalizing commercial and contractual arrangements" is as close as they come. That could mean anything.

    It means they can't agree who pays for what and an acceptable tariff for >> electricity supply. It is in the interests of the supplier to hold out
    since the price of electricity is rising by the day.

    Show me how that follows? Why would anyone start construction before such fundamental details are spelled out? They wouldn't.
    They already have done. That or their preferred cheapest possible electricity supplier has already gone to the wall. Suppliers going bust
    has thrown many UK households thrown into a pool where some other larger supplier takes over supply gives them a much less favourable variable
    tariff that more nearly reflects current price to supply.
    (even then they are all losing money hand over fist right now)

    Almost no electricity supply companies can make any money on domestic
    sale of electricity. The cost to make electricity (apart from hydro) is higher than the capped retail sale price to consumers. It is a mad house!

    The only suppliers operating on a sound financial basis in the UK at
    present have either nuclear or hydro as well as gas generating capacity
    in their portfolio and are cross subsidising the loss making retail arm
    from that. Industry is screaming blue murder they pay full price.

    Those that merely buy and sell gas/electricity are failing spectacularly
    and it isn't over yet. A few more go down with each week that passes.
    They won't get a chance to up their capped prices until April now.
    Domestic consumers are protected (for now) by a price cap. When it runs >> out in April (or their supplier goes bust) there will be a massive
    readjustement of +50% perhaps more.

    In the US local utility rates are regulated by local boards, usually at the state level. Generation is a competitive matter with the freedom to buy from whom you want. I don't know exactly how they do things in the UK, but if they didn't have
    electrical supply lined up prior to constructing the facility, that is simply incompetent program management.

    Quite probably a bit of both. But as things stand UK electricity
    suppliers with very few exceptions have *NO* generating capacity at all >> - they are clueless middlemen billing operations. Wonderful effect of
    deregulation of the electricity market.

    Not at all relevant to the issue of arranging electrical power.
    Actually it is critical to arranging electrical power. You have to buy
    it from someone who is still in business when the hardware is complete. There have been so many failures in the UK supply industry that it has become chaotic - especially if you want the lowest possible price.

    https://www.forbes.com/uk/advisor/energy/failed-uk-energy-suppliers-update/

    It is the lowest cost box shifters that have failed first.
    It is roughly split into the people who make it, the regional
    infrastructure operators and the people who bulk buy electricity and
    sell it on. Many of the latter were also operating on the spot market
    and so have been comprehensively wiped out by the gas price shocks.

    If you read back though this discussion you have made unsupported statements several times and never followed through on demonstrating they are true. Now you cite an article that says what I said it said, they are finalizing "legal agreements",
    which you somehow interpret is setting tariffs, otherwise known as rates. This started with you claiming chargers were "unable to get supply". That's not the same thing as they were too incompetent to line up the electrical source before they started
    construction.

    They remain unable to get supply. That is pretty damn fundamental.

    So you claim. "were still finalizing commercial and contractual arrangements" does not imply anything about supply.
    So why has it taken the so long? The physical kit was all installed for
    the opening last June but then it was cancelled with a few days notice
    and rescheduled for this month. Then it was cancelled with a few days notice. Rinse and repeat. Some exemplar of how to do a superhub!

    I expect you would be in the Olympics if they had a "jumping to conclusions" event. Probably win gold.

    --

    Rick C.

    -+--- Get 1,000 miles of free Supercharging
    -+--- Tesla referral code - https://ts.la/richard11209

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Dimiter_Popoff@21:1/5 to Rick C on Wed Jan 26 00:10:43 2022
    On 1/25/2022 23:19, Rick C wrote:
    On Tuesday, January 25, 2022 at 11:43:24 AM UTC-4, Dimiter Popoff wrote:
    On 1/25/2022 16:27, Martin Brown wrote:
    ....
    The only suppliers operating on a sound financial basis in the UK at
    present have either nuclear or hydro as well as gas generating capacity
    in their portfolio and are cross subsidising the loss making retail arm
    from that. Industry is screaming blue murder they pay full price.

    This is quickly becoming a worldwide disaster, after decades of playing
    with subsidized windmills, rooftops and other nonsense instead of
    building enough nuclear what else could we expect.
    In Bulgaria, they are "building" a second nuclear plant for over 30
    years now, must have spent zillions on "consulting" to practically
    zero results, other than ongoing wrestling who is to build it.
    Consequently an energy crisis.

    So you think nuclear is the solution to the energy problem other than the fact that it is prohibitively expensive to build it?

    In the UK the present nuclear generation plant being built is not going to return the profit the money bags expected. So in the future the UK government is going to allow them to pass all risk to the rate payers and they can plan and build nuclear
    projects as inefficiently as they wish!

    Yes, what a grand idea!


    It has been made too expensive, this is true. Not because it is
    inherently expensive though. Because it is regulated (which it should
    be for obvious reasons) it has become a convenient cow to milk by
    plenty of people who contribute nothing to society but milking
    that cow. My estimate is that about 80% of the cost goes there.
    IOW the problem with nuclear is only social.

    There is *no* other way we know to generate the energy we need.
    All the windmill nonsense has led us into the current energy crisis.
    They are not even as good as fusion energy which at least is
    10 years away - has been that since the 50-s. The only result
    of the windmill & rooftop nonsense spent on for decades now
    instead of on the stable and proven nuclear technology is the energy
    crisis we are only just entering.

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From whit3rd@21:1/5 to Cydrome Leader on Tue Jan 25 14:19:10 2022
    On Saturday, January 22, 2022 at 11:11:07 PM UTC-8, Cydrome Leader wrote:
    Anthony William Sloman <bill....@ieee.org> wrote:

    With the right working fluid, and the right design, heat pumps can work anywhere or at least anywhere where anybody lives.

    Dear Dumbass, go ahead and name two brands of heatpumps that provide at least 100kBTU of heating capacity with outdoor temps of negative F. Be sure to hand over the name of the authorized installers... zip code 60601.

    Firstly, fluids like ammonia have triple points well below 0 F (below -50, even)
    so heatpumps for that range are well-known. Second, you ask for brand names? Why ask an Australia resident, if your zip code is 60601?

    Bill was right. Heat pumps CAN work. Your local market for installers is a different matter entirely.

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Rick C@21:1/5 to Dimiter Popoff on Tue Jan 25 17:56:02 2022
    On Tuesday, January 25, 2022 at 6:10:49 PM UTC-4, Dimiter Popoff wrote:
    On 1/25/2022 23:19, Rick C wrote:
    On Tuesday, January 25, 2022 at 11:43:24 AM UTC-4, Dimiter Popoff wrote:
    On 1/25/2022 16:27, Martin Brown wrote:
    ....
    The only suppliers operating on a sound financial basis in the UK at
    present have either nuclear or hydro as well as gas generating capacity >>> in their portfolio and are cross subsidising the loss making retail arm >>> from that. Industry is screaming blue murder they pay full price.

    This is quickly becoming a worldwide disaster, after decades of playing >> with subsidized windmills, rooftops and other nonsense instead of
    building enough nuclear what else could we expect.
    In Bulgaria, they are "building" a second nuclear plant for over 30
    years now, must have spent zillions on "consulting" to practically
    zero results, other than ongoing wrestling who is to build it.
    Consequently an energy crisis.

    So you think nuclear is the solution to the energy problem other than the fact that it is prohibitively expensive to build it?

    In the UK the present nuclear generation plant being built is not going to return the profit the money bags expected. So in the future the UK government is going to allow them to pass all risk to the rate payers and they can plan and build nuclear
    projects as inefficiently as they wish!

    Yes, what a grand idea!

    It has been made too expensive, this is true. Not because it is
    inherently expensive though. Because it is regulated (which it should
    be for obvious reasons) it has become a convenient cow to milk by
    plenty of people who contribute nothing to society but milking
    that cow. My estimate is that about 80% of the cost goes there.
    IOW the problem with nuclear is only social.

    You sound like a Trmper claiming the election was stolen with absolutely no evidence or even identification of those milking the cow. No, the costs of nuclear has nothing to do with milk or even ice cream.


    There is *no* other way we know to generate the energy we need.
    All the windmill nonsense has led us into the current energy crisis.
    They are not even as good as fusion energy which at least is
    10 years away - has been that since the 50-s. The only result
    of the windmill & rooftop nonsense spent on for decades now
    instead of on the stable and proven nuclear technology is the energy
    crisis we are only just entering.

    Ah, there it is. No, the election was not stolen nor is wind or solar power without utility. (pun not intended)...

    I can only hang my head in sorrow that so many ignore the reality of renewable power which is happening and gaining momentum. I find it amusing that you talk about it "spent on for decades now" as if it is a massive failure while instead the prices
    continue to drop as the scale increases. We do need better energy storage, but in the mean time fossil fuels can serve a backup role with ever diminishing contribution to our carbon pollution.

    In fact, it is ironic that you talk about nuclear as a solution when it has the exact same problem as renewable, it is not dispatchable. While everyone screams about how massive storage is needed to accommodate the variation in output of renewables,
    they ignore the mismatch between supply and demand of nuclear. Nuclear can be throttled slowly, but the changes in demand during the course of a day are too large for nuclear to be much of a bigger part of the US energy supply than it is now. Also, the
    economics, as they are, for nuclear are always based on the assumption they will be run continuously other than when refueling. The enormous capital expenditure requires this or the return on investment becomes unsuitable or the price has to rise.

    So you want to replace non-dispatchable power with non-dispatchable power. Not a good argument.

    --

    Rick C.

    -+-+- Get 1,000 miles of free Supercharging
    -+-+- Tesla referral code - https://ts.la/richard11209

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Anthony William Sloman@21:1/5 to Dimiter Popoff on Tue Jan 25 18:23:55 2022
    On Wednesday, January 26, 2022 at 9:10:49 AM UTC+11, Dimiter Popoff wrote:
    On 1/25/2022 23:19, Rick C wrote:
    On Tuesday, January 25, 2022 at 11:43:24 AM UTC-4, Dimiter Popoff wrote:
    On 1/25/2022 16:27, Martin Brown wrote:
    ....
    The only suppliers operating on a sound financial basis in the UK at
    present have either nuclear or hydro as well as gas generating capacity >>> in their portfolio and are cross subsidising the loss making retail arm >>> from that. Industry is screaming blue murder they pay full price.

    This is quickly becoming a worldwide disaster, after decades of playing >> with subsidized windmills, rooftops and other nonsense instead of
    building enough nuclear what else could we expect.
    In Bulgaria, they are "building" a second nuclear plant for over 30
    years now, must have spent zillions on "consulting" to practically
    zero results, other than ongoing wrestling who is to build it.
    Consequently an energy crisis.

    So you think nuclear is the solution to the energy problem other than the fact that it is prohibitively expensive to build it?

    In the UK the present nuclear generation plant being built is not going to return the profit the money bags expected. So in the future the UK government is going to allow them to pass all risk to the rate payers and they can plan and build nuclear
    projects as inefficiently as they wish!

    Yes, what a grand idea!

    It has been made too expensive, this is true. Not because it is
    inherently expensive though. Because it is regulated (which it should
    be for obvious reasons) it has become a convenient cow to milk by
    plenty of people who contribute nothing to society but milking
    that cow. My estimate is that about 80% of the cost goes there.
    IOW the problem with nuclear is only social.

    Chernobyl and Fukushima suggests otherwise. Nuclear has very nasty failure modes.

    There is *no* other way we know to generate the energy we need.
    All the windmill nonsense has led us into the current energy crisis.

    Rubbish.At least in Australia, solar farms and windmills are the cheapest source of power and utility generators won't invest in any other. At the moment they need fast-turn-on gas-fired back-up to cope with windless nights (which don't happen often) but
    the utilities are buying grid-scale batteries, and the government is reworking the Snowy Mountains hydroelectric scheme to throw in a lot of pumped storage.

    South Australia recently ran for a week on renewable sources. Denmark has done as well.

    They are not even as good as fusion energy which at least is 10 years away - has been that since the 50-s.

    Perhaps. Ink jet printers were in the same state for about twenty years. The trouble with inventions is that they don't show up when you want them, and often they don't show up where you expect them to.

    https://hb11.energy/

    Neutron-free boron-hydrogen fusion may work. Professor Heinrich Hora is remarkably old, but he is celver.

    The only result of the windmill & rooftop nonsense spent on for decades now instead of on the stable and proven nuclear technology is the energy crisis we are only just entering.

    If this is energy crisis, it isn't a particularly dramatic one. Australia is doing very nicely out of roof-top solar, solar farms and wind turbines. It's going to take a while before we've got the system into a state where they can supply all the energy
    we need (and fill the tankers with liquid hydrogen to ship off to South Korea and Japan. We do have a lot more money than Eastern European nations, so the capital required is being invested faster.

    --
    Bill Sloman, Sydney

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Tom Gardner@21:1/5 to Anthony William Sloman on Wed Jan 26 08:38:48 2022
    On 26/01/22 02:23, Anthony William Sloman wrote:
    On Wednesday, January 26, 2022 at 9:10:49 AM UTC+11, Dimiter Popoff wrote:
    On 1/25/2022 23:19, Rick C wrote:
    On Tuesday, January 25, 2022 at 11:43:24 AM UTC-4, Dimiter Popoff wrote: >>>> On 1/25/2022 16:27, Martin Brown wrote:
    .... The only suppliers operating on a sound financial basis in the
    UK at present have either nuclear or hydro as well as gas generating >>>>> capacity in their portfolio and are cross subsidising the loss making >>>>> retail arm from that. Industry is screaming blue murder they pay full >>>>> price.

    This is quickly becoming a worldwide disaster, after decades of
    playing with subsidized windmills, rooftops and other nonsense instead >>>> of building enough nuclear what else could we expect. In Bulgaria, they >>>> are "building" a second nuclear plant for over 30 years now, must have >>>> spent zillions on "consulting" to practically zero results, other than >>>> ongoing wrestling who is to build it. Consequently an energy crisis.

    So you think nuclear is the solution to the energy problem other than the >>> fact that it is prohibitively expensive to build it?

    In the UK the present nuclear generation plant being built is not going
    to return the profit the money bags expected. So in the future the UK
    government is going to allow them to pass all risk to the rate payers and >>> they can plan and build nuclear projects as inefficiently as they wish!

    Yes, what a grand idea!

    It has been made too expensive, this is true. Not because it is inherently >> expensive though. Because it is regulated (which it should be for obvious
    reasons) it has become a convenient cow to milk by plenty of people who
    contribute nothing to society but milking that cow. My estimate is that
    about 80% of the cost goes there. IOW the problem with nuclear is only
    social.

    Chernobyl and Fukushima suggests otherwise. Nuclear has very nasty failure modes.

    Coal, oil and gas have very nasty /normal/ operating modes.

    Windmills and tidal are better, /when/ they are available.

    Given the presumption that cars will go electric in the
    foreseeable future, what will happen when there's almost
    zero wind power in the UK for a week? Nuclear would be
    well matched to that.

    (Rule of thumb from some gridwatch data: wind power supplies
    X% of its peak power for X% of the time, i.e. 3 days/year
    it is <1% of peak)



    There is *no* other way we know to generate the energy we need. All the
    windmill nonsense has led us into the current energy crisis.

    Rubbish.At least in Australia, solar farms and windmills are the cheapest source of power and utility generators won't invest in any other. At the moment they need fast-turn-on gas-fired back-up to cope with windless nights (which don't happen often) but the utilities are buying grid-scale batteries, and the government is reworking the Snowy Mountains hydroelectric scheme to throw in a lot of pumped storage.

    They are cheap, but their proponents don't include the cost
    of keeping other types of plant available for when they are
    unavailable for days on end.

    IMHO that is disingenuous. When accountants have applied
    similar "reasoning" to companies, they have closed useful
    companies and even industries.

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Anthony William Sloman@21:1/5 to Tom Gardner on Wed Jan 26 01:54:45 2022
    On Wednesday, January 26, 2022 at 7:38:55 PM UTC+11, Tom Gardner wrote:
    On 26/01/22 02:23, Anthony William Sloman wrote:
    On Wednesday, January 26, 2022 at 9:10:49 AM UTC+11, Dimiter Popoff wrote:
    On 1/25/2022 23:19, Rick C wrote:
    On Tuesday, January 25, 2022 at 11:43:24 AM UTC-4, Dimiter Popoff wrote: >>>> On 1/25/2022 16:27, Martin Brown wrote:
    .... The only suppliers operating on a sound financial basis in the >>>>> UK at present have either nuclear or hydro as well as gas generating >>>>> capacity in their portfolio and are cross subsidising the loss making >>>>> retail arm from that. Industry is screaming blue murder they pay full >>>>> price.

    This is quickly becoming a worldwide disaster, after decades of
    playing with subsidized windmills, rooftops and other nonsense instead >>>> of building enough nuclear what else could we expect. In Bulgaria, they >>>> are "building" a second nuclear plant for over 30 years now, must have >>>> spent zillions on "consulting" to practically zero results, other than >>>> ongoing wrestling who is to build it. Consequently an energy crisis. >>>
    So you think nuclear is the solution to the energy problem other than the
    fact that it is prohibitively expensive to build it?

    In the UK the present nuclear generation plant being built is not going >>> to return the profit the money bags expected. So in the future the UK >>> government is going to allow them to pass all risk to the rate payers and
    they can plan and build nuclear projects as inefficiently as they wish! >>>
    Yes, what a grand idea!

    It has been made too expensive, this is true. Not because it is inherently
    expensive though. Because it is regulated (which it should be for obvious >> reasons) it has become a convenient cow to milk by plenty of people who >> contribute nothing to society but milking that cow. My estimate is that >> about 80% of the cost goes there. IOW the problem with nuclear is only
    social.

    Chernobyl and Fukushima suggests otherwise. Nuclear has very nasty failure modes.

    Coal, oil and gas have very nasty /normal/ operating modes.

    CO2 emission is nasty, and it is built in. The failure modes are big fires when the fuel stores catch on fire, but the mess isn't still nasty after 100,000 years. Even the CO2 problem is self-curing - the

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Paleocene%E2%80%93Eocene_Thermal_Maximum

    went away of it's own accord, though it did take a while.

    Windmills and tidal are better, /when/ they are available.

    Given the presumption that cars will go electric in the
    foreseeable future, what will happen when there's almost
    zero wind power in the UK for a week? Nuclear would be
    well matched to that.

    The nice thing about electric cars is that when everybody is using them, their batteries could deliver something three times the capacity of the whole grid (though only for a couple of hours). Day/night alternation from solar power isn't a problem. The
    short answer is that solar and windmills need to offer quite a lot of excess capacity to cope with worst case situations. In Australia the plan seems to be to use that excess capacity to make electrolytic hydrogen, liquify it and ship it off in tanker
    loads to South Korea and Japan. It's a thermodynamic nonsense, but it keeps the investors happy.

    (Rule of thumb from some gridwatch data: wind power supplies X% of its peak power for X% of the time, i.e. 3 days/year it is <1% of peak).

    So wind power isn't the whole answer.

    There is *no* other way we know to generate the energy we need. All the >> windmill nonsense has led us into the current energy crisis.

    Rubbish.At least in Australia, solar farms and windmills are the cheapest source of power and utility generators won't invest in any other. At the moment they need fast-turn-on gas-fired back-up to cope with windless nights
    (which don't happen often) but the utilities are buying grid-scale batteries,
    and the government is reworking the Snowy Mountains hydroelectric scheme to
    throw in a lot of pumped storage.

    They are cheap, but their proponents don't include the cost of keeping other types of plant available for when they are unavailable for days on end.

    There are "proponents" like that, but the Australian utility companies are currently relying on the "legacy" generating systems, which do include a few fast-start gas-turbine generators, which run on natural gas at the moment, but would run just as
    happily on hydrogen. Batteries and pumped hydro deliver about 85% of the energy you use to charge them, while hydrogen only returns about 25%, but you can store a great deal of it.

    IMHO that is disingenuous. When accountants have applied similar "reasoning" to companies, they have closed useful companies and even industries.

    The UK has accountants like the US has lawyers. They do need to be kept under control, and are even less likely to understand why than lawyers.

    --
    Bill Sloman, Sydney

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Tom Gardner@21:1/5 to Anthony William Sloman on Wed Jan 26 10:28:06 2022
    On 26/01/22 09:54, Anthony William Sloman wrote:
    On Wednesday, January 26, 2022 at 7:38:55 PM UTC+11, Tom Gardner wrote:
    On 26/01/22 02:23, Anthony William Sloman wrote:
    On Wednesday, January 26, 2022 at 9:10:49 AM UTC+11, Dimiter Popoff
    wrote:
    On 1/25/2022 23:19, Rick C wrote:
    On Tuesday, January 25, 2022 at 11:43:24 AM UTC-4, Dimiter Popoff
    wrote:
    On 1/25/2022 16:27, Martin Brown wrote:
    .... The only suppliers operating on a sound financial basis in
    the UK at present have either nuclear or hydro as well as gas
    generating capacity in their portfolio and are cross subsidising >>>>>>> the loss making retail arm from that. Industry is screaming blue >>>>>>> murder they pay full price.

    This is quickly becoming a worldwide disaster, after decades of
    playing with subsidized windmills, rooftops and other nonsense
    instead of building enough nuclear what else could we expect. In
    Bulgaria, they are "building" a second nuclear plant for over 30
    years now, must have spent zillions on "consulting" to practically >>>>>> zero results, other than ongoing wrestling who is to build it.
    Consequently an energy crisis.

    So you think nuclear is the solution to the energy problem other than >>>>> the fact that it is prohibitively expensive to build it?

    In the UK the present nuclear generation plant being built is not
    going to return the profit the money bags expected. So in the future >>>>> the UK government is going to allow them to pass all risk to the rate >>>>> payers and they can plan and build nuclear projects as inefficiently >>>>> as they wish!

    Yes, what a grand idea!

    It has been made too expensive, this is true. Not because it is
    inherently expensive though. Because it is regulated (which it should
    be for obvious reasons) it has become a convenient cow to milk by
    plenty of people who contribute nothing to society but milking that
    cow. My estimate is that about 80% of the cost goes there. IOW the
    problem with nuclear is only social.

    Chernobyl and Fukushima suggests otherwise. Nuclear has very nasty
    failure modes.

    Coal, oil and gas have very nasty /normal/ operating modes.

    CO2 emission is nasty, and it is built in. The failure modes are big fires when the fuel stores catch on fire, but the mess isn't still nasty after 100,000 years. Even the CO2 problem is self-curing - the

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Paleocene%E2%80%93Eocene_Thermal_Maximum

    went away of it's own accord, though it did take a while.

    Windmills and tidal are better, /when/ they are available.

    Given the presumption that cars will go electric in the foreseeable future, >> what will happen when there's almost zero wind power in the UK for a week? >> Nuclear would be well matched to that.

    The nice thing about electric cars is that when everybody is using them, their batteries could deliver something three times the capacity of the whole grid (though only for a couple of hours).

    I'd be "disappointed" if I had left my car charging, I had to
    drive 200 miles (or uphill), and that it was only 50% charged.



    Day/night alternation from solar
    power isn't a problem. The short answer is that solar and windmills need to offer quite a lot of excess capacity to cope with worst case situations. In Australia the plan seems to be to use that excess capacity to make electrolytic hydrogen, liquify it and ship it off in tanker loads to South Korea and Japan. It's a thermodynamic nonsense, but it keeps the investors happy.

    Large scale storage would be a game-changer in the UK. That
    would make someone as rich as Croesus.


    (Rule of thumb from some gridwatch data: wind power supplies X% of its
    peak power for X% of the time, i.e. 3 days/year it is <1% of peak).

