linux burned down my house
linu...@lycos.com
this was a terrible mistake and it ended up costing me my house and all
my expensive stuff. this linux crap is so bad that calling it linsux is
being too generus.
this free crapware that they can barely give away for free screwed up
my BIOS and ended up overclocking my CPU. after setup finished this
home made hackware needed to download about 50 gigs of security patches
and upgrades and updates and who knows what sort of uncontrolled home
made crapware. so I left my computer on while it downloaded all this
crap and went out. while I was gone the CPU over heated and started a
fire. my multi million dollar estate went up in flames.
thanks linsux. my lawyer told me that if this was software from a real
company I could sue and get money. but since its crapware thats written
by fat hackers working out of their moms basement there is nothing I
can do.
anyone who wants to use linsux should do it at they're own risk. this
crap is no where near ready for the public to use. no wonder its free.
so is dog shit.
gman1223
gio...@gmail.com
Gotte check in with the doc man, something's wrong with u I think.
Hope you'll get better. Cheers
dark.f...@gmail.com
belive you deserved to lose your so-called "Multi Million Dollar"
estate. there are a few things that sort of corrupt you story.
1. If you are soooo rich, chances are you'd be using a Mac. They're
prettier. And would match your lifestyle better.
2. I dont know what OS even needs more than 3 GB of space. Ive been
using Fedora Core for 2 Years now, with no problems.
3. Linux is VERY user friendly, and most mistakes are fault of the End
User.
4. Apperantly you didnt spend much time in school, for to learn how to
spell and use proper grammar, or even Capitalization for that matter.
5. About 7 of the ten "Helpful Posts" youve made, have been in tha last
2 hours.
Maybe you should stop being such a loser, and stop spamming the groups
with your Wintard jabber. And if you were soooo computer savvy, you
would know (a) What your system need to run the given OS (b) How big
the OS is (c) Can my CPU handle it...or (d) All of the Above.
Benji
Geico Caveman
> thanks linsux. my lawyer told me that if this was software from a real
> company I could sue and get money. but since its crapware thats written
> by fat hackers working out of their moms basement there is nothing I
> can do.
>
> anyone who wants to use linsux should do it at they're own risk. this
> crap is no where near ready for the public to use. no wonder its free.
> so is dog shit.
Why can't trolls present their punch lines first and lies later ?
Peter Jensen
Hash: SHA1
gman1223 wrote:
> are you for real?
Obviously he is not. He is a troll. His purpose is to troll. You have
been trolled. Personally, I found it moderately amusing. Almost makes
as much sense as the less extreme bullshit these types usually spout.
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.2 (GNU/Linux)
iD8DBQFECjKDd1ZThqotgfgRApr+AKCSjorqbHYt5DfR22vMmXF0c9XypQCghckX
MW4OXM1E5xyVUbAS9p5OdH0=
=8FN1
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
--
PeKaJe
I can just imagine a cluster of Windows machines. They'd have to have a team
of MCSE's equipped with roller skates, just to keep pressing reset buttons ...
linuxman
linux-...@lycos.com --> i wish you would just shut the f*** up. Linux
is the most stable os that ever was, and I have never heard of Linux
screwing with cmos settings. And as for linux burning you house down I
hardly believe it. Winblows is more likely to cause computer failure, I
cant remember a day in which windows didnt do something to piss me off.
linuxman
could just reset that way =)
amosf © Tim Fairchild
> Windows destroyed my computer and killed my dog. I installed it on my PC
and it pissed me off so back from all the crashing and the 20 viruses that
got installed that I smashed the PC with a sledgehammer. I tried to sue MS
but they sent a guy around and shot my dog and said next time it would be
me.
Lobo
That's nothing. My cat liked to sleep next to my Windows box to keep
warm. Then what we all feared HAPPENED! One of the 100's of thousands
of Window's virii mutated and jumped to my cat. When my cat went out,
it infected the neighbor's cats. And it didn't stop there. You know
how prolific Windows virii can be. The next to be infected were all
the dogs in the neighborhood. Then it jumped to the children. Then to
their parents. It spread so fast that now the whole town has been
infected and is quarantined under Marshall law. Microsoft has been
spending a fortune to keep this quiet. All communication has been cut
off to keep Gate's dirty secret. MSCE's are here wearing
anti-contamination suits but are not gaining. There have been ominous
reports that they are considering a "low level format" of the ENTIRE
town.
Because I also had a Linux box, I'm able to get this message out. The
local LUG here is busy collecting all the Windows boxes and soaking
them in formaldehyde to remove this mutated virus.
PS. Please send Linux disks so we can finish the job and save the
remaining women and children.
dtr...@gmail.com
Rex Ballard
linu...@lycos.com wrote:
> I installed this distro to see if linux lives up to the hype or not.
> this was a terrible mistake and it ended up costing me my house and all
> my expensive stuff. this linux crap is so bad that calling it linsux is
> being too generus.
WHICH DISTRO! You start like a typical wintroll - absolutely no
specifics whatsever.
How did you get it? This whole story sounds like such a load of
nonsense that it has absolutely no credibility at all.
> this free crapware that they can barely give away for free screwed up
> my BIOS and ended up overclocking my CPU.
That's really interesting, since absolutely no version of Linux that I
know of alters the BIOS to overclock the CPU. YOU might have decided
to overclock the CPU, but it's highly unlikley that Linux was even
capable of setting the BIOS to overclock.
> after setup finished this
> home made hackware needed to download about 50 gigs of security patches
> and upgrades and updates and who knows what sort of uncontrolled home
> made crapware.
Clearly an exaggeration. Even the largest distribution, with all
available languages installed, takes up less than 6 gigabytes. But
that one is sold commercially. You didn't get this one commercially
though, did you?
> so I left my computer on while it downloaded all this
> crap and went out. while I was gone the CPU over heated and started a
> fire. my multi million dollar estate went up in flames.
There is one possible scenario where Linux could have started a fire.
If you had an old 800x600 monitor and you tried to push the resolution
to 1024x768 or better. This was something that could be manually
configured on old Slackware distributions. The problem was that the
flyback transformer would overheat and eventually you would see some
sparks and fight.
> thanks linsux. my lawyer told me that if this was software from a real
> company I could sue and get money. but since its crapware thats written
> by fat hackers working out of their moms basement there is nothing I
> can do.
Actually, even if were Microsoft Software, you wouldn't get a dime.
Remember, all software comes with licenses, and nearly all licenses
require that the end user indemnify the publisher against all
liability. About the only way around it is if you could prove that
there were deliberate sabotage.
Now, if you could name the specific distribution, the specific hardware
used, and as much of the configuration as you can possibly remember,
along with any information about choices you made, you might be able to
recreate your scenario and have an independent evaluator determine
whether this was the actual cause - or if your cat just knocked over a
lamp or if you were just using a cheap extension cord.
> anyone who wants to use linsux should do it at they're own risk. this
> crap is no where near ready for the public to use. no wonder its free.
> so is dog shit.
This is pure nonsense. You obviously weren't there when the fire
started, so you don't know exactly HOW the fire started. What was the
cause determined by the fire department.
To begin with, unless you removed the cover to the PC, even if the fan
died and the processor did overheat, it wouldn't cause a fire. It
would be in a metal case to prevent static interference. Second, unless
you deliberately overclocked the CPU to something like double the rated
capability it still wouldn't run hot enough to actually cause a fire.
Many mondern PCs have power supplies that produce up to 400 watts of
power, that could be well over the 10 amp rating of most inexpensive
extension cords.
You might regret publishing this rediculous claim, it indicates that
you may have defrauded your insurance company.
Rex Ballard
Chris Wilkinson
linu...@lycos.com wrote:
> this free crapware that they can barely give away for free screwed up
> my BIOS and ended up overclocking my CPU. after setup finished this
> home made hackware needed to download about 50 gigs of security patches
> and upgrades and updates and who knows what sort of uncontrolled home
> made crapware. so I left my computer on while it downloaded all this
> crap and went out. while I was gone the CPU over heated and started a
> fire. my multi million dollar estate went up in flames.
Good. That'll teach you to lie thru your teeth...now what was
the real story? Let me guess...you got bored masturbating and
decided that the most useful thing you could do with your life
was to compose a trite piece of crap into cola..is that close?
> thanks linsux. my lawyer told me that if this was software from a real
> company I could sue and get money. but since its crapware thats written
> by fat hackers working out of their moms basement there is nothing I
> can do.
If you were a real person posting a real happening you'd not
sound like the attention-seeking problem child that you are in
reality...
> anyone who wants to use linsux should do it at they're own risk. this
> crap is no where near ready for the public to use. no wonder its free.
> so is dog shit.
Posting puerile trite into here is free too, unfortunately.
Otherwise you'd just have to keep masturbating...
--
Kind regards,
Chris Wilkinson, Brisbane, Australia.
Anyone wishing to email me directly can remove the obvious
spamblocker, and replace it with t p g <dot> c o m <dot> a u
spi...@freenet.co.uk
Comic timing
Just as they lack common sense, imagination, basic english writing skills
and style, they also lack comic timing. It was mildly amusing though...
No-one in their right mind would think it was serious though, of course.
--
| |What to do if you find yourself stuck in a crack|
| spi...@freenet.co.uk |in the ground beneath a giant boulder, which you|
| |can't move, with no hope of rescue. |
|Andrew Halliwell BSc(hons)|Consider how lucky you are that life has been |
| in |good to you so far... |
| Computer Science | -The BOOK, Hitch-hiker's guide to the galaxy.|
Sinister Midget
>
> linu...@lycos.com wrote:
>> I installed this distro to see if linux lives up to the hype or not.
>> this was a terrible mistake and it ended up costing me my house and all
>> my expensive stuff. this linux crap is so bad that calling it linsux is
>> being too generus.
>
> WHICH DISTRO! You start like a typical wintroll - absolutely no
> specifics whatsever.
There's a more glaring clue than not providing specifics:
Anything wasted on the retard is, well, wasted.
--
Reatle: Innovative Microsoft peer-to-peer software.
nes...@wigner.berkeley.edu
would be even less at European voltages). Otherwise I agree with you.
nes...@wigner.berkeley.edu
accident, and she sued the city because she said the trauma had caused
her to become a nymphmaniac? At least that's how I remember the story.
The city had to pay, and the case was infamous as an abuse of the
legal system. Somehow this story reminds me of that one. I'm looking
forward to:
"Linux made me a nymphomanicac!!!"
"Linux burned down my house and made me a nymphomaniac!!!"
"Linux burned down my house and made me a devil worshipper and a
nyphomaniac!!!
Larry Qualig
Rex.... you're giving this fools post far too seriously and have given
him way too much credit. I doubt that *anyone* here believes a single
sentence of that post.
Lobo
>Ha HA HA ah aHHHHh ha LOBO That's frickinn Funny man LOL LOL
Don't laugh. This was not funny. Hundreds of people almost died before
we got it under control.
The MSCE's slunk out of town last night except for the two that
Chester caught. Him and the Colonel were heating up a kettle of tar
and plucking chickens but we told them they can't do that any more.
All the townsfolk went to a town meeting this morning and it was voted
1287 to 1 to make the county a "virus-free environment". So Windows
was banned. Things should be back to normal within a few days. The
kids at the school have volunteered their time. People will be able to
bring their computers (after the LUG guys have disinfected and power
washed the boxes) to the auditorium where the younger, smaller kids
will be installing Linux. The older and bigger kids will then return
and install the boxes in the homes and collect the infected MS install
and hardware disks, as well as all the related manuals for proper
disposal. We are were unable to disinfect these items. We have
contacted Waste Management Systems for a quote for hazardous waste
disposal (preferably in another state).
The largest damage was at Clem's MS Server farm on the outskirts of
town. The only solution here was to dig a trench and bulldoze the
servers into the ground to prevent a resurgence of the infection. We
really didn't like to do this but there is no other choice at present.
