Experimenting
bea...@gmail.com
solar.
Experiment to see if I can run my lights on solar.
Experiment to see if I can open a hanger door with solar.
Experiment to see if I can use solar where I live.
Experiment to see if I can run my computer on solar.
Experiment to see if I can (enter reason here) with solar.
The question is, why would you bother when you can just use the
correct formula to size and design a solar power system that will
work. Admittedly you may not like the price, but hey, can’t take the
heat, get out of the kitchen. Solar energy is “FREE”. The equipment to
use this “FREE” energy costs real money.
The truth is that the experimenting was done more than twenty years
ago. The sizing and design of a solar power system is a well
documented and proven formula.
There are a number of reasons for people not following basic design
work.
One reason is the information obtained in these groups comes from
people who, themselves, cannot grasp the fundamentals of sizing and
design. Because they can’t understand the the sizing and design
process they actively try to repress the information. This is because
if you learn the correct method of sizing and design you will
instantly be able to spot their ignorance and ask embarrassing
questions they can’t answer.
Another reason is that some people feel guilty about their energy use
and assuage this guilt by being able to say “Oh yes, I’m experimenting
with solar to see if it will run my house”. Some how this absolves
them of their wasteful energy practices.
There is no reason to experiment with solar power. It will not teach
you anything that is not already common knowledge. Nor will it teach
you anything that you won’t learn by learning the correct method of
sizing and design.
What it always comes down to is someone saying “I want to experiment
with solar to see if it will run (enter load here)”. What they
invariably mean is “Can I power my (enter load here) for less than
$100”?
Twenty minutes with the correct formula will teach you more about
solar power design for free, than you will ever learn with any number
of HF panel kits.
Eeyore
bea...@gmail.com wrote:
> Another reason is that some people feel guilty about their energy use
> and assuage this guilt by being able to say “Oh yes, I’m experimenting
> with solar to see if it will run my house”. Some how this absolves
> them of their wasteful energy practices.
And the best way of dealing with that is to heat (or cool) your home more
selectively and install decent insulation (way more than standard which is
typically fairly 'token' in its function).
Graham
Ken Maltby
"Eeyore" <rabbitsfriend...@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:483E599E...@hotmail.com...
There are plenty of reasons that people develop an interest in
"experimental" solar power generation. A typical engineered
PV System, is not the only answer or even one that interests
everyone.
If you don't have the independent self reliant spirit; you
won't understand. If you can't see why some people grow
their own vegetables, when they can buy them cheaper at the
local grocery, then I can't make you see. I suppose that you
feel the same way about people who build their own windmills,
or develop a water source on their property.
I won't even mention "Experimental" Aircraft.
Luck;
Ken
bea...@gmail.com
On May 29, 5:22 pm, Eeyore <rabbitsfriendsandrelati...@hotmail.com>
wrote:
bea...@gmail.com
> "Eeyore" <rabbitsfriendsandrelati...@hotmail.com> wrote in message
>
> news:483E599E...@hotmail.com...
>
>
>
> > beal...@gmail.com wrote:
>
> >> Another reason is that some people feel guilty about their energy use
> >> and assuage this guilt by being able to say "Oh yes, I'm experimenting
> >> with solar to see if it will run my house". Some how this absolves
> >> them of their wasteful energy practices.
>
> > And the best way of dealing with that is to heat (or cool) your home more
> > selectively and install decent insulation (way more than standard which is
> > typically fairly 'token' in its function).
>
> > Graham
>
> There are plenty of reasons that people develop an interest in
> "experimental" solar power generation. A typical engineered
> PV System, is not the only answer or even one that interests
> everyone.
There is no reason for "experimental solar power generation"
when it only replicates what has already been done. The point is to
generate electricity. Solar will do that. The question is whether you
arrive at the system that provides your energy needs for the least
amount of effort, time and money.
In the nearly twenty-five years that I have been using solar and the
fifteen years I spent designing and installing solar systems no one
has come up with a better way to size and design systems that is new.
Perhaps you will share with us the ground breaking discovery that your
experimenting has produced.
>
> If you don't have the independent self reliant spirit; you
> won't understand. If you can't see why some people grow
> their own vegetables, when they can buy them cheaper at the
> local grocery, then I can't make you see. I suppose that you
> feel the same way about people who build their own windmills,
> or develop a water source on their property.
Well as I have not paid an electric bill or water bill in the last
twenty odd years, grow olives, apples, plums and veggies. Built my
house with my own to hands and do my own mechanical repairs, you can
drop the self-sufficient clap trap and accept that your statement is
incorrect.
There is no reason to experiment with solar, of any size, it has all
been done before. So again you can tell us what great discovery you
have made in the design principles for solar power installations.
Ulysses
<bea...@gmail.com> wrote in message
news:121a4618-c9c2-478d...@b9g2000prh.googlegroups.com...
There is a lot of talk in these groups about “Experimenting” with
solar.