    So wind power isn't the whole answer.

    Of course, but then nothing is; diversity is good.

    My objection is to those that ignore it and stupidly
    (or worse) quote the generating capacity as 27% of peak
    as if that was the only necessary number.



    There is *no* other way we know to generate the energy we need. All
    the windmill nonsense has led us into the current energy crisis.

    Rubbish.At least in Australia, solar farms and windmills are the
    cheapest source of power and utility generators won't invest in any
    other. At the moment they need fast-turn-on gas-fired back-up to cope
    with windless nights (which don't happen often) but the utilities are
    buying grid-scale batteries, and the government is reworking the Snowy
    Mountains hydroelectric scheme to throw in a lot of pumped storage.

    They are cheap, but their proponents don't include the cost of keeping
    other types of plant available for when they are unavailable for days on
    end.

    There are "proponents" like that, but the Australian utility companies are currently relying on the "legacy" generating systems, which do include a few fast-start gas-turbine generators, which run on natural gas at the moment, but would run just as happily on hydrogen. Batteries and pumped hydro deliver about 85% of the energy you use to charge them, while hydrogen only returns about 25%, but you can store a great deal of it.

    I wish there was more capacity for pumped hydro here. As you know,
    there isn't much possibility in S England and the Netherlands!


    IMHO that is disingenuous. When accountants have applied similar
    "reasoning" to companies, they have closed useful companies and even
    industries.
    The UK has accountants like the US has lawyers. They do need to be kept under control, and are even less likely to understand why than lawyers.

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Rick C@21:1/5 to Tom Gardner on Wed Jan 26 04:13:47 2022
    On Wednesday, January 26, 2022 at 4:38:55 AM UTC-4, Tom Gardner wrote:
    On 26/01/22 02:23, Anthony William Sloman wrote:
    On Wednesday, January 26, 2022 at 9:10:49 AM UTC+11, Dimiter Popoff wrote:
    On 1/25/2022 23:19, Rick C wrote:
    On Tuesday, January 25, 2022 at 11:43:24 AM UTC-4, Dimiter Popoff wrote: >>>> On 1/25/2022 16:27, Martin Brown wrote:
    .... The only suppliers operating on a sound financial basis in the >>>>> UK at present have either nuclear or hydro as well as gas generating >>>>> capacity in their portfolio and are cross subsidising the loss making >>>>> retail arm from that. Industry is screaming blue murder they pay full >>>>> price.

    This is quickly becoming a worldwide disaster, after decades of
    playing with subsidized windmills, rooftops and other nonsense instead >>>> of building enough nuclear what else could we expect. In Bulgaria, they >>>> are "building" a second nuclear plant for over 30 years now, must have >>>> spent zillions on "consulting" to practically zero results, other than >>>> ongoing wrestling who is to build it. Consequently an energy crisis. >>>
    So you think nuclear is the solution to the energy problem other than the
    fact that it is prohibitively expensive to build it?

    In the UK the present nuclear generation plant being built is not going >>> to return the profit the money bags expected. So in the future the UK >>> government is going to allow them to pass all risk to the rate payers and
    they can plan and build nuclear projects as inefficiently as they wish! >>>
    Yes, what a grand idea!

    It has been made too expensive, this is true. Not because it is inherently
    expensive though. Because it is regulated (which it should be for obvious >> reasons) it has become a convenient cow to milk by plenty of people who >> contribute nothing to society but milking that cow. My estimate is that >> about 80% of the cost goes there. IOW the problem with nuclear is only
    social.

    Chernobyl and Fukushima suggests otherwise. Nuclear has very nasty failure modes.
    Coal, oil and gas have very nasty /normal/ operating modes.

    Windmills and tidal are better, /when/ they are available.

    Given the presumption that cars will go electric in the
    foreseeable future, what will happen when there's almost
    zero wind power in the UK for a week? Nuclear would be
    well matched to that.

    People keep babbling about how good nuclear is, but it is also not dispatchable. Demand varies a great deal during a single day as well as from day to day. Nuclear can't cope with that. That's why they refer to it as baseload. Even the French only
    use about 70% nuclear. While they have some reactors that can adapt during a daily cycle, they adjust slowly (to prevent Xenon poisoning). Because the cost of nuclear is mostly from the capital and other fixed costs, when run a lower power levels the
    effective cost his higher. Nukes are normally run flat out to make cheaper electricity.

    Then there is the cost in general. While ancient nuke plants are more cost effective due to the capital investment having been amortized, new ones are *hugely* expensive and produce the most expensive electricity we have. In the US one new construction
    project was axed because of the huge cost overruns. In the UK a project underway has seen massive cost overruns and huge schedule delays. The French seem to be pretty bad a building nuclear reactors on schedule and under budget... same as everyone else.


    No, if nuclear is the energy source for the future, what do we do until that future arrives in 15 years or more?


    (Rule of thumb from some gridwatch data: wind power supplies
    X% of its peak power for X% of the time, i.e. 3 days/year
    it is <1% of peak)
    There is *no* other way we know to generate the energy we need. All the >> windmill nonsense has led us into the current energy crisis.

    Rubbish.At least in Australia, solar farms and windmills are the cheapest source of power and utility generators won't invest in any other. At the moment they need fast-turn-on gas-fired back-up to cope with windless nights
    (which don't happen often) but the utilities are buying grid-scale batteries,
    and the government is reworking the Snowy Mountains hydroelectric scheme to
    throw in a lot of pumped storage.
    They are cheap, but their proponents don't include the cost
    of keeping other types of plant available for when they are
    unavailable for days on end.

    Hasn't that cost already been paid for? Do people factor in the cost of the supplementary power to add to nuclear? Well, they do when it comes to a free market and peak rates go through the roof! I think someone in this group posted a link to show
    what the local utilities pay for power at peak times and it is astronomical because of the need for peaking plants that run for such a short time because nuclear can not be ramped up and down.


    IMHO that is disingenuous. When accountants have applied
    similar "reasoning" to companies, they have closed useful
    companies and even industries.

    Yup, and we still don't factor in the cost of waste disposal in electricity rates from nuclear and they keep running. I wonder how they manage that? Oh, yeah, federal subsidies.

    --

    Rick C.

    -+-++ Get 1,000 miles of free Supercharging
    -+-++ Tesla referral code - https://ts.la/richard11209

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Anthony William Sloman@21:1/5 to gnuarm.del...@gmail.com on Wed Jan 26 04:41:15 2022
    On Wednesday, January 26, 2022 at 11:13:51 PM UTC+11, gnuarm.del...@gmail.com wrote:
    On Wednesday, January 26, 2022 at 4:38:55 AM UTC-4, Tom Gardner wrote:
    On 26/01/22 02:23, Anthony William Sloman wrote:
    On Wednesday, January 26, 2022 at 9:10:49 AM UTC+11, Dimiter Popoff wrote:
    On 1/25/2022 23:19, Rick C wrote:
    On Tuesday, January 25, 2022 at 11:43:24 AM UTC-4, Dimiter Popoff wrote:
    On 1/25/2022 16:27, Martin Brown wrote:

    <snip>

    They are cheap, but their proponents don't include the cost
    of keeping other types of plant available for when they are
    unavailable for days on end.
    Hasn't that cost already been paid for? Do people factor in the cost of the supplementary power to add to nuclear? Well, they do when it comes to a free market and peak rates go through the roof! I think someone in this group posted a link to show what
    the local utilities pay for power at peak times and it is astronomical because of the need for peaking plants that run for such a short time because nuclear can not be ramped up and down.

    But that "astronomical" cost is what pays for the peaking plants. The peaking plants only make money when they are needed, but they have to make enough money then to cover the cost of keeping them on standby all the time. The people who design the
    systems are well aware of this, and the people who operate the systems keep track of who gets what - as much to catch ENRON style scams where the peaks are artificially created to make extra money for particular plants, as for any other reason.

    IMHO that is disingenuous. When accountants have applied
    similar "reasoning" to companies, they have closed useful
    companies and even industries.

    Yup, and we still don't factor in the cost of waste disposal in electricity rates from nuclear and they keep running. I wonder how they manage that? Oh, yeah, federal subsidies.

    Waste from nuclear plants stays dangerous for about 100,000 years, and nobody has sorted out any kind of long term repository. It's not so much a government subsidy as institutionalised buck-passing.

    --
    Bill Sloman, Sydney

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Rick C@21:1/5 to Tom Gardner on Wed Jan 26 04:24:27 2022
    On Wednesday, January 26, 2022 at 6:28:13 AM UTC-4, Tom Gardner wrote:
    On 26/01/22 09:54, Anthony William Sloman wrote:
    On Wednesday, January 26, 2022 at 7:38:55 PM UTC+11, Tom Gardner wrote:
    On 26/01/22 02:23, Anthony William Sloman wrote:
    On Wednesday, January 26, 2022 at 9:10:49 AM UTC+11, Dimiter Popoff
    wrote:
    On 1/25/2022 23:19, Rick C wrote:
    On Tuesday, January 25, 2022 at 11:43:24 AM UTC-4, Dimiter Popoff >>>>> wrote:
    On 1/25/2022 16:27, Martin Brown wrote:
    .... The only suppliers operating on a sound financial basis in >>>>>>> the UK at present have either nuclear or hydro as well as gas >>>>>>> generating capacity in their portfolio and are cross subsidising >>>>>>> the loss making retail arm from that. Industry is screaming blue >>>>>>> murder they pay full price.

    This is quickly becoming a worldwide disaster, after decades of >>>>>> playing with subsidized windmills, rooftops and other nonsense
    instead of building enough nuclear what else could we expect. In >>>>>> Bulgaria, they are "building" a second nuclear plant for over 30 >>>>>> years now, must have spent zillions on "consulting" to practically >>>>>> zero results, other than ongoing wrestling who is to build it.
    Consequently an energy crisis.

    So you think nuclear is the solution to the energy problem other than >>>>> the fact that it is prohibitively expensive to build it?

    In the UK the present nuclear generation plant being built is not >>>>> going to return the profit the money bags expected. So in the future >>>>> the UK government is going to allow them to pass all risk to the rate >>>>> payers and they can plan and build nuclear projects as inefficiently >>>>> as they wish!

    Yes, what a grand idea!

    It has been made too expensive, this is true. Not because it is
    inherently expensive though. Because it is regulated (which it should >>>> be for obvious reasons) it has become a convenient cow to milk by
    plenty of people who contribute nothing to society but milking that >>>> cow. My estimate is that about 80% of the cost goes there. IOW the
    problem with nuclear is only social.

    Chernobyl and Fukushima suggests otherwise. Nuclear has very nasty
    failure modes.

    Coal, oil and gas have very nasty /normal/ operating modes.

    CO2 emission is nasty, and it is built in. The failure modes are big fires when the fuel stores catch on fire, but the mess isn't still nasty after 100,000 years. Even the CO2 problem is self-curing - the

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Paleocene%E2%80%93Eocene_Thermal_Maximum

    went away of it's own accord, though it did take a while.

    Windmills and tidal are better, /when/ they are available.

    Given the presumption that cars will go electric in the foreseeable future,
    what will happen when there's almost zero wind power in the UK for a week?
    Nuclear would be well matched to that.

    The nice thing about electric cars is that when everybody is using them, their batteries could deliver something three times the capacity of the whole
    grid (though only for a couple of hours).
    I'd be "disappointed" if I had left my car charging, I had to
    drive 200 miles (or uphill), and that it was only 50% charged.

    For every EV user who wanted to take a 200 mile trip today, there are probably 100 who are only driving the average 30 miles and don't need to charge at all because there is less energy from renewables. The "EV grid" can be the first load that is shed
    when less power is available, which works just like any power storage.


    Day/night alternation from solar
    power isn't a problem. The short answer is that solar and windmills need to
    offer quite a lot of excess capacity to cope with worst case situations. In
    Australia the plan seems to be to use that excess capacity to make electrolytic hydrogen, liquify it and ship it off in tanker loads to South Korea and Japan. It's a thermodynamic nonsense, but it keeps the investors happy.
    Large scale storage would be a game-changer in the UK. That
    would make someone as rich as Croesus.

    It will be a process, not unlike building a nuclear plant taking time and money. The difference is it will be as profitable as planned from day one and probably more so.


    (Rule of thumb from some gridwatch data: wind power supplies X% of its >>> peak power for X% of the time, i.e. 3 days/year it is <1% of peak).

    So wind power isn't the whole answer.
    Of course, but then nothing is; diversity is good.

    Diversity is good until it isn't. The French don't seem to share that opinion.


    My objection is to those that ignore it and stupidly
    (or worse) quote the generating capacity as 27% of peak
    as if that was the only necessary number.

    Who has done that in this discussion? Are you arguing with phantoms?


    There is *no* other way we know to generate the energy we need. All >>>> the windmill nonsense has led us into the current energy crisis.

    Rubbish.At least in Australia, solar farms and windmills are the
    cheapest source of power and utility generators won't invest in any
    other. At the moment they need fast-turn-on gas-fired back-up to cope >>> with windless nights (which don't happen often) but the utilities are >>> buying grid-scale batteries, and the government is reworking the Snowy >>> Mountains hydroelectric scheme to throw in a lot of pumped storage.

    They are cheap, but their proponents don't include the cost of keeping
    other types of plant available for when they are unavailable for days on >> end.

    There are "proponents" like that, but the Australian utility companies are currently relying on the "legacy" generating systems, which do include a few
    fast-start gas-turbine generators, which run on natural gas at the moment, but would run just as happily on hydrogen. Batteries and pumped hydro deliver
    about 85% of the energy you use to charge them, while hydrogen only returns
    about 25%, but you can store a great deal of it.
    I wish there was more capacity for pumped hydro here. As you know,
    there isn't much possibility in S England and the Netherlands!

    As has been explained many time, England is doomed, so I suppose it doesn't matter.

    --

    Rick C.

    -++-- Get 1,000 miles of free Supercharging
    -++-- Tesla referral code - https://ts.la/richard11209

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Tom Gardner@21:1/5 to Rick C on Wed Jan 26 13:39:47 2022
    On 26/01/22 12:24, Rick C wrote:
    On Wednesday, January 26, 2022 at 6:28:13 AM UTC-4, Tom Gardner wrote:
    On 26/01/22 09:54, Anthony William Sloman wrote:
    On Wednesday, January 26, 2022 at 7:38:55 PM UTC+11, Tom Gardner wrote: >>>> On 26/01/22 02:23, Anthony William Sloman wrote:
    On Wednesday, January 26, 2022 at 9:10:49 AM UTC+11, Dimiter Popoff
    wrote:
    On 1/25/2022 23:19, Rick C wrote:
    On Tuesday, January 25, 2022 at 11:43:24 AM UTC-4, Dimiter
    Popoff wrote:
    On 1/25/2022 16:27, Martin Brown wrote:
    .... The only suppliers operating on a sound financial basis >>>>>>>>> in the UK at present have either nuclear or hydro as well as >>>>>>>>> gas generating capacity in their portfolio and are cross
    subsidising the loss making retail arm from that. Industry is >>>>>>>>> screaming blue murder they pay full price.

    This is quickly becoming a worldwide disaster, after decades
    of playing with subsidized windmills, rooftops and other
    nonsense instead of building enough nuclear what else could we >>>>>>>> expect. In Bulgaria, they are "building" a second nuclear plant >>>>>>>> for over 30 years now, must have spent zillions on "consulting" >>>>>>>> to practically zero results, other than ongoing wrestling who
    is to build it. Consequently an energy crisis.

    So you think nuclear is the solution to the energy problem other >>>>>>> than the fact that it is prohibitively expensive to build it?

    In the UK the present nuclear generation plant being built is
    not going to return the profit the money bags expected. So in the >>>>>>> future the UK government is going to allow them to pass all risk >>>>>>> to the rate payers and they can plan and build nuclear projects
    as inefficiently as they wish!

    Yes, what a grand idea!

    It has been made too expensive, this is true. Not because it is
    inherently expensive though. Because it is regulated (which it
    should be for obvious reasons) it has become a convenient cow to
    milk by plenty of people who contribute nothing to society but
    milking that cow. My estimate is that about 80% of the cost goes
    there. IOW the problem with nuclear is only social.

    Chernobyl and Fukushima suggests otherwise. Nuclear has very nasty
    failure modes.

    Coal, oil and gas have very nasty /normal/ operating modes.

    CO2 emission is nasty, and it is built in. The failure modes are big
    fires when the fuel stores catch on fire, but the mess isn't still nasty >>> after 100,000 years. Even the CO2 problem is self-curing - the

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Paleocene%E2%80%93Eocene_Thermal_Maximum

    went away of it's own accord, though it did take a while.

    Windmills and tidal are better, /when/ they are available.

    Given the presumption that cars will go electric in the foreseeable
    future, what will happen when there's almost zero wind power in the UK >>>> for a week? Nuclear would be well matched to that.

    The nice thing about electric cars is that when everybody is using them, >>> their batteries could deliver something three times the capacity of the
    whole grid (though only for a couple of hours).
    I'd be "disappointed" if I had left my car charging, I had to drive 200
    miles (or uphill), and that it was only 50% charged.

    For every EV user who wanted to take a 200 mile trip today, there are probably 100 who are only driving the average 30 miles and don't need to charge at all because there is less energy from renewables. The "EV grid" can be the first load that is shed when less power is available, which works just like any power storage.

    True, but so what? If I need and expect /my/ car to be fully
    charged then other people cars are irrelevant.

    You are using statistics for support, not illumination (cf a
    drunkard leaning against a lamppost). Statisticians drown in
    lakes of average depth 3".



    Day/night alternation from solar power isn't a problem. The short answer >>> is that solar and windmills need to offer quite a lot of excess capacity >>> to cope with worst case situations. In Australia the plan seems to be to >>> use that excess capacity to make electrolytic hydrogen, liquify it and
    ship it off in tanker loads to South Korea and Japan. It's a
    thermodynamic nonsense, but it keeps the investors happy.
    Large scale storage would be a game-changer in the UK. That would make
    someone as rich as Croesus.

    It will be a process, not unlike building a nuclear plant taking time and money. The difference is it will be as profitable as planned from day one and probably more so.

    All you need are suitable technology or suitable geography.
    Nobody has the technology (except pumped hydro), and the UK
    does not have the geography.



    (Rule of thumb from some gridwatch data: wind power supplies X% of
    its peak power for X% of the time, i.e. 3 days/year it is <1% of
    peak).

    So wind power isn't the whole answer.
    Of course, but then nothing is; diversity is good.

    Diversity is good until it isn't. The French don't seem to share that opinion.


    My objection is to those that ignore it and stupidly (or worse) quote the
    generating capacity as 27% of peak as if that was the only necessary
    number.

    Who has done that in this discussion? Are you arguing with phantoms?

    Strawman question; not worth answering.



    There is *no* other way we know to generate the energy we need.
    All the windmill nonsense has led us into the current energy
    crisis.

    Rubbish.At least in Australia, solar farms and windmills are the
    cheapest source of power and utility generators won't invest in any
    other. At the moment they need fast-turn-on gas-fired back-up to
    cope with windless nights (which don't happen often) but the
    utilities are buying grid-scale batteries, and the government is
    reworking the Snowy Mountains hydroelectric scheme to throw in a lot >>>>> of pumped storage.

    They are cheap, but their proponents don't include the cost of keeping >>>> other types of plant available for when they are unavailable for days
    on end.

    There are "proponents" like that, but the Australian utility companies
    are currently relying on the "legacy" generating systems, which do
    include a few fast-start gas-turbine generators, which run on natural gas >>> at the moment, but would run just as happily on hydrogen. Batteries and
    pumped hydro deliver about 85% of the energy you use to charge them,
    while hydrogen only returns about 25%, but you can store a great deal of >>> it.
    I wish there was more capacity for pumped hydro here. As you know, there
    isn't much possibility in S England and the Netherlands!

    As has been explained many time, England is doomed, so I suppose it doesn't matter.

    Your passive aggressive refusal to address the realities is
    revealing and disappointing.

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Tom Gardner@21:1/5 to Rick C on Wed Jan 26 13:47:04 2022
    On 26/01/22 12:13, Rick C wrote:
    On Wednesday, January 26, 2022 at 4:38:55 AM UTC-4, Tom Gardner wrote:
    On 26/01/22 02:23, Anthony William Sloman wrote:
    On Wednesday, January 26, 2022 at 9:10:49 AM UTC+11, Dimiter Popoff
    wrote:
    On 1/25/2022 23:19, Rick C wrote:
    On Tuesday, January 25, 2022 at 11:43:24 AM UTC-4, Dimiter Popoff
    wrote:
    On 1/25/2022 16:27, Martin Brown wrote:
    .... The only suppliers operating on a sound financial basis in
    the UK at present have either nuclear or hydro as well as gas
    generating capacity in their portfolio and are cross subsidising >>>>>>> the loss making retail arm from that. Industry is screaming blue >>>>>>> murder they pay full price.

    This is quickly becoming a worldwide disaster, after decades of
    playing with subsidized windmills, rooftops and other nonsense
    instead of building enough nuclear what else could we expect. In
    Bulgaria, they are "building" a second nuclear plant for over 30
    years now, must have spent zillions on "consulting" to practically >>>>>> zero results, other than ongoing wrestling who is to build it.
    Consequently an energy crisis.

    So you think nuclear is the solution to the energy problem other than >>>>> the fact that it is prohibitively expensive to build it?

    In the UK the present nuclear generation plant being built is not
    going to return the profit the money bags expected. So in the future >>>>> the UK government is going to allow them to pass all risk to the rate >>>>> payers and they can plan and build nuclear projects as inefficiently >>>>> as they wish!

    Yes, what a grand idea!

    It has been made too expensive, this is true. Not because it is
    inherently expensive though. Because it is regulated (which it should
    be for obvious reasons) it has become a convenient cow to milk by
    plenty of people who contribute nothing to society but milking that
    cow. My estimate is that about 80% of the cost goes there. IOW the
    problem with nuclear is only social.

    Chernobyl and Fukushima suggests otherwise. Nuclear has very nasty
    failure modes.
    Coal, oil and gas have very nasty /normal/ operating modes.

    Windmills and tidal are better, /when/ they are available.

    Given the presumption that cars will go electric in the foreseeable future, >> what will happen when there's almost zero wind power in the UK for a week? >> Nuclear would be well matched to that.

    People keep babbling about how good nuclear is, but it is also not dispatchable. Demand varies a great deal during a single day as well as from day to day. Nuclear can't cope with that. That's why they refer to it as baseload. Even the French only use about 70% nuclear. While they have some reactors that can adapt during a daily cycle, they adjust slowly (to prevent Xenon poisoning). Because the cost of nuclear is mostly from the capital and other fixed costs, when run a lower power levels the effective cost his higher. Nukes are normally run flat out to make cheaper electricity.

    Then there is the cost in general. While ancient nuke plants are more cost effective due to the capital investment having been amortized, new ones are *hugely* expensive and produce the most expensive electricity we have. In the US one new construction project was axed because of the huge cost overruns. In the UK a project underway has seen massive cost overruns and huge schedule delays. The French seem to be pretty bad a building nuclear reactors on schedule and under budget... same as everyone else.

    No, if nuclear is the energy source for the future, what do we do until that future arrives in 15 years or more?


    (Rule of thumb from some gridwatch data: wind power supplies
    X% of its peak power for X% of the time, i.e. 3 days/year
    it is <1% of peak)
    There is *no* other way we know to generate the energy we need. All
    the windmill nonsense has led us into the current energy crisis.