That site will be infectious for years to come.
PS The one vote against banning MS Windows came from some
millionaire who lives in a big, ostentatious mansion on the hill
behind the Church. His mansion burned down and he blamed it on Linux.
He says he is penniless now. Spent his last time on some big city
shyster lawyer firm. Sam, the fire marshal went out to the scene and
discovered the fire was caused by a nest of MS worms that had pupated
in the bios. When they flew away, one of them touched the CPU and it's
wings caught on fire. It then apparently fluttered onto the stack of
install disks next to the computer. Well you 'all know how flammable
those are. We believe all the moths were burned in the ensuing fire.
That sure is a relief. The town folks had a collection and we raised
enough money to buy him a trailer to live in (this shows how good
hearted the townsfolk are even though he was a doofus).
PPS The tar that Chester and the Colonel heated up didn't go to
waste. Those fine fellows used it to build a couple of speed bumps in
front of the school which we needed.
PPPS A big heartfelt thank you to all of you that sent Linux disks.
We couldn't have done this without your generosity.
PPPPS My cat is doing well but it will take a long time before she
trusts going near a computer again.
Lobo
>
>PPPPS My cat is doing well but it will take a long time before she
>trusts going near a computer again.
PPPPPS Here's a picture of her after she came home from the vet
http://dura.cell.free.fr/home/pr0n/shaved_pussy.jpg
Let this be a warning to all. DON'T let your pets get to close to your
Windoze box. Them Windoze virii are extremely virulent and are capable
of mutating at a ferocious rate.
Rex Ballard
Add to that the Monitor and any accessories. That could be enough to
overheat a really cheap extension cord.
I cant help but think that the whole story is made up. But, if I just
called him a liar, he might point me to a URL and google map of a house
that burned down.
There was a remote element of truth, but I wanted to make sure that we
put that to bed too.
Linønut
>>PPPPS My cat is doing well but it will take a long time before she
>>trusts going near a computer again.
>
> PPPPPS Here's a picture of her after she came home from the vet
> http://dura.cell.free.fr/home/pr0n/shaved_pussy.jpg
Looks like Garfield, humiliated.
pr0n? Nah, I prefer files in NROP format.
--
Q: Why does a GNU/Linux user compile his kernel?
A: Because he can.
chrisv
>WHICH DISTRO!
Boy, Rex, that was really a troll worth feeding.
Gates Danderhoff
That's amazing. The same thing happened to me. I'm now living in a
cardboard box.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
This message was posted via one or more anonymous remailing services.
The original sender is unknown. Any address shown in the From header
is unverified.
Nigel Feltham
>> so I left my computer on while it downloaded all this
>> crap and went out. while I was gone the CPU over heated and started a
>> fire. my multi million dollar estate went up in flames.
>
> There is one possible scenario where Linux could have started a fire.
> If you had an old 800x600 monitor and you tried to push the resolution
> to 1024x768 or better. This was something that could be manually
> configured on old Slackware distributions. The problem was that the
> flyback transformer would overheat and eventually you would see some
> sparks and fight.
But the monitor would need to be at least 10 years old as all monitors made
since that time have protection and just go into standby at the merest hint
of being overdriven, can't be many of these left in use - especially in a
multimillion dollar estate the OP claims was destroyed.
>> thanks linsux. my lawyer told me that if this was software from a real
>> company I could sue and get money. but since its crapware thats written
>> by fat hackers working out of their moms basement there is nothing I
>> can do.
>
> Actually, even if were Microsoft Software, you wouldn't get a dime.
> Remember, all software comes with licenses, and nearly all licenses
> require that the end user indemnify the publisher against all
> liability. About the only way around it is if you could prove that
> there were deliberate sabotage.
Even then you've no chance of winning - don't forget who owns all the
lawyers.
> To begin with, unless you removed the cover to the PC, even if the fan
> died and the processor did overheat, it wouldn't cause a fire. It
> would be in a metal case to prevent static interference. Second, unless
> you deliberately overclocked the CPU to something like double the rated
> capability it still wouldn't run hot enough to actually cause a fire.
And still no chance of a fire if it's an intel CPU - I know from experience
(from fan failure and incorrectly fitted heatsinks) that when a PIII or P4
starts to overheat it immediataly switches the motherboard into standby and
is left with no permanent damage. Some AMD's will burn though (main reason
I prefer intels for my home PC).
Mark Kent
nes...@wigner.berkeley.edu <nes...@wigner.berkeley.edu> espoused:
> Rex, 400 watts is less than 4 amps (assuming US 110-120 voltage, it
> would be even less at European voltages). Otherwise I agree with you.
>
Indeed. Max power from a US socket is 10 x 110 = 1.1kW
Max power from UK socket is 13 x 240 = 3.1kW
This is why it's /much/ faster to make tea here :-)
--
| Mark Kent -- mark at ellandroad dot demon dot co dot uk |
The soul would have no rainbow had the eyes no tears.
Mark Kent
Rex Ballard <rex.b...@gmail.com> espoused:
> That's the DC output current. The input current would be about double.
> Add to that the Monitor and any accessories. That could be enough to
> overheat a really cheap extension cord.
But you need to consider the voltage too. A Switched Mode PSU can
exceed 80% efficiency with ease, so at 500W and 110V, you'll be looking
at approx 5 Amps, max. Of course, it will only /draw/ all that current
if you're using it in the PC - the idle state will be perhaps 100 or 200
mA only for the PSU on its own. The power has to go somewhere - it
cannot dissipate in the PSU, which would explode if you tried to do
that.
>
> I cant help but think that the whole story is made up. But, if I just
> called him a liar, he might point me to a URL and google map of a house
> that burned down.
>
> There was a remote element of truth, but I wanted to make sure that we
> put that to bed too.
>
Lobo
wrote:
>begin oe_protect.scr
>nes...@wigner.berkeley.edu <nes...@wigner.berkeley.edu> espoused:
>> Rex, 400 watts is less than 4 amps (assuming US 110-120 voltage, it
>> would be even less at European voltages). Otherwise I agree with you.
>>
>
>Indeed. Max power from a US socket is 10 x 110 = 1.1kW
15 x 120 = 1.8kW
>Max power from UK socket is 13 x 240 = 3.1kW
You guys can have less copper in your overall wiring with 240 v and is
cheaper.
>This is why it's /much/ faster to make tea here :-)
Most kettles here are about 1000 watts. What's yours?
New kitchens are wired 14/3. Each plug on a dual socket can supply 15
amps so you can have a toaster and a kettle at the same location. The
interesting thing is that when you draw full current from each plug,
the current in the neutral drops to zero. Voltage to homes is 240 v
and split into two 120 volt lines at electrical panel.
http://hyperphysics.phy-astr.gsu.edu/hbase/electric/hsehld.html#c1
Some places drop their voltage to 110 to save electricity. It can go
lower during "brownouts".
ukuntu
> On Thu, 9 Mar 2006 13:00:18 +0000, Mark Kent <mark...@demon.co.uk>
> wrote:
>
>>begin oe_protect.scr
>>nes...@wigner.berkeley.edu <nes...@wigner.berkeley.edu> espoused:
>>> Rex, 400 watts is less than 4 amps (assuming US 110-120 voltage, it
>>> would be even less at European voltages). Otherwise I agree with you.
>>>
>>
>>Indeed. Max power from a US socket is 10 x 110 = 1.1kW
>
> 15 x 120 = 1.8kW
>
>>Max power from UK socket is 13 x 240 = 3.1kW
>
> You guys can have less copper in your overall wiring with 240 v and is
> cheaper.
230V is now the nominal voltage.
>
>>This is why it's /much/ faster to make tea here :-)
>
> Most kettles here are about 1000 watts. What's yours?
Most are probably 2 or 2.5kW, but there's a growing trend for 'fast boil'
kettles which are 3kW.
>
> New kitchens are wired 14/3. Each plug on a dual socket can supply 15
> amps so you can have a toaster and a kettle at the same location.
Presumably a '14/3' is similar to what we have - a ring main, where the
15A cable is connected to each socket in turn and both ends of the ring
join at the meter. Thus the meter fuse can be 30A, and it allows for
kettles and toasters and heaters and so on without any real problems of
overloading.
[..]
Mark Kent
Lobo <n...@here.com> espoused:
> On Thu, 9 Mar 2006 13:00:18 +0000, Mark Kent <mark...@demon.co.uk>
> wrote:
>
>>begin oe_protect.scr
>>nes...@wigner.berkeley.edu <nes...@wigner.berkeley.edu> espoused:
>>> Rex, 400 watts is less than 4 amps (assuming US 110-120 voltage, it
>>> would be even less at European voltages). Otherwise I agree with you.
>>>
>>
>>Indeed. Max power from a US socket is 10 x 110 = 1.1kW
>
> 15 x 120 = 1.8kW
Oh - I thought US mains plugs were rated at 10 Amps?
>
>>Max power from UK socket is 13 x 240 = 3.1kW
>
> You guys can have less copper in your overall wiring with 240 v and is
> cheaper.
>
>>This is why it's /much/ faster to make tea here :-)
>
> Most kettles here are about 1000 watts. What's yours?
Mine's 3kW. Boils for one cup in about 55 seconds...
>
> New kitchens are wired 14/3. Each plug on a dual socket can supply 15
> amps so you can have a toaster and a kettle at the same location. The
> interesting thing is that when you draw full current from each plug,
> the current in the neutral drops to zero. Voltage to homes is 240 v
> and split into two 120 volt lines at electrical panel.
Our core transport network is 25kV, 3 phase, with local distribution at
400V 3 phase. If you get one phase of that, it's 240V with a neutral.
If you're right at the end of a really long run, the drop might be 400V,
but it's delivered as 240V plus neutral.
>
> http://hyperphysics.phy-astr.gsu.edu/hbase/electric/hsehld.html#c1
>
> Some places drop their voltage to 110 to save electricity. It can go
> lower during "brownouts".
Interesting... as our energy supplies become increasingly scarce, we
either need lots more wind, wave and sun, or we'll be suffering in the
same way. I'm looking at building a local battery and inverter with
some solar and wind to drive it here as a degree of protection against
that.
That said, our biggest problem this year is drought - we've had almost
no rain for months, and most of our reservoirs are almost empty already.
--
| Mark Kent -- mark at ellandroad dot demon dot co dot uk |
The beauty of a pun is in the "Oy!" of the beholder.
Jim Richardson
Hash: SHA1
On Fri, 10 Mar 2006 08:19:29 +0000,
Mark Kent <mark...@demon.co.uk> wrote:
> begin oe_protect.scr
> Lobo <n...@here.com> espoused:
>> On Thu, 9 Mar 2006 13:00:18 +0000, Mark Kent <mark...@demon.co.uk>
>> wrote:
>>
>>>begin oe_protect.scr
>>>nes...@wigner.berkeley.edu <nes...@wigner.berkeley.edu> espoused:
>>>> Rex, 400 watts is less than 4 amps (assuming US 110-120 voltage, it
>>>> would be even less at European voltages). Otherwise I agree with you.
>>>>
>>>
>>>Indeed. Max power from a US socket is 10 x 110 = 1.1kW
>>
>> 15 x 120 = 1.8kW
>
> Oh - I thought US mains plugs were rated at 10 Amps?
>
110 plugs max out at 15A, 220, at 20A (from memory) Most houses only
have the 220 ones for things like dryers, water heaters, electric
stoves, but you can add them if you need them.
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.2.1 (GNU/Linux)
iD8DBQFEEUOcd90bcYOAWPYRAo5yAKDq9AU1AIOY37IIHJfBZP2BqRrBEwCdFMy1
patAMUko2wQUDIkLIwwiwIM=
=8ZR/
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
--
Jim Richardson http://www.eskimo.com/~warlock
The nice thing about standards is that there are so many of them to choose
from.