The question is, why would you bother when you can just use the
correct formula to size and design a solar power system that will
work. Admittedly you may not like the price, but hey, can’t take the
heat, get out of the kitchen. Solar energy is “FREE”. The equipment to
use this “FREE” energy costs real money.
I'm not sure what you are talking about as far as "experimenting with solar"
goes--at least I don't recall reading any such thing recently on this NG.
What I do come across is people who pay a lot of money for solar panels and
expect to go on using 30-40 kWh per day, running heavy appliances at night,
and wondering why their batteries are always dead and sulfated. I think
these people need to "experiment" with ways to use less electricity and this
may include ways to do things a little differently. Sometimes what works
for one person may not be suitable for another and may take some
"exprimenting" to get it just right.
The truth is that the experimenting was done more than twenty years
ago. The sizing and design of a solar power system is a well
documented and proven formula.
To me that's not very encouraging. Very little progress in over twenty
years. .
There is no reason to experiment with solar power. It will not teach
you anything that is not already common knowledge. Nor will it teach
you anything that you won’t learn by learning the correct method of
sizing and design.
Well, in general I agree with that statement however I keep coming across
people who seem to defy the generally accepted "sizing" guidelines and get
by with a lot less than the people who sell solar panels and inverters tell
them they need. They did not accomplish this by accepting the established
"common knowledge." What would you say is the minimum sizing for inverters
(total watts output) and electriciy consumption (kWh/day) for an average
family of four with all the usual appliances, not including air conditioning
and a half dozen computers and monstrous TVs and stereos (or electric
welders, but some basic garage-type tools)?
What it always comes down to is someone saying “I want to experiment
with solar to see if it will run (enter load here)”. What they
invariably mean is “Can I power my (enter load here) for less than
$100”?
Do you sell solar installations and nobody is buying enough stuff right now?
Twenty minutes with the correct formula will teach you more about
solar power design for free, than you will ever learn with any number
of HF panel kits.
Are you against experimenting in general or just when it comes to finding
out how much power a solar panel will produce (which I would not call
experimenting). Currently I'm "experimenting" with a wind generator made
from an old worn-out Honda eu2000 generator. Compared to building a
complete wind generator from scratch it is extremely simple and easy. I
don't know for sure how it will compare to some other homebrew types just
yet but it looks promising. There may be some formulas for determining how
much power I can get with a specific set of blades with a specific wind
speed etc but if someone doesn't try it and post the results nobody will
really know for sure. Besides that very few people even seem to know what's
inside the eu2000. Maybe it'll make a usable wind generator with very
little work and maybe it won't. But many of us just can't stand to see a
perfectly good whatever just sitting there when it could be doing something.
Even if that something is not a lot.
I also experiment with other things too. The most motivating thing someone
can say to me is "it can't be done."
z
@b9g2000prh.googlegroups.com:
> There is a lot of talk in these groups about “Experimenting” with
> solar.
>
> Experiment to see if I can run my lights on solar.
>
> Experiment to see if I can open a hanger door with solar.
>
> Experiment to see if I can use solar where I live.
>
> Experiment to see if I can run my computer on solar.
>
> Experiment to see if I can (enter reason here) with solar.
Really? I don't see that many people experimenting with solar on this
group. At least not recently. Some questions about wire size and some
people wondering if they can run X off solar or wind -- but not a lot of
actual experimentation.
Care to point to some posts in alt.energy.homepower like this?
Anthony Matonak
...
> There is no reason to experiment with solar power. It will not teach
> you anything that is not already common knowledge. Nor will it teach
> you anything that you won’t learn by learning the correct method of
> sizing and design.
Experiments are a way to learn and they are a viable tool.
Simple experiments are done all the time in classrooms to
help students learn. None of these classroom experiments
will add to the sum of human knowledge but they do teach
people things they don't already know.
Clearly things that you feel are common knowledge are
unknown to others so I don't see any particular reason
to berate people for wanting to learn.
Anthony
bea...@gmail.com
> <beal...@gmail.com> wrote in message
>
> news:121a4618-c9c2-478d...@b9g2000prh.googlegroups.com...
> There is a lot of talk in these groups about “Experimenting” with
> solar.
>
> The question is, why would you bother when you can just use the
> correct formula to size and design a solar power system that will
> work. Admittedly you may not like the price, but hey, can’t take the
> heat, get out of the kitchen. Solar energy is “FREE”. The equipment to
> use this “FREE” energy costs real money.
>
> I'm not sure what you are talking about as far as "experimenting with solar"
> goes--at least I don't recall reading any such thing recently on this NG.
> What I do come across is people who pay a lot of money for solar panels and
> expect to go on using 30-40 kWh per day, running heavy appliances at night,
> and wondering why their batteries are always dead and sulfated. I think
> these people need to "experiment" with ways to use less electricity and this
> may include ways to do things a little differently. Sometimes what works
> for one person may not be suitable for another and may take some
> "exprimenting" to get it just right.