    Rubbish.At least in Australia, solar farms and windmills are the
    cheapest source of power and utility generators won't invest in any
    other. At the moment they need fast-turn-on gas-fired back-up to cope
    with windless nights (which don't happen often) but the utilities are
    buying grid-scale batteries, and the government is reworking the Snowy
    Mountains hydroelectric scheme to throw in a lot of pumped storage.
    They are cheap, but their proponents don't include the cost of keeping
    other types of plant available for when they are unavailable for days on
    end.

    Hasn't that cost already been paid for? Do people factor in the cost of the supplementary power to add to nuclear? Well, they do when it comes to a free market and peak rates go through the roof! I think someone in this group posted a link to show what the local utilities pay for power at peak times and it is astronomical because of the need for peaking plants that run for such a short time because nuclear can not be ramped up and down.

    Nope, it is because renewables ramp up and down uncontrollably.

    The astronomical cost is because it that capacity is only
    needed for /relatively/ short times. But it is /needed/ and
    cannot be ignored.

    Bill also made that point.



    IMHO that is disingenuous. When accountants have applied similar
    "reasoning" to companies, they have closed useful companies and even
    industries.

    Yup, and we still don't factor in the cost of waste disposal in electricity rates from nuclear and they keep running. I wonder how they manage that?
    Oh, yeah, federal subsidies.

    It has to be factored in, and is.

    Whether state subsidies is the right way to pay for it is
    a separate issue.

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Rick C@21:1/5 to Tom Gardner on Wed Jan 26 09:01:43 2022
    On Wednesday, January 26, 2022 at 9:39:55 AM UTC-4, Tom Gardner wrote:
    On 26/01/22 12:24, Rick C wrote:
    On Wednesday, January 26, 2022 at 6:28:13 AM UTC-4, Tom Gardner wrote:
    On 26/01/22 09:54, Anthony William Sloman wrote:
    On Wednesday, January 26, 2022 at 7:38:55 PM UTC+11, Tom Gardner wrote: >>>> On 26/01/22 02:23, Anthony William Sloman wrote:
    On Wednesday, January 26, 2022 at 9:10:49 AM UTC+11, Dimiter Popoff >>>>> wrote:
    On 1/25/2022 23:19, Rick C wrote:
    On Tuesday, January 25, 2022 at 11:43:24 AM UTC-4, Dimiter
    Popoff wrote:
    On 1/25/2022 16:27, Martin Brown wrote:
    .... The only suppliers operating on a sound financial basis >>>>>>>>> in the UK at present have either nuclear or hydro as well as >>>>>>>>> gas generating capacity in their portfolio and are cross
    subsidising the loss making retail arm from that. Industry is >>>>>>>>> screaming blue murder they pay full price.

    This is quickly becoming a worldwide disaster, after decades >>>>>>>> of playing with subsidized windmills, rooftops and other
    nonsense instead of building enough nuclear what else could we >>>>>>>> expect. In Bulgaria, they are "building" a second nuclear plant >>>>>>>> for over 30 years now, must have spent zillions on "consulting" >>>>>>>> to practically zero results, other than ongoing wrestling who >>>>>>>> is to build it. Consequently an energy crisis.

    So you think nuclear is the solution to the energy problem other >>>>>>> than the fact that it is prohibitively expensive to build it? >>>>>>>
    In the UK the present nuclear generation plant being built is >>>>>>> not going to return the profit the money bags expected. So in the >>>>>>> future the UK government is going to allow them to pass all risk >>>>>>> to the rate payers and they can plan and build nuclear projects >>>>>>> as inefficiently as they wish!

    Yes, what a grand idea!

    It has been made too expensive, this is true. Not because it is >>>>>> inherently expensive though. Because it is regulated (which it
    should be for obvious reasons) it has become a convenient cow to >>>>>> milk by plenty of people who contribute nothing to society but
    milking that cow. My estimate is that about 80% of the cost goes >>>>>> there. IOW the problem with nuclear is only social.

    Chernobyl and Fukushima suggests otherwise. Nuclear has very nasty >>>>> failure modes.

    Coal, oil and gas have very nasty /normal/ operating modes.

    CO2 emission is nasty, and it is built in. The failure modes are big
    fires when the fuel stores catch on fire, but the mess isn't still nasty >>> after 100,000 years. Even the CO2 problem is self-curing - the

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Paleocene%E2%80%93Eocene_Thermal_Maximum >>>
    went away of it's own accord, though it did take a while.

    Windmills and tidal are better, /when/ they are available.

    Given the presumption that cars will go electric in the foreseeable >>>> future, what will happen when there's almost zero wind power in the UK >>>> for a week? Nuclear would be well matched to that.

    The nice thing about electric cars is that when everybody is using them, >>> their batteries could deliver something three times the capacity of the >>> whole grid (though only for a couple of hours).
    I'd be "disappointed" if I had left my car charging, I had to drive 200 >> miles (or uphill), and that it was only 50% charged.

    For every EV user who wanted to take a 200 mile trip today, there are probably 100 who are only driving the average 30 miles and don't need to charge at all because there is less energy from renewables. The "EV grid" can be the first load that is shed when less power is available, which works
    just like any power storage.
    True, but so what? If I need and expect /my/ car to be fully
    charged then other people cars are irrelevant.

    Why can you not see this clearly? EVs can act as dispatchable loads rather than using dispatchable generation. Every night prior to a power shortage EVs would charge and keep EVs topped off as much as anyone wants. When we have a shortage of
    renewable power most people can refrain from charging. As you say, those people have nothing to do with your EV. I don't know why you are prattling on about your single EV. If you want to drive your EV on a trip, I suggest you keep it charged!
    Doesn't that make sense?


    You are using statistics for support, not illumination (cf a
    drunkard leaning against a lamppost). Statisticians drown in
    lakes of average depth 3".

    You appear to be willfully ignorant of what I am saying. Any 10 year old would understand at this point. Why don't you?


    Day/night alternation from solar power isn't a problem. The short answer >>> is that solar and windmills need to offer quite a lot of excess capacity >>> to cope with worst case situations. In Australia the plan seems to be to >>> use that excess capacity to make electrolytic hydrogen, liquify it and >>> ship it off in tanker loads to South Korea and Japan. It's a
    thermodynamic nonsense, but it keeps the investors happy.
    Large scale storage would be a game-changer in the UK. That would make
    someone as rich as Croesus.

    It will be a process, not unlike building a nuclear plant taking time and money. The difference is it will be as profitable as planned from day one and probably more so.
    All you need are suitable technology or suitable geography.
    Nobody has the technology (except pumped hydro), and the UK
    does not have the geography.

    That's funny, Australia seems to be doing well without using tons of pumped hydro. Maybe you aren't familiar with the country that is also a continent?


    (Rule of thumb from some gridwatch data: wind power supplies X% of >>>>> its peak power for X% of the time, i.e. 3 days/year it is <1% of
    peak).

    So wind power isn't the whole answer.
    Of course, but then nothing is; diversity is good.

    Diversity is good until it isn't. The French don't seem to share that opinion.


    My objection is to those that ignore it and stupidly (or worse) quote the >> generating capacity as 27% of peak as if that was the only necessary
    number.

    Who has done that in this discussion? Are you arguing with phantoms?
    Strawman question; not worth answering.

    LOL You make an irrelevant statement about "those that... " and you call my statement a strawman??? Maybe you need to look up the definition.


    There is *no* other way we know to generate the energy we need. >>>>>> All the windmill nonsense has led us into the current energy
    crisis.

    Rubbish.At least in Australia, solar farms and windmills are the
    cheapest source of power and utility generators won't invest in any >>>>> other. At the moment they need fast-turn-on gas-fired back-up to
    cope with windless nights (which don't happen often) but the
    utilities are buying grid-scale batteries, and the government is
    reworking the Snowy Mountains hydroelectric scheme to throw in a lot >>>>> of pumped storage.

    They are cheap, but their proponents don't include the cost of keeping >>>> other types of plant available for when they are unavailable for days >>>> on end.

    There are "proponents" like that, but the Australian utility companies >>> are currently relying on the "legacy" generating systems, which do
    include a few fast-start gas-turbine generators, which run on natural gas
    at the moment, but would run just as happily on hydrogen. Batteries and >>> pumped hydro deliver about 85% of the energy you use to charge them,
    while hydrogen only returns about 25%, but you can store a great deal of >>> it.
    I wish there was more capacity for pumped hydro here. As you know, there >> isn't much possibility in S England and the Netherlands!

    As has been explained many time, England is doomed, so I suppose it doesn't
    matter.
    Your passive aggressive refusal to address the realities is
    revealing and disappointing.

    Yes, the song of the truly desperate, ad hominem. I guess you have joined Bill's ranks.

    --

    Rick C.

    -++-+ Get 1,000 miles of free Supercharging
    -++-+ Tesla referral code - https://ts.la/richard11209

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Rick C@21:1/5 to Tom Gardner on Wed Jan 26 09:08:20 2022
    On Wednesday, January 26, 2022 at 9:47:11 AM UTC-4, Tom Gardner wrote:
    On 26/01/22 12:13, Rick C wrote:
    On Wednesday, January 26, 2022 at 4:38:55 AM UTC-4, Tom Gardner wrote:
    On 26/01/22 02:23, Anthony William Sloman wrote:
    On Wednesday, January 26, 2022 at 9:10:49 AM UTC+11, Dimiter Popoff
    wrote:
    On 1/25/2022 23:19, Rick C wrote:
    On Tuesday, January 25, 2022 at 11:43:24 AM UTC-4, Dimiter Popoff >>>>> wrote:
    On 1/25/2022 16:27, Martin Brown wrote:
    .... The only suppliers operating on a sound financial basis in >>>>>>> the UK at present have either nuclear or hydro as well as gas >>>>>>> generating capacity in their portfolio and are cross subsidising >>>>>>> the loss making retail arm from that. Industry is screaming blue >>>>>>> murder they pay full price.

    This is quickly becoming a worldwide disaster, after decades of >>>>>> playing with subsidized windmills, rooftops and other nonsense
    instead of building enough nuclear what else could we expect. In >>>>>> Bulgaria, they are "building" a second nuclear plant for over 30 >>>>>> years now, must have spent zillions on "consulting" to practically >>>>>> zero results, other than ongoing wrestling who is to build it.
    Consequently an energy crisis.

    So you think nuclear is the solution to the energy problem other than >>>>> the fact that it is prohibitively expensive to build it?

    In the UK the present nuclear generation plant being built is not >>>>> going to return the profit the money bags expected. So in the future >>>>> the UK government is going to allow them to pass all risk to the rate >>>>> payers and they can plan and build nuclear projects as inefficiently >>>>> as they wish!

    Yes, what a grand idea!

    It has been made too expensive, this is true. Not because it is
    inherently expensive though. Because it is regulated (which it should >>>> be for obvious reasons) it has become a convenient cow to milk by
    plenty of people who contribute nothing to society but milking that >>>> cow. My estimate is that about 80% of the cost goes there. IOW the
    problem with nuclear is only social.

    Chernobyl and Fukushima suggests otherwise. Nuclear has very nasty
    failure modes.
    Coal, oil and gas have very nasty /normal/ operating modes.

    Windmills and tidal are better, /when/ they are available.

    Given the presumption that cars will go electric in the foreseeable future,
    what will happen when there's almost zero wind power in the UK for a week?
    Nuclear would be well matched to that.

    People keep babbling about how good nuclear is, but it is also not dispatchable. Demand varies a great deal during a single day as well as from
    day to day. Nuclear can't cope with that. That's why they refer to it as baseload. Even the French only use about 70% nuclear. While they have some reactors that can adapt during a daily cycle, they adjust slowly (to prevent
    Xenon poisoning). Because the cost of nuclear is mostly from the capital and
    other fixed costs, when run a lower power levels the effective cost his higher. Nukes are normally run flat out to make cheaper electricity.

    Then there is the cost in general. While ancient nuke plants are more cost effective due to the capital investment having been amortized, new ones are
    *hugely* expensive and produce the most expensive electricity we have. In the US one new construction project was axed because of the huge cost overruns. In the UK a project underway has seen massive cost overruns and huge schedule delays. The French seem to be pretty bad a building nuclear reactors on schedule and under budget... same as everyone else.

    No, if nuclear is the energy source for the future, what do we do until that
    future arrives in 15 years or more?


    (Rule of thumb from some gridwatch data: wind power supplies
    X% of its peak power for X% of the time, i.e. 3 days/year
    it is <1% of peak)
    There is *no* other way we know to generate the energy we need. All >>>> the windmill nonsense has led us into the current energy crisis.

    Rubbish.At least in Australia, solar farms and windmills are the
    cheapest source of power and utility generators won't invest in any
    other. At the moment they need fast-turn-on gas-fired back-up to cope >>> with windless nights (which don't happen often) but the utilities are >>> buying grid-scale batteries, and the government is reworking the Snowy >>> Mountains hydroelectric scheme to throw in a lot of pumped storage.
    They are cheap, but their proponents don't include the cost of keeping
    other types of plant available for when they are unavailable for days on >> end.

    Hasn't that cost already been paid for? Do people factor in the cost of the
    supplementary power to add to nuclear? Well, they do when it comes to a free
    market and peak rates go through the roof! I think someone in this group posted a link to show what the local utilities pay for power at peak times and it is astronomical because of the need for peaking plants that run for such a short time because nuclear can not be ramped up and down.
    Nope, it is because renewables ramp up and down uncontrollably.

    Obviously you can't understand a simple point. In the dark ages, long before there were significant renewable generation facilities roaming the earth, peaking plants were used to handle the inherent mismatch between nuclear facilities and the variable
    loads. I don't know how to make it any more simple than that. Do... you... un-der-staaaand?


    The astronomical cost is because it that capacity is only
    needed for /relatively/ short times. But it is /needed/ and
    cannot be ignored.

    Yes, they are needed to provide the extra power that you can't get from nuclear plants to match the variation in loads.


    Bill also made that point.

    IMHO that is disingenuous. When accountants have applied similar
    "reasoning" to companies, they have closed useful companies and even
    industries.

    Yup, and we still don't factor in the cost of waste disposal in electricity
    rates from nuclear and they keep running. I wonder how they manage that? Oh, yeah, federal subsidies.
    It has to be factored in, and is.

    Please show me where storage for the lifetime of the nuclear waste is being paid. I've never seen that accounting. They may be paying the current bills as they come in, but those bills will be coming for many thousands of years. But we don't need to
    worry about that, do we?


    Whether state subsidies is the right way to pay for it is
    a separate issue.

    To pay for what exactly? Please show me where anyone has done the accounting for the thousands of years of storage?

    --

    Rick C.

    -+++- Get 1,000 miles of free Supercharging
    -+++- Tesla referral code - https://ts.la/richard11209

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Dimiter_Popoff@21:1/5 to Rick C on Wed Jan 26 19:17:10 2022
    On 1/26/2022 19:08, Rick C wrote:
    On Wednesday, January 26, 2022 at 9:47:11 AM UTC-4, Tom Gardner wrote:
    On 26/01/22 12:13, Rick C wrote:
    On Wednesday, January 26, 2022 at 4:38:55 AM UTC-4, Tom Gardner wrote:
    On 26/01/22 02:23, Anthony William Sloman wrote:
    On Wednesday, January 26, 2022 at 9:10:49 AM UTC+11, Dimiter Popoff
    wrote:
    On 1/25/2022 23:19, Rick C wrote:
    On Tuesday, January 25, 2022 at 11:43:24 AM UTC-4, Dimiter Popoff >>>>>>> wrote:
    On 1/25/2022 16:27, Martin Brown wrote:
    .... The only suppliers operating on a sound financial basis in >>>>>>>>> the UK at present have either nuclear or hydro as well as gas >>>>>>>>> generating capacity in their portfolio and are cross subsidising >>>>>>>>> the loss making retail arm from that. Industry is screaming blue >>>>>>>>> murder they pay full price.

    This is quickly becoming a worldwide disaster, after decades of >>>>>>>> playing with subsidized windmills, rooftops and other nonsense >>>>>>>> instead of building enough nuclear what else could we expect. In >>>>>>>> Bulgaria, they are "building" a second nuclear plant for over 30 >>>>>>>> years now, must have spent zillions on "consulting" to practically >>>>>>>> zero results, other than ongoing wrestling who is to build it. >>>>>>>> Consequently an energy crisis.

    So you think nuclear is the solution to the energy problem other than >>>>>>> the fact that it is prohibitively expensive to build it?

    In the UK the present nuclear generation plant being built is not >>>>>>> going to return the profit the money bags expected. So in the future >>>>>>> the UK government is going to allow them to pass all risk to the rate >>>>>>> payers and they can plan and build nuclear projects as inefficiently >>>>>>> as they wish!

    Yes, what a grand idea!

    It has been made too expensive, this is true. Not because it is
    inherently expensive though. Because it is regulated (which it should >>>>>> be for obvious reasons) it has become a convenient cow to milk by
    plenty of people who contribute nothing to society but milking that >>>>>> cow. My estimate is that about 80% of the cost goes there. IOW the >>>>>> problem with nuclear is only social.

    Chernobyl and Fukushima suggests otherwise. Nuclear has very nasty
    failure modes.
    Coal, oil and gas have very nasty /normal/ operating modes.

    Windmills and tidal are better, /when/ they are available.

    Given the presumption that cars will go electric in the foreseeable future,
    what will happen when there's almost zero wind power in the UK for a week? >>>> Nuclear would be well matched to that.

    People keep babbling about how good nuclear is, but it is also not
    dispatchable. Demand varies a great deal during a single day as well as from
    day to day. Nuclear can't cope with that. That's why they refer to it as >>> baseload. Even the French only use about 70% nuclear. While they have some >>> reactors that can adapt during a daily cycle, they adjust slowly (to prevent
    Xenon poisoning). Because the cost of nuclear is mostly from the capital and
    other fixed costs, when run a lower power levels the effective cost his
    higher. Nukes are normally run flat out to make cheaper electricity.

    Then there is the cost in general. While ancient nuke plants are more cost >>> effective due to the capital investment having been amortized, new ones are >>> *hugely* expensive and produce the most expensive electricity we have. In >>> the US one new construction project was axed because of the huge cost
    overruns. In the UK a project underway has seen massive cost overruns and >>> huge schedule delays. The French seem to be pretty bad a building nuclear >>> reactors on schedule and under budget... same as everyone else.

    No, if nuclear is the energy source for the future, what do we do until that
    future arrives in 15 years or more?


    (Rule of thumb from some gridwatch data: wind power supplies
    X% of its peak power for X% of the time, i.e. 3 days/year
    it is <1% of peak)
    There is *no* other way we know to generate the energy we need. All >>>>>> the windmill nonsense has led us into the current energy crisis.

    Rubbish.At least in Australia, solar farms and windmills are the
    cheapest source of power and utility generators won't invest in any
    other. At the moment they need fast-turn-on gas-fired back-up to cope >>>>> with windless nights (which don't happen often) but the utilities are >>>>> buying grid-scale batteries, and the government is reworking the Snowy >>>>> Mountains hydroelectric scheme to throw in a lot of pumped storage.
    They are cheap, but their proponents don't include the cost of keeping >>>> other types of plant available for when they are unavailable for days on >>>> end.

    Hasn't that cost already been paid for? Do people factor in the cost of the >>> supplementary power to add to nuclear? Well, they do when it comes to a free
    market and peak rates go through the roof! I think someone in this group >>> posted a link to show what the local utilities pay for power at peak times >>> and it is astronomical because of the need for peaking plants that run for >>> such a short time because nuclear can not be ramped up and down.
    Nope, it is because renewables ramp up and down uncontrollably.

    Obviously you can't understand a simple point. In the dark ages, long before there were significant renewable generation facilities roaming the earth, peaking plants were used to handle the inherent mismatch between nuclear facilities and the variable
    loads. I don't know how to make it any more simple than that. Do... you... un-der-staaaand?


    The astronomical cost is because it that capacity is only
    needed for /relatively/ short times. But it is /needed/ and
    cannot be ignored.

    Yes, they are needed to provide the extra power that you can't get from nuclear plants to match the variation in loads.


    Bill also made that point.

    IMHO that is disingenuous. When accountants have applied similar
    "reasoning" to companies, they have closed useful companies and even
    industries.

    Yup, and we still don't factor in the cost of waste disposal in electricity >>> rates from nuclear and they keep running. I wonder how they manage that? >>> Oh, yeah, federal subsidies.
    It has to be factored in, and is.

    Please show me where storage for the lifetime of the nuclear waste is being paid. I've never seen that accounting. They may be paying the current bills as they come in, but those bills will be coming for many thousands of years. But we don't need to
    worry about that, do we?


    Whether state subsidies is the right way to pay for it is
    a separate issue.

    To pay for what exactly? Please show me where anyone has done the accounting for the thousands of years of storage?


    Oh come on, be the first anti-nuclear activist to accept the reality
    before all lights go out because of all the wasteful toying with
    windmills and the like.
    They have had now 3 decades to prove themselves - and the result of
    that experiment is the energy crisis. Where is the electricity if
    they were the solution, the energy crisis is getting from bad to worse
    by the day. Then Putin will turn off the gas for the EU in midwinter
    and guess what happens *then*.

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Rick C@21:1/5 to Dimiter Popoff on Wed Jan 26 11:58:45 2022
    On Wednesday, January 26, 2022 at 1:17:18 PM UTC-4, Dimiter Popoff wrote:
    Oh come on, be the first anti-nuclear activist to accept the reality
    before all lights go out because of all the wasteful toying with
    windmills and the like.
    They have had now 3 decades to prove themselves - and the result of
    that experiment is the energy crisis. Where is the electricity if
    they were the solution, the energy crisis is getting from bad to worse
    by the day. Then Putin will turn off the gas for the EU in midwinter
    and guess what happens *then*.

    Interesting how you avoid addressing the issue of nuclear waste, or any other issue we've discussed for that matter. Maybe when Putin cuts off the gas and the EU goes to nuclear, in a few decades that it will take to make that conversion, you can get
    Putin to take your waste and they can store it next to Chernobyl? Russia will be hurting for money after a couple of decades of not selling gas or oil. They can cook dinner over the waste! You'll have to get them to promise not to extract dangerous
    radionuclides that can be used in dirty bombs.

    Yeah, no problema!

    --

    Rick C.

    -++++ Get 1,000 miles of free Supercharging
    -++++ Tesla referral code - https://ts.la/richard11209

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Dimiter_Popoff@21:1/5 to Rick C on Wed Jan 26 22:49:54 2022
    On 1/26/2022 21:58, Rick C wrote:
    On Wednesday, January 26, 2022 at 1:17:18 PM UTC-4, Dimiter Popoff wrote:
    Oh come on, be the first anti-nuclear activist to accept the reality
    before all lights go out because of all the wasteful toying with
    windmills and the like.
    They have had now 3 decades to prove themselves - and the result of
    that experiment is the energy crisis. Where is the electricity if
    they were the solution, the energy crisis is getting from bad to worse
    by the day. Then Putin will turn off the gas for the EU in midwinter
    and guess what happens *then*.

    Interesting how you avoid addressing the issue of nuclear waste, or any other issue we've discussed for that matter. Maybe when Putin cuts off the gas and the EU goes to nuclear, in a few decades that it will take to make that conversion, you can get
    Putin to take your waste and they can store it next to Chernobyl? Russia will be hurting for money after a couple of decades of not selling gas or oil. They can cook dinner over the waste! You'll have to get them to promise not to extract dangerous
    radionuclides that can be used in dirty bombs.

    Yeah, no problema!