--- Grace Murray Hopper, as quoted in the Unix Haters Handbook, p.10
William Poaster
You must be in the South-East? We're not suffering shortages up here! :-)
--
SuSE 10.1 OSS Beta3 (Agama Lizard)
Lobo
wrote:
>begin oe_protect.scr
>Lobo <n...@here.com> espoused:
>> On Thu, 9 Mar 2006 13:00:18 +0000, Mark Kent <mark...@demon.co.uk>
>> wrote:
>>
>>>begin oe_protect.scr
>>>nes...@wigner.berkeley.edu <nes...@wigner.berkeley.edu> espoused:
>>>> Rex, 400 watts is less than 4 amps (assuming US 110-120 voltage, it
>>>> would be even less at European voltages). Otherwise I agree with you.
>>>>
>>>
>>>Indeed. Max power from a US socket is 10 x 110 = 1.1kW
>>
>> 15 x 120 = 1.8kW
>
>Oh - I thought US mains plugs were rated at 10 Amps?
>
>>
>>>Max power from UK socket is 13 x 240 = 3.1kW
>>
>> You guys can have less copper in your overall wiring with 240 v and is
>> cheaper.
>>
>>>This is why it's /much/ faster to make tea here :-)
>>
>> Most kettles here are about 1000 watts. What's yours?
>
>Mine's 3kW. Boils for one cup in about 55 seconds...
40 gal whole house water heaters are 3kw here. You guys sure like your
tea.
>>
>> New kitchens are wired 14/3. Each plug on a dual socket can supply 15
>> amps so you can have a toaster and a kettle at the same location. The
>> interesting thing is that when you draw full current from each plug,
>> the current in the neutral drops to zero. Voltage to homes is 240 v
>> and split into two 120 volt lines at electrical panel.
>
>Our core transport network is 25kV, 3 phase, with local distribution at
>400V 3 phase. If you get one phase of that, it's 240V with a neutral.
>If you're right at the end of a really long run, the drop might be 400V,
>but it's delivered as 240V plus neutral.
In Canada it is 600V 3 phase on the pole lines. It's 480V in the US.
There are taps on the pole transformers to adjust for voltage
variations as you get further from the power substations.
We have 60HZ which is more efficient than your 50HZ in transmission
and motors. Your 240V is more efficient in building wiring. Our
Canadian industrial plants use 600V 60HZ 3 Phase motors which is the
most efficient there is in the world.
The best house wiring would be 220V @ 60HZ but it is too late to
change. Too much existing infrastructure in various countries.
>>
>> http://hyperphysics.phy-astr.gsu.edu/hbase/electric/hsehld.html#c1
>>
>> Some places drop their voltage to 110 to save electricity. It can go
>> lower during "brownouts".
>
>Interesting... as our energy supplies become increasingly scarce, we
>either need lots more wind, wave and sun, or we'll be suffering in the
>same way. I'm looking at building a local battery and inverter with
>some solar and wind to drive it here as a degree of protection against
>that.
Inverters are not very efficient. You would do better to convert
lights and other resistive loads to DC and use inverter only where
necessary.
>That said, our biggest problem this year is drought - we've had almost
>no rain for months, and most of our reservoirs are almost empty already.
Global warming? I'm running your BBC global climate change experiment
on my computer. I started it before I decided to switch to Linux so I
have to reboot WinXP at night to keep it running :-(
When I have some time to spare, I will see if Wine will work with it.
Lobo
<war...@eskimo.com> wrote:
>110 plugs max out at 15A, 220, at 20A (from memory) Most houses only
>have the 220 ones for things like dryers, water heaters, electric
>stoves, but you can add them if you need them.
outlets = single 15A (110V 14/2 wiring + 1 ground)
outlets (split) = dual 15A (2 x 110 14/3 wiring + 1 ground)
dryers & water heaters = dual 20A (2x110=220V 12/3 wiring + 1 ground)
stoves = dual 30A (2x110=220V 10/3 wiring + 1 ground)
Must have separate ground wiring even though the neutral and ground
are connected at the main electrical panel. This allows use of GFI's
(ground fault interrupters) to prevent electrocution. Codes are
probably different elsewhere.
I install them when renovating :-)
Peter North
my former mansion had great wiring. dont try to blame my excellent
wiring for the fuck up of your crap OS. if your piece of crap operating
system didn't dork my bios the cpu wouldnt be overclocked an my crib
wouldnt burn down.
why must you always make lame excuses for that piece of crap you call
linux?
Mark Kent
><war...@eskimo.com> wrote:
>
>
>>110 plugs max out at 15A, 220, at 20A (from memory) Most houses only
>>have the 220 ones for things like dryers, water heaters, electric
>>stoves, but you can add them if you need them.
>
> outlets = single 15A (110V 14/2 wiring + 1 ground)
> outlets (split) = dual 15A (2 x 110 14/3 wiring + 1 ground)
> dryers & water heaters = dual 20A (2x110=220V 12/3 wiring + 1 ground)
> stoves = dual 30A (2x110=220V 10/3 wiring + 1 ground)
>
> Must have separate ground wiring even though the neutral and ground
> are connected at the main electrical panel. This allows use of GFI's
> (ground fault interrupters) to prevent electrocution. Codes are
> probably different elsewhere.
>
> I install them when renovating :-)
>
Hehe :-) Yeah, we have a very comprehensive set of wiring rules,
including how to run wires in walls, what height to set sockets at so
that disabled people can use them, new colours (again! 3rd time in 40
years!) so that colour-blind people can become electricians (didn't used
to be allowed).
ELCBs have been standard install for about 20 years now (presumably same
as your GFI), and are a requirement for any power point which might be
used for outside connection using an extension of some kind, but are not
a requirement for 1st floor and up (we use floor zero for ground, which
means that the first floor underground is -1, and so on - very logical).
Minimum ring main capacity is 60A x 240V, with a limit on number of
power points, but I forget how many; lighting circuits are 15A x 240V,
unless you start going commercial.
Sometimes earth is strapped to neutral at house entry-point, but there
are serious disadvantages with that approach, unless you /really/ have
3-phase supply.
Mark Kent
Jim Richardson <war...@eskimo.com> espoused:
> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
> Hash: SHA1
>
> On Fri, 10 Mar 2006 08:19:29 +0000,
> Mark Kent <mark...@demon.co.uk> wrote:
>> begin oe_protect.scr
>> Lobo <n...@here.com> espoused:
>>> On Thu, 9 Mar 2006 13:00:18 +0000, Mark Kent <mark...@demon.co.uk>
>>> wrote:
>>>
>>>>begin oe_protect.scr
>>>>nes...@wigner.berkeley.edu <nes...@wigner.berkeley.edu> espoused:
>>>>> Rex, 400 watts is less than 4 amps (assuming US 110-120 voltage, it
>>>>> would be even less at European voltages). Otherwise I agree with you.
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>>Indeed. Max power from a US socket is 10 x 110 = 1.1kW
>>>
>>> 15 x 120 = 1.8kW
>>
>> Oh - I thought US mains plugs were rated at 10 Amps?
>>
>
> 110 plugs max out at 15A, 220, at 20A (from memory) Most houses only
> have the 220 ones for things like dryers, water heaters, electric
> stoves, but you can add them if you need them.
>
Okay - thanks. With ours, if you need to go above the 13Ax240V, then
you get a switched outlet with direct wiring (up to 30Ax240v for
cookers), or up to 3-phase for industrial stuff.
Larry Qualig
So what you're basically claiming is that Linux burned down your
double-wide mansion.
> why must you always make lame excuses for that piece of
> crap you call linux?
And why must you always post total nonsense?
Mark Kent
William Poaster <w...@suse10.1oss.eu> espoused:
Yeah - I'm the Yorkshireman living in Kent :-) (It is my name as well,
but that's a coincidence). Apparently, back up North, there's plenty of
watter :-)
William Poaster
Oh, aye! We got plenty o't stuff, lad! Actually it was the "mark at
ellandroad" (Leeds United FC at Ellland Road, I believe, though I'm not a
soccer fan) part of your sig that led me to think you were still in
Yorkshire! :-)
I've been through Leeds a few times.
GreyCloud
>>>Indeed. Max power from a US socket is 10 x 110 = 1.1kW
>>
>>15 x 120 = 1.8kW
>
>
> Oh - I thought US mains plugs were rated at 10 Amps?
>
No, the average breaker and outlets are rated for 20 amps.
You can plug in a large microwave oven that has a current draw of 18
amps without throwing the breaker.
--
Where are we going?
And why am I in this handbasket?
Jim Richardson
Hash: SHA1
On Fri, 10 Mar 2006 21:56:24 +0000,
Mark Kent <mark...@demon.co.uk> wrote:
> begin oe_protect.scr
> Jim Richardson <war...@eskimo.com> espoused:
>> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
>> Hash: SHA1
>>
>> On Fri, 10 Mar 2006 08:19:29 +0000,
>> Mark Kent <mark...@demon.co.uk> wrote:
>>> begin oe_protect.scr
>>> Lobo <n...@here.com> espoused:
>>>> On Thu, 9 Mar 2006 13:00:18 +0000, Mark Kent <mark...@demon.co.uk>
>>>> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>>begin oe_protect.scr
>>>>>nes...@wigner.berkeley.edu <nes...@wigner.berkeley.edu> espoused:
>>>>>> Rex, 400 watts is less than 4 amps (assuming US 110-120 voltage, it
>>>>>> would be even less at European voltages). Otherwise I agree with you.
>>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>Indeed. Max power from a US socket is 10 x 110 = 1.1kW
>>>>
>>>> 15 x 120 = 1.8kW
>>>
>>> Oh - I thought US mains plugs were rated at 10 Amps?
>>>
>>
>> 110 plugs max out at 15A, 220, at 20A (from memory) Most houses only
>> have the 220 ones for things like dryers, water heaters, electric
>> stoves, but you can add them if you need them.
>>
>
> Okay - thanks. With ours, if you need to go above the 13Ax240V, then
> you get a switched outlet with direct wiring (up to 30Ax240v for
> cookers), or up to 3-phase for industrial stuff.
>
The lower voltage 110 stuff has some advantages, but only a few.
Frankly, I'd prefer the 220 approach. Once a standard has set in
however....
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.2.1 (GNU/Linux)
iD8DBQFEEgkFd90bcYOAWPYRAuCUAJ9EeLlkyYvlqCiTNdyd9mojGK+owQCfQJ/n
FdJsg2kwI6n8QhOVh7cDs8s=
=QIFB
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
--
Jim Richardson http://www.eskimo.com/~warlock
Noise proves nothing. Often a hen who has merely laid an egg cackles
as if she laid an asteroid.
-- Mark Twain
Mark Kent
Lobo <n...@here.com> espoused:
> On Fri, 10 Mar 2006 08:19:29 +0000, Mark Kent <mark...@demon.co.uk>
> wrote:
>
>>begin oe_protect.scr
>>Lobo <n...@here.com> espoused:
>>> On Thu, 9 Mar 2006 13:00:18 +0000, Mark Kent <mark...@demon.co.uk>
>>> wrote:
>>>
>>>>begin oe_protect.scr
>>>>nes...@wigner.berkeley.edu <nes...@wigner.berkeley.edu> espoused:
>>>>> Rex, 400 watts is less than 4 amps (assuming US 110-120 voltage, it
>>>>> would be even less at European voltages). Otherwise I agree with you.
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>>Indeed. Max power from a US socket is 10 x 110 = 1.1kW
>>>
>>> 15 x 120 = 1.8kW
>>
>>Oh - I thought US mains plugs were rated at 10 Amps?