What is there to experiment with? Light globes? This one uses 100W and
that one uses 50W - A 50% saving. Sort of cut and dried. Comparison
shopping is not a new concept.
>
> The truth is that the experimenting was done more than twenty years
> ago. The sizing and design of a solar power system is a well
> documented and proven formula.
>
> To me that's not very encouraging. Very little progress in over twenty
> years.
Oh no, plenty of progress, none of it from experimenting with solar to
see if someone can run their lights.
>
> There is no reason to experiment with solar power. It will not teach
> you anything that is not already common knowledge. Nor will it teach
> you anything that you won’t learn by learning the correct method of
> sizing and design.
>
> Well, in general I agree with that statement however I keep coming across
> people who seem to defy the generally accepted "sizing" guidelines and get
> by with a lot less than the people who sell solar panels and inverters tell
> them they need.
Assuming honest installers:
Generally a supplier asks what people want to run, this is then
calculated to define what size the system needs to be. This is based
entirely on the customers wants. The customer usually wants everything
except the price.
> They did not accomplish this by accepting the established
> "common knowledge."
Actually this is exactly what they did. The formula used for system
sizing is well documented and works for any size system.
> What would you say is the minimum sizing for inverters
> (total watts output) and electriciy consumption (kWh/day) for an average
> family of four with all the usual appliances, not including air conditioning
> and a half dozen computers and monstrous TVs and stereos (or electric
> welders, but some basic garage-type tools)?
Bit of a contradiction here. First it is an average family of four
then it is a family of four that is not average.
But lets look at the average energy use in Victoria. 15kWh/day
System - 48V
Inverter - 10kW
Days Autonomy - 5
Battery capacity - 2500 Ah
Daily depth of Discharge - 14%
Panels - 32 (Will vary with choice of panel)
>
> What it always comes down to is someone saying “I want to experiment
> with solar to see if it will run (enter load here)”. What they
> invariably mean is “Can I power my (enter load here) for less than
> $100”?
>
> Do you sell solar installations and nobody is buying enough stuff right now?
No, I used to sell systems, arthritis and age caught up with me. The
solar work I do now is helping people fix the problems left behind by
shonky dealers and the ubiquitous "experimenters". Knowing how to
correctly size a system is the consumers best defense against being
ripped off.
>
> Twenty minutes with the correct formula will teach you more about
> solar power design for free, than you will ever learn with any number
> of HF panel kits.
>
> Are you against experimenting in general or just when it comes to finding
> out how much power a solar panel will produce (which I would not call
> experimenting). Currently I'm "experimenting" with a wind generator made
> from an old worn-out Honda eu2000 generator. Compared to building a
> complete wind generator from scratch it is extremely simple and easy. I
> don't know for sure how it will compare to some other homebrew types just
> yet but it looks promising. There may be some formulas for determining how
> much power I can get with a specific set of blades with a specific wind
> speed etc but if someone doesn't try it and post the results nobody will
> really know for sure. Besides that very few people even seem to know what's
> inside the eu2000. Maybe it'll make a usable wind generator with very
> little work and maybe it won't. But many of us just can't stand to see a
> perfectly good whatever just sitting there when it could be doing something.
> Even if that something is not a lot.
Very good. A just and reasonable project. But this does not make
system design any more of a mystery that needs to be "experimented"
with.
>
> I also experiment with other things too. The most motivating thing someone
> can say to me is "it can't be done."
Ain't no setch thing as can't be done.
bea...@gmail.com
> beal...@gmail.com wrote in news:121a4618-c9c2-478d-84e8-61ed7fe56a41
Rex Mundi <sleep...@the.wheel.org> wrote in
news:321u34hhn986m3bua...@4ax.com:
z
@q24g2000prf.googlegroups.com:
Heh so you wrote a post about future group activity, i got it. Care to
pick some stocks? :)
He's not experimenting, just wants to get familiar with the equipment
and light his shed. Its not an experiment. Its quite reasonable to do a
small project first so you can see how the wiring works and make any
mistakes on a small scale -- especially if you are going to install and
build the thing yourself.
Having real world data on solar panel output also helps -- this will let
him know what to expect when he puts up more panels. Its well easy to
calculate how much sun you think you get, but no reason not to know
exactly how much energy a given panel size produces in your local.
Ken Maltby
<bea...@gmail.com> wrote in message
news:56878cb3-1583-4828...@z16g2000prn.googlegroups.com...
> On May 29, 10:13 pm, "Ken Maltby" <kmal...@sbcglobal.net> wrote:
>>
>> There are plenty of reasons that people develop an interest in
>> "experimental" solar power generation. A typical engineered
>> PV System, is not the only answer or even one that interests
>> everyone.
>
> There is no reason for "experimental solar power generation"
> when it only replicates what has already been done. The point is to
> generate electricity. Solar will do that. The question is whether you
> arrive at the system that provides your energy needs for the least
> amount of effort, time and money.