    The nuclear waste is the last resort of the antinuclear
    activists, clearly meanwhile you know there is nothing
    else to cling to.
    And the fact is that the talk about nuclear waste is
    a non-issue made up by the anti nuclear propaganda which has
    been around for many decades.
    Jerry Cohen was suggesting to dump it at some deep place at sea,
    which could be done of course, it can dissipate slowly enough and do
    nothing worth a discussion.
    But the fact is the waste is also a valuable resource so they don't
    dump it, propaganda is one thing decision making is another.

    Until humanity manages fusion fission is the only option it has
    to generate energy so the lights stay on.
    Antinuclear scaremongering is a fact of life of course, with very
    few of the activists doing it not for profit but just out of
    misguided good intentions. *Very* few, I don't think you are
    one of them, you must have interests in some windmill or rooftop
    or battery buffering thing or sort of. Do you?

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Rick C@21:1/5 to Dimiter Popoff on Wed Jan 26 13:09:57 2022
    On Wednesday, January 26, 2022 at 4:50:02 PM UTC-4, Dimiter Popoff wrote:
    On 1/26/2022 21:58, Rick C wrote:
    On Wednesday, January 26, 2022 at 1:17:18 PM UTC-4, Dimiter Popoff wrote:
    Oh come on, be the first anti-nuclear activist to accept the reality
    before all lights go out because of all the wasteful toying with
    windmills and the like.
    They have had now 3 decades to prove themselves - and the result of
    that experiment is the energy crisis. Where is the electricity if
    they were the solution, the energy crisis is getting from bad to worse
    by the day. Then Putin will turn off the gas for the EU in midwinter
    and guess what happens *then*.

    Interesting how you avoid addressing the issue of nuclear waste, or any other issue we've discussed for that matter. Maybe when Putin cuts off the gas and the EU goes to nuclear, in a few decades that it will take to make that conversion, you can get
    Putin to take your waste and they can store it next to Chernobyl? Russia will be hurting for money after a couple of decades of not selling gas or oil. They can cook dinner over the waste! You'll have to get them to promise not to extract dangerous
    radionuclides that can be used in dirty bombs.

    Yeah, no problema!

    The nuclear waste is the last resort of the antinuclear
    activists, clearly meanwhile you know there is nothing
    else to cling to.
    And the fact is that the talk about nuclear waste is
    a non-issue made up by the anti nuclear propaganda which has
    been around for many decades.
    Jerry Cohen was suggesting to dump it at some deep place at sea,
    which could be done of course, it can dissipate slowly enough and do
    nothing worth a discussion.
    But the fact is the waste is also a valuable resource so they don't
    dump it, propaganda is one thing decision making is another.

    I like that. Don't get rid of it. As a valuable resource we only need to hang onto it until the market ripens. LOL I haven't had a laugh like that all day!


    Until humanity manages fusion fission is the only option it has
    to generate energy so the lights stay on.
    Antinuclear scaremongering is a fact of life of course, with very
    few of the activists doing it not for profit but just out of
    misguided good intentions. *Very* few, I don't think you are
    one of them, you must have interests in some windmill or rooftop
    or battery buffering thing or sort of. Do you?

    Ok, no more scare mongering. Let's build nuclear power plants. We'll let you build the next one. Pony up!

    Oh, don't worry. Your investment will be paid back in 10 or 20 years... if the plant gets built in that time frame. So it might take 30 or 40 years to get paid back, if ever.

    Oh well. Glad it's your money.

    --

    Rick C.

    +---- Get 1,000 miles of free Supercharging
    +---- Tesla referral code - https://ts.la/richard11209

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Dimiter_Popoff@21:1/5 to Rick C on Wed Jan 26 23:22:09 2022
    On 1/26/2022 23:09, Rick C wrote:
    On Wednesday, January 26, 2022 at 4:50:02 PM UTC-4, Dimiter Popoff wrote:
    On 1/26/2022 21:58, Rick C wrote:
    On Wednesday, January 26, 2022 at 1:17:18 PM UTC-4, Dimiter Popoff wrote: >>>> Oh come on, be the first anti-nuclear activist to accept the reality
    before all lights go out because of all the wasteful toying with
    windmills and the like.
    They have had now 3 decades to prove themselves - and the result of
    that experiment is the energy crisis. Where is the electricity if
    they were the solution, the energy crisis is getting from bad to worse >>>> by the day. Then Putin will turn off the gas for the EU in midwinter
    and guess what happens *then*.

    Interesting how you avoid addressing the issue of nuclear waste, or any other issue we've discussed for that matter. Maybe when Putin cuts off the gas and the EU goes to nuclear, in a few decades that it will take to make that conversion, you can get
    Putin to take your waste and they can store it next to Chernobyl? Russia will be hurting for money after a couple of decades of not selling gas or oil. They can cook dinner over the waste! You'll have to get them to promise not to extract dangerous
    radionuclides that can be used in dirty bombs.

    Yeah, no problema!

    The nuclear waste is the last resort of the antinuclear
    activists, clearly meanwhile you know there is nothing
    else to cling to.
    And the fact is that the talk about nuclear waste is
    a non-issue made up by the anti nuclear propaganda which has
    been around for many decades.
    Jerry Cohen was suggesting to dump it at some deep place at sea,
    which could be done of course, it can dissipate slowly enough and do
    nothing worth a discussion.
    But the fact is the waste is also a valuable resource so they don't
    dump it, propaganda is one thing decision making is another.

    I like that. Don't get rid of it. As a valuable resource we only need to hang onto it until the market ripens. LOL I haven't had a laugh like that all day!

    It is because you are not educated on the matter past what
    you have been fed by the media. People have had the same laugh
    not so long ago when told the Earth was not flat.



    Until humanity manages fusion fission is the only option it has
    to generate energy so the lights stay on.
    Antinuclear scaremongering is a fact of life of course, with very
    few of the activists doing it not for profit but just out of
    misguided good intentions. *Very* few, I don't think you are
    one of them, you must have interests in some windmill or rooftop
    or battery buffering thing or sort of. Do you?

    Ok, no more scare mongering. Let's build nuclear power plants. We'll let you build the next one. Pony up!

    Oh, don't worry. Your investment will be paid back in 10 or 20 years... if the plant gets built in that time frame. So it might take 30 or 40 years to get paid back, if ever.

    Oh well. Glad it's your money.


    It is a simple question. You being evasive answers it of course.

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Rick C@21:1/5 to Dimiter Popoff on Wed Jan 26 13:46:46 2022
    On Wednesday, January 26, 2022 at 5:22:18 PM UTC-4, Dimiter Popoff wrote:
    On 1/26/2022 23:09, Rick C wrote:
    On Wednesday, January 26, 2022 at 4:50:02 PM UTC-4, Dimiter Popoff wrote:
    On 1/26/2022 21:58, Rick C wrote:
    On Wednesday, January 26, 2022 at 1:17:18 PM UTC-4, Dimiter Popoff wrote:
    Oh come on, be the first anti-nuclear activist to accept the reality >>>> before all lights go out because of all the wasteful toying with
    windmills and the like.
    They have had now 3 decades to prove themselves - and the result of >>>> that experiment is the energy crisis. Where is the electricity if
    they were the solution, the energy crisis is getting from bad to worse >>>> by the day. Then Putin will turn off the gas for the EU in midwinter >>>> and guess what happens *then*.

    Interesting how you avoid addressing the issue of nuclear waste, or any other issue we've discussed for that matter. Maybe when Putin cuts off the gas and the EU goes to nuclear, in a few decades that it will take to make that conversion, you can
    get Putin to take your waste and they can store it next to Chernobyl? Russia will be hurting for money after a couple of decades of not selling gas or oil. They can cook dinner over the waste! You'll have to get them to promise not to extract dangerous
    radionuclides that can be used in dirty bombs.

    Yeah, no problema!

    The nuclear waste is the last resort of the antinuclear
    activists, clearly meanwhile you know there is nothing
    else to cling to.
    And the fact is that the talk about nuclear waste is
    a non-issue made up by the anti nuclear propaganda which has
    been around for many decades.
    Jerry Cohen was suggesting to dump it at some deep place at sea,
    which could be done of course, it can dissipate slowly enough and do
    nothing worth a discussion.
    But the fact is the waste is also a valuable resource so they don't
    dump it, propaganda is one thing decision making is another.

    I like that. Don't get rid of it. As a valuable resource we only need to hang onto it until the market ripens. LOL I haven't had a laugh like that all day!
    It is because you are not educated on the matter past what
    you have been fed by the media. People have had the same laugh
    not so long ago when told the Earth was not flat.


    Until humanity manages fusion fission is the only option it has
    to generate energy so the lights stay on.
    Antinuclear scaremongering is a fact of life of course, with very
    few of the activists doing it not for profit but just out of
    misguided good intentions. *Very* few, I don't think you are
    one of them, you must have interests in some windmill or rooftop
    or battery buffering thing or sort of. Do you?

    Ok, no more scare mongering. Let's build nuclear power plants. We'll let you build the next one. Pony up!

    Oh, don't worry. Your investment will be paid back in 10 or 20 years... if the plant gets built in that time frame. So it might take 30 or 40 years to get paid back, if ever.

    Oh well. Glad it's your money.

    It is a simple question. You being evasive answers it of course.

    You mean whether I have investments in wind or solar power? It is an irrelevant question. We can discuss the facts or you can ignore the inconvenient truths.

    I think it funny that by participating in a discussion in sed you consider me to be an "activist". This is a very round about way to use an ad hominem attack.

    So do you want to discuss the facts or do you want to evade and dismiss the facts? Are you willing to invest in the next nuclear plant?

    --

    Rick C.

    +---+ Get 1,000 miles of free Supercharging
    +---+ Tesla referral code - https://ts.la/richard11209

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Dimiter_Popoff@21:1/5 to Rick C on Thu Jan 27 00:14:18 2022
    On 1/26/2022 23:46, Rick C wrote:
    On Wednesday, January 26, 2022 at 5:22:18 PM UTC-4, Dimiter Popoff wrote:
    On 1/26/2022 23:09, Rick C wrote:
    On Wednesday, January 26, 2022 at 4:50:02 PM UTC-4, Dimiter Popoff wrote: >>>> On 1/26/2022 21:58, Rick C wrote:
    On Wednesday, January 26, 2022 at 1:17:18 PM UTC-4, Dimiter Popoff wrote: >>>>>> Oh come on, be the first anti-nuclear activist to accept the reality >>>>>> before all lights go out because of all the wasteful toying with
    windmills and the like.
    They have had now 3 decades to prove themselves - and the result of >>>>>> that experiment is the energy crisis. Where is the electricity if
    they were the solution, the energy crisis is getting from bad to worse >>>>>> by the day. Then Putin will turn off the gas for the EU in midwinter >>>>>> and guess what happens *then*.

    Interesting how you avoid addressing the issue of nuclear waste, or any other issue we've discussed for that matter. Maybe when Putin cuts off the gas and the EU goes to nuclear, in a few decades that it will take to make that conversion, you can
    get Putin to take your waste and they can store it next to Chernobyl? Russia will be hurting for money after a couple of decades of not selling gas or oil. They can cook dinner over the waste! You'll have to get them to promise not to extract dangerous
    radionuclides that can be used in dirty bombs.

    Yeah, no problema!

    The nuclear waste is the last resort of the antinuclear
    activists, clearly meanwhile you know there is nothing
    else to cling to.
    And the fact is that the talk about nuclear waste is
    a non-issue made up by the anti nuclear propaganda which has
    been around for many decades.
    Jerry Cohen was suggesting to dump it at some deep place at sea,
    which could be done of course, it can dissipate slowly enough and do
    nothing worth a discussion.
    But the fact is the waste is also a valuable resource so they don't
    dump it, propaganda is one thing decision making is another.

    I like that. Don't get rid of it. As a valuable resource we only need to hang onto it until the market ripens. LOL I haven't had a laugh like that all day!
    It is because you are not educated on the matter past what
    you have been fed by the media. People have had the same laugh
    not so long ago when told the Earth was not flat.


    Until humanity manages fusion fission is the only option it has
    to generate energy so the lights stay on.
    Antinuclear scaremongering is a fact of life of course, with very
    few of the activists doing it not for profit but just out of
    misguided good intentions. *Very* few, I don't think you are
    one of them, you must have interests in some windmill or rooftop
    or battery buffering thing or sort of. Do you?

    Ok, no more scare mongering. Let's build nuclear power plants. We'll let you build the next one. Pony up!

    Oh, don't worry. Your investment will be paid back in 10 or 20 years... if the plant gets built in that time frame. So it might take 30 or 40 years to get paid back, if ever.

    Oh well. Glad it's your money.

    It is a simple question. You being evasive answers it of course.

    You mean whether I have investments in wind or solar power? It is an irrelevant question. We can discuss the facts or you can ignore the inconvenient truths.

    I think it funny that by participating in a discussion in sed you consider me to be an "activist". This is a very round about way to use an ad hominem attack.

    So do you want to discuss the facts or do you want to evade and dismiss the facts? Are you willing to invest in the next nuclear plant?


    So you are yet another anti-nuclear activist doing it for profit.
    Which is OK, it just has to be made clear in a public discussion.

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Rick C@21:1/5 to Dimiter Popoff on Wed Jan 26 14:27:02 2022
    On Wednesday, January 26, 2022 at 6:14:27 PM UTC-4, Dimiter Popoff wrote:
    On 1/26/2022 23:46, Rick C wrote:
    On Wednesday, January 26, 2022 at 5:22:18 PM UTC-4, Dimiter Popoff wrote:
    On 1/26/2022 23:09, Rick C wrote:
    On Wednesday, January 26, 2022 at 4:50:02 PM UTC-4, Dimiter Popoff wrote:
    On 1/26/2022 21:58, Rick C wrote:
    On Wednesday, January 26, 2022 at 1:17:18 PM UTC-4, Dimiter Popoff wrote:
    Oh come on, be the first anti-nuclear activist to accept the reality >>>>>> before all lights go out because of all the wasteful toying with >>>>>> windmills and the like.
    They have had now 3 decades to prove themselves - and the result of >>>>>> that experiment is the energy crisis. Where is the electricity if >>>>>> they were the solution, the energy crisis is getting from bad to worse
    by the day. Then Putin will turn off the gas for the EU in midwinter >>>>>> and guess what happens *then*.

    Interesting how you avoid addressing the issue of nuclear waste, or any other issue we've discussed for that matter. Maybe when Putin cuts off the gas and the EU goes to nuclear, in a few decades that it will take to make that conversion, you can
    get Putin to take your waste and they can store it next to Chernobyl? Russia will be hurting for money after a couple of decades of not selling gas or oil. They can cook dinner over the waste! You'll have to get them to promise not to extract dangerous
    radionuclides that can be used in dirty bombs.

    Yeah, no problema!

    The nuclear waste is the last resort of the antinuclear
    activists, clearly meanwhile you know there is nothing
    else to cling to.
    And the fact is that the talk about nuclear waste is
    a non-issue made up by the anti nuclear propaganda which has
    been around for many decades.
    Jerry Cohen was suggesting to dump it at some deep place at sea,
    which could be done of course, it can dissipate slowly enough and do >>>> nothing worth a discussion.
    But the fact is the waste is also a valuable resource so they don't >>>> dump it, propaganda is one thing decision making is another.

    I like that. Don't get rid of it. As a valuable resource we only need to hang onto it until the market ripens. LOL I haven't had a laugh like that all day!
    It is because you are not educated on the matter past what
    you have been fed by the media. People have had the same laugh
    not so long ago when told the Earth was not flat.


    Until humanity manages fusion fission is the only option it has
    to generate energy so the lights stay on.
    Antinuclear scaremongering is a fact of life of course, with very
    few of the activists doing it not for profit but just out of
    misguided good intentions. *Very* few, I don't think you are
    one of them, you must have interests in some windmill or rooftop
    or battery buffering thing or sort of. Do you?

    Ok, no more scare mongering. Let's build nuclear power plants. We'll let you build the next one. Pony up!

    Oh, don't worry. Your investment will be paid back in 10 or 20 years... if the plant gets built in that time frame. So it might take 30 or 40 years to get paid back, if ever.

    Oh well. Glad it's your money.

    It is a simple question. You being evasive answers it of course.

    You mean whether I have investments in wind or solar power? It is an irrelevant question. We can discuss the facts or you can ignore the inconvenient truths.

    I think it funny that by participating in a discussion in sed you consider me to be an "activist". This is a very round about way to use an ad hominem attack.

    So do you want to discuss the facts or do you want to evade and dismiss the facts? Are you willing to invest in the next nuclear plant?

    So you are yet another anti-nuclear activist doing it for profit.
    Which is OK, it just has to be made clear in a public discussion.

    As I thought. You can't discuss the facts, so ad hominem. Ok. I guess that shows just how weak your arguments really are.

    BTW, have you stop beating your wife?

    --

    Rick C.
    +--+- Get 1,000 miles of free Supercharging
    +--+- Tesla referral code - https://ts.la/richard11209

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Tom Gardner@21:1/5 to Rick C on Wed Jan 26 23:35:35 2022
    On 26/01/22 22:27, Rick C wrote:
    On Wednesday, January 26, 2022 at 6:14:27 PM UTC-4, Dimiter Popoff wrote:
    On 1/26/2022 23:46, Rick C wrote:
    On Wednesday, January 26, 2022 at 5:22:18 PM UTC-4, Dimiter Popoff wrote: >>>> On 1/26/2022 23:09, Rick C wrote:
    On Wednesday, January 26, 2022 at 4:50:02 PM UTC-4, Dimiter Popoff wrote: >>>>>> On 1/26/2022 21:58, Rick C wrote:
    On Wednesday, January 26, 2022 at 1:17:18 PM UTC-4, Dimiter Popoff wrote:
    Oh come on, be the first anti-nuclear activist to accept the reality >>>>>>>> before all lights go out because of all the wasteful toying with >>>>>>>> windmills and the like.
    They have had now 3 decades to prove themselves - and the result of >>>>>>>> that experiment is the energy crisis. Where is the electricity if >>>>>>>> they were the solution, the energy crisis is getting from bad to worse >>>>>>>> by the day. Then Putin will turn off the gas for the EU in midwinter >>>>>>>> and guess what happens *then*.

    Interesting how you avoid addressing the issue of nuclear waste, or any other issue we've discussed for that matter. Maybe when Putin cuts off the gas and the EU goes to nuclear, in a few decades that it will take to make that conversion, you can
    get Putin to take your waste and they can store it next to Chernobyl? Russia will be hurting for money after a couple of decades of not selling gas or oil. They can cook dinner over the waste! You'll have to get them to promise not to extract dangerous
    radionuclides that can be used in dirty bombs.

    Yeah, no problema!

    The nuclear waste is the last resort of the antinuclear
    activists, clearly meanwhile you know there is nothing
    else to cling to.
    And the fact is that the talk about nuclear waste is
    a non-issue made up by the anti nuclear propaganda which has
    been around for many decades.
    Jerry Cohen was suggesting to dump it at some deep place at sea,
    which could be done of course, it can dissipate slowly enough and do >>>>>> nothing worth a discussion.
    But the fact is the waste is also a valuable resource so they don't >>>>>> dump it, propaganda is one thing decision making is another.

    I like that. Don't get rid of it. As a valuable resource we only need to hang onto it until the market ripens. LOL I haven't had a laugh like that all day!
    It is because you are not educated on the matter past what
    you have been fed by the media. People have had the same laugh
    not so long ago when told the Earth was not flat.


    Until humanity manages fusion fission is the only option it has
    to generate energy so the lights stay on.
    Antinuclear scaremongering is a fact of life of course, with very
    few of the activists doing it not for profit but just out of
    misguided good intentions. *Very* few, I don't think you are
    one of them, you must have interests in some windmill or rooftop
    or battery buffering thing or sort of. Do you?

    Ok, no more scare mongering. Let's build nuclear power plants. We'll let you build the next one. Pony up!

    Oh, don't worry. Your investment will be paid back in 10 or 20 years... if the plant gets built in that time frame. So it might take 30 or 40 years to get paid back, if ever.

    Oh well. Glad it's your money.

    It is a simple question. You being evasive answers it of course.

    You mean whether I have investments in wind or solar power? It is an irrelevant question. We can discuss the facts or you can ignore the inconvenient truths.

    I think it funny that by participating in a discussion in sed you consider me to be an "activist". This is a very round about way to use an ad hominem attack.

    So do you want to discuss the facts or do you want to evade and dismiss the facts? Are you willing to invest in the next nuclear plant?

    So you are yet another anti-nuclear activist doing it for profit.
    Which is OK, it just has to be made clear in a public discussion.

    As I thought. You can't discuss the facts, so ad hominem. Ok. I guess that shows just how weak your arguments really are.

    BTW, have you stop beating your wife?

    He is trying to clarify your position, and you are being evasive.

    That is /not/ an ad hominem attack.

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Rick C@21:1/5 to Tom Gardner on Wed Jan 26 16:20:31 2022
    On Wednesday, January 26, 2022 at 7:35:41 PM UTC-4, Tom Gardner wrote:
    On 26/01/22 22:27, Rick C wrote:
    On Wednesday, January 26, 2022 at 6:14:27 PM UTC-4, Dimiter Popoff wrote:
    On 1/26/2022 23:46, Rick C wrote:
    On Wednesday, January 26, 2022 at 5:22:18 PM UTC-4, Dimiter Popoff wrote:
    On 1/26/2022 23:09, Rick C wrote:
    On Wednesday, January 26, 2022 at 4:50:02 PM UTC-4, Dimiter Popoff wrote:
    On 1/26/2022 21:58, Rick C wrote:
    On Wednesday, January 26, 2022 at 1:17:18 PM UTC-4, Dimiter Popoff wrote:
    Oh come on, be the first anti-nuclear activist to accept the reality
    before all lights go out because of all the wasteful toying with >>>>>>>> windmills and the like.
    They have had now 3 decades to prove themselves - and the result of >>>>>>>> that experiment is the energy crisis. Where is the electricity if >>>>>>>> they were the solution, the energy crisis is getting from bad to worse
    by the day. Then Putin will turn off the gas for the EU in midwinter
    and guess what happens *then*.

    Interesting how you avoid addressing the issue of nuclear waste, or any other issue we've discussed for that matter. Maybe when Putin cuts off the gas and the EU goes to nuclear, in a few decades that it will take to make that conversion, you
    can get Putin to take your waste and they can store it next to Chernobyl? Russia will be hurting for money after a couple of decades of not selling gas or oil. They can cook dinner over the waste! You'll have to get them to promise not to extract
    dangerous radionuclides that can be used in dirty bombs.

    Yeah, no problema!

    The nuclear waste is the last resort of the antinuclear
    activists, clearly meanwhile you know there is nothing
    else to cling to.
    And the fact is that the talk about nuclear waste is
    a non-issue made up by the anti nuclear propaganda which has
    been around for many decades.
    Jerry Cohen was suggesting to dump it at some deep place at sea, >>>>>> which could be done of course, it can dissipate slowly enough and do >>>>>> nothing worth a discussion.
    But the fact is the waste is also a valuable resource so they don't >>>>>> dump it, propaganda is one thing decision making is another.

    I like that. Don't get rid of it. As a valuable resource we only need to hang onto it until the market ripens. LOL I haven't had a laugh like that all day!
    It is because you are not educated on the matter past what
    you have been fed by the media. People have had the same laugh
    not so long ago when told the Earth was not flat.


    Until humanity manages fusion fission is the only option it has >>>>>> to generate energy so the lights stay on.
    Antinuclear scaremongering is a fact of life of course, with very >>>>>> few of the activists doing it not for profit but just out of
    misguided good intentions. *Very* few, I don't think you are
    one of them, you must have interests in some windmill or rooftop >>>>>> or battery buffering thing or sort of. Do you?