>>
>>>
>>>>Max power from UK socket is 13 x 240 = 3.1kW
>>>
>>> You guys can have less copper in your overall wiring with 240 v and is
>>> cheaper.
>>>
>>>>This is why it's /much/ faster to make tea here :-)
>>>
>>> Most kettles here are about 1000 watts. What's yours?
>>
>>Mine's 3kW. Boils for one cup in about 55 seconds...
>
> 40 gal whole house water heaters are 3kw here. You guys sure like your
> tea.
Our house heaters are 7kW. We just don't like wasting time... :-)
>
>>>
>>> New kitchens are wired 14/3. Each plug on a dual socket can supply 15
>>> amps so you can have a toaster and a kettle at the same location. The
>>> interesting thing is that when you draw full current from each plug,
>>> the current in the neutral drops to zero. Voltage to homes is 240 v
>>> and split into two 120 volt lines at electrical panel.
>>
>>Our core transport network is 25kV, 3 phase, with local distribution at
>>400V 3 phase. If you get one phase of that, it's 240V with a neutral.
>>If you're right at the end of a really long run, the drop might be 400V,
>>but it's delivered as 240V plus neutral.
>
> In Canada it is 600V 3 phase on the pole lines. It's 480V in the US.
> There are taps on the pole transformers to adjust for voltage
> variations as you get further from the power substations.
>
> We have 60HZ which is more efficient than your 50HZ in transmission
> and motors. Your 240V is more efficient in building wiring. Our
> Canadian industrial plants use 600V 60HZ 3 Phase motors which is the
> most efficient there is in the world.
Ours are 400V 50Hz 3 phase, so they need to be a bit bigger.
>
> The best house wiring would be 220V @ 60HZ but it is too late to
> change. Too much existing infrastructure in various countries.
Even agreeing on 240Vac@50Hz for the UK was no mean feat as there were
so many competing systems using different line voltages. Some systems
were DC.
I recall the German railways being run on a very low frequency supply,
something of the order of 15Hz or 10Hz. Makes for huge inductors :-)
>
>>>
>>> http://hyperphysics.phy-astr.gsu.edu/hbase/electric/hsehld.html#c1
>>>
>>> Some places drop their voltage to 110 to save electricity. It can go
>>> lower during "brownouts".
>>
>>Interesting... as our energy supplies become increasingly scarce, we
>>either need lots more wind, wave and sun, or we'll be suffering in the
>>same way. I'm looking at building a local battery and inverter with
>>some solar and wind to drive it here as a degree of protection against
>>that.
>
> Inverters are not very efficient. You would do better to convert
> lights and other resistive loads to DC and use inverter only where
> necessary.
Virtually all of my lighting is flourescent, for the power saving (about
10% of resistive lighting), result is that the house lighting doesn't
use a great deal of power. The communal areas (halls, stairways,
bathrooms, utilities, outside) are all switched using infra-red
detectors, light sensors and timers, again, to keep the usage down,
otherwise Mrs Mark, the kids and the au-pair never switch them off!
After that, most of the rest are based around switched-mode power
supplies, so they don't really care what they get - 100V to 250V is
fine, but they absolutely must have AC. After that, there're washing
machine, the dishwashers, drier and other white goods which would
require AC to drive the motors.
It would be very difficult for me to attempt a switch to DC
distribution. I did consider a 12V system for powering some of the very
many low-voltage items, but each time I looked at it, the amount of
copper required made it less than worthwhile.
>
>>That said, our biggest problem this year is drought - we've had almost
>>no rain for months, and most of our reservoirs are almost empty already.
>
> Global warming? I'm running your BBC global climate change experiment
> on my computer. I started it before I decided to switch to Linux so I
> have to reboot WinXP at night to keep it running :-(
Hehe! Yes, global warming has been making a huge impact here.
>
> When I have some time to spare, I will see if Wine will work with it.
--
| Mark Kent -- mark at ellandroad dot demon dot co dot uk |
Dawn, n.:
The time when men of reason go to bed.
-- Ambrose Bierce, "The Devil's Dictionary"
Lobo
wrote:
>
>Virtually all of my lighting is flourescent, for the power saving (about
>10% of resistive lighting), result is that the house lighting doesn't
>use a great deal of power. The communal areas (halls, stairways,
>bathrooms, utilities, outside) are all switched using infra-red
>detectors, light sensors and timers, again, to keep the usage down,
>otherwise Mrs Mark, the kids and the au-pair never switch them off!
LED house lighting is on the horizon. We have Xmas lites that require
very little wattage. No waste in heat. I don't like the fluorescents.
I think my brain subliminally picks up the 60HZ flicker. I can imagine
how worse it would be with 50HZ.
>After that, most of the rest are based around switched-mode power
>supplies, so they don't really care what they get - 100V to 250V is
>fine, but they absolutely must have AC. After that, there're washing
>machine, the dishwashers, drier and other white goods which would
>require AC to drive the motors.
I'm not sure the world can continue to provide the raw materials and
resources to have all these goodies that we in the developed nations
have come to accept as our right, available to all. It's going to make
for some interesting times ahead.
>It would be very difficult for me to attempt a switch to DC
>distribution. I did consider a 12V system for powering some of the very
>many low-voltage items, but each time I looked at it, the amount of
>copper required made it less than worthwhile.
I know someone who lives on an island who uses ten 12 volt batteries
(powered by solar panels) to reduce losses. (Breakers don't work so
good though hehehehe)
>>>That said, our biggest problem this year is drought - we've had almost
>>>no rain for months, and most of our reservoirs are almost empty already.
>>
>> Global warming? I'm running your BBC global climate change experiment
>> on my computer. I started it before I decided to switch to Linux so I
>> have to reboot WinXP at night to keep it running :-(
>
>Hehe! Yes, global warming has been making a huge impact here.
You guys (51) are further north than me (49 deg)
Wait till the gulf current is shunted by the melting polar caps. You
will then get to experience some of the winter cold we experience in
Canada.... (10 months of winter and two of bad sledding ;-)
ukuntu
> On Sat, 11 Mar 2006 17:52:04 +0000, Mark Kent <mark...@demon.co.uk>
> wrote:
>
>
>>
>>Virtually all of my lighting is flourescent, for the power saving (about
>>10% of resistive lighting), result is that the house lighting doesn't
>>use a great deal of power. The communal areas (halls, stairways,
>>bathrooms, utilities, outside) are all switched using infra-red
>>detectors, light sensors and timers, again, to keep the usage down,
>>otherwise Mrs Mark, the kids and the au-pair never switch them off!
>
> LED house lighting is on the horizon. We have Xmas lites that require
> very little wattage. No waste in heat. I don't like the fluorescents.
> I think my brain subliminally picks up the 60HZ flicker. I can imagine
> how worse it would be with 50HZ.
>
Most people over here now use Compact fluorescent lights (see
http://www.fraw.org.uk/pubs/frpg/frpg-02.html). They are more like the
CCFLs used in TFT displays and don't flicker at all (well, they _do_, but
at frequencies of kHz's).
The Ghost In The Machine
<mi...@cumulus.com>
wrote
on Fri, 10 Mar 2006 16:27:10 -0700
<meGdnZpWjKWykY_Z...@bresnan.com>:
> Mark Kent wrote:
>
>>>>Indeed. Max power from a US socket is 10 x 110 = 1.1kW
>>>
>>>15 x 120 = 1.8kW
>>
>>
>> Oh - I thought US mains plugs were rated at 10 Amps?
>>
>
> No, the average breaker and outlets are rated for 20 amps.
> You can plug in a large microwave oven that has a current draw of 18
> amps without throwing the breaker.
>
It depends on the plug/location/wiring/etc. In my kitchen,
for instance, the breakers are 20 amps. (The odd part:
the breakers are in the master bedroom, on the other
side of the condo. Of course that probably keeps most
of the kids out. :-) ) Other plugs are rated 15 amps,
except for dedicated plugs for the stove, washer, and
dryer, and the circuit for the HVAC system. There's also
probably a master switch somewhere next to a meter which
the electric company knows about (I'd have to find it)
and reads on occasion.
Admittedly, most people don't put microwaves in their bedrooms. :-)
--
#191, ewi...@earthlink.net
Windows Vista. Because everyone wants a really slick-looking 8-sided wheel.
The Ghost In The Machine
<war...@eskimo.com>
wrote
on Fri, 10 Mar 2006 15:17:25 -0800
<51e9e3-...@grendel.myth>:
220V 50Hz would be very nice. 110V doubles the current, and 60Hz can
interfere with heart function; it's exactly the wrong frequency.
I'll admit to wondering what it would take to switch. Most houses have
nearby stepdown transformers; those may be the only thing that needs
replacing, other than of course the sockets proper and every piece of
electronic equipment. :-) I don't think the 50 Hz will hurt the actual
wiring too much although there's probably a large number of issues with
industrial equipment (think LC circuits and/or power-factor bypass
capacitors and that sort of thing; I don't know the details), and
the generators would have to run at a lower frequency.
Of course there's an awful lot of stepdown transformers, most of them
mounted on utility poles.
Jim Richardson
Hash: SHA1
the 50hz myth is exactly that, a myth, it's no better, or worse, than
being shocked by 60hz, and 60hz is more efficient power transfer.
> I'll admit to wondering what it would take to switch. Most houses have
> nearby stepdown transformers; those may be the only thing that needs
> replacing, other than of course the sockets proper and every piece of
> electronic equipment. :-) I don't think the 50 Hz will hurt the actual
> wiring too much although there's probably a large number of issues with
> industrial equipment (think LC circuits and/or power-factor bypass
> capacitors and that sort of thing; I don't know the details), and
> the generators would have to run at a lower frequency.
We could fairly easily change to 220VAC, but there's no practical way to
switch to 50Hz, even if it were worth it, you'd have to rewind most of
the generators, which would be quite a task.
>
> Of course there's an awful lot of stepdown transformers, most of them
> mounted on utility poles.
>
The main downside to a switch to 220, is that it has a much high arc
potential, and can shock you, in situations where 110 is nothing but a
tingle, but it's a minor difference. IMHO, it would be worth the switch,
but it's not going to happen for all the usual reasons.
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.2.2 (GNU/Linux)
iD8DBQFEF61Sd90bcYOAWPYRAnQSAKCIrOQksK3num/g4/gAxZ31SabLygCfQYbD
m0hy+15q2eEPAntKnEds0Wo=
=Bk56
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
--
Jim Richardson http://www.eskimo.com/~warlock
If you don't know how to do something, you don't know how to do it with a
computer.
Mark Kent
Of course, with the inclusion of switched-mode power supplies for most
low-power devices like chargers, TVs, videos, dvds, laptops, etc. etc.,
they can easily be, and usually are, designed for 100-300V @ 30-60Hz
without significantly impacting their function. Thus the
voltage/frequency debate can be reduced to considering high-power
devices, where in general, a higher voltage feed is usually more cost
effective, but as you say, with an existing infrastructure in place, I
can't see it changing.
--
| Mark Kent -- mark at ellandroad dot demon dot co dot uk |
Anybody want a binary telemetry frame editor written in Perl?
-- Larry Wall in <1997080122...@wall.org>
Jim Richardson
Hash: SHA1
On Thu, 16 Mar 2006 08:31:46 +0000,
Mark Kent <mark...@demon.co.uk> wrote:
> Jim Richardson <war...@eskimo.com> espoused:
>>
>>
>> The main downside to a switch to 220, is that it has a much high arc
>> potential, and can shock you, in situations where 110 is nothing but a
>> tingle, but it's a minor difference. IMHO, it would be worth the switch,
>> but it's not going to happen for all the usual reasons.