>
That's not the question for everyone, and at least for some, you
need to add - that I can do myself. Not just build but develop
the process, skills, and learn from doing. This usually means that
there will be more time, money, and effort expended doing it
your own way than would be spent hiring a pro (such as you claim
to be). There can be much satisfaction working out a process that
provides results, even if you did reinvent the wheel a few times along
the way.
> In the nearly twenty-five years that I have been using solar and the
> fifteen years I spent designing and installing solar systems no one
> has come up with a better way to size and design systems that is new.
>
Not too surprising, as I just dug out an old text book from a course
I took more than 30 years ago:
Titled: Solar Heating and Cooling of Residential Buildings - Sizing,
Installation and Operation Of Systems
Published by the U.S. Department Of Commerce -Economic
Development Administration
The course was developed by the Solar Energy Applications
Laboratory of Colorado State University.
> Perhaps you will share with us the ground breaking discovery that your
> experimenting has produced.
>>
Sure - Earth Shattering Discovery: That **I** could actually build
a working system that produced usable results. That some of my
crazy ideas and modified parts actually worked out, eventually after
a little experimenting here and there. (Measure twice, cut many times,
then start over.) That scrounged and made over parts, can often be
made to do a good job.
>> If you don't have the independent self reliant spirit; you
>> won't understand. If you can't see why some people grow
>> their own vegetables, when they can buy them cheaper at the
>> local grocery, then I can't make you see. I suppose that you
>> feel the same way about people who build their own windmills,
>> or develop a water source on their property.
>
> Well as I have not paid an electric bill or water bill in the last
> twenty odd years, grow olives, apples, plums and veggies. Built my
> house with my own to hands and do my own mechanical repairs, you can
> drop the self-sufficient clap trap and accept that your statement is
> incorrect.
>
If that is actually your history, then it is hard to understand your
attitude. Who's home design did you follow to the letter? You
know that there are plenty of very well established house designs,
there is no reason that you would have experimented with any of
your own house design ideas, right? It has all been done before.
> There is no reason to experiment with solar, of any size, it has all
> been done before. So again you can tell us what great discovery you
> have made in the design principles for solar power installations.
>>
I guess the main principle still stands - Put it where the Sun shines.
So if you can get your head out of where ....
Luck;
Ken
bea...@gmail.com
> beal...@gmail.com wrote in news:bf187b86-8549-4e22-91e4-f373db3934d2
He wants to see if it will work. The answer is yes. No need to test
the water. Define the load and calculate the system parameters and
build it.
bea...@gmail.com
> <beal...@gmail.com> wrote in message
>
> news:56878cb3-1583-4828...@z16g2000prn.googlegroups.com...
>
> > On May 29, 10:13 pm, "Ken Maltby" <kmal...@sbcglobal.net> wrote:
>
> >> There are plenty of reasons that people develop an interest in
> >> "experimental" solar power generation. A typical engineered
> >> PV System, is not the only answer or even one that interests
> >> everyone.
>
> > There is no reason for "experimental solar power generation"
> > when it only replicates what has already been done. The point is to
> > generate electricity. Solar will do that. The question is whether you
> > arrive at the system that provides your energy needs for the least
> > amount of effort, time and money.
>
> That's not the question for everyone, and at least for some, you
> need to add - that I can do myself. Not just build but develop
> the process, skills, and learn from doing. This usually means that
> there will be more time, money, and effort expended doing it
> your own way than would be spent hiring a pro (such as you claim
> to be). There can be much satisfaction working out a process that
> provides results, even if you did reinvent the wheel a few times along
> the way.
Of course you can do it yourself. That is my point. And you can do it
straight out of the box, no pissing about, just correct design from
the beginning.
>
> > In the nearly twenty-five years that I have been using solar and the
> > fifteen years I spent designing and installing solar systems no one
> > has come up with a better way to size and design systems that is new.
>
> Not too surprising, as I just dug out an old text book from a course
> I took more than 30 years ago:
>
> Titled: Solar Heating and Cooling of Residential Buildings - Sizing,
> Installation and Operation Of Systems
> Published by the U.S. Department Of Commerce -Economic
> Development Administration
>
> The course was developed by the Solar Energy Applications
> Laboratory of Colorado State University.
>
> > Perhaps you will share with us the ground breaking discovery that your
> > experimenting has produced.
>
> Sure - Earth Shattering Discovery: That **I** could actually build
> a working system that produced usable results. That some of my
> crazy ideas and modified parts actually worked out, eventually after
> a little experimenting here and there. (Measure twice, cut many times,
> then start over.) That scrounged and made over parts, can often be
> made to do a good job.
And this surprised you, that you could do it yourself?
Measure twice, size and design many times, then start over. Nothing
spent other than a bit of time, then build the system based on the
correct principles that will work.