    Ok, no more scare mongering. Let's build nuclear power plants. We'll let you build the next one. Pony up!

    Oh, don't worry. Your investment will be paid back in 10 or 20 years... if the plant gets built in that time frame. So it might take 30 or 40 years to get paid back, if ever.

    Oh well. Glad it's your money.

    It is a simple question. You being evasive answers it of course.

    You mean whether I have investments in wind or solar power? It is an irrelevant question. We can discuss the facts or you can ignore the inconvenient truths.

    I think it funny that by participating in a discussion in sed you consider me to be an "activist". This is a very round about way to use an ad hominem attack.

    So do you want to discuss the facts or do you want to evade and dismiss the facts? Are you willing to invest in the next nuclear plant?

    So you are yet another anti-nuclear activist doing it for profit.
    Which is OK, it just has to be made clear in a public discussion.

    As I thought. You can't discuss the facts, so ad hominem. Ok. I guess that shows just how weak your arguments really are.

    BTW, have you stop beating your wife?
    He is trying to clarify your position, and you are being evasive.

    That is /not/ an ad hominem attack.

    No, he's not asking for any relevant clarification. He is trying to get me to answer and irrelevant question. Then he says "you are yet another anti-nuclear activist doing it for profit". That is ad hominem by definition.

    I'm happy to discuss any relevant facts. So far there has been no response to my assertions of the issues of building new nuclear generation plants. There is a reason why they are not being built in the western world. We have learned they are not
    good ideas and are very expensive.

    How much solar can be built for $20,000,000,000.00? That's around 1 GW in a nuclear plant or around 20 GW in a solar or wind facility. Ok, cut that renewable capacity in half and add storage with the other $10,000,000,000.00. Yeah, I know which I want
    to see built. 1 GW of the most expensive energy around, or 10 GW of safer renewable energy with storage.

    --

    Rick C.

    +--++ Get 1,000 miles of free Supercharging
    +--++ Tesla referral code - https://ts.la/richard11209

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Anthony William Sloman@21:1/5 to Tom Gardner on Wed Jan 26 17:13:44 2022
    On Thursday, January 27, 2022 at 12:39:55 AM UTC+11, Tom Gardner wrote:
    On 26/01/22 12:24, Rick C wrote:
    On Wednesday, January 26, 2022 at 6:28:13 AM UTC-4, Tom Gardner wrote:
    On 26/01/22 09:54, Anthony William Sloman wrote:
    On Wednesday, January 26, 2022 at 7:38:55 PM UTC+11, Tom Gardner wrote: >>>> On 26/01/22 02:23, Anthony William Sloman wrote:
    On Wednesday, January 26, 2022 at 9:10:49 AM UTC+11, Dimiter Popoff >>>>> wrote:
    On 1/25/2022 23:19, Rick C wrote:
    On Tuesday, January 25, 2022 at 11:43:24 AM UTC-4, Dimiter
    Popoff wrote:
    On 1/25/2022 16:27, Martin Brown wrote:

    <snip>

    The nice thing about electric cars is that when everybody is using them, >>> their batteries could deliver something three times the capacity of the >>> whole grid (though only for a couple of hours).

    I'd be "disappointed" if I had left my car charging, I had to drive 200 >> miles (or uphill), and that it was only 50% charged.

    My expectation would be that you'd get paid for letting your car be used for grid storage, and you could opt out - briefly - if you needed to have it fully charged for a day or so. You'd lose money by making the choice, but not a lot.

    For every EV user who wanted to take a 200 mile trip today, there are probably 100 who are only driving the average 30 miles and don't need to charge at all because there is less energy from renewables. The "EV grid" can be the first load that is shed when less power is available, which works
    just like any power storage.

    True, but so what? If I need and expect /my/ car to be fully
    charged then other people cars are irrelevant.

    The internet of things is is fully up to coping with a one or two day opt-out. The bureaucrats might be a bit slow to realise that they could offer the option.

    You are using statistics for support, not illumination (cf a
    drunkard leaning against a lamppost). Statisticians drown in
    lakes of average depth 3".

    My cousin the statistician wouldn't. Statisticians understand that the mean and the median are rather coarse-grained measures.
    The one's that calculate the likely frequencies of natural disasters do concentrate on the tails of the distributions.

    Day/night alternation from solar power isn't a problem. The short answer >>> is that solar and windmills need to offer quite a lot of excess capacity >>> to cope with worst case situations. In Australia the plan seems to be to >>> use that excess capacity to make electrolytic hydrogen, liquify it and >>> ship it off in tanker loads to South Korea and Japan. It's a
    thermodynamic nonsense, but it keeps the investors happy.

    Large scale storage would be a game-changer in the UK. That would make
    someone as rich as Croesus.

    It will be a process, not unlike building a nuclear plant taking time and money. The difference is it will be as profitable as planned from day one and probably more so.

    Grid scale storage is very different from building nuclear plant - as you seem to be aware in that " it will be as profitable as planned from day one
    and probably more so". What you don't seem to have noticed is that you can install it in relatively small chunks. Nuclear only seems to works if you build big chunks of generating capacity - which is imposed more by public opinion and bureaucracy than
    any real necessity, but does seem to be generally true.

    All you need are suitable technology or suitable geography.
    Nobody has the technology (except pumped hydro), and the UK does not have the geography.

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dinorwig_Power_Station

    It has been there - in the UK - since 1984. Scotland also offers sites. The Lake District (in England) might offer a few as well.

    Grid scale batteries are a suitable technology.

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vanadium_redox_battery

    The Wikipedia data is a bit old - somebody in Australia seems to have signed a contract for a respectable installation - but the technology is still has to move into high volume production.

    <snip>
    --
    Bill Sloman, Sydney

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Anthony William Sloman@21:1/5 to Tom Gardner on Wed Jan 26 17:27:53 2022
    On Thursday, January 27, 2022 at 12:47:11 AM UTC+11, Tom Gardner wrote:
    On 26/01/22 12:13, Rick C wrote:
    On Wednesday, January 26, 2022 at 4:38:55 AM UTC-4, Tom Gardner wrote:
    On 26/01/22 02:23, Anthony William Sloman wrote:
    On Wednesday, January 26, 2022 at 9:10:49 AM UTC+11, Dimiter Popoff wrote:
    On 1/25/2022 23:19, Rick C wrote:
    On Tuesday, January 25, 2022 at 11:43:24 AM UTC-4, Dimiter Popoff wrote:
    On 1/25/2022 16:27, Martin Brown wrote:

    <snip>

    Hasn't that cost already been paid for? Do people factor in the cost of the
    supplementary power to add to nuclear? Well, they do when it comes to a free
    market and peak rates go through the roof! I think someone in this group posted a link to show what the local utilities pay for power at peak times and it is astronomical because of the need for peaking plants that run for such a short time because nuclear can not be ramped up and down.

    Nope, it is because renewables ramp up and down uncontrollably.

    Renewables may ramp down uncontrollably, but the peak power they deliver is entirely controllable. Solar cells can be manipulated to deliver the peak current desired at a higher voltage than the value that optimises power extraction, and windmills have
    variable pitch sails.

    The astronomical cost is because it that capacity is only
    needed for /relatively/ short times. But it is /needed/ and
    cannot be ignored.

    Bill also made that point.

    And I did make the point that the cost only looks astronomical because the peaking plants only get paid for when they are in use - they exist the whole year round, and have to get paid enough when they are working to cover a whole year's interest on
    capital, staff salaries and maintenance.

    Peaking plants are a sensible investment.

    <snip>

    --
    Bill Sloman, Sydney

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From whit3rd@21:1/5 to gnuarm.del...@gmail.com on Wed Jan 26 21:36:25 2022
    On Wednesday, January 26, 2022 at 9:08:24 AM UTC-8, gnuarm.del...@gmail.com wrote:
    On Wednesday, January 26, 2022 at 9:47:11 AM UTC-4, Tom Gardner wrote:
    On 26/01/22 12:13, Rick C wrote:

    posted a link to show what the local utilities pay for power at peak times
    and it is astronomical because of the need for peaking plants that run for
    such a short time because nuclear can not be ramped up and down.

    Nope, it is because renewables ramp up and down uncontrollably.

    ... before there were significant renewable generation facilities roaming the earth, peaking plants were used to handle the inherent mismatch between nuclear facilities and the variable loads.

    The astronomical cost is because it that capacity is only
    needed for /relatively/ short times. But it is /needed/ and
    cannot be ignored.

    Yes, they are needed to provide the extra power that you can't get from nuclear plants to match the variation in loads.

    There's other options; an aluminum mill, for example, can buy and use irregular power (i.e.
    only during peaks), or a hydroelectric dam can throttle its flow rapidly. The Tesla peak-power
    success is available now, and for the future, flow batteries seem poised to lower those prices.

    Traditionally, incandescent lighting was tolerant of fluctuations, and gave the grid a lower
    power usage when voltages dropped; switchmode power and AC motors do NOT share that
    beneficial effect, so the grid stability is more of a problem these days.

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Tom Gardner@21:1/5 to Anthony William Sloman on Thu Jan 27 09:29:59 2022
    On 27/01/22 01:27, Anthony William Sloman wrote:
    On Thursday, January 27, 2022 at 12:47:11 AM UTC+11, Tom Gardner wrote:
    On 26/01/22 12:13, Rick C wrote:
    On Wednesday, January 26, 2022 at 4:38:55 AM UTC-4, Tom Gardner wrote:
    On 26/01/22 02:23, Anthony William Sloman wrote:
    On Wednesday, January 26, 2022 at 9:10:49 AM UTC+11, Dimiter Popoff
    wrote:
    On 1/25/2022 23:19, Rick C wrote:
    On Tuesday, January 25, 2022 at 11:43:24 AM UTC-4, Dimiter Popoff >>>>>>> wrote:
    On 1/25/2022 16:27, Martin Brown wrote:

    <snip>

    Hasn't that cost already been paid for? Do people factor in the cost of
    the supplementary power to add to nuclear? Well, they do when it comes to >>> a free market and peak rates go through the roof! I think someone in this >>> group posted a link to show what the local utilities pay for power at
    peak times and it is astronomical because of the need for peaking plants >>> that run for such a short time because nuclear can not be ramped up and
    down.

    Nope, it is because renewables ramp up and down uncontrollably.

    Renewables may ramp down uncontrollably, but the peak power they deliver is entirely controllable. Solar cells can be manipulated to deliver the peak current desired at a higher voltage than the value that optimises power extraction, and windmills have variable pitch sails.

    If you vastly over-provision the installed capacity, that
    will reduce the probability of outages. But see the /excellent/ https://withouthotair.com/ for a discussion of the UK alternative.
    In particular he insists the numbers add up ("numbers not
    adjectives"), and gives several alternative mixes for the UK in
    the future.

    (Excellent => lauded by _everybody_ from Big Energy to Greens
    to politicians)



    The astronomical cost is because it that capacity is only needed for
    /relatively/ short times. But it is /needed/ and cannot be ignored.

    Bill also made that point.

    And I did make the point that the cost only looks astronomical because the peaking plants only get paid for when they are in use - they exist the whole year round, and have to get paid enough when they are working to cover a whole year's interest on capital, staff salaries and maintenance.

    Yup.

    IMHO those costs should be included in the cost of the
    renewable energy. They shouldn't be conveniently ignored
    by the renewable energy salesmen and lobbyists.


    Peaking plants are a sensible investment.

    Yup.

    Grid scale storage will be too - when the technology is
    not only available (in the location) but also proven.
    People will make /lots/ of money from it.

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Tom Gardner@21:1/5 to Anthony William Sloman on Thu Jan 27 09:20:42 2022
    On 27/01/22 01:13, Anthony William Sloman wrote:
    On Thursday, January 27, 2022 at 12:39:55 AM UTC+11, Tom Gardner wrote:
    On 26/01/22 12:24, Rick C wrote:
    On Wednesday, January 26, 2022 at 6:28:13 AM UTC-4, Tom Gardner wrote:
    On 26/01/22 09:54, Anthony William Sloman wrote:
    On Wednesday, January 26, 2022 at 7:38:55 PM UTC+11, Tom Gardner
    wrote:
    On 26/01/22 02:23, Anthony William Sloman wrote:
    On Wednesday, January 26, 2022 at 9:10:49 AM UTC+11, Dimiter
    Popoff wrote:
    On 1/25/2022 23:19, Rick C wrote:
    On Tuesday, January 25, 2022 at 11:43:24 AM UTC-4, Dimiter
    Popoff wrote:
    On 1/25/2022 16:27, Martin Brown wrote:

    <snip>

    The nice thing about electric cars is that when everybody is using
    them, their batteries could deliver something three times the
    capacity of the whole grid (though only for a couple of hours).

    I'd be "disappointed" if I had left my car charging, I had to drive
    200 miles (or uphill), and that it was only 50% charged.

    My expectation would be that you'd get paid for letting your car be used for grid storage, and you could opt out - briefly - if you needed to have it fully charged for a day or so. You'd lose money by making the choice, but not a lot.

    I would hope so too, but I until I can kick the tyres...

    Still wouldn't help with the "your mother has A Fall" scenario.



    For every EV user who wanted to take a 200 mile trip today, there are
    probably 100 who are only driving the average 30 miles and don't need to >>> charge at all because there is less energy from renewables. The "EV
    grid" can be the first load that is shed when less power is available,
    which works just like any power storage.

    True, but so what? If I need and expect /my/ car to be fully charged then
    other people cars are irrelevant.

    The internet of things is is fully up to coping with a one or two day opt-out. The bureaucrats might be a bit slow to realise that they could offer the option.

    Here the POTS is being aggressively replaced by VOIP, which
    requires a modem in the customer premises. When the power is
    out, so is the phone.

    BT/OpenReach statement is "you can use your cellphone
    instead", which is fine - except for those places that
    don't have reception and for "emergency buttons" worn
    by the elderly in case of A Fall.

    I've seen reports that BT will grudgingly add batteries
    (or similar), if you can force them to recognise you
    don't have cellphone reception. No answer to the emergency
    button issue.

    I imagine lots of IoT applications will be ignored.



    You are using statistics for support, not illumination (cf a drunkard
    leaning against a lamppost). Statisticians drown in lakes of average depth >> 3".

    My cousin the statistician wouldn't. Statisticians understand that the mean and the median are rather coarse-grained measures. The one's that calculate the likely frequencies of natural disasters do concentrate on the tails of the distributions.

    Oh yes indeed. A salesman/snakecharmer likes the mean because
    it can conceal a multitude of sins. Somebody responsible for continuity/reliability will insist on the CDF. I used the
    95% percentile as a quick indication of getting close to an edge.



    Day/night alternation from solar power isn't a problem. The short
    answer is that solar and windmills need to offer quite a lot of
    excess capacity to cope with worst case situations. In Australia the >>>>> plan seems to be to use that excess capacity to make electrolytic
    hydrogen, liquify it and ship it off in tanker loads to South Korea
    and Japan. It's a thermodynamic nonsense, but it keeps the investors >>>>> happy.

    Large scale storage would be a game-changer in the UK. That would make >>>> someone as rich as Croesus.

    It will be a process, not unlike building a nuclear plant taking time
    and money. The difference is it will be as profitable as planned from day >>> one and probably more so.

    Grid scale storage is very different from building nuclear plant - as you seem to be aware in that " it will be as profitable as planned from day one and probably more so". What you don't seem to have noticed is that you can install it in relatively small chunks. Nuclear only seems to works if you build big chunks of generating capacity - which is imposed more by public opinion and bureaucracy than any real necessity, but does seem to be generally true.

    Rolls Royce is aggressively pushing its small modular reactors
    that are build in a factory and dropped into a hole onsite.

    You can guess where they have developed and proved that technology!



    All you need are suitable technology or suitable geography. Nobody has the >> technology (except pumped hydro), and the UK does not have the geography.

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dinorwig_Power_Station

    I remember watching CEGB newsletters about that as it was being
    built. My father didn't wangle a visit to that "largest manmade
    cavern in Europe"; I've never forgiven him :)

    I've been to the slightly smaller one in Scotland, Cruachan.

    Their capacity is tiny, suitable only for black starts and
    World Cup halftime.


    It has been there - in the UK - since 1984. Scotland also offers sites. The Lake District (in England) might offer a few as well.

    I suspect Scotland will be limited to flooding very large
    areas a few metres deep, due to the lack of elevation.

    The SNP would have a field day, and it would probably
    reduce the United Kingdom of Great Britain (without NI)
    to England and Wales.

    As I'm sure you are aware, here 1000ft/300m is classed as
    a mountain, and there aren't many of those peaks.


    Grid scale batteries are a suitable technology.

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vanadium_redox_battery

    Let's hope that, or similar, can be shown to be reliable.
    But until someone can give a price and I can kick the tyres...

    There seem to be hope for compressing/expanding gas, but
    I haven't followed the technology.


    The Wikipedia data is a bit old - somebody in Australia seems to have signed a contract for a respectable installation - but the technology is still has to move into high volume production.

    Contracts are easy; look at the penalty clauses :)

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Martin Brown@21:1/5 to All on Thu Jan 27 12:25:41 2022
    On 27/01/2022 05:36, whit3rd wrote:

    Traditionally, incandescent lighting was tolerant of fluctuations, and gave the grid a lower
    power usage when voltages dropped; switchmode power and AC motors do NOT share that
    beneficial effect, so the grid stability is more of a problem these days.

    It is worse than that. Switched mode and LED lamps draw ever more
    current as their input voltage falls to maintain constant power output.

    I only noticed that the other phase in my village had gone down when I
    went to boil the kettle pure 3kW resistive load and it took forever!

    Computer and LED lighting was fine on 208 volts instead of nominal 240
    my few remaining filament bulbs were noticeably dim, visibly orange and
    got even dimmer with the kettle on.

    --
    Regards,
    Martin Brown

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Anthony William Sloman@21:1/5 to Tom Gardner on Thu Jan 27 06:21:45 2022
    On Thursday, January 27, 2022 at 8:30:06 PM UTC+11, Tom Gardner wrote:
    On 27/01/22 01:27, Anthony William Sloman wrote:
    On Thursday, January 27, 2022 at 12:47:11 AM UTC+11, Tom Gardner wrote:
    On 26/01/22 12:13, Rick C wrote:
    On Wednesday, January 26, 2022 at 4:38:55 AM UTC-4, Tom Gardner wrote: >>>> On 26/01/22 02:23, Anthony William Sloman wrote:
    On Wednesday, January 26, 2022 at 9:10:49 AM UTC+11, Dimiter Popoff >>>>> wrote:
    On 1/25/2022 23:19, Rick C wrote:
    On Tuesday, January 25, 2022 at 11:43:24 AM UTC-4, Dimiter Popoff >>>>>>> wrote:
    On 1/25/2022 16:27, Martin Brown wrote:

    <snip>

    The astronomical cost is because it that capacity is only needed for
    /relatively/ short times. But it is /needed/ and cannot be ignored.

    Bill also made that point.

    And I did make the point that the cost only looks astronomical because the peaking plants only get paid for when they are in use - they exist the whole
    year round, and have to get paid enough when they are working to cover a whole year's interest on capital, staff salaries and maintenance.

    Yup.

    IMHO those costs should be included in the cost of the
    renewable energy. They shouldn't be conveniently ignored by the renewable energy salesmen and lobbyists.

    Who on earth are they selling to and lobbying?

    In Australia the debate is between he people who make a lot of money out of digging up coal and want the government to keep them in business, and the energy utilities who want to keep on putting solar farms and windmills because that lets them produce
    energy more cheaply than burning coal. The energy utilities have got a whole lot of legacy power stations, and quite bit of dispatchable hydro power and a grid that covers the eastern half of the continent, so they haven't been under pressure to add
    new peaking plants, but they are starting to buy grid scale batteries.

    Peaking plants are a sensible investment.
    Yup.

    Grid scale storage will be too - when the technology is not only available (in the location) but also proven.
    People will make /lots/ of money from it.

    The Tesla grid scale battery in South Australia made a lot of money - unexpectedly - by taking over the short term phase and voltage regulation of the South Australian segment of the east coast grid. About 70% of it's capacity seems to be devoted to
    that and makes ten times as much money as the. other 30% which buys up excess capacity when it is cheap and sells it back when the market will pay more.

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hornsdale_Power_Reserve

    More seems to have been bought recently, and even more is being bought by utility generators in other eastern states.

    The technology does look to have been proven. Vanadium flow batteries would probably be even better, but they aren't yet being produce in volume, though

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vanadium_redox_battery

    lists nine grid-scale examples. They clearly work, but people do still seem to be thinking about tweaking the technology to make them work better, and the people who sell them do seem to feel the need to set up demonstration systems.

    https://www.pv-magazine.com/2021/09/03/vsun-reveals-redox-flow-battery-tech-in-australia/

    --
    Bill Sloman, Sydney

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From jlarkin@highlandsniptechnology.com@21:1/5 to All on Thu Jan 27 07:35:59 2022
    On Wed, 26 Jan 2022 21:36:25 -0800 (PST), whit3rd <whit3rd@gmail.com>
    wrote:

    On Wednesday, January 26, 2022 at 9:08:24 AM UTC-8, gnuarm.del...@gmail.com wrote:
    On Wednesday, January 26, 2022 at 9:47:11 AM UTC-4, Tom Gardner wrote:
    On 26/01/22 12:13, Rick C wrote:

    posted a link to show what the local utilities pay for power at peak times
    and it is astronomical because of the need for peaking plants that run for
    such a short time because nuclear can not be ramped up and down.

    Nope, it is because renewables ramp up and down uncontrollably.

    ... before there were significant renewable generation facilities roaming the earth, peaking plants were used to handle the inherent mismatch between nuclear facilities and the variable loads.

    The astronomical cost is because it that capacity is only
    needed for /relatively/ short times. But it is /needed/ and
    cannot be ignored.

    Yes, they are needed to provide the extra power that you can't get from nuclear plants to match the variation in loads.

    There's other options; an aluminum mill, for example, can buy and use irregular power (i.e.
    only during peaks),

    Can it? A lot of proceses take days or weeks to start up and shut
    down.



    --

    I yam what I yam - Popeye

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Martin Brown@21:1/5 to jlarkin@highlandsniptechnology.com on Thu Jan 27 16:18:21 2022
    On 27/01/2022 15:35, jlarkin@highlandsniptechnology.com wrote:
    On Wed, 26 Jan 2022 21:36:25 -0800 (PST), whit3rd <whit3rd@gmail.com>
    wrote:

    On Wednesday, January 26, 2022 at 9:08:24 AM UTC-8, gnuarm.del...@gmail.com wrote:
    On Wednesday, January 26, 2022 at 9:47:11 AM UTC-4, Tom Gardner wrote:
    On 26/01/22 12:13, Rick C wrote:

    posted a link to show what the local utilities pay for power at peak times
    and it is astronomical because of the need for peaking plants that run for
    such a short time because nuclear can not be ramped up and down.

    Nope, it is because renewables ramp up and down uncontrollably.

    ... before there were significant renewable generation facilities roaming the earth, peaking plants were used to handle the inherent mismatch between nuclear facilities and the variable loads.

    The astronomical cost is because it that capacity is only
    needed for /relatively/ short times. But it is /needed/ and
    cannot be ignored.

    Yes, they are needed to provide the extra power that you can't get from nuclear plants to match the variation in loads.

    There's other options; an aluminum mill, for example, can buy and use irregular power (i.e.
    only during peaks),

    Can it? A lot of proceses take days or weeks to start up and shut
    down.