>>
>>
>
> Of course, with the inclusion of switched-mode power supplies for most
> low-power devices like chargers, TVs, videos, dvds, laptops, etc. etc.,
> they can easily be, and usually are, designed for 100-300V @ 30-60Hz
> without significantly impacting their function. Thus the
> voltage/frequency debate can be reduced to considering high-power
> devices, where in general, a higher voltage feed is usually more cost
> effective, but as you say, with an existing infrastructure in place, I
> can't see it changing.
>
Agreed, it's an infrastructure thing. But in the US, most houses, and
(IIRC) all new ones, have 220 coming in, so that part isn't the problem.
The current (heh) system works fine, the benefits of switching would be
minor enough that the hassle isn't worth it. It's not as if the extra
copper needed for the slightly higher current draw per KVA costs that
much.
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.2.2 (GNU/Linux)
iD8DBQFEGbP4d90bcYOAWPYRAgpRAJ0eHsMEdKSKBh2vdQXQsRPxD3w0KgCfSQ3T
U5LeL11d1sG8ynT0+Z1sGP8=
=QaXX
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
--
Jim Richardson http://www.eskimo.com/~warlock
"The dinosaurs became extinct because they didn't have a space program"
-- Larry Niven
Lobo
The higher the voltage, the less amperage required to give the same
power: Ohm's law: (KVA)watts=volts x amps
The UK's ring system is radically different from NA's radial system.
The ring system allows current to be shared by two wires, lessoning
the load and voltage drop.
Jim Richardson
Hash: SHA1
Yes, and the higher the voltage, the easier it is for the current to
flow across a resistance, such as moist clothing. Although the
difference from 110V to 220V is not too significant.
> The UK's ring system is radically different from NA's radial system.
> The ring system allows current to be shared by two wires, lessoning
> the load and voltage drop.
>
This makes no sense.
Both systems employ 3 wires at the house end, one earth, one "hot" and
one "neutral" although in fact, the current flows through both the live,
and neutral wires, it's just that the neutral side is usually tied to
earth at the entrance to the house.
Delivery to the house, is by two wires. In the UK, and the US.
reducing current (without increasing the voltage) will have no effect on
voltage drop, unless the heat produced by the current is affecting some
componants resistance. The total load, is the same for a given VA, no
matter how many "wires" it gets there by.
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.2.2 (GNU/Linux)
iD8DBQFEGe5kd90bcYOAWPYRAhoNAJ98AlXdsqEBVpjP/AC0OSoIdSLGAwCeIjsS
RXXWPiEVzcYureSaPA9WKKk=
=PvCw
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
--
Jim Richardson http://www.eskimo.com/~warlock
I have plenty of common sense, I just choose to ignore it.
--- Calvin
Lobo
<war...@eskimo.com> wrote:
I was talking about the wiring within the house.
In the UK's ring system, these three wires go from the main panel,
around the house from socket to socket and then reconnected to the
main panel. You can actually cut these wires between sockets and all
will continue to function.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ring_circuit
>Delivery to the house, is by two wires. In the UK, and the US.
Yes.
>reducing current (without increasing the voltage) will have no effect on
>voltage drop, unless the heat produced by the current is affecting some
>componants resistance. The total load, is the same for a given VA, no
>matter how many "wires" it gets there by.
The higher the current through any resistance, the higher the voltage
drop. With the UK system, the effective resistance of the wires is
halved. Any voltage drop over a resistance creates heat which is
wasted electricity in this application.
Both the UK and NA use the ring system at the power pole with "spurs"
to adjacent areas. This prevents knocking out power to large areas if
a short occurs. Breakers will open to isolate that particular area.
In fact, the entire power grid is made up of interconnected rings. The
failure of one substation to completely cut itself from the grid is
what caused that large power outage in the NE states and Canada. This
put more load on the remaining rings. It was a chain reaction. The
remaining rings had to supply more and more power as each dropped out.
It was a scenario that the power companies were not prepared for.
tha...@tux.glaci.remove-this.com
>
> Agreed, it's an infrastructure thing. But in the US, most houses, and
> (IIRC) all new ones, have 220 coming in, so that part isn't the problem.
>
> The current (heh) system works fine, the benefits of switching would be
> minor enough that the hassle isn't worth it. It's not as if the extra
> copper needed for the slightly higher current draw per KVA costs that
> much.
My new place has 110, 220, 440, single phage, three phase, and
probably a couple of other things I don't know about. Its an old
commercial warehouse building that I'll be converting into loft.
space. We will probably drop the 440 and the three phase service,
but will wait until we investigate under-floor heating option
before we make up our mind.
One thing I know we will do is run 5 volt LED lighting and invest
in some sort of active solar heating system, perhaps even some
active solar to run a few fans or pumps.
Of course ultimately I'll retire to the country and drop off the
grid entirely... that is the dream anyway. :)
Later,
Thad
Mark Kent
It's a good system, and significantly lightens the amount of copper
required, and/or halves the impedance which you'd get from spurs.
>
>>Delivery to the house, is by two wires. In the UK, and the US.
>
> Yes.
>
>>reducing current (without increasing the voltage) will have no effect on
>>voltage drop, unless the heat produced by the current is affecting some
>>componants resistance. The total load, is the same for a given VA, no
>>matter how many "wires" it gets there by.
>
> The higher the current through any resistance, the higher the voltage
> drop. With the UK system, the effective resistance of the wires is
> halved. Any voltage drop over a resistance creates heat which is
> wasted electricity in this application.
It's halved twice, once for the doubled voltage (as power = v x i), and
once for the ring system. This is a substantial saving over a few
million properties. Final result is a quarter...
>
> Both the UK and NA use the ring system at the power pole with "spurs"
> to adjacent areas. This prevents knocking out power to large areas if
> a short occurs. Breakers will open to isolate that particular area.
>
> In fact, the entire power grid is made up of interconnected rings. The
> failure of one substation to completely cut itself from the grid is
> what caused that large power outage in the NE states and Canada. This
> put more load on the remaining rings. It was a chain reaction. The
> remaining rings had to supply more and more power as each dropped out.
> It was a scenario that the power companies were not prepared for.
Total failure/meltdown is the nastiest of all failures, and in many
respects, the hardest to plan for, as you never know where it might
start from. You could spend a fortune on protecting a network from
something which never happens - someone still has to pay.
Some systems use things like hydro-electrics to store extra charge, so
that at low-demand times, water is pumped up into a top reservoir, and
when demand is high, it runs back through the turbines to generate the
extra electricity required.
--
| Mark Kent -- mark at ellandroad dot demon dot co dot uk |
Marriage is the only adventure open to the cowardly.
- Voltaire
Mark Kent
> wrote:
>
>
>>
>>Virtually all of my lighting is flourescent, for the power saving (about
>>10% of resistive lighting), result is that the house lighting doesn't
>>use a great deal of power. The communal areas (halls, stairways,
>>bathrooms, utilities, outside) are all switched using infra-red
>>detectors, light sensors and timers, again, to keep the usage down,
>>otherwise Mrs Mark, the kids and the au-pair never switch them off!
>
> LED house lighting is on the horizon. We have Xmas lites that require
> very little wattage. No waste in heat. I don't like the fluorescents.
> I think my brain subliminally picks up the 60HZ flicker. I can imagine
> how worse it would be with 50HZ.
Modern ones don't flicker. Or at least, they do it at such high
frequencies that you'd not know.
Maplin are already selling led lights as plug-in replacements for the
power-hungry halogen ones which many people favour. I've not seen them
in large numbers yet, but I like the idea. As you say, xmas lights are
already led-based.
>
>>After that, most of the rest are based around switched-mode power
>>supplies, so they don't really care what they get - 100V to 250V is
>>fine, but they absolutely must have AC. After that, there're washing
>>machine, the dishwashers, drier and other white goods which would
>>require AC to drive the motors.
>
> I'm not sure the world can continue to provide the raw materials and
> resources to have all these goodies that we in the developed nations
> have come to accept as our right, available to all. It's going to make
> for some interesting times ahead.
I think our economies will collapse without such machinery, as it would
in effect be like turning back the clock by 100 years. Modern devices
are highly efficient compared with older ones, though, both in terms of
water and power usage - all appliances have been 'eco' rated in the UK
for many years - I always try to get the most efficient.
The first problem we face will be power shortage, though...
>
>>It would be very difficult for me to attempt a switch to DC
>>distribution. I did consider a 12V system for powering some of the very
>>many low-voltage items, but each time I looked at it, the amount of
>>copper required made it less than worthwhile.
>
> I know someone who lives on an island who uses ten 12 volt batteries
> (powered by solar panels) to reduce losses. (Breakers don't work so
> good though hehehehe)
My basic plan was for 20 car batteries to get me 240VDC, and then to
invert. I'd like to know more about the inverter used on our trains for
the last several years, as it's highly efficient, converting 1kVDC to
something high AC for the traction motors - I think GEC invented it.
>
>>>>That said, our biggest problem this year is drought - we've had almost
>>>>no rain for months, and most of our reservoirs are almost empty already.
>>>
>>> Global warming? I'm running your BBC global climate change experiment
>>> on my computer. I started it before I decided to switch to Linux so I
>>> have to reboot WinXP at night to keep it running :-(
>>
>>Hehe! Yes, global warming has been making a huge impact here.
>
> You guys (51) are further north than me (49 deg)
> Wait till the gulf current is shunted by the melting polar caps. You
> will then get to experience some of the winter cold we experience in
> Canada.... (10 months of winter and two of bad sledding ;-)
Yeah, I know... although we're still mostly martime, so we won't get
the continental climate though (of really wide variation). I was in
Canada at xmas - went sledging & skiing :-)
>
>>> When I have some time to spare, I will see if Wine will work with it.
--
| Mark Kent -- mark at ellandroad dot demon dot co dot uk |
Dr. Livingston?
Dr. Livingston I. Presume?
Mark Kent
ukuntu <ro...@local.host> espoused:
Not a bad document, but a bit dated. The cost savings are much greater
now, as most bulbs (2D, bayonet & ES) are < £3 each, not the £6 to £7
quoted. Also, they're much more efficient than is listed, I think.
I've been using compact flourescents since the Thorn ones (2D) first
came out in the late 1970s, and haven't really looked back...
Also, most of my house is painted white inside & out, to keep light
levels high, and I'm looking into adding additional roof lights (windows)
and small portholes in some rooms to increase the amount of natural
light available.
With a perfectly good sun in the sky, it seems a bit daft to cover it up
with walls and then put a light inside the walls...
--
| Mark Kent -- mark at ellandroad dot demon dot co dot uk |
Lobo
wrote:
LED's are the future. We have them in all our traffic lights now. (New
vehicles also)
http://www.livescience.com/technology/051021_nano_light.html
"LEDs produce twice as much light as a regular 60 watt bulb and burn
for over 50,000 hours. The Department of Energy estimates LED lighting
could reduce U.S. energy consumption for lighting by 29 percent by
2025. LEDs don't emit much heat, so they're also more energy
efficient. And they're much harder to break.
Other scientists have said they expect LEDs to eventually replace
standard incandescent bulbs as well as fluorescent and sodium vapor
lights."
Lobo
wrote:
>begin oe_protect.scr
>Lobo <n...@here.com> espoused:
>> On Sat, 11 Mar 2006 17:52:04 +0000, Mark Kent <mark...@demon.co.uk>
>> wrote:
>>
>>
>>>
>>>Virtually all of my lighting is flourescent, for the power saving (about
>>>10% of resistive lighting), result is that the house lighting doesn't
>>>use a great deal of power. The communal areas (halls, stairways,
>>>bathrooms, utilities, outside) are all switched using infra-red
>>>detectors, light sensors and timers, again, to keep the usage down,
>>>otherwise Mrs Mark, the kids and the au-pair never switch them off!
>>
>> LED house lighting is on the horizon. We have Xmas lites that require
>> very little wattage. No waste in heat. I don't like the fluorescents.