>
> >> If you don't have the independent self reliant spirit; you
> >> won't understand. If you can't see why some people grow
> >> their own vegetables, when they can buy them cheaper at the
> >> local grocery, then I can't make you see. I suppose that you
> >> feel the same way about people who build their own windmills,
> >> or develop a water source on their property.
>
> > Well as I have not paid an electric bill or water bill in the last
> > twenty odd years, grow olives, apples, plums and veggies. Built my
> > house with my own to hands and do my own mechanical repairs, you can
> > drop the self-sufficient clap trap and accept that your statement is
> > incorrect.
>
> If that is actually your history, then it is hard to understand your
> attitude. Who's home design did you follow to the letter?
My own, of course. No point doing it any other way.
> You know that there are plenty of very well established house designs,
> there is no reason that you would have experimented with any of
> your own house design ideas, right? It has all been done before.
All the experimenting was on paper. Which is my point. You don't need
to buy anything to design a system that will work, no HF toy panels,
no wire, nothing, not even the formula for the sizing and design
work.
>
> > There is no reason to experiment with solar, of any size, it has all
> > been done before. So again you can tell us what great discovery you
> > have made in the design principles for solar power installations.
>
> I guess the main principle still stands - Put it where the Sun shines.
I guess that you have not discovered anything.
>
> So if you can get your head out of where ....
Is that where you keep your head.
The point is if you really want to learn about solar power sizing and
design there is no need to spend money on dubious equipment.
You will learn more and have a better understanding of sizing and
design and greater chance of a working system on your first build if
you simply learn the formula for sizing and design.
> Luck;
> Ken
>
Ulysses
> On May 30, 2:35 am, "Ulysses" <eatmys...@spamola.com/> wrote:
>
>
>
>
>
> > <beal...@gmail.com> wrote in message
>
> sizing is well documented and works for any size system.
>
> > What would you say is the minimum sizing for inverters
> > (total watts output) and electriciy consumption (kWh/day) for an average
> > family of four with all the usual appliances, not including air conditioning
> > and a half dozen computers and monstrous TVs and stereos (or electric
> > welders, but some basic garage-type tools)?
>
> Bit of a contradiction here. First it is an average family of four
> then it is a family of four that is not average.
I'm not sure what the contradiction is here. Do *most* people have
monstrous TVs and welders? I can't consider myself quite average
because I just have a 27" TV and I keep seeing electronic gadgets that
many people can't seem to live without and I don't even know what they
are or what they are for.
>
> But lets look at the average energy use in Victoria. 15kWh/day
>
> System - 48V
> Inverter - 10kW
> Days Autonomy - 5
> Battery capacity - 2500 Ah
> Daily depth of Discharge - 14%
> Panels - 32 (Will vary with choice of panel)
OK, for example, here's my system:
48V
Inverter - 3.6 kW
Battery capacity - 660 Ah (obviously wont last as long as 2500 Ah)
Daily depth of Discharge - 14%
Panels - none, but I charge with a gasoline engine and alternator.
Currently I an using a propane refrigerator and 100% propane range so
that will lower my figures a bit. We (me, wife, two teenage
daughters) do about six loads of laundry per week, use a clothesline
most of the time but occasionally use the gas (propane) dryer. We
don't watch a lot of TV but we do have a 27" CRT unit plus satellite
receiver, DVD recorder, VHS recorder etc. We use one laptop and one
desktop computer several hours per day. We use our microwave oven
regularly and generally make two pots of coffee per day with an
electric coffee maker. I run an air compressor about 15-30 minutes
per day and occasionally run a second compressor for a similar amount
of time. I use electric saws and drills regularly but not for
extended periods of time. We have two cordless phones and three alarm
clocks plugged in all the time. All of our lights are 13W CF. We use
our bathroom fans. We vacuum our floors with a vacuum cleaner but we
do use a human-powered carpet sweeper inbetween vacuumings. I
generally use a seperate 240V generator to run my well pump and fill
my water tank (gravity system) but I can run my well pump and my
washing machine at the same time from my inverter along with a 240V
autotransformer. We are not suffering from lack of electricity or
appliances. This is all done with a single OutBack VFX3648 inverter.
I have talked to others who are living similarly with a single
inverter, even inverters as small as 3000 watts. It took some time
and effort and monitoring of a Kill A Watt meter and the battery meter
to determine just how much power everything uses and what we could run
at the same time and what we couldn't and what to unplg when not in
use. I would call that experimenting although it might not fit
precisely into your definition as far as solar is concerned, but in my
mind the principle is the same. Once we figured out everything and
jotted down how many amps everything uses it all became routine and we
don't think much about it any more. This is what I meant by "doing
things differently." Certainly, you can't run an air compressor from
a 700 watt inveter and you can't recharge your batteries with too few
panels and it's easy enough to figure out your comsumption and how
many batteries you need and how much power you have to put back in
them for everything to work smoothly but the rest of it, the way I see
it, is experimenting.