    I think they can vary their load to some extent on the electrolysis side without allowing the furnace pots to cool. Making less aluminium but
    still fully operational. Sudden power disconnects can do a hell of a lot
    of damage as a precursor leap year failure to Y2k demonstrated in 1996.

    http://www.sysmod.com/ieismelt.htm

    Chloralkali electrolysis plants are the dynamic dump load of choice in
    the UK - they really can switch the process on and off quickly and get a
    very favourable tariff as a result. They don't need to generate much
    heat since many are aqueous brine to make bleach and sodium hydroxide
    directly.

    Manufacture of sodium metal requires molten anhydrous eutectic salt and
    they do need enough supply to keep them molten or there is big trouble.

    They are the ultimate load balancer for the UK national grid.

    The last remaining UK aluminium smelter is sat next to a hydro electric
    plant but with electricity prices as they are the electricity is worth
    more than the aluminium it could manufacture!

    https://www.reuters.com/markets/commodities/europes-power-crunch-sparks-aluminium-smelter-meltdown-andy-home-2022-01-06/

    --
    Regards,
    Martin Brown

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From jlarkin@highlandsniptechnology.com@21:1/5 to '''newspam'''@nonad.co.uk on Thu Jan 27 08:31:41 2022
    On Thu, 27 Jan 2022 16:18:21 +0000, Martin Brown
    <'''newspam'''@nonad.co.uk> wrote:

    On 27/01/2022 15:35, jlarkin@highlandsniptechnology.com wrote:
    On Wed, 26 Jan 2022 21:36:25 -0800 (PST), whit3rd <whit3rd@gmail.com>
    wrote:

    On Wednesday, January 26, 2022 at 9:08:24 AM UTC-8, gnuarm.del...@gmail.com wrote:
    On Wednesday, January 26, 2022 at 9:47:11 AM UTC-4, Tom Gardner wrote: >>>>> On 26/01/22 12:13, Rick C wrote:

    posted a link to show what the local utilities pay for power at peak times
    and it is astronomical because of the need for peaking plants that run for
    such a short time because nuclear can not be ramped up and down.

    Nope, it is because renewables ramp up and down uncontrollably.

    ... before there were significant renewable generation facilities roaming the earth, peaking plants were used to handle the inherent mismatch between nuclear facilities and the variable loads.

    The astronomical cost is because it that capacity is only
    needed for /relatively/ short times. But it is /needed/ and
    cannot be ignored.

    Yes, they are needed to provide the extra power that you can't get from nuclear plants to match the variation in loads.

    There's other options; an aluminum mill, for example, can buy and use irregular power (i.e.
    only during peaks),

    Can it? A lot of proceses take days or weeks to start up and shut
    down.

    I think they can vary their load to some extent on the electrolysis side >without allowing the furnace pots to cool. Making less aluminium but
    still fully operational. Sudden power disconnects can do a hell of a lot
    of damage as a precursor leap year failure to Y2k demonstrated in 1996.

    http://www.sysmod.com/ieismelt.htm

    Chloralkali electrolysis plants are the dynamic dump load of choice in
    the UK - they really can switch the process on and off quickly and get a
    very favourable tariff as a result. They don't need to generate much
    heat since many are aqueous brine to make bleach and sodium hydroxide >directly.

    Manufacture of sodium metal requires molten anhydrous eutectic salt and
    they do need enough supply to keep them molten or there is big trouble.

    They are the ultimate load balancer for the UK national grid.

    The last remaining UK aluminium smelter is sat next to a hydro electric
    plant but with electricity prices as they are the electricity is worth
    more than the aluminium it could manufacture!

    https://www.reuters.com/markets/commodities/europes-power-crunch-sparks-aluminium-smelter-meltdown-andy-home-2022-01-06/


    Energy costs and supply intermittents drive energy-intensive things to
    imports, usually from countries that burn coal.

    That sort of thing is, in the long term, a worldwide income equalizer.
    And a good source of CO2.



    --

    I yam what I yam - Popeye

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Tom Gardner@21:1/5 to Anthony William Sloman on Thu Jan 27 17:37:02 2022
    On 27/01/22 14:21, Anthony William Sloman wrote:
    On Thursday, January 27, 2022 at 8:30:06 PM UTC+11, Tom Gardner wrote:
    On 27/01/22 01:27, Anthony William Sloman wrote:
    On Thursday, January 27, 2022 at 12:47:11 AM UTC+11, Tom Gardner wrote: >>>> On 26/01/22 12:13, Rick C wrote:
    On Wednesday, January 26, 2022 at 4:38:55 AM UTC-4, Tom Gardner
    wrote:
    On 26/01/22 02:23, Anthony William Sloman wrote:
    On Wednesday, January 26, 2022 at 9:10:49 AM UTC+11, Dimiter
    Popoff wrote:
    On 1/25/2022 23:19, Rick C wrote:
    On Tuesday, January 25, 2022 at 11:43:24 AM UTC-4, Dimiter
    Popoff wrote:
    On 1/25/2022 16:27, Martin Brown wrote:

    <snip>

    The astronomical cost is because it that capacity is only needed for
    /relatively/ short times. But it is /needed/ and cannot be ignored.

    Bill also made that point.

    And I did make the point that the cost only looks astronomical because
    the peaking plants only get paid for when they are in use - they exist
    the whole year round, and have to get paid enough when they are working
    to cover a whole year's interest on capital, staff salaries and
    maintenance.

    Yup.

    IMHO those costs should be included in the cost of the renewable energy.
    They shouldn't be conveniently ignored by the renewable energy salesmen
    and lobbyists.

    Who on earth are they selling to and lobbying?

    Politicians and companies that give them money when they buy
    their plant.

    Organisations like Greenpeace (and to a lesser extent Friends
    of the Earth) target people that give them donations.

    I'm not a fan of Greenpeace; they use disreputable tactics
    to push their points.



    In Australia the debate is between he people who make a lot of money out of digging up coal and want the government to keep them in business, and the energy utilities who want to keep on putting solar farms and windmills because that lets them produce energy more cheaply than burning coal. The energy utilities have got a whole lot of legacy power stations, and quite
    bit of dispatchable hydro power and a grid that covers the eastern half of the continent, so they haven't been under pressure to add new peaking plants, but they are starting to buy grid scale batteries.

    Peaking plants are a sensible investment.
    Yup.

    Grid scale storage will be too - when the technology is not only available >> (in the location) but also proven. People will make /lots/ of money from
    it.

    The Tesla grid scale battery in South Australia made a lot of money - unexpectedly - by taking over the short term phase and voltage regulation of the South Australian segment of the east coast grid. About 70% of it's capacity seems to be devoted to that and makes ten times as much money as the. other 30% which buys up excess capacity when it is cheap and sells it back when the market will pay more.

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hornsdale_Power_Reserve

    More seems to have been bought recently, and even more is being bought by utility generators in other eastern states.

    Yes, but I regard that as a technically interesting niche market.

    The massive grid-scale storage domain interests me more in the
    context of using renewable to ditch fossil fuels.


    The technology does look to have been proven. Vanadium flow batteries would probably be even better, but they aren't yet being produce in volume, though

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vanadium_redox_battery

    lists nine grid-scale examples. They clearly work, but people do still seem to be thinking about tweaking the technology to make them work better, and the people who sell them do seem to feel the need to set up demonstration systems.

    https://www.pv-magazine.com/2021/09/03/vsun-reveals-redox-flow-battery-tech-in-australia/

    Let's hope something is /proven/ before too long.

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Cydrome Leader@21:1/5 to whit3rd@gmail.com on Thu Jan 27 17:34:01 2022
    whit3rd <whit3rd@gmail.com> wrote:
    On Saturday, January 22, 2022 at 11:11:07 PM UTC-8, Cydrome Leader wrote:
    Anthony William Sloman <bill....@ieee.org> wrote:

    With the right working fluid, and the right design, heat pumps can work
    anywhere or at least anywhere where anybody lives.

    Dear Dumbass, go ahead and name two brands of heatpumps that provide at least
    100kBTU of heating capacity with outdoor temps of negative F. Be sure to hand
    over the name of the authorized installers... zip code 60601.

    Firstly, fluids like ammonia have triple points well below 0 F (below -50, even)
    so heatpumps for that range are well-known. Second, you ask for brand names? Why ask an Australia resident, if your zip code is 60601?

    Bill was right. Heat pumps CAN work. Your local market for installers is a
    different matter entirely.

    Oh what's that? Heat pumps don't universally work everywhere and have constraints
    that makes them effectively useless for heating outside of a hot ass prison colony?

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Cydrome Leader@21:1/5 to Anthony William Sloman on Thu Jan 27 17:39:46 2022
    Anthony William Sloman <bill.sloman@ieee.org> wrote:
    On Tuesday, January 25, 2022 at 4:09:39 PM UTC+11, Cydrome Leader wrote:
    Anthony William Sloman <bill....@ieee.org> wrote:
    On Monday, January 24, 2022 at 4:58:51 AM UTC+11, Cydrome Leader wrote:
    Anthony William Sloman <bill....@ieee.org> wrote:
    On Sunday, January 23, 2022 at 6:20:38 PM UTC+11, Cydrome Leader wrote: >> >> >> Anthony William Sloman <bill....@ieee.org> wrote:
    On Saturday, January 22, 2022 at 6:41:48 PM UTC+11, gnuarm.del...@gmail.com wrote:
    On Saturday, January 22, 2022 at 1:01:18 AM UTC-5, Jasen Betts wrote:
    On 2022-01-21, John Larkin <jlarkin@highland_atwork_technology.com> wrote:
    On Fri, 21 Jan 2022 20:46:49 -0000 (UTC), Cydrome Leader <pres...@MUNGEpanix.com> wrote:
    John Larkin <jlarkin@highland_atwork_technology.com> wrote:
    On Wed, 19 Jan 2022 19:30:11 -0500, "Tom Del Rosso" <fizzbin...@that-google-mail-domain.com> wrote:
    jla...@highlandsniptechnology.com wrote:

    <snip>

    You didn't factor in the transportation cost of the electricity. The losses are not large, but it starts eating into the CoP margin. The real issue is the cost of the installation. A heat pump requires backup heat for when it's not very
    effective such as low temps but also for removing ice from the coils. To do that they run it in air conditioner mode and run the backup heat to keep the house from cooling off.

    Actually, they don't or at least they don't have to. In Australia most
    air-conditioning systems as touted as "reverse cycle systems". You can run
    the compressor in reverse so it while it can cool the house in summer, it.

    Oh really? How do they run the compressor in reverse? flip the leads? Let's
    all take notes as the guru of heat pumps enlightens us once again.

    There are all sort of options. Using a pair of valves to flip the
    intakes and outlets would work. If the compressor is being spun by a
    synchronous motor you could use electronics to make it spin in the
    opposite direction. I haven't dismanted my Mitsubishi reverse cycle
    air-conditioner to find out how they do it - it would invalidate my
    guarantee if I did, and I don't really need to know. Cydrome Leader does
    - he's advanced enough fatuous misconceptions to make it clear that he >> >> > hasn't got a clue.

    Well, the expert has spoken. There might be a synchronous motor in the
    compressor and some magic electronics to spin it the other direction.

    Thinking about what the compressor has to do with the gas stream it is compressing suggests that it wouldn't be a good idea to run it in reverse.
    The electronics to do that would be pretty trivial - you wouldn't need to add any extra parts or compromise the reliability.

    Ignore the reversing valve I mentioned originally, that must be one of my misconceptions about parts extra parts to fail in the heating or cooling months.

    Mechanical parts do fail more frequently than well-designed electronics. >> > They do wear.

    Surprise, heat pumps are almost entirely mechanical, and not even slightly >> user servicable.

    But their control systems contain the usual amounts of electronics. it's a lot
    easier and cheaper to set up a user-interface with an LCD display, and put the
    valve actuators next to the valves, and control them over some kind of serial link.

    yeah, check. The standard failure mode for AC or heat pump units is a serial link
    problem.

    And for the audience, no, they do not reverse the spin on a motor to switch >> from heating to cooling or vice versa.

    They could have done. It isn't exactly difficult. Thinking about the gas volume
    changes through the compressor suggests that it wouldn't have been good way to
    go, but bad engineers get all sorts of silly ideas into their heads, and it can
    be difficult to change their minds.

    Really? Name the type of compressor you'd use that switches pumping direction with the flip of the motor rotation and is suitable for standard refrigerants.

    Here's a casual heat pump repair video skillfully trimmed to 16 minutes

    But who wants to spend 16 minutes watching a video? And US air-conditioning systems are sold into a relatively impoverished mass market. People from better-off countries are more interested in learning about more up-market systems - not something that has been minimally adapted from a gas-fired ducted
    air home heating system (which seems to be what Rick C wants to talk about).

    Some people like to learn, unlike you. You don't know anything at all about air conditioning, so stop pretending. It's not fooling anyone.

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Rick C@21:1/5 to All on Thu Jan 27 14:11:06 2022
    On Thursday, January 27, 2022 at 1:36:28 AM UTC-4, whit3rd wrote:
    On Wednesday, January 26, 2022 at 9:08:24 AM UTC-8, gnuarm.del...@gmail.com wrote:
    On Wednesday, January 26, 2022 at 9:47:11 AM UTC-4, Tom Gardner wrote:
    On 26/01/22 12:13, Rick C wrote:

    posted a link to show what the local utilities pay for power at peak times
    and it is astronomical because of the need for peaking plants that run for
    such a short time because nuclear can not be ramped up and down.

    Nope, it is because renewables ramp up and down uncontrollably.
    ... before there were significant renewable generation facilities roaming the earth, peaking plants were used to handle the inherent mismatch between nuclear facilities and the variable loads.
    The astronomical cost is because it that capacity is only
    needed for /relatively/ short times. But it is /needed/ and
    cannot be ignored.

    Yes, they are needed to provide the extra power that you can't get from nuclear plants to match the variation in loads.
    There's other options; an aluminum mill, for example, can buy and use irregular power (i.e.
    only during peaks), or a hydroelectric dam can throttle its flow rapidly. The Tesla peak-power
    success is available now, and for the future, flow batteries seem poised to lower those prices.

    Yes, you can do many things to supplement nuclear to make it viable without peaking plants. But that doesn't alter the fact that nuclear power generation has similar problems to renewables, just the other side of the coin, the inflexibility to supply
    variable loads rather than needing to adapt variable supply to loads.

    BTW, how would it work to tell an aluminum mill when they can operate? In the UK they have to pay large electric consumers to stop consuming. That sounds like more of an emergency stop gap measure than a practical back fill for nuclear.


    Traditionally, incandescent lighting was tolerant of fluctuations, and gave the grid a lower
    power usage when voltages dropped; switchmode power and AC motors do NOT share that
    beneficial effect, so the grid stability is more of a problem these days.

    Is former incandescent lighting really much of a load in the grand scheme of things? I think I'm burning maybe 50 watts total for lighting at any one time and that's typically off peak. Where are these motors you are referring to? Are you talking
    about industrial motors? Again, I can't think of anything in my home that uses any real amount of power in the grand scheme of things other than perhaps the heat pump. Is that the sort of motor you mean? Weren't they always like that?

    --

    Rick C.

    +-+-- Get 1,000 miles of free Supercharging
    +-+-- Tesla referral code - https://ts.la/richard11209

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From John Larkin@21:1/5 to spamjunk@blueyonder.co.uk on Thu Jan 27 13:46:48 2022
    On Thu, 27 Jan 2022 09:20:42 +0000, Tom Gardner
    <spamjunk@blueyonder.co.uk> wrote:


    Here the POTS is being aggressively replaced by VOIP, which
    requires a modem in the customer premises. When the power is
    out, so is the phone.

    Our company phone system only requires each phone to have an internet connection. People can take them home and work from there
    transparently. All the usual buttons and things work anywhere.

    When the power is out, nothing else will happen, so we take a walk or
    go home. We have a contingency plan to keep all the ice cream treats
    from melting.



    --

    If a man will begin with certainties, he shall end with doubts,
    but if he will be content to begin with doubts he shall end in certainties. Francis Bacon

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Tom Gardner@21:1/5 to John Larkin on Fri Jan 28 00:19:07 2022
    On 27/01/22 21:46, John Larkin wrote:
    On Thu, 27 Jan 2022 09:20:42 +0000, Tom Gardner
    <spamjunk@blueyonder.co.uk> wrote:


    Here the POTS is being aggressively replaced by VOIP, which
    requires a modem in the customer premises. When the power is
    out, so is the phone.

    Our company phone system only requires each phone to have an internet connection. People can take them home and work from there
    transparently. All the usual buttons and things work anywhere.

    When the power is out, nothing else will happen, so we take a walk or
    go home. We have a contingency plan to keep all the ice cream treats
    from melting.

    Oh, not having to use a phone is a blessing.

    But not being able to summon help when necessary is
    a curse. And that's more likely to happen to the elderly.

    When in her 90s, my mother (and I!) both relied on her
    emergency button. She pressed it very rarely - once she
    was in bed having a heart attack, once she had slipped
    gently to the floor and stayed there.

    Using a cellphone was not possible - I even had trouble
    teaching her to tune an FM radio! Plus in the basement
    kitchen the 60cm thick walls meant there was no coverage
    even in the centre of a city.

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From jlarkin@highlandsniptechnology.com@21:1/5 to spamjunk@blueyonder.co.uk on Thu Jan 27 18:42:25 2022
    On Fri, 28 Jan 2022 00:19:07 +0000, Tom Gardner
    <spamjunk@blueyonder.co.uk> wrote:

    On 27/01/22 21:46, John Larkin wrote:
    On Thu, 27 Jan 2022 09:20:42 +0000, Tom Gardner
    <spamjunk@blueyonder.co.uk> wrote:


    Here the POTS is being aggressively replaced by VOIP, which
    requires a modem in the customer premises. When the power is
    out, so is the phone.

    Our company phone system only requires each phone to have an internet
    connection. People can take them home and work from there
    transparently. All the usual buttons and things work anywhere.

    When the power is out, nothing else will happen, so we take a walk or
    go home. We have a contingency plan to keep all the ice cream treats
    from melting.

    Oh, not having to use a phone is a blessing.

    But not being able to summon help when necessary is
    a curse. And that's more likely to happen to the elderly.

    When in her 90s, my mother (and I!) both relied on her
    emergency button. She pressed it very rarely - once she
    was in bed having a heart attack, once she had slipped
    gently to the floor and stayed there.

    Using a cellphone was not possible - I even had trouble
    teaching her to tune an FM radio! Plus in the basement
    kitchen the 60cm thick walls meant there was no coverage
    even in the centre of a city.

    Our real landline, from AT&T, was unreliable and got to be crazy
    expensive... a zillion fees for extras like long distance. Remember
    long distance?

    We got Comcast internet and cable TV and they threw in the equivalent
    phone service, our old phones and our old phone number, for free.

    Comcast keeps increasing the internet speed, probably to compete
    against fiber and microwave options. It's 130+40 mbits now.



    --

    I yam what I yam - Popeye

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Anthony William Sloman@21:1/5 to Cydrome Leader on Thu Jan 27 18:17:34 2022
    On Friday, January 28, 2022 at 4:39:53 AM UTC+11, Cydrome Leader wrote:
    Anthony William Sloman <bill....@ieee.org> wrote:
    On Tuesday, January 25, 2022 at 4:09:39 PM UTC+11, Cydrome Leader wrote:
    Anthony William Sloman <bill....@ieee.org> wrote:
    On Monday, January 24, 2022 at 4:58:51 AM UTC+11, Cydrome Leader wrote: >> >> Anthony William Sloman <bill....@ieee.org> wrote:
    On Sunday, January 23, 2022 at 6:20:38 PM UTC+11, Cydrome Leader wrote:
    Anthony William Sloman <bill....@ieee.org> wrote:
    On Saturday, January 22, 2022 at 6:41:48 PM UTC+11, gnuarm.del...@gmail.com wrote:
    On Saturday, January 22, 2022 at 1:01:18 AM UTC-5, Jasen Betts wrote:
    On 2022-01-21, John Larkin <jlarkin@highland_atwork_technology.com> wrote:
    On Fri, 21 Jan 2022 20:46:49 -0000 (UTC), Cydrome Leader <pres...@MUNGEpanix.com> wrote:
    John Larkin <jlarkin@highland_atwork_technology.com> wrote: >> >> >> >> > >>> On Wed, 19 Jan 2022 19:30:11 -0500, "Tom Del Rosso" <fizzbin...@that-google-mail-domain.com> wrote:
    jla...@highlandsniptechnology.com wrote:

    <snip>

    Really? Name the type of compressor you'd use that switches pumping direction with the flip of the motor rotation and is suitable for standard refrigerants.

    Axial flow turbine, as found in modern jet engines. Refrigerants are just gases/volatile liquids. There might be a materials compatibility problem but I've not heard of one.

    <snip>

    Some people like to learn, unlike you.

    That's what you like to think. It's mere mindless abuse.

    You don't know anything at all about air conditioning,

    Air-conditioning is just thermodynamics and universal gas theory, both of which I had to learn about ans an undergraduate (and use as a graduate student).
    What you seem to think you know is rather more superficial.

    so stop pretending. It's not fooling anyone.

    You may think that that kind of line will fool other people? Grow up.

    --
    Bill Sloman, Sydney

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Tom Gardner@21:1/5 to Tom Gardner on Fri Jan 28 10:03:49 2022
    On 27/01/22 09:20, Tom Gardner wrote:
    On 27/01/22 01:13, Anthony William Sloman wrote:
    The internet of things is is fully up to coping with a one or two day
    opt-out. The bureaucrats might be a bit slow to realise that they could offer
    the option.

    Here the POTS is being aggressively replaced by VOIP, which
    requires a modem in the customer premises. When the power is
    out, so is the phone.

    BT/OpenReach statement is "you can use your cellphone
    instead", which is fine - except for those places that
    don't have reception and for "emergency buttons" worn
    by the elderly in case of A Fall.

    I've seen reports that BT will grudgingly add batteries
    (or similar), if you can force them to recognise you
    don't have cellphone reception. No answer to the emergency
    button issue.

    I imagine lots of IoT applications will be ignored.

    More info, on comp.risks - the one usenet group all engineers
    should read. https://catless.ncl.ac.uk/Risks/33/04/#subj12.1

    UK's Telecomm Provider(s) Switching to Digital Phone Lines

    Openreach the provider of the UK's telecomm's infrastructure is switching to 'Digital Voice' which appears to be replacing the copper wired analogue exchange to residence connection with one based on broadband technology.
    See https://www.bt.com/help/landline/digital-voice-migration. The
    changeover will be done by 2025. It looks like they are migrating the
    entire country onto VOIP. Also, the way handsets connect to the service
    inside the house is changing to one using DECT.

    The consequences include:

    1. Householders having to re-arrange their domestic phone systems—to
    establish a connection to their router. Or replace their handsets with a
    Digital Voice compatible one.

    2. However, BT Digital Voice appears to only work with the routers (Smart
    Hub 2) they provide!

    3. BT state that if consumers have a monitored alarm that's connected to
    their landline (like a health pendant or monitored burglar alarm) they'll
    need to speak to their alarm provider before moving to Digital Voice.
    Apparently these systems will stop working.

    4. Oh and if there's a power cut or your broadband fails, you'll be unable
    to make calls using Digital Voice, including calls to 999

    5. Some areas have no broadband services / or they fail often

    Risks: very limited news / announcements about the programme, issues over requiring householders to change their equipment / undertake technical re-configuration with limited / little support. Elderly / vulnerable
    residents a risk.