>> I think my brain subliminally picks up the 60HZ flicker. I can imagine
>> how worse it would be with 50HZ.
>
>Modern ones don't flicker. Or at least, they do it at such high
>frequencies that you'd not know.
I'll have to look into that. But, I still don't like the wavelength of
most fluorescents.
>Maplin are already selling led lights as plug-in replacements for the
>power-hungry halogen ones which many people favour. I've not seen them
>in large numbers yet, but I like the idea. As you say, xmas lights are
>already led-based.
>
>>
>>>After that, most of the rest are based around switched-mode power
>>>supplies, so they don't really care what they get - 100V to 250V is
>>>fine, but they absolutely must have AC. After that, there're washing
>>>machine, the dishwashers, drier and other white goods which would
>>>require AC to drive the motors.
>>
>> I'm not sure the world can continue to provide the raw materials and
>> resources to have all these goodies that we in the developed nations
>> have come to accept as our right, available to all. It's going to make
>> for some interesting times ahead.
>
>I think our economies will collapse without such machinery, as it would
>in effect be like turning back the clock by 100 years. Modern devices
>are highly efficient compared with older ones, though, both in terms of
>water and power usage - all appliances have been 'eco' rated in the UK
>for many years - I always try to get the most efficient.
>
>The first problem we face will be power shortage, though...
Yep. Good thing we Canucks have got the second largest oil reserves in
the world as well as lots of hydro. Unfortunately, we have the world's
greatest per capita oil glutton directly to the south who feel is
their God Given Right to drive their kids to school in two ton SUV's.
We are the US's largest supplier of oil. If things go poorly in the
middle east for them and they decide to invade us, I hope you guys
will come to our aide. Of course you will have to dump Tony first. ;-)
>>>It would be very difficult for me to attempt a switch to DC
>>>distribution. I did consider a 12V system for powering some of the very
>>>many low-voltage items, but each time I looked at it, the amount of
>>>copper required made it less than worthwhile.
>>
>> I know someone who lives on an island who uses ten 12 volt batteries
>> (powered by solar panels) to reduce losses. (Breakers don't work so
>> good though hehehehe)
>
>My basic plan was for 20 car batteries to get me 240VDC, and then to
>invert. I'd like to know more about the inverter used on our trains for
>the last several years, as it's highly efficient, converting 1kVDC to
>something high AC for the traction motors - I think GEC invented it.
Watch out for shocks!
>>>>>That said, our biggest problem this year is drought - we've had almost
>>>>>no rain for months, and most of our reservoirs are almost empty already.
>>>>
>>>> Global warming? I'm running your BBC global climate change experiment
>>>> on my computer. I started it before I decided to switch to Linux so I
>>>> have to reboot WinXP at night to keep it running :-(
>>>
>>>Hehe! Yes, global warming has been making a huge impact here.
>>
>> You guys (51) are further north than me (49 deg)
>> Wait till the gulf current is shunted by the melting polar caps. You
>> will then get to experience some of the winter cold we experience in
>> Canada.... (10 months of winter and two of bad sledding ;-)
>
>Yeah, I know... although we're still mostly martime, so we won't get
>the continental climate though (of really wide variation). I was in
>Canada at xmas - went sledging & skiing :-)
A cold maritime climate is worse. Large, heavy snowfalls with icing
problems.
If the OCPC is successful, the spin-off in energy efficient and
alternate power source computers will be extremely beneficial. The
world doesn't need another 100,000,000 computers burning 1/2 KW each
at this time.
Grug
dark.f...@gmail.com wrote:
> You, my friend, are a complete dumbass. And just for posting this, I
> belive you deserved to lose your so-called "Multi Million Dollar"
> estate. there are a few things that sort of corrupt you story.
>
> 1. If you are soooo rich, chances are you'd be using a Mac. They're
> prettier. And would match your lifestyle better.
>
> 2. I dont know what OS even needs more than 3 GB of space. Ive been
> using Fedora Core for 2 Years now, with no problems.
>
> 3. Linux is VERY user friendly, and most mistakes are fault of the End
> User.
>
> 4. Apperantly you didnt spend much time in school, for to learn how to
> spell and use proper grammar, or even Capitalization for that matter.
>
> 5. About 7 of the ten "Helpful Posts" youve made, have been in tha last
> 2 hours.
>
> Maybe you should stop being such a loser, and stop spamming the groups
> with your Wintard jabber. And if you were soooo computer savvy, you
> would know (a) What your system need to run the given OS (b) How big
> the OS is (c) Can my CPU handle it...or (d) All of the Above.
>
> Benji
The Ghost In The Machine
<mark...@demon.co.uk>
wrote
on Tue, 21 Mar 2006 16:11:29 +0000
<h6l5f3-...@ellandroad.demon.co.uk>:
> begin oe_protect.scr
> Lobo <n...@here.com> espoused:
>> On Sat, 11 Mar 2006 17:52:04 +0000, Mark Kent <mark...@demon.co.uk>
>> wrote:
>>
>>
>>>
>>>Virtually all of my lighting is flourescent, for the power saving (about
>>>10% of resistive lighting), result is that the house lighting doesn't
>>>use a great deal of power. The communal areas (halls, stairways,
>>>bathrooms, utilities, outside) are all switched using infra-red
>>>detectors, light sensors and timers, again, to keep the usage down,
>>>otherwise Mrs Mark, the kids and the au-pair never switch them off!
>>
>> LED house lighting is on the horizon. We have Xmas lites that require
>> very little wattage. No waste in heat. I don't like the fluorescents.
>> I think my brain subliminally picks up the 60HZ flicker. I can imagine
>> how worse it would be with 50HZ.
>
> Modern ones don't flicker. Or at least, they do it at such high
> frequencies that you'd not know.
I suspect there are multiple issues here. For starters,
a leaky tube probably is the cause of most flickering,
although there's the possibility of a ballast resistor
or switch contacts going. Modern tubes do help,
however, in using less mercury and in probably using a
longer-persistence phosphor coating the tube's insides.
(Around here I occasionally see a tube glowing pinkish-red.
Presumably that's because oxygen or nitrogen is being
ionized, instead of mercury.)
http://home.howstuffworks.com/fluorescent-lamp.htm
covers the basics.
>
> Maplin are already selling led lights as plug-in replacements for the
> power-hungry halogen ones which many people favour. I've not seen them
> in large numbers yet, but I like the idea. As you say, xmas lights are
> already led-based.
Around here we have a number of traffic signals that have been
converted to LEDs; we're seeing LED flashlights as well. I
don't think LEDs are quite as efficient as fluorescents yet
(but both are more efficient in lumens/watt than a standard
incandescent).
http://www.homeownernet.com/articles/saveelec.html
indicates 67-83 lumens/watt for a standard fluorescent,
compared to 17-23 lumens/watt for an incandescent.
http://www.otherpower.com/otherpower_lighting.html
has roughly comparable numbers, and mentions that there's
apparently a problem with LED lighting in that it's
inherently directional. This makes LEDs ideal for such
things as traffic signals (and, if they ever get around to
it, traffic streetlights as well) and they could be used
for reflective backlighting (shine white light onto ceiling
and have the reflected light diffuse into the room) but it
won't have the near-omnidirectionality of an incandescent
or straight fluorescent tube.
I suppose at some point one might work around that problem
with an obvious fix. An LED, after all, is a P-N junction;
presumably one can suspend that junction in a form
similar to incandescent tubes suspending their filaments,
as opposed to lensing it as most LEDs currently do.
Whether that's already been tried and how well it works,
I don't know. The above webpage suggests it won't be much
better than a standard incandescent, which is interesting
-- but for such things as flashlights and signage which
requires directional output, they're far simpler to set up.
And then there's quantum dots, which presumably are still in the
research stage.
>
>>
>>>After that, most of the rest are based around switched-mode power
>>>supplies, so they don't really care what they get - 100V to 250V is
>>>fine, but they absolutely must have AC. After that, there're washing
>>>machine, the dishwashers, drier and other white goods which would
>>>require AC to drive the motors.
>>
>> I'm not sure the world can continue to provide the raw materials and
>> resources to have all these goodies that we in the developed nations
>> have come to accept as our right, available to all. It's going to make
>> for some interesting times ahead.
>
> I think our economies will collapse without such machinery, as it would
> in effect be like turning back the clock by 100 years. Modern devices
> are highly efficient compared with older ones, though, both in terms of
> water and power usage - all appliances have been 'eco' rated in the UK
> for many years - I always try to get the most efficient.
>
> The first problem we face will be power shortage, though...
Maybe not; we've plenty of coal. The first problem may be
a transportation shortage, which depends on oil.
>
>
>>
>>>It would be very difficult for me to attempt a switch to DC
>>>distribution. I did consider a 12V system for powering some of the very
>>>many low-voltage items, but each time I looked at it, the amount of
>>>copper required made it less than worthwhile.
>>
>> I know someone who lives on an island who uses ten 12 volt batteries
>> (powered by solar panels) to reduce losses. (Breakers don't work so
>> good though hehehehe)
>
> My basic plan was for 20 car batteries to get me 240VDC, and then to
> invert. I'd like to know more about the inverter used on our trains for
> the last several years, as it's highly efficient, converting 1kVDC to
> something high AC for the traction motors - I think GEC invented it.
There are already inverters/transformers that work off a
single car or marine battery, generating 120VAC from 12VDC.
(There's a catch of course; the current going into the
inverter is fairly hefty. P=VI and all that.)
I would presume that inverters exist for 240VDC as well,
though would have to look.
>
>>
>>>>>That said, our biggest problem this year is drought - we've had almost
>>>>>no rain for months, and most of our reservoirs are almost empty already.
>>>>
>>>> Global warming? I'm running your BBC global climate change experiment
>>>> on my computer. I started it before I decided to switch to Linux so I
>>>> have to reboot WinXP at night to keep it running :-(
>>>
>>>Hehe! Yes, global warming has been making a huge impact here.
>>
>> You guys (51) are further north than me (49 deg)
>> Wait till the gulf current is shunted by the melting polar caps. You
>> will then get to experience some of the winter cold we experience in
>> Canada.... (10 months of winter and two of bad sledding ;-)
>
> Yeah, I know... although we're still mostly martime, so we won't get
> the continental climate though (of really wide variation). I was in
> Canada at xmas - went sledging & skiing :-)
There's an issue with Canadian cold; Canada, after all,
is a largish land mass, which among other things does
not retain heat as well as the ocean. Any cold air going
to Europe will presumably be ocean-based from the west,
and therefore not nearly as cold as those cold fronts that
make the midwestern US and on occasion the northeastern US
shiver so. :-)
Then again, I could be wrong...but it's clear that "global
warming" is far from even because of such issues as the
Gulf Stream. There's also the issue of the additional
energy fueling a gigantic heat engine (the down side,
literally, being precipitation, with cyclones, typhoons,
hurricanes, and other such stormy results).
>
>>
>>>> When I have some time to spare, I will see if Wine will work with it.
>
--
Grug
dark.f...@gmail.com wrote:
> You, my friend, are a complete dumbass. And just for posting this, I
> belive you deserved to lose your so-called "Multi Million Dollar"
> estate. there are a few things that sort of corrupt you story.
>
> 1. If you are soooo rich, chances are you'd be using a Mac. They're
> prettier. And would match your lifestyle better.
>
> 2. I dont know what OS even needs more than 3 GB of space. Ive been
> using Fedora Core for 2 Years now, with no problems.
There are some linux distros that come with sooo much stuff (most of it
crap), that it can fill more than 3GB of space.
But most installs are less than this, of course.
>
> 3. Linux is VERY user friendly, and most mistakes are fault of the End
> User.
LOL... is this a joke? Linux user friendly? God I can't stop laughing
right now... I need to rest a few...