I actually have a second VFX3648 but it is always off. When I bought
my system I expected that the two inverters might not be enough and I
might have to double my system someday.
Right now I'm "experimenting" (sorry) with Google Groups because my
newsgroup server appears to have died. I hope this works.
>
>
>
> No, I used to sell systems, arthritis and age caught up with me. The
> solar work I do now is helping people fix the problems left behind by
> shonky dealers and the ubiquitous "experimenters". Knowing how to
> correctly size a system is the consumers best defense against being
> ripped off.
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> > I also experiment with other things too. The most motivating thing someone
> > can say to me is "it can't be done."
>
> Ain't no setch thing as can't be done.- Hide quoted text -
Well, there are probably a lot of solar installers that would tell me
what I'm doing (my system) can't be done.
>
> - Show quoted text -- Hide quoted text -
>
> - Show quoted text -
Ulysses
"z" <z...@yada.yada.com> wrote in message
news:Xns9AADB2AF8A6...@216.196.97.131...
> bea...@gmail.com wrote in news:bf187b86-8549-4e22-91e4-f373db3934d2
> @q24g2000prf.googlegroups.com:
>
> > On May 30, 5:03 am, z <z...@yada.yada.com> wrote:
> >> beal...@gmail.com wrote in news:121a4618-c9c2-478d-84e8-61ed7fe56a41
> >> @b9g2000prh.googlegroups.com:
> >>
> >> > There is a lot of talk in these groups about "Experimenting" with
> >> > solar.
> >>
> >> group. At least not recently. Some questions about wire size and some
> >> people wondering if they can run X off solar or wind -- but not a lot
> of
> >> actual experimentation.
> >>
> >> Care to point to some posts in alt.energy.homepower like this?
> >
> > Rex Mundi <sleep...@the.wheel.org> wrote in
> > news:321u34hhn986m3bua...@4ax.com:
> >
>
> Heh so you wrote a post about future group activity, i got it. Care to
> pick some stocks? :)
When did they invent time travel? I missed it. I keep getting spam email
from 2038. At least we now know there there will still be email in 30
years.
>
>
z
Dude -- I set my computer clock to 1969 and then only pay 19 cents a gal
for gas!
bea...@gmail.com
> On May 29, 4:58 pm, beal...@gmail.com wrote:
>
>
>
> > On May 30, 2:35 am, "Ulysses" <eatmys...@spamola.com/> wrote:
>
> > > <beal...@gmail.com> wrote in message
>
> > > Actually this is exactly what they did. The formula used for system
> > sizing is well documented and works for any size system.
>
> > > What would you say is the minimum sizing for inverters
> > > (total watts output) and electriciy consumption (kWh/day) for an average
> > > family of four with all the usual appliances, not including air conditioning
> > > and a half dozen computers and monstrous TVs and stereos (or electric
> > > welders, but some basic garage-type tools)?
>
> > Bit of a contradiction here. First it is an average family of four
> > then it is a family of four that is not average.
>
> I'm not sure what the contradiction is here. Do *most* people have
> monstrous TVs and welders? I can't consider myself quite average
> because I just have a 27" TV and I keep seeing electronic gadgets that
> many people can't seem to live without and I don't even know what they
> are or what they are for.
You have answered your own question.
>
>
>
> > But lets look at the average energy use in Victoria. 15kWh/day
>
> > System - 48V
> > Inverter - 10kW
> > Days Autonomy - 5
> > Battery capacity - 2500 Ah
> > Daily depth of Discharge - 14%
> > Panels - 32 (Will vary with choice of panel)
>
> OK, for example, here's my system:
>
> 48V
> Inverter - 3.6 kW
> Battery capacity - 660 Ah (obviously wont last as long as 2500 Ah)
> Daily depth of Discharge - 14%
What is the daily kWhs
> Panels - none, but I charge with a gasoline engine and alternator.
Hardly alternative energy.
>
> Currently I an using a propane refrigerator and 100% propane range so
> that will lower my figures a bit.
Yes quite a common setup.
> We (me, wife, two teenage
> daughters) do about six loads of laundry per week, use a clothesline
> most of the time but occasionally use the gas (propane) dryer.
We only have the solar powered cloths line. Daughters are an energy
sink. Raised two.
> We don't watch a lot of TV but we do have a 27" CRT unit plus satellite
> receiver, DVD recorder, VHS recorder etc.
Lot of electronics for not watching much TV. Replace our dead 15" crt
for a 19" LCD. 15% energy saving to boot. Watch less than five hours a
week.
> We use one laptop and one
> desktop computer several hours per day.
One desk top, 3 - 6 hours a day at present.
> We use our microwave oven
> regularly and generally make two pots of coffee per day with an
> electric coffee maker.
No Microwave no coffee maker, Lots of tea, either gas or wood heated
depending on time of year.