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Joe Gwinn@21:1/5 to spamjunk@blueyonder.co.uk on Fri Jan 28 15:04:33 2022
    On Fri, 28 Jan 2022 10:03:49 +0000, Tom Gardner
    <spamjunk@blueyonder.co.uk> wrote:

    On 27/01/22 09:20, Tom Gardner wrote:
    On 27/01/22 01:13, Anthony William Sloman wrote:
    The internet of things is is fully up to coping with a one or two day
    opt-out. The bureaucrats might be a bit slow to realise that they could offer
    the option.

    Here the POTS is being aggressively replaced by VOIP, which
    requires a modem in the customer premises. When the power is
    out, so is the phone.

    BT/OpenReach statement is "you can use your cellphone
    instead", which is fine - except for those places that
    don't have reception and for "emergency buttons" worn
    by the elderly in case of A Fall.

    I've seen reports that BT will grudgingly add batteries
    (or similar), if you can force them to recognise you
    don't have cellphone reception. No answer to the emergency
    button issue.

    I imagine lots of IoT applications will be ignored.

    More info, on comp.risks - the one usenet group all engineers
    should read. https://catless.ncl.ac.uk/Risks/33/04/#subj12.1

    UK's Telecomm Provider(s) Switching to Digital Phone Lines

    Openreach the provider of the UK's telecomm's infrastructure is switching to >'Digital Voice' which appears to be replacing the copper wired analogue >exchange to residence connection with one based on broadband technology.
    See https://www.bt.com/help/landline/digital-voice-migration. The
    changeover will be done by 2025. It looks like they are migrating the
    entire country onto VOIP. Also, the way handsets connect to the service >inside the house is changing to one using DECT.

    The consequences include:

    1. Householders having to re-arrange their domestic phone systemsto
    establish a connection to their router. Or replace their handsets with a
    Digital Voice compatible one.

    2. However, BT Digital Voice appears to only work with the routers (Smart
    Hub 2) they provide!

    3. BT state that if consumers have a monitored alarm that's connected to
    their landline (like a health pendant or monitored burglar alarm) they'll
    need to speak to their alarm provider before moving to Digital Voice.
    Apparently these systems will stop working.

    4. Oh and if there's a power cut or your broadband fails, you'll be unable
    to make calls using Digital Voice, including calls to 999

    5. Some areas have no broadband services / or they fail often

    Risks: very limited news / announcements about the programme, issues over >requiring householders to change their equipment / undertake technical >re-configuration with limited / little support. Elderly / vulnerable >residents a risk.

    Same thing is happening here, in the Boston area. Verizon (the legacy
    telco and now an ISP) is dropping copper land lines as fast as
    possible.

    They do have a battery-box option that costs extra, but seems to be a
    good deal, as it allows one to use commodity rechargeable lead-acid
    SLA batteries of the sort used for burglar alarms and UPS units.

    But getting real technical details out of Verizon is like pulling
    teeth.

    We also have COMCAST (Xfinity), so at least Verizon has competition.

    Joe Gwinn

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Dimiter_Popoff@21:1/5 to Joe Gwinn on Fri Jan 28 22:18:02 2022
    On 1/28/2022 22:04, Joe Gwinn wrote:
    On Fri, 28 Jan 2022 10:03:49 +0000, Tom Gardner
    <spamjunk@blueyonder.co.uk> wrote:

    On 27/01/22 09:20, Tom Gardner wrote:
    On 27/01/22 01:13, Anthony William Sloman wrote:
    The internet of things is is fully up to coping with a one or two day
    opt-out. The bureaucrats might be a bit slow to realise that they could offer
    the option.

    Here the POTS is being aggressively replaced by VOIP, which
    requires a modem in the customer premises. When the power is
    out, so is the phone.

    BT/OpenReach statement is "you can use your cellphone
    instead", which is fine - except for those places that
    don't have reception and for "emergency buttons" worn
    by the elderly in case of A Fall.

    I've seen reports that BT will grudgingly add batteries
    (or similar), if you can force them to recognise you
    don't have cellphone reception. No answer to the emergency
    button issue.

    I imagine lots of IoT applications will be ignored.

    More info, on comp.risks - the one usenet group all engineers
    should read. https://catless.ncl.ac.uk/Risks/33/04/#subj12.1

    UK's Telecomm Provider(s) Switching to Digital Phone Lines

    Openreach the provider of the UK's telecomm's infrastructure is switching to >> 'Digital Voice' which appears to be replacing the copper wired analogue
    exchange to residence connection with one based on broadband technology.
    See https://www.bt.com/help/landline/digital-voice-migration. The
    changeover will be done by 2025. It looks like they are migrating the
    entire country onto VOIP. Also, the way handsets connect to the service
    inside the house is changing to one using DECT.

    The consequences include:

    1. Householders having to re-arrange their domestic phone systems—to
    establish a connection to their router. Or replace their handsets with a
    Digital Voice compatible one.

    2. However, BT Digital Voice appears to only work with the routers (Smart
    Hub 2) they provide!

    3. BT state that if consumers have a monitored alarm that's connected to
    their landline (like a health pendant or monitored burglar alarm) they'll
    need to speak to their alarm provider before moving to Digital Voice.
    Apparently these systems will stop working.

    4. Oh and if there's a power cut or your broadband fails, you'll be unable >> to make calls using Digital Voice, including calls to 999

    5. Some areas have no broadband services / or they fail often

    Risks: very limited news / announcements about the programme, issues over
    requiring householders to change their equipment / undertake technical
    re-configuration with limited / little support. Elderly / vulnerable
    residents a risk.

    Same thing is happening here, in the Boston area. Verizon (the legacy
    telco and now an ISP) is dropping copper land lines as fast as
    possible.

    They do have a battery-box option that costs extra, but seems to be a
    good deal, as it allows one to use commodity rechargeable lead-acid
    SLA batteries of the sort used for burglar alarms and UPS units.

    But getting real technical details out of Verizon is like pulling
    teeth.

    We also have COMCAST (Xfinity), so at least Verizon has competition.

    Joe Gwinn

    We moved to broadband (coaxial cable TV) nearly 20 years ago here.
    Was our choice, phone got VOIP - a normal phone plugged into a
    cable modem. Prior to that all we had was a twisted pair muxed between
    3 neighbouring houses...14400 bps was possible on a very good day so
    we were just happy when the coaxial cable reached us.
    I don't know if the battery backup would be very useful in your
    area, here it would not be useful at all. Even if the cable modem and everything is powered when there is a blackout in the area
    some of the amplifiers/buffers/whatever the boxes in the streets
    are just lose power and that is it. In fact if the net stops
    I first check (using the mobile internet) for blackouts in the vicinity.

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Aoli@21:1/5 to All on Fri Jan 28 14:06:01 2022
    Here, California, the rule is: "There is no fast lane"
    So speed in any lane except the one I am in.
    And that is usually the case.
    80 MPH on a 65 road is the norm.
    Just means the speeder breaks up into many more pieces upon crash. Unfortunately taking others too.

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From John Larkin@21:1/5 to Aoli on Fri Jan 28 16:07:51 2022
    On Fri, 28 Jan 2022 14:06:01 -0800, Aoli <Aoli@Aoli.com> wrote:

    Here, California, the rule is: "There is no fast lane"
    So speed in any lane except the one I am in.
    And that is usually the case.
    80 MPH on a 65 road is the norm.

    Except just east of Auburn. "Clipper Gap Speed Trap."

    --

    If a man will begin with certainties, he shall end with doubts,
    but if he will be content to begin with doubts he shall end in certainties. Francis Bacon

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Lasse Langwadt Christensen@21:1/5 to All on Sat Jan 29 04:42:48 2022
    fredag den 28. januar 2022 kl. 03.17.38 UTC+1 skrev bill....@ieee.org:
    On Friday, January 28, 2022 at 4:39:53 AM UTC+11, Cydrome Leader wrote:
    Anthony William Sloman <bill....@ieee.org> wrote:
    On Tuesday, January 25, 2022 at 4:09:39 PM UTC+11, Cydrome Leader wrote:
    Anthony William Sloman <bill....@ieee.org> wrote:
    On Monday, January 24, 2022 at 4:58:51 AM UTC+11, Cydrome Leader wrote:
    Anthony William Sloman <bill....@ieee.org> wrote:
    On Sunday, January 23, 2022 at 6:20:38 PM UTC+11, Cydrome Leader wrote:
    Anthony William Sloman <bill....@ieee.org> wrote:
    On Saturday, January 22, 2022 at 6:41:48 PM UTC+11, gnuarm.del...@gmail.com wrote:
    On Saturday, January 22, 2022 at 1:01:18 AM UTC-5, Jasen Betts wrote:
    On 2022-01-21, John Larkin <jlarkin@highland_atwork_technology.com> wrote:
    On Fri, 21 Jan 2022 20:46:49 -0000 (UTC), Cydrome Leader <pres...@MUNGEpanix.com> wrote:
    John Larkin <jlarkin@highland_atwork_technology.com> wrote: >> >> >> >> > >>> On Wed, 19 Jan 2022 19:30:11 -0500, "Tom Del Rosso" <fizzbin...@that-google-mail-domain.com> wrote:
    jla...@highlandsniptechnology.com wrote:

    <snip>
    Really? Name the type of compressor you'd use that switches pumping direction
    with the flip of the motor rotation and is suitable for standard refrigerants.
    Axial flow turbine, as found in modern jet engines. Refrigerants are just gases/volatile liquids. There might be a materials compatibility problem but I've not heard of one.


    no. First, the turbine is a part that extracts energy from moving gas, in a jet engine to drive the compressor..
    Next, in an axial compressor the blades that add speed to the gas are wing shaped and the increase in
    pressure happens when the gas slows in the diverging path between the stators, neither will work in reverse

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Anthony William Sloman@21:1/5 to lang...@fonz.dk on Sat Jan 29 05:43:01 2022
    On Saturday, January 29, 2022 at 11:42:52 PM UTC+11, lang...@fonz.dk wrote:
    fredag den 28. januar 2022 kl. 03.17.38 UTC+1 skrev bill....@ieee.org:
    On Friday, January 28, 2022 at 4:39:53 AM UTC+11, Cydrome Leader wrote:
    Anthony William Sloman <bill....@ieee.org> wrote:
    On Tuesday, January 25, 2022 at 4:09:39 PM UTC+11, Cydrome Leader wrote:
    Anthony William Sloman <bill....@ieee.org> wrote:
    On Monday, January 24, 2022 at 4:58:51 AM UTC+11, Cydrome Leader wrote:
    Anthony William Sloman <bill....@ieee.org> wrote:
    On Sunday, January 23, 2022 at 6:20:38 PM UTC+11, Cydrome Leader wrote:
    Anthony William Sloman <bill....@ieee.org> wrote:
    On Saturday, January 22, 2022 at 6:41:48 PM UTC+11, gnuarm.del...@gmail.com wrote:
    On Saturday, January 22, 2022 at 1:01:18 AM UTC-5, Jasen Betts wrote:
    On 2022-01-21, John Larkin <jlarkin@highland_atwork_technology.com> wrote:
    On Fri, 21 Jan 2022 20:46:49 -0000 (UTC), Cydrome Leader <pres...@MUNGEpanix.com> wrote:
    John Larkin <jlarkin@highland_atwork_technology.com> wrote:
    On Wed, 19 Jan 2022 19:30:11 -0500, "Tom Del Rosso" <fizzbin...@that-google-mail-domain.com> wrote:
    jla...@highlandsniptechnology.com wrote:

    <snip>
    Really? Name the type of compressor you'd use that switches pumping direction
    with the flip of the motor rotation and is suitable for standard refrigerants.

    Axial flow turbine, as found in modern jet engines. Refrigerants are just gases/volatile liquids. There might be a materials compatibility problem but I've not heard of one.

    no. First, the turbine is a part that extracts energy from moving gas, in a jet engine to drive the compressor..

    Perhaps. But I was suing the word "turbine" describes the structure, rather than the function.

    Next, in an axial compressor the blades that add speed to the gas are wing shaped and the increase in
    pressure happens when the gas slows in the diverging path between the stators, neither will work in reverse.

    It will - just not as efficiently. Aircraft can fly upside down, and symmetrical aerofoils can still generate lift.

    Think about turbine flow meters - they do work for bidiredtional flows, though sensing the direction of rotation does take a bit of extra electronics (which you had better provide when they are used for metering). I had fun with a turbine meter for a
    milk tanker a very long time ago. The milk was driven out of the tanker by pressurised gas and I had to detect the change of conductivity of fluid spinning the meter very rapidly - the customer paid for milk delivered, and not the pressurising gas.

    --
    Bill Sloman, Sydney

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Lasse Langwadt Christensen@21:1/5 to All on Sat Jan 29 05:57:38 2022
    lørdag den 29. januar 2022 kl. 14.43.05 UTC+1 skrev bill....@ieee.org:
    On Saturday, January 29, 2022 at 11:42:52 PM UTC+11, lang...@fonz.dk wrote:
    fredag den 28. januar 2022 kl. 03.17.38 UTC+1 skrev bill....@ieee.org:
    On Friday, January 28, 2022 at 4:39:53 AM UTC+11, Cydrome Leader wrote:
    Anthony William Sloman <bill....@ieee.org> wrote:
    On Tuesday, January 25, 2022 at 4:09:39 PM UTC+11, Cydrome Leader wrote:
    Anthony William Sloman <bill....@ieee.org> wrote:
    On Monday, January 24, 2022 at 4:58:51 AM UTC+11, Cydrome Leader wrote:
    Anthony William Sloman <bill....@ieee.org> wrote:
    On Sunday, January 23, 2022 at 6:20:38 PM UTC+11, Cydrome Leader wrote:
    Anthony William Sloman <bill....@ieee.org> wrote:
    On Saturday, January 22, 2022 at 6:41:48 PM UTC+11, gnuarm.del...@gmail.com wrote:
    On Saturday, January 22, 2022 at 1:01:18 AM UTC-5, Jasen Betts wrote:
    On 2022-01-21, John Larkin <jlarkin@highland_atwork_technology.com> wrote:
    On Fri, 21 Jan 2022 20:46:49 -0000 (UTC), Cydrome Leader <pres...@MUNGEpanix.com> wrote:
    John Larkin <jlarkin@highland_atwork_technology.com> wrote:
    On Wed, 19 Jan 2022 19:30:11 -0500, "Tom Del Rosso" <fizzbin...@that-google-mail-domain.com> wrote:
    jla...@highlandsniptechnology.com wrote:

    <snip>
    Really? Name the type of compressor you'd use that switches pumping direction
    with the flip of the motor rotation and is suitable for standard refrigerants.

    Axial flow turbine, as found in modern jet engines. Refrigerants are just gases/volatile liquids. There might be a materials compatibility problem but I've not heard of one.

    no. First, the turbine is a part that extracts energy from moving gas, in a jet engine to drive the compressor..
    Perhaps. But I was suing the word "turbine" describes the structure, rather than the function.

    so just using random word that describes something entirely different ..
    a wind mill is also an axial flow turbine

    Next, in an axial compressor the blades that add speed to the gas are wing shaped and the increase in
    pressure happens when the gas slows in the diverging path between the stators, neither will work in reverse.

    It will - just not as efficiently. Aircraft can fly upside down, and symmetrical aerofoils can still generate lift.

    what you are proposing is not like flying upside down, it would be like flying backwards
    and it is not blades blades that does the compression it is the stators


    Think about turbine flow meters - they do work for bidiredtional flows, though sensing the direction of rotation does take a bit of extra electronics (which you had better provide when they are used for metering). I had fun with a turbine meter for a
    milk tanker a very long time ago. The milk was driven out of the tanker by pressurised gas and I had to detect the change of conductivity of fluid spinning the meter very rapidly - the customer paid for milk delivered, and not the pressurising gas.


    a turbine is not a compressor....

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Anthony William Sloman@21:1/5 to lang...@fonz.dk on Sat Jan 29 06:08:04 2022
    On Sunday, January 30, 2022 at 12:57:41 AM UTC+11, lang...@fonz.dk wrote:
    lørdag den 29. januar 2022 kl. 14.43.05 UTC+1 skrev bill....@ieee.org:
    On Saturday, January 29, 2022 at 11:42:52 PM UTC+11, lang...@fonz.dk wrote:
    fredag den 28. januar 2022 kl. 03.17.38 UTC+1 skrev bill....@ieee.org:
    On Friday, January 28, 2022 at 4:39:53 AM UTC+11, Cydrome Leader wrote:
    Anthony William Sloman <bill....@ieee.org> wrote:
    On Tuesday, January 25, 2022 at 4:09:39 PM UTC+11, Cydrome Leader wrote:
    Anthony William Sloman <bill....@ieee.org> wrote:
    On Monday, January 24, 2022 at 4:58:51 AM UTC+11, Cydrome Leader wrote:
    Anthony William Sloman <bill....@ieee.org> wrote:
    On Sunday, January 23, 2022 at 6:20:38 PM UTC+11, Cydrome Leader wrote:
    Anthony William Sloman <bill....@ieee.org> wrote:
    On Saturday, January 22, 2022 at 6:41:48 PM UTC+11, gnuarm.del...@gmail.com wrote:
    On Saturday, January 22, 2022 at 1:01:18 AM UTC-5, Jasen Betts wrote:
    On 2022-01-21, John Larkin <jlarkin@highland_atwork_technology.com> wrote:
    On Fri, 21 Jan 2022 20:46:49 -0000 (UTC), Cydrome Leader <pres...@MUNGEpanix.com> wrote:
    John Larkin <jlarkin@highland_atwork_technology.com> wrote:
    On Wed, 19 Jan 2022 19:30:11 -0500, "Tom Del Rosso" <fizzbin...@that-google-mail-domain.com> wrote:
    jla...@highlandsniptechnology.com wrote:

    <snip>
    Really? Name the type of compressor you'd use that switches pumping direction
    with the flip of the motor rotation and is suitable for standard refrigerants.

    Axial flow turbine, as found in modern jet engines. Refrigerants are just gases/volatile liquids. There might be a materials compatibility problem but I've not heard of one.

    no. First, the turbine is a part that extracts energy from moving gas, in a jet engine to drive the compressor..

    Perhaps. But I was suing the word "turbine" describes the structure, rather than the function.

    so just using random word that describes something entirely different ..

    There's nothing random about the structure, and it wasn't any kind of "random" choice of word.

    a wind mill is also an axial flow turbine

    Up to a point.

    Next, in an axial compressor the blades that add speed to the gas are wing shaped and the increase in
    pressure happens when the gas slows in the diverging path between the stators, neither will work in reverse.

    It will - just not as efficiently. Aircraft can fly upside down, and symmetrical aerofoils can still generate lift.
    what you are proposing is not like flying upside down, it would be like flying backwards

    and it is not blades blades that does the compression it is the stators

    Don't be silly. They interact.

    Think about turbine flow meters - they do work for bidiredtional flows, though sensing the direction of rotation does take a bit of extra electronics (which you had better provide when they are used for metering). I had fun with a turbine meter for a
    milk tanker a very long time ago. The milk was driven out of the tanker by pressurised gas and I had to detect the change of conductivity of fluid spinning the meter very rapidly - the customer paid for milk delivered, and not the pressurising gas.

    a turbine is not a compressor....

    Repeating the assertion doesn't make it any more persuasive. Non-native speakers of English aren't always reliable guides to what words actually mean to native speakers.

    --
    Bill Sloman, Sydney

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Lasse Langwadt Christensen@21:1/5 to All on Sat Jan 29 08:19:47 2022
    lørdag den 29. januar 2022 kl. 15.08.09 UTC+1 skrev bill....@ieee.org:
    On Sunday, January 30, 2022 at 12:57:41 AM UTC+11, lang...@fonz.dk wrote:
    lørdag den 29. januar 2022 kl. 14.43.05 UTC+1 skrev bill....@ieee.org:
    On Saturday, January 29, 2022 at 11:42:52 PM UTC+11, lang...@fonz.dk wrote:
    fredag den 28. januar 2022 kl. 03.17.38 UTC+1 skrev bill....@ieee.org:
    On Friday, January 28, 2022 at 4:39:53 AM UTC+11, Cydrome Leader wrote:
    Anthony William Sloman <bill....@ieee.org> wrote:
    On Tuesday, January 25, 2022 at 4:09:39 PM UTC+11, Cydrome Leader wrote:
    Anthony William Sloman <bill....@ieee.org> wrote:
    On Monday, January 24, 2022 at 4:58:51 AM UTC+11, Cydrome Leader wrote:
    Anthony William Sloman <bill....@ieee.org> wrote:
    On Sunday, January 23, 2022 at 6:20:38 PM UTC+11, Cydrome Leader wrote:
    Anthony William Sloman <bill....@ieee.org> wrote:
    On Saturday, January 22, 2022 at 6:41:48 PM UTC+11, gnuarm.del...@gmail.com wrote:
    On Saturday, January 22, 2022 at 1:01:18 AM UTC-5, Jasen Betts wrote:
    On 2022-01-21, John Larkin <jlarkin@highland_atwork_technology.com> wrote:
    On Fri, 21 Jan 2022 20:46:49 -0000 (UTC), Cydrome Leader <pres...@MUNGEpanix.com> wrote:
    John Larkin <jlarkin@highland_atwork_technology.com> wrote:
    On Wed, 19 Jan 2022 19:30:11 -0500, "Tom Del Rosso" <fizzbin...@that-google-mail-domain.com> wrote:
    jla...@highlandsniptechnology.com wrote:

    <snip>
    Really? Name the type of compressor you'd use that switches pumping direction
    with the flip of the motor rotation and is suitable for standard refrigerants.

    Axial flow turbine, as found in modern jet engines. Refrigerants are just gases/volatile liquids. There might be a materials compatibility problem but I've not heard of one.

    no. First, the turbine is a part that extracts energy from moving gas, in a jet engine to drive the compressor..

    Perhaps. But I was suing the word "turbine" describes the structure, rather than the function.

    so just using random word that describes something entirely different ..
    There's nothing random about the structure, and it wasn't any kind of "random" choice of word.

    so not random just wrong..

    a wind mill is also an axial flow turbine
    Up to a point.

    what point?

    Next, in an axial compressor the blades that add speed to the gas are wing shaped and the increase in
    pressure happens when the gas slows in the diverging path between the stators, neither will work in reverse.

    It will - just not as efficiently. Aircraft can fly upside down, and symmetrical aerofoils can still generate lift.
    what you are proposing is not like flying upside down, it would be like flying backwards

    and it is not blades blades that does the compression it is the stators
    Don't be silly. They interact.

    and you have no idea how it works

    Think about turbine flow meters - they do work for bidiredtional flows, though sensing the direction of rotation does take a bit of extra electronics (which you had better provide when they are used for metering). I had fun with a turbine meter for
    a milk tanker a very long time ago. The milk was driven out of the tanker by pressurised gas and I had to detect the change of conductivity of fluid spinning the meter very rapidly - the customer paid for milk delivered, and not the pressurising gas.

    a turbine is not a compressor....
    Repeating the assertion doesn't make it any more persuasive.

    repeating your errors doesn't make them right

    Non-native speakers of English aren't always reliable guides to what words actually mean to native speakers.

    FFS

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Turbine
    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Compressor


    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Joe Gwinn@21:1/5 to All on Sat Jan 29 17:39:10 2022
    On Fri, 28 Jan 2022 22:18:02 +0200, Dimiter_Popoff <dp@tgi-sci.com>
    wrote:

    On 1/28/2022 22:04, Joe Gwinn wrote:
    On Fri, 28 Jan 2022 10:03:49 +0000, Tom Gardner
    <spamjunk@blueyonder.co.uk> wrote:

    On 27/01/22 09:20, Tom Gardner wrote:
    On 27/01/22 01:13, Anthony William Sloman wrote:
    The internet of things is is fully up to coping with a one or two day >>>>> opt-out. The bureaucrats might be a bit slow to realise that they could offer
    the option.