> 4. Apperantly you didnt spend much time in school, for to learn how to
> spell and use proper grammar, or even Capitalization for that matter.
Ok, heh. I got it. "Apparently" this is a joke indeed.
Mark Kent
I agree - I'd go so far as saying it's pretty much a no brainer, to be
honest. I know that most new cars have led lights for all but the
spotlights/headlights, and that traffic lights are increasingly led
based. The key was getting a white/blue led, which had been sought for
years but remained out of reach. Still, it's about 20 years since I
started using flourescent, so it's about time we had some new tech along
to make things better :-)
Mark Kent
Lobo <n...@here.com> espoused:
> On Tue, 21 Mar 2006 16:11:29 +0000, Mark Kent <mark...@demon.co.uk>
> wrote:
>
>>begin oe_protect.scr
>>Lobo <n...@here.com> espoused:
>>> On Sat, 11 Mar 2006 17:52:04 +0000, Mark Kent <mark...@demon.co.uk>
>>> wrote:
>>>
>>>
>>>>
>>>>Virtually all of my lighting is flourescent, for the power saving (about
>>>>10% of resistive lighting), result is that the house lighting doesn't
>>>>use a great deal of power. The communal areas (halls, stairways,
>>>>bathrooms, utilities, outside) are all switched using infra-red
>>>>detectors, light sensors and timers, again, to keep the usage down,
>>>>otherwise Mrs Mark, the kids and the au-pair never switch them off!
>>>
>>> LED house lighting is on the horizon. We have Xmas lites that require
>>> very little wattage. No waste in heat. I don't like the fluorescents.
>>> I think my brain subliminally picks up the 60HZ flicker. I can imagine
>>> how worse it would be with 50HZ.
>>
>>Modern ones don't flicker. Or at least, they do it at such high
>>frequencies that you'd not know.
>
> I'll have to look into that. But, I still don't like the wavelength of
> most fluorescents.
We get them in a range of colour temperatures, from very warm to
daylight. The power consumption is the key, though - they're about 10%
of incandescent - it's daft not to use them.
>
>>Maplin are already selling led lights as plug-in replacements for the
>>power-hungry halogen ones which many people favour. I've not seen them
>>in large numbers yet, but I like the idea. As you say, xmas lights are
>>already led-based.
>>
>>>
>>>>After that, most of the rest are based around switched-mode power
>>>>supplies, so they don't really care what they get - 100V to 250V is
>>>>fine, but they absolutely must have AC. After that, there're washing
>>>>machine, the dishwashers, drier and other white goods which would
>>>>require AC to drive the motors.
>>>
>>> I'm not sure the world can continue to provide the raw materials and
>>> resources to have all these goodies that we in the developed nations
>>> have come to accept as our right, available to all. It's going to make
>>> for some interesting times ahead.
>>
>>I think our economies will collapse without such machinery, as it would
>>in effect be like turning back the clock by 100 years. Modern devices
>>are highly efficient compared with older ones, though, both in terms of
>>water and power usage - all appliances have been 'eco' rated in the UK
>>for many years - I always try to get the most efficient.
>>
>>The first problem we face will be power shortage, though...
>
> Yep. Good thing we Canucks have got the second largest oil reserves in
> the world as well as lots of hydro. Unfortunately, we have the world's
> greatest per capita oil glutton directly to the south who feel is
> their God Given Right to drive their kids to school in two ton SUV's.
It would be interesting to see the US pay a more reasonable price for
fuel, but I can't see their right-wing or their ultra-right-wing parties
accepting that...
>
> We are the US's largest supplier of oil. If things go poorly in the
> middle east for them and they decide to invade us, I hope you guys
> will come to our aide. Of course you will have to dump Tony first. ;-)
Ah, don't worry - we'd be there ;-) Tony'll be gone soon. I don't
think even the yanks would be foolish enough to try that, but at the
back of my mind, I can't quite dismiss it. They've tried before... ;-)
>
>>>>It would be very difficult for me to attempt a switch to DC
>>>>distribution. I did consider a 12V system for powering some of the very
>>>>many low-voltage items, but each time I looked at it, the amount of
>>>>copper required made it less than worthwhile.
>>>
>>> I know someone who lives on an island who uses ten 12 volt batteries
>>> (powered by solar panels) to reduce losses. (Breakers don't work so
>>> good though hehehehe)
>>
>>My basic plan was for 20 car batteries to get me 240VDC, and then to
>>invert. I'd like to know more about the inverter used on our trains for
>>the last several years, as it's highly efficient, converting 1kVDC to
>>something high AC for the traction motors - I think GEC invented it.
>
> Watch out for shocks!
Yeah, especially if it's DC. On the AC side, and ELCB will solve that
problem.
>
>>>>>>That said, our biggest problem this year is drought - we've had almost
>>>>>>no rain for months, and most of our reservoirs are almost empty already.
>>>>>
>>>>> Global warming? I'm running your BBC global climate change experiment
>>>>> on my computer. I started it before I decided to switch to Linux so I
>>>>> have to reboot WinXP at night to keep it running :-(
>>>>
>>>>Hehe! Yes, global warming has been making a huge impact here.
>>>
>>> You guys (51) are further north than me (49 deg)
>>> Wait till the gulf current is shunted by the melting polar caps. You
>>> will then get to experience some of the winter cold we experience in
>>> Canada.... (10 months of winter and two of bad sledding ;-)
>>
>>Yeah, I know... although we're still mostly martime, so we won't get
>>the continental climate though (of really wide variation). I was in
>>Canada at xmas - went sledging & skiing :-)
>
> A cold maritime climate is worse. Large, heavy snowfalls with icing
> problems.
>
> If the OCPC is successful, the spin-off in energy efficient and
> alternate power source computers will be extremely beneficial. The
> world doesn't need another 100,000,000 computers burning 1/2 KW each
> at this time.
Quite... I'm about to replace one of my (recently died) PCs, and have
been in two minds about either building something high performance or
building something energy efficient. Rock and a hard place :-)
Mark Kent
The Ghost In The Machine <ew...@sirius.tg00suus7038.net> espoused:
If you move your coal by rail to your power station, then you're okay,
because the power station can make electricity to power the train. The
next issue is to look at powering cars from bio-diesel... most diesels
will run from cooking oil from rape, sunflower and so on, so we could
easily grow our fuel for them.
>
>>
>>
>>>
>>>>It would be very difficult for me to attempt a switch to DC
>>>>distribution. I did consider a 12V system for powering some of the very
>>>>many low-voltage items, but each time I looked at it, the amount of
>>>>copper required made it less than worthwhile.
>>>
>>> I know someone who lives on an island who uses ten 12 volt batteries
>>> (powered by solar panels) to reduce losses. (Breakers don't work so
>>> good though hehehehe)
>>
>> My basic plan was for 20 car batteries to get me 240VDC, and then to
>> invert. I'd like to know more about the inverter used on our trains for
>> the last several years, as it's highly efficient, converting 1kVDC to
>> something high AC for the traction motors - I think GEC invented it.
>
> There are already inverters/transformers that work off a
> single car or marine battery, generating 120VAC from 12VDC.
> (There's a catch of course; the current going into the
> inverter is fairly hefty. P=VI and all that.)
>
> I would presume that inverters exist for 240VDC as well,
> though would have to look.
Oh yeah - I've got a 300W 13.8V to 240Vac 50Hz one in the car - it only
cost £20. You can get them up to 1kW, although as you say, I gets
rather high. I could do with something like a 20kVA invertor which
should power my house for most purposes, and then find out what battery
is required. Then I just need windmills & solar cells to charge the
battery.
>
>>
>>>
>>>>>>That said, our biggest problem this year is drought - we've had almost
>>>>>>no rain for months, and most of our reservoirs are almost empty already.
>>>>>
>>>>> Global warming? I'm running your BBC global climate change experiment
>>>>> on my computer. I started it before I decided to switch to Linux so I
>>>>> have to reboot WinXP at night to keep it running :-(
>>>>
>>>>Hehe! Yes, global warming has been making a huge impact here.
>>>
>>> You guys (51) are further north than me (49 deg)
>>> Wait till the gulf current is shunted by the melting polar caps. You
>>> will then get to experience some of the winter cold we experience in
>>> Canada.... (10 months of winter and two of bad sledding ;-)
>>
>> Yeah, I know... although we're still mostly martime, so we won't get
>> the continental climate though (of really wide variation). I was in
>> Canada at xmas - went sledging & skiing :-)
>
> There's an issue with Canadian cold; Canada, after all,
> is a largish land mass, which among other things does
> not retain heat as well as the ocean. Any cold air going
> to Europe will presumably be ocean-based from the west,
> and therefore not nearly as cold as those cold fronts that
> make the midwestern US and on occasion the northeastern US
> shiver so. :-)
Yeah... but the UK has a maritime climate - nowhere is more than 70
miles from the sea, so we don't get the continental cold that you get in
Germany, Poland, Czech and so on.
>
> Then again, I could be wrong...but it's clear that "global
> warming" is far from even because of such issues as the
> Gulf Stream. There's also the issue of the additional
> energy fueling a gigantic heat engine (the down side,
> literally, being precipitation, with cyclones, typhoons,
> hurricanes, and other such stormy results).
It'll be a pig for us if the gulf stream stops - apart from anything
else, the palm trees in Cornwall will die :-)
>
>>
>>>
>>>>> When I have some time to spare, I will see if Wine will work with it.
>>
>
>
--
Lobo
> begin oe_protect.scr
> Lobo <n...@here.com> espoused:
>> On Tue, 21 Mar 2006 16:11:29 +0000, Mark Kent <mark...@demon.co.uk>
>> wrote:
<snip>
>>>I think our economies will collapse without such machinery, as it would
>>>in effect be like turning back the clock by 100 years. Modern devices
>>>are highly efficient compared with older ones, though, both in terms of
>>>water and power usage - all appliances have been 'eco' rated in the UK
>>>for many years - I always try to get the most efficient.
>>>
>>>The first problem we face will be power shortage, though...
>>
>> Yep. Good thing we Canucks have got the second largest oil reserves in
>> the world as well as lots of hydro. Unfortunately, we have the world's
>> greatest per capita oil glutton directly to the south who feel is their
>> God Given Right to drive their kids to school in two ton SUV's.
>
> It would be interesting to see the US pay a more reasonable price for
> fuel, but I can't see their right-wing or their ultra-right-wing parties
> accepting that...
Maybe when their balance of payments and debt gets to the breaking point,
they will start paying the real price of gas; like the rest of the world
does.
"right-wing or their ultra-right-wing parties" hehehehe
They honestly think their Democrats are left leaning.
>> We are the US's largest supplier of oil. If things go poorly in the
>> middle east for them and they decide to invade us, I hope you guys will
>> come to our aide. Of course you will have to dump Tony first. ;-)
>
> Ah, don't worry - we'd be there ;-) Tony'll be gone soon.
I really thought he'd have been sent packing sooner. You fellows put up
pretty large anti-war demonstrations over there.
> I don't
> think even the yanks would be foolish enough to try that, but at the
> back of my mind, I can't quite dismiss it. They've tried before... ;-)
Yes, back in 1812. But the two of us whupped their asses pretty good in
Detroit and other places on their northern front. They haven't tried
messing with us Canucks since. ;-)
The Ghost In The Machine
<aq86f3-...@ellandroad.demon.co.uk>:
That covers the electricity, I suppose. I was thinking personal
transport.
> The next issue is to look at powering cars from bio-diesel...
> most diesels will run from cooking oil from rape, sunflower
> and so on, so we could easily grow our fuel for them.
Not as easy as I for one would like to think. The problem,
of course, is in the management of modern farm enterprises,
which AIUI is characterized for every cup of vegetables,
one needs 10 cups of diesel oil.
I wish I knew how to verify this.