> I run an air compressor about 15-30 minutes
> per day and occasionally run a second compressor for a similar amount
> of time. I use electric saws and drills regularly but not for
> extended periods of time.
Yeah, more use than me. I use a generator for the air compressor,
large power tools and the washing machine, maybe an hour a week. The
kids have left home.
> We have two cordless phones and three alarm
> clocks plugged in all the time.
1 Alarm clock - needs a battery once every 4-5 years. 1 battery clock
- battery every two years. 1 clock that gets wound once a week.
> All of our lights are 13W CF.
Half my lights are 10W dichroics (MR16) and the other half are 48 LED
in MR16 package.
> We use our bathroom fans. We vacuum our floors with a vacuum cleaner but we
> do use a human-powered carpet sweeper inbetween vacuumings.
Slate, concrete and brick floors. Broom and mop as required.
> I generally use a seperate 240V generator to run my well pump and fill
> my water tank (gravity system) but I can run my well pump and my
> washing machine at the same time from my inverter along with a 240V
> autotransformer. We are not suffering from lack of electricity or
> appliances. This is all done with a single OutBack VFX3648 inverter.
> I have talked to others who are living similarly with a single
> inverter, even inverters as small as 3000 watts.
600W pure sine inverter. Might replace it with a 1500W next year,
Depends on whether I spring for a new laser printer.
> It took some time
> and effort and monitoring of a Kill A Watt meter and the battery meter
> to determine just how much power everything uses and what we could run
> at the same time and what we couldn't and what to unplg when not in
> use.
Looked at the compliance plates and designed for the load. Able to run
everything at the same time.
> I would call that experimenting although it might not fit
> precisely into your definition as far as solar is concerned, but in my
> mind the principle is the same. Once we figured out everything and
> jotted down how many amps everything uses it all became routine and we
> don't think much about it any more. This is what I meant by "doing
> things differently."
Seen this concept many times, build a system, then work out a
lifestyle to fit it.
I did it all on paper. Designed and built a system to provide the
lifestyle I wanted. Not constrained by pre-conceived concepts from
mains living. Nearly all twelve volts. Worked as planned from day one.
I have played with new lighting as it comes along. Mostly as
evaluation for a retailer.
> Certainly, you can't run an air compressor from
> a 700 watt inveter and you can't recharge your batteries with too few
> panels and it's easy enough to figure out your comsumption and how
> many batteries you need and how much power you have to put back in
> them for everything to work smoothly but the rest of it, the way I see
> it, is experimenting.
All been done before.
>
> I actually have a second VFX3648 but it is always off. When I bought
> my system I expected that the two inverters might not be enough and I
> might have to double my system someday.
>
> Right now I'm "experimenting" (sorry) with Google Groups because my
> newsgroup server appears to have died. I hope this works.
Been there, done that. Google Groups seems to work ok.
>
>
>
>
>
> > No, I used to sell systems, arthritis and age caught up with me. The
> > solar work I do now is helping people fix the problems left behind by
> > shonky dealers and the ubiquitous "experimenters". Knowing how to
> > correctly size a system is the consumers best defense against being
> > ripped off.
>
> > > I also experiment with other things too. The most motivating thing someone
> > > can say to me is "it can't be done."
>
> > Ain't no setch thing as can't be done.- Hide quoted text -
>
> Well, there are probably a lot of solar installers that would tell me
> what I'm doing (my system) can't be done.
Yep, a lot of shysters around.
wmbjk...@citlink.net
>On May 31, 3:07 am, Ulysses <jimknela...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>> On May 29, 4:58 pm, beal...@gmail.com wrote:
>600W pure sine inverter. Might replace it with a 1500W next year,
>Depends on whether I spring for a new laser printer.
Bloody hell. How many hundreds of times have you accused others of bad
"design" because they expanded their setups to meet changing needs?
Can you spell hypocrite?
>I use a generator for the air compressor,
>large power tools and the washing machine, maybe an hour a week.
Even when compared to the average off-gridder, being limited to one
hour per week for all loads over 600W constitutes doing-without. And
with fuel soon to be $5 per gallon in the US, most "experimenters"
should shoot for zero use of a generator except for backup. Since
you're in a climate conducive to solar water heating, why not
experiment with that instead of burning propane and starting threads
criticizing others who are trying to do better? And why buy and haul
thousands of gallons of propane to run a fridge while wasting
thousands of hours on Usenet trying to convince readers that you're a
solar expert? How is it that so many of the "experimenters" here have
managed something as easy as solar-powered electric refrigeration, yet
the self-titled solar "designer" keeps spending on propane, for
*decades*?
>> It took some time
>> and effort and monitoring of a Kill A Watt meter and the battery meter
>> to determine just how much power everything uses and what we could run
>> at the same time and what we couldn't and what to unplg when not in
>> use.
>
>Looked at the compliance plates and designed for the load.