    Here the POTS is being aggressively replaced by VOIP, which
    requires a modem in the customer premises. When the power is
    out, so is the phone.

    BT/OpenReach statement is "you can use your cellphone
    instead", which is fine - except for those places that
    don't have reception and for "emergency buttons" worn
    by the elderly in case of A Fall.

    I've seen reports that BT will grudgingly add batteries
    (or similar), if you can force them to recognise you
    don't have cellphone reception. No answer to the emergency
    button issue.

    I imagine lots of IoT applications will be ignored.

    More info, on comp.risks - the one usenet group all engineers
    should read. https://catless.ncl.ac.uk/Risks/33/04/#subj12.1

    UK's Telecomm Provider(s) Switching to Digital Phone Lines

    Openreach the provider of the UK's telecomm's infrastructure is switching to
    'Digital Voice' which appears to be replacing the copper wired analogue
    exchange to residence connection with one based on broadband technology. >>> See https://www.bt.com/help/landline/digital-voice-migration. The
    changeover will be done by 2025. It looks like they are migrating the
    entire country onto VOIP. Also, the way handsets connect to the service >>> inside the house is changing to one using DECT.

    The consequences include:

    1. Householders having to re-arrange their domestic phone systemsto
    establish a connection to their router. Or replace their handsets with a
    Digital Voice compatible one.

    2. However, BT Digital Voice appears to only work with the routers (Smart >>> Hub 2) they provide!

    3. BT state that if consumers have a monitored alarm that's connected to >>> their landline (like a health pendant or monitored burglar alarm) they'll
    need to speak to their alarm provider before moving to Digital Voice. >>> Apparently these systems will stop working.

    4. Oh and if there's a power cut or your broadband fails, you'll be unable >>> to make calls using Digital Voice, including calls to 999

    5. Some areas have no broadband services / or they fail often

    Risks: very limited news / announcements about the programme, issues over >>> requiring householders to change their equipment / undertake technical
    re-configuration with limited / little support. Elderly / vulnerable
    residents a risk.

    Same thing is happening here, in the Boston area. Verizon (the legacy
    telco and now an ISP) is dropping copper land lines as fast as
    possible.

    They do have a battery-box option that costs extra, but seems to be a
    good deal, as it allows one to use commodity rechargeable lead-acid
    SLA batteries of the sort used for burglar alarms and UPS units.

    But getting real technical details out of Verizon is like pulling
    teeth.

    We also have COMCAST (Xfinity), so at least Verizon has competition.

    Joe Gwinn

    We moved to broadband (coaxial cable TV) nearly 20 years ago here.
    Was our choice, phone got VOIP - a normal phone plugged into a
    cable modem. Prior to that all we had was a twisted pair muxed between
    3 neighbouring houses...14400 bps was possible on a very good day so
    we were just happy when the coaxial cable reached us.

    I recall those days. In the 1980s, my future wife would get
    frustrated because my phone was busy for hours while I was on this or
    that bulletin board. Shields up! or Shields down! as in Star Trek.

    The marriage was saved by the arrival of Broadband (meaning cable
    then).


    I don't know if the battery backup would be very useful in your
    area, here it would not be useful at all. Even if the cable modem and >everything is powered when there is a blackout in the area
    some of the amplifiers/buffers/whatever the boxes in the streets
    are just lose power and that is it. In fact if the net stops
    I first check (using the mobile internet) for blackouts in the vicinity.

    As for the COMCAST cable guys, they claim to have backup power along
    the way, I have no way to tell. But when I ask about holdup time for
    VOIP telephones via cable, the sales droid gets evasive.

    As for the fiber replacement for copper land line, the theory is that
    there is pure passive fiber from the equivalent of the central office
    to the customer premises, and the ~central office has its own backup
    power, so if the user premises also has a battery, life is good, until
    the on-premise battery is exhausted, about 24 hours.

    Joe Gwinn

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Anthony William Sloman@21:1/5 to lang...@fonz.dk on Sat Jan 29 18:06:45 2022
    On Sunday, January 30, 2022 at 3:19:51 AM UTC+11, lang...@fonz.dk wrote:
    lørdag den 29. januar 2022 kl. 15.08.09 UTC+1 skrev bill....@ieee.org:
    On Sunday, January 30, 2022 at 12:57:41 AM UTC+11, lang...@fonz.dk wrote:
    lørdag den 29. januar 2022 kl. 14.43.05 UTC+1 skrev bill....@ieee.org:
    On Saturday, January 29, 2022 at 11:42:52 PM UTC+11, lang...@fonz.dk wrote:
    fredag den 28. januar 2022 kl. 03.17.38 UTC+1 skrev bill....@ieee.org:
    On Friday, January 28, 2022 at 4:39:53 AM UTC+11, Cydrome Leader wrote:
    Anthony William Sloman <bill....@ieee.org> wrote:
    On Tuesday, January 25, 2022 at 4:09:39 PM UTC+11, Cydrome Leader wrote:
    Anthony William Sloman <bill....@ieee.org> wrote:
    On Monday, January 24, 2022 at 4:58:51 AM UTC+11, Cydrome Leader wrote:
    Anthony William Sloman <bill....@ieee.org> wrote:
    On Sunday, January 23, 2022 at 6:20:38 PM UTC+11, Cydrome Leader wrote:
    Anthony William Sloman <bill....@ieee.org> wrote:
    On Saturday, January 22, 2022 at 6:41:48 PM UTC+11, gnuarm.del...@gmail.com wrote:
    On Saturday, January 22, 2022 at 1:01:18 AM UTC-5, Jasen Betts wrote:
    On 2022-01-21, John Larkin <jlarkin@highland_atwork_technology.com> wrote:
    On Fri, 21 Jan 2022 20:46:49 -0000 (UTC), Cydrome Leader <pres...@MUNGEpanix.com> wrote:
    John Larkin <jlarkin@highland_atwork_technology.com> wrote:
    On Wed, 19 Jan 2022 19:30:11 -0500, "Tom Del Rosso" <fizzbin...@that-google-mail-domain.com> wrote:
    jla...@highlandsniptechnology.com wrote:

    <snip>

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Turbine https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Compressor

    Note that the axial compressor - item 1.2.4 in the "compressor"article - looks exactly like a turbine.

    There's a reason for that. What's going on at the flow level is much the same, but driving the rotating element and having it driven means that it is doing a different job, even if most of the details are much the same.

    --
    Bill Sloman, Sydney

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From whit3rd@21:1/5 to jla...@highlandsniptechnology.com on Sat Jan 29 20:11:19 2022
    On Thursday, January 27, 2022 at 8:31:53 AM UTC-8, jla...@highlandsniptechnology.com wrote:

    Energy costs and supply intermittents drive energy-intensive things to imports, usually from countries that burn coal.

    That sort of thing is, in the long term, a worldwide income equalizer.
    And a good source of CO2.

    The quality of life that we currently enjoy is dependent on an ecosphere that evolved with vulcanism as the only supplemetal source of CO2. Excess CO2 in the atmophere is
    noted at a few mass extinctions... quality of life was low at those times, and that's more
    important to a dinosaur than income equality. More than income, actually. Suffering the cost is better than suffering a mass extinction.

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From jlarkin@highlandsniptechnology.com@21:1/5 to All on Sun Jan 30 08:34:19 2022
    On Sat, 29 Jan 2022 20:11:19 -0800 (PST), whit3rd <whit3rd@gmail.com>
    wrote:

    On Thursday, January 27, 2022 at 8:31:53 AM UTC-8, jla...@highlandsniptechnology.com wrote:

    Energy costs and supply intermittents drive energy-intensive things to
    imports, usually from countries that burn coal.

    That sort of thing is, in the long term, a worldwide income equalizer.
    And a good source of CO2.

    The quality of life that we currently enjoy is dependent on an ecosphere that >evolved with vulcanism as the only supplemetal source of CO2. Excess CO2 in the atmophere is
    noted at a few mass extinctions... quality of life was low at those times, and that's more
    important to a dinosaur than income equality. More than income, actually. >Suffering the cost is better than suffering a mass extinction.

    https://www.livescience.com/44330-jurassic-dinosaur-carbon-dioxide.html

    and

    "During the Cambrian explosion, when multi-cellular life first came on
    the scene, CO2 levels were as much as 10 times higher than they are
    today."


    CO2 is plant food. Animals eat plants.





    --

    I yam what I yam - Popeye

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Rick C@21:1/5 to jla...@highlandsniptechnology.com on Sun Jan 30 09:08:49 2022
    On Sunday, January 30, 2022 at 11:34:35 AM UTC-5, jla...@highlandsniptechnology.com wrote:
    On Sat, 29 Jan 2022 20:11:19 -0800 (PST), whit3rd <whi...@gmail.com>
    wrote:
    On Thursday, January 27, 2022 at 8:31:53 AM UTC-8, jla...@highlandsniptechnology.com wrote:

    Energy costs and supply intermittents drive energy-intensive things to
    imports, usually from countries that burn coal.

    That sort of thing is, in the long term, a worldwide income equalizer.
    And a good source of CO2.

    The quality of life that we currently enjoy is dependent on an ecosphere that
    evolved with vulcanism as the only supplemetal source of CO2. Excess CO2 in the atmophere is
    noted at a few mass extinctions... quality of life was low at those times, and that's more
    important to a dinosaur than income equality. More than income, actually. >Suffering the cost is better than suffering a mass extinction. https://www.livescience.com/44330-jurassic-dinosaur-carbon-dioxide.html

    and

    "During the Cambrian explosion, when multi-cellular life first came on
    the scene, CO2 levels were as much as 10 times higher than they are
    today."


    CO2 is plant food. Animals eat plants.

    Yes, and just like animals, plants can only eat so much. If we grew ten fold the crops we currently produce, would we grow ten fold the animals and would people eat ten fold these animals?

    Likewise, doubling the CO2 in the air is not a valuable advantage to the farmer. All the significant advances in agriculture has been in nutrient added to the ground.

    I'm starting to wonder if Larkin is unable to process new information. Even when simple things are explained to him, he doesn't seem to understand.

    --

    Rick C.

    +-+-+ Get 1,000 miles of free Supercharging
    +-+-+ Tesla referral code - https://ts.la/richard11209

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Arnie Dwyer@21:1/5 to jlarkin@highlandsniptechnology.com on Sun Jan 30 21:09:09 2022
    jlarkin@highlandsniptechnology.com wrote:

    On Sat, 29 Jan 2022 20:11:19 -0800 (PST), whit3rd <whit3rd@gmail.com>
    wrote:

    On Thursday, January 27, 2022 at 8:31:53 AM UTC-8, >>jla...@highlandsniptechnology.com wrote:

    Energy costs and supply intermittents drive energy-intensive things to
    imports, usually from countries that burn coal.

    That sort of thing is, in the long term, a worldwide income equalizer.
    And a good source of CO2.

    The quality of life that we currently enjoy is dependent on an ecosphere >>that evolved with vulcanism as the only supplemetal source of CO2.
    Excess CO2 in the atmophere is noted at a few mass extinctions...
    quality of life was low at those times, and that's more important to a >>dinosaur than income equality. More than income, actually. Suffering
    the cost is better than suffering a mass extinction.

    https://www.livescience.com/44330-jurassic-dinosaur-carbon-dioxide.html

    and

    "During the Cambrian explosion, when multi-cellular life first came on
    the scene, CO2 levels were as much as 10 times higher than they are
    today."


    CO2 is plant food. Animals eat plants.

    There were no animals in the Cambrian era. These did not appear until the Mesozoic Era which occurred much later. See

    https://www.ck12.org/book/ck-12-human-biology/section/6.8/

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From jlarkin@highlandsniptechnology.com@21:1/5 to All on Sun Jan 30 13:52:20 2022
    On Sun, 30 Jan 2022 21:09:09 -0000 (UTC), Arnie Dwyer <spamme@not.com>
    wrote:

    jlarkin@highlandsniptechnology.com wrote:

    On Sat, 29 Jan 2022 20:11:19 -0800 (PST), whit3rd <whit3rd@gmail.com>
    wrote:

    On Thursday, January 27, 2022 at 8:31:53 AM UTC-8, >>>jla...@highlandsniptechnology.com wrote:

    Energy costs and supply intermittents drive energy-intensive things to >>>> imports, usually from countries that burn coal.

    That sort of thing is, in the long term, a worldwide income equalizer. >>>> And a good source of CO2.

    The quality of life that we currently enjoy is dependent on an ecosphere >>>that evolved with vulcanism as the only supplemetal source of CO2.
    Excess CO2 in the atmophere is noted at a few mass extinctions...
    quality of life was low at those times, and that's more important to a >>>dinosaur than income equality. More than income, actually. Suffering
    the cost is better than suffering a mass extinction.

    https://www.livescience.com/44330-jurassic-dinosaur-carbon-dioxide.html

    and

    "During the Cambrian explosion, when multi-cellular life first came on
    the scene, CO2 levels were as much as 10 times higher than they are
    today."


    CO2 is plant food. Animals eat plants.

    There were no animals in the Cambrian era.

    Late Precambrian is not Cambrian. Are we allowed to still day "duh" ?

    "The Cambrian explosion, Cambrian radiation or Cambrian
    diversification refers to an interval of time approximately 541
    million years ago in the Cambrian Period when practically all major
    animal phyla started appearing in the fossil record."

    Wikipedia

    These did not appear until the
    Mesozoic Era which occurred much later. See

    https://www.ck12.org/book/ck-12-human-biology/section/6.8/


    Plant and animal Life flourished when it was warm and we had lots of
    CO2. Thousands of PPM.

    As the earth is greening now. CO2 levels got dangerously low, but
    things are improving.

    https://www.nasa.gov/feature/goddard/2016/carbon-dioxide-fertilization-greening-earth

    https://www.dropbox.com/s/a19stdo3bbm2zyk/World_Grain.jpg?raw=1

    The other benefit of extracting gas and oil is that fertilizers and
    farm machines and irrigation and transport are good for agriculture.

    Sorry to disappoint, but things are getting better.



    --

    I yam what I yam - Popeye

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Joe Gwinn@21:1/5 to All on Sun Jan 30 18:32:37 2022
    On Sun, 30 Jan 2022 21:09:09 -0000 (UTC), Arnie Dwyer <spamme@not.com>
    wrote:

    jlarkin@highlandsniptechnology.com wrote:

    On Sat, 29 Jan 2022 20:11:19 -0800 (PST), whit3rd <whit3rd@gmail.com>
    wrote:

    On Thursday, January 27, 2022 at 8:31:53 AM UTC-8, >>>jla...@highlandsniptechnology.com wrote:

    Energy costs and supply intermittents drive energy-intensive things to >>>> imports, usually from countries that burn coal.

    That sort of thing is, in the long term, a worldwide income equalizer. >>>> And a good source of CO2.

    The quality of life that we currently enjoy is dependent on an ecosphere >>>that evolved with vulcanism as the only supplemetal source of CO2.
    Excess CO2 in the atmophere is noted at a few mass extinctions...
    quality of life was low at those times, and that's more important to a >>>dinosaur than income equality. More than income, actually. Suffering
    the cost is better than suffering a mass extinction.

    https://www.livescience.com/44330-jurassic-dinosaur-carbon-dioxide.html

    and

    "During the Cambrian explosion, when multi-cellular life first came on
    the scene, CO2 levels were as much as 10 times higher than they are
    today."


    CO2 is plant food. Animals eat plants.

    There were no animals in the Cambrian era. These did not appear until the >Mesozoic Era which occurred much later. See

    https://www.ck12.org/book/ck-12-human-biology/section/6.8/

    I don't think that's right. Animals are critters that eat other
    critters, versus using photosynthesis. Critters that live off
    chemical gradients are probably considered animals.

    Viruses appear to have evolved very early as well, along with
    bacteria.

    Anyway, there were lots of one-cell critters that ate other one-celled critters, long before multi cellular animals evolved. Here is the
    early store, the three kingdoms.

    .<https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Archaea>


    Joe Gwinn

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Anthony William Sloman@21:1/5 to jla...@highlandsniptechnology.com on Sun Jan 30 17:31:20 2022
    On Monday, January 31, 2022 at 8:52:31 AM UTC+11, jla...@highlandsniptechnology.com wrote:
    On Sun, 30 Jan 2022 21:09:09 -0000 (UTC), Arnie Dwyer <spa...@not.com> wrote:
    jla...@highlandsniptechnology.com wrote:

    On Sat, 29 Jan 2022 20:11:19 -0800 (PST), whit3rd <whi...@gmail.com>
    wrote:

    On Thursday, January 27, 2022 at 8:31:53 AM UTC-8, >>>jla...@highlandsniptechnology.com wrote:

    Energy costs and supply intermittents drive energy-intensive things to >>>> imports, usually from countries that burn coal.

    That sort of thing is, in the long term, a worldwide income equalizer. >>>> And a good source of CO2.

    The quality of life that we currently enjoy is dependent on an ecosphere >>>that evolved with vulcanism as the only supplemetal source of CO2. >>>Excess CO2 in the atmophere is noted at a few mass extinctions... >>>quality of life was low at those times, and that's more important to a >>>dinosaur than income equality. More than income, actually. Suffering >>>the cost is better than suffering a mass extinction.

    https://www.livescience.com/44330-jurassic-dinosaur-carbon-dioxide.html >>
    and

    "During the Cambrian explosion, when multi-cellular life first came on
    the scene, CO2 levels were as much as 10 times higher than they are
    today."


    CO2 is plant food. Animals eat plants.

    There were no animals in the Cambrian era.
    Late Precambrian is not Cambrian. Are we allowed to still day "duh" ?

    "The Cambrian explosion, Cambrian radiation or Cambrian
    diversification refers to an interval of time approximately 541
    million years ago in the Cambrian Period when practically all major
    animal phyla started appearing in the fossil record."

    Wikipedia
    These did not appear until the
    Mesozoic Era which occurred much later. See

    https://www.ck12.org/book/ck-12-human-biology/section/6.8/
    Plant and animal Life flourished when it was warm and we had lots of
    CO2. Thousands of PPM.

    John Larkin hasn't noticed that that the Sun was a bit smaller back then, so the earth got somewhat less solar radiation. It needed a bigger greenhouse effect to get warm enough for liquid water (and life).

    As the earth is greening now.

    To some extent. More global warming is going to have other effects and there's no particular reason to expect the trend to continue. Plants also need water, and while global warming means that more water is going to be evaporated from the oceans (the
    current one degree Celcius warming means 6% more). Climate change means that the extra rain isn't guaranteed to keep on falling where it used to. We need more crops, not more weeds.

    CO2 levels got dangerously low, but things are improving.

    The sun has got bigger since the Carbonifereous, and the atmospheric CO2 level the Earth needs to stay comfortably warm is lower now.

    https://www.spacecentre.nz/resources/faq/solar-system/sun/getting-bigger.html

    https://www.nasa.gov/feature/goddard/2016/carbon-dioxide-fertilization-greening-earth

    https://www.dropbox.com/s/a19stdo3bbm2zyk/World_Grain.jpg?raw=1

    The other benefit of extracting gas and oil is that fertilizers and farm machines and irrigation and transport are good for agriculture.

    You need energy to synthesise fertilisers and build farm machinery. We can now get all the energy we need from solar farms and windmills.

    The fossil carbon extraction industry would prefer that we didn't, and lie like fury in the hope of hanging onto their income stream for a few more years.

    Sorry to disappoint, but things are getting better.

    Climate change isn't any kind of improvement, even if climate change denial propaganda tries to tell gullible twits like John Larkin something different.

    --
    Bill Sloman, Sydney

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Arnie Dwyer@21:1/5 to jlarkin@highlandsniptechnology.com on Mon Jan 31 02:10:46 2022
    jlarkin@highlandsniptechnology.com wrote:

    On Sun, 30 Jan 2022 21:09:09 -0000 (UTC), Arnie Dwyer <spamme@not.com>
    wrote:
    [...]

    CO2 is plant food. Animals eat plants.

    There were no animals in the Cambrian era.

    Late Precambrian is not Cambrian. Are we allowed to still day "duh" ?

    "The Cambrian explosion, Cambrian radiation or Cambrian
    diversification refers to an interval of time approximately 541
    million years ago in the Cambrian Period when practically all major
    animal phyla started appearing in the fossil record."

    As you stated, Late Precambrian is not Cambrian. Duh!

    Wikipedia

    These did not appear until the
    Mesozoic Era which occurred much later. See

    https://www.ck12.org/book/ck-12-human-biology/section/6.8/


    Plant and animal Life flourished when it was warm and we had lots of
    CO2. Thousands of PPM.

    Too much CO2 is lethal to animals.

    As the earth is greening now. CO2 levels got dangerously low, but
    things are improving.

    https://www.nasa.gov/feature/goddard/2016/carbon-dioxide-fertilization-gr eening-earth

    https://www.dropbox.com/s/a19stdo3bbm2zyk/World_Grain.jpg?raw=1

    The other benefit of extracting gas and oil is that fertilizers and
    farm machines and irrigation and transport are good for agriculture.

    Sorry to disappoint, but things are getting better.

    I guess you have never heard of Global Warming. Things are not getting
    better.

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Anthony William Sloman@21:1/5 to Arnie Dwyer on Sun Jan 30 19:08:32 2022
    On Monday, January 31, 2022 at 1:10:53 PM UTC+11, Arnie Dwyer wrote:
    jla...@highlandsniptechnology.com wrote:

    On Sun, 30 Jan 2022 21:09:09 -0000 (UTC), Arnie Dwyer <spa...@not.com> wrote:

    <snip>

    Sorry to disappoint, but things are getting better.

    I guess you have never heard of Global Warming. Things are not getting better.

    John Larkin has heard about global warming, but he is a gullible twit, and believes what the fossil carbon extraction industry wants him to believe.

    He's a sucker for climate change denial propaganda and believes all the twaddle that Anthony Watts (and all the other propagandists) peddle.

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anthony_Watts_(blogger)

    --
    Bill Sloman, Sydney

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From whit3rd@21:1/5 to jla...@highlandsniptechnology.com on Sun Jan 30 20:00:56 2022
    On Sunday, January 30, 2022 at 8:34:35 AM UTC-8, jla...@highlandsniptechnology.com wrote:
    On Sat, 29 Jan 2022 20:11:19 -0800 (PST), whit3rd <whi...@gmail.com>
    wrote:
    On Thursday, January 27, 2022 at 8:31:53 AM UTC-8, jla...@highlandsniptechnology.com wrote:

    Energy costs and supply intermittents drive energy-intensive things to
    imports, usually from countries that burn coal.

    That sort of thing is, in the long term, a worldwide income equalizer.
    And a good source of CO2.

    The quality of life that we currently enjoy is dependent on an ecosphere that
    evolved with vulcanism as the only supplemetal source of CO2. Excess CO2 in the atmophere is
    noted at a few mass extinctions...

    "During the Cambrian explosion, when multi-cellular life first came on
    the scene, CO2 levels were as much as 10 times higher than they are
    today."

    At that time, there was a very different ecosystem (if it can even be called that)
    and certainly didn't support human life.

    CO2 is plant food. Animals eat plants.

    So, we're polluting the air with excessive plant food. Phosphates in lakes cause
    clots of algae, that's water pollution with a plant nutrient.

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)