>
>>
>>>
>>>
>>>>
>>>>>It would be very difficult for me to attempt a switch to DC
>>>>>distribution. I did consider a 12V system for powering some of the very
>>>>>many low-voltage items, but each time I looked at it, the amount of
>>>>>copper required made it less than worthwhile.
>>>>
>>>> I know someone who lives on an island who uses ten 12 volt batteries
>>>> (powered by solar panels) to reduce losses. (Breakers don't work so
>>>> good though hehehehe)
>>>
>>> My basic plan was for 20 car batteries to get me 240VDC, and then to
>>> invert. I'd like to know more about the inverter used on our trains for
>>> the last several years, as it's highly efficient, converting 1kVDC to
>>> something high AC for the traction motors - I think GEC invented it.
>>
>> There are already inverters/transformers that work off a
>> single car or marine battery, generating 120VAC from 12VDC.
>> (There's a catch of course; the current going into the
>> inverter is fairly hefty. P=VI and all that.)
>>
>> I would presume that inverters exist for 240VDC as well,
>> though would have to look.
>
> Oh yeah - I've got a 300W 13.8V to 240Vac 50Hz one in the car - it only
> cost £20. You can get them up to 1kW, although as you say, I gets
> rather high. I could do with something like a 20kVA invertor which
> should power my house for most purposes, and then find out what battery
> is required. Then I just need windmills & solar cells to charge the
> battery.
Shouldn't be a problem. :-)
>
>>
>>>
>>>>
>>>>>>>That said, our biggest problem this year is drought - we've had almost
>>>>>>>no rain for months, and most of our reservoirs are almost empty already.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Global warming? I'm running your BBC global climate change experiment
>>>>>> on my computer. I started it before I decided to switch to Linux so I
>>>>>> have to reboot WinXP at night to keep it running :-(
>>>>>
>>>>>Hehe! Yes, global warming has been making a huge impact here.
>>>>
>>>> You guys (51) are further north than me (49 deg)
>>>> Wait till the gulf current is shunted by the melting polar caps. You
>>>> will then get to experience some of the winter cold we experience in
>>>> Canada.... (10 months of winter and two of bad sledding ;-)
>>>
>>> Yeah, I know... although we're still mostly martime, so we won't get
>>> the continental climate though (of really wide variation). I was in
>>> Canada at xmas - went sledging & skiing :-)
>>
>> There's an issue with Canadian cold; Canada, after all,
>> is a largish land mass, which among other things does
>> not retain heat as well as the ocean. Any cold air going
>> to Europe will presumably be ocean-based from the west,
>> and therefore not nearly as cold as those cold fronts that
>> make the midwestern US and on occasion the northeastern US
>> shiver so. :-)
>
> Yeah... but the UK has a maritime climate - nowhere is more than 70
> miles from the sea, so we don't get the continental cold that you get in
> Germany, Poland, Czech and so on.
Me? I'm on the US Left Coast. SF Bay Area. We don't get cold.
(Well, OK, so we do get an occasional hailstorm and maybe
it dips below 0C during the night on a very rare occasion.)
>
>>
>> Then again, I could be wrong...but it's clear that "global
>> warming" is far from even because of such issues as the
>> Gulf Stream. There's also the issue of the additional
>> energy fueling a gigantic heat engine (the down side,
>> literally, being precipitation, with cyclones, typhoons,
>> hurricanes, and other such stormy results).
>
> It'll be a pig for us if the gulf stream stops - apart from anything
> else, the palm trees in Cornwall will die :-)
Too bad for Cornwall, I s'pose. :-) Can't say if I've been there or not
(I did visit London during my youth, a quarter-century ago. Wow.
What a way to put it... :-) )
>
>>
>>>
>>>>
>>>>>> When I have some time to spare, I will see if Wine will work with it.
>>>
>>
>>
>
>
--
Mark Kent
Lobo <n...@here.com> espoused:
> On Tue, 21 Mar 2006 21:38:29 +0000, Mark Kent wrote:
>
>> begin oe_protect.scr
>> Lobo <n...@here.com> espoused:
>>> On Tue, 21 Mar 2006 16:11:29 +0000, Mark Kent <mark...@demon.co.uk>
>>> wrote:
>
><snip>
>
>>>>I think our economies will collapse without such machinery, as it would
>>>>in effect be like turning back the clock by 100 years. Modern devices
>>>>are highly efficient compared with older ones, though, both in terms of
>>>>water and power usage - all appliances have been 'eco' rated in the UK
>>>>for many years - I always try to get the most efficient.
>>>>
>>>>The first problem we face will be power shortage, though...
>>>
>>> Yep. Good thing we Canucks have got the second largest oil reserves in
>>> the world as well as lots of hydro. Unfortunately, we have the world's
>>> greatest per capita oil glutton directly to the south who feel is their
>>> God Given Right to drive their kids to school in two ton SUV's.
>>
>> It would be interesting to see the US pay a more reasonable price for
>> fuel, but I can't see their right-wing or their ultra-right-wing parties
>> accepting that...
>
> Maybe when their balance of payments and debt gets to the breaking point,
> they will start paying the real price of gas; like the rest of the world
> does.
There's an enormous amount of US cash floating around the world,
financially centred on London, as it's now effectively stateless. The
US is continuing to grow its balance of payments deficit, which is not
sustainable long-term. US economists have tried to blame the EU
banks for some of their woes, because they're "charging too much
interest", which is probably good for whipping up some anti-foreigner
feeling at home, but does nothing to address the real problem - they're
borrowing far too much money. But, I can't see any US government being
likely to reduce spending and increase taxation, which is what they need
to do to avoid meltdown.
>
> "right-wing or their ultra-right-wing parties" hehehehe
> They honestly think their Democrats are left leaning.
Trouble is that our Labour party is going the way of their Democrats, as
Tony Benn said, it's becoming like the US here where there is no
political choice to be made. Maybe the Liberal Democrats will emerge as
a viable proposition, but I'm not sure - their policies usually appeal
to the educated/intellectual types, as they're aimed at resolving
problems like global warming, pollution, education, health and so on in
sustainable ways, rather than producing impressive sound-bites.
>
>>> We are the US's largest supplier of oil. If things go poorly in the
>>> middle east for them and they decide to invade us, I hope you guys will
>>> come to our aide. Of course you will have to dump Tony first. ;-)
>>
>> Ah, don't worry - we'd be there ;-) Tony'll be gone soon.
>
> I really thought he'd have been sent packing sooner. You fellows put up
> pretty large anti-war demonstrations over there.
The anti-war feeling is still very large here, and growing all the time.
Tony B actually tried the 'God' defence recently, which caused a huge
furore - I found it utterly revolting. He made a speech yesterday
justifying international 'intervention' (ie., invading people you decide
you don't like), but at least one newspaper, the Guardian, felt that
he'd not addressed the fundamental question, which is that Iraq is now
another breeding ground for terrorists - ie., the whole process not only
doesn't work, but has the opposite effect of its intention.
>
>> I don't
>> think even the yanks would be foolish enough to try that, but at the
>> back of my mind, I can't quite dismiss it. They've tried before... ;-)
>
> Yes, back in 1812. But the two of us whupped their asses pretty good in
> Detroit and other places on their northern front. They haven't tried
> messing with us Canucks since. ;-)
Someone wrote an Overture about that, istr :-))
--
| Mark Kent -- mark at ellandroad dot demon dot co dot uk |
I'm not afraid of death -- I just don't want to be there when it happens.
-- Woody Allen
Mark Kent
The Ghost In The Machine <ew...@sirius.tg00suus7038.net> espoused:
> In comp.os.linux.advocacy, Mark Kent
><mark...@demon.co.uk>
> wrote
> on Tue, 21 Mar 2006 21:46:18 +0000
><aq86f3-...@ellandroad.demon.co.uk>:
>> begin oe_protect.scr
>> The Ghost In The Machine <ew...@sirius.tg00suus7038.net> espoused:
>>> In comp.os.linux.advocacy, Mark Kent
>>><mark...@demon.co.uk>
>>> wrote
>>> on Tue, 21 Mar 2006 16:11:29 +0000
>>><h6l5f3-...@ellandroad.demon.co.uk>:
>>>> begin oe_protect.scr
>>>> Lobo <n...@here.com> espoused:
>>>>> On Sat, 11 Mar 2006 17:52:04 +0000, Mark Kent <mark...@demon.co.uk>
>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>
Critical question... a review would need to look at farming practice as
well as personal vehicle design. I suspect hybrids will be the way for
some time, with combined oil burning engines and electric motors, but
battery size/weight is always an issue.
On a slightly amusing note, some people here have taken to driving their
(older) diesels around on filtered, used cooking oil! They get drums of
it from the fish 'n' chip shop, filter it, and put it in their car.
Naturally they pay the excise duty on the fuel, but it's not much, and
then they can drive around for almost free, whilst recycling, or at
least re-using, some oil. Apparently it's hard to get rid of the faint
odour of deep-fried cod, however :-)
>
>>
>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>>It would be very difficult for me to attempt a switch to DC
>>>>>>distribution. I did consider a 12V system for powering some of the very
>>>>>>many low-voltage items, but each time I looked at it, the amount of
>>>>>>copper required made it less than worthwhile.
>>>>>
>>>>> I know someone who lives on an island who uses ten 12 volt batteries
>>>>> (powered by solar panels) to reduce losses. (Breakers don't work so
>>>>> good though hehehehe)
>>>>
>>>> My basic plan was for 20 car batteries to get me 240VDC, and then to
>>>> invert. I'd like to know more about the inverter used on our trains for
>>>> the last several years, as it's highly efficient, converting 1kVDC to
>>>> something high AC for the traction motors - I think GEC invented it.
>>>
>>> There are already inverters/transformers that work off a
>>> single car or marine battery, generating 120VAC from 12VDC.
>>> (There's a catch of course; the current going into the
>>> inverter is fairly hefty. P=VI and all that.)
>>>
>>> I would presume that inverters exist for 240VDC as well,
>>> though would have to look.
>>
>> Oh yeah - I've got a 300W 13.8V to 240Vac 50Hz one in the car - it only
>> cost £20. You can get them up to 1kW, although as you say, I gets
>> rather high. I could do with something like a 20kVA invertor which
>> should power my house for most purposes, and then find out what battery
>> is required. Then I just need windmills & solar cells to charge the
>> battery.
>
> Shouldn't be a problem. :-)
Hopefully... It's the 20kVA invertor which is the main challenge. One
friend of mine, ex of Kosova, (trained as a power engineer in Kosovo
before coming here and doing an Elec Eng degree at Imperial) has
described his parent's power installation back home, which uses solar
cells & a windmill & a battery and an invertor, with some kind of
switch-gear to switch between 'local' and 'grid' power. That said,
their load is minimal, couple of light bulbs, television, fridge...
We don't usually get all that hot or all that cold, it's temperate here,
but the things they are a-changin'
>
>>
>>>
>>> Then again, I could be wrong...but it's clear that "global
>>> warming" is far from even because of such issues as the
>>> Gulf Stream. There's also the issue of the additional
>>> energy fueling a gigantic heat engine (the down side,
>>> literally, being precipitation, with cyclones, typhoons,
>>> hurricanes, and other such stormy results).
>>
>> It'll be a pig for us if the gulf stream stops - apart from anything
>> else, the palm trees in Cornwall will die :-)
>
> Too bad for Cornwall, I s'pose. :-) Can't say if I've been there or not
> (I did visit London during my youth, a quarter-century ago. Wow.
> What a way to put it... :-) )
Ahh, scary, getting old... should you go back again, visit tintagel
castle - truly amazing, St Micheal's mount, visit the cheddar gorge on
the way down... stonehenge on the way back.
<snip>
--
| Mark Kent -- mark at ellandroad dot demon dot co dot uk |