Appliance labels generally state power needs, not energy. Which means
that the labels are virtually useless when "designing" for clothes
washers, dishwashers, etc. That's why most "experimenters" spring for
a $20 KillaWatt. Of course, if one either does without variable-power
appliances or runs them off a generator, then one can save the $20.
<snorf>
> Able to run everything at the same time.
LOL Sure, so long as you start the generator first!
>Seen this concept many times, build a system, then work out a
>lifestyle to fit it.
>
>I did it all on paper. Designed and built a system to provide the
>lifestyle I wanted. Not constrained by pre-conceived concepts from
>mains living. Nearly all twelve volts. Worked as planned from day one.
It "worked as planned from day one" eh?
The archives have a better memory about your history.
http://groups.google.com/group/alt.solar.photovoltaic/msg/b12e6f90e9118349
Forgetful ghinius George wrote on Nov 3 1999:
**********************
4 solarex 42 watt panels 6 320Ah gell cells 1 12v 22A regulator 1
150W sine wave inverter
This year I have lashed out and bought 2 80w VLX Solarex panels to
boost my input.
*************************
So a mere 9 years ago, and *after* your supposed career as an
installer, you were adding to an undesigned <chuckle> setup, which
still isn't finished. Even with the planned upgrade to a 1500W
inverter, most reasonable folks would still consider it inadequate.
Obviously you're a typical example of expanding your hardware as
needed. So what's the point of pretending that you did it any other
way?
>> > No, I used to sell systems, arthritis and age caught up with me.
>Yep, a lot of shysters around.
... and BS artists. See http://www.citlink.net/~wmbjk/tbfduwisdumb.htm
and http://www.lowexpecations.com/.
Wayne
bea...@gmail.com
understand that I have reduced my daily load. This reduction, of
course, allows me a lot of leeway. One of the things it allows me to
do is change from an old inkjet that is nearing the end of its life
and replace it with a laser printer that, while it uses more energy,
is several times faster than the old printer. In the end the
difference in energy use is negligible. Changing the inverter is of no
consequence to my systems performance.
So your rant has no meaning what so ever.
On Jun 1, 12:36 am, wmbjkREM...@citlink.net wrote:
> The archives have a better memory about your history.http://groups.google.com/group/alt.solar.photovoltaic/msg/b12e6f90e91...
Ulysses
Aah, that's the problem. My computer is too new! I gotta get back my old
IBM punch card unit. Cya in '69.
Morris Dovey
> Really? I don't see that many people experimenting with solar on this
> group. At least not recently. Some questions about wire size and
> some people wondering if they can run X off solar or wind -- but not
> a lot of actual experimentation.
Zack...
That you don't see something doesn't mean it's not there. ;-)
I post as often as I think people will tolerate - I'm afraid that if I
posted more, it'd be interpreted as pushing products rather than trying
to encourage DIYers.
We're experimenting with two "flavors" of solar-powered fluidyne
engines: a low-temperature model constructed (mostly) of 4" schedule-40
PVC drain pipe that we've tortured until it runs - and a
high-temperature fluidyne constructed of iron, copper, and aluminum
that (I'm hoping) will be completely assembled and tested today.
Today's experiment will be our first try at using the collection tube of
a 4'x8' parabolic concentrator as the hot head of a fluidyne - and if we
get it to percolate, we'll try pumping some water.
If you don't see us, it'll be because you weren't looking in the right
place. :-D
--
Morris Dovey
DeSoto Solar
DeSoto, Iowa USA
http://www.iedu.com/DeSoto/
bea...@gmail.com
Ah Morris. You are experimenting with new ways to produce energy. That
is a wonderful thing. It is also totally different to my point which
is about experimenting with solar power (or any other energy source)
to see if it will do a job. In this case there is no need to
experiment.
System sizing and design is well documented. In your case, you get
your fluidyne engine to work, great. But when it come to using it in a
power system it is just a number. It provides "X" number of watts, end
of story.
People who start out buying equipment in the hope, that if they keep
adding to the list, they will end up with a system that fulfills their
energy requirement are just wasting time and money.
Morris Dovey
> Ah Morris. You are experimenting with new ways to produce energy. That
> is a wonderful thing. It is also totally different to my point which
> is about experimenting with solar power (or any other energy source)
> to see if it will do a job. In this case there is no need to
> experiment.
Point taken. Still, it's worth remembering that a lot of this is new to
a lot of people (like me) and that there's a certain amount of "fiddlin'
around" that goes into acquiring a "gut feel" for any unfamiliar technology.
I envy your PV experience (and your home installation!) - but I'd
probably need to liberate a bit of magic smoke before I was completely
comfortable working just with formulas. I'm not sure if that's human
nature or just because I learn better by burning my fingers.
> System sizing and design is well documented. In your case, you get
> your fluidyne engine to work, great. But when it come to using it in a
> power system it is just a number. It provides "X" number of watts, end
> of story.
I've been working overtime to push it in that direction. So far, every
time I've thought I had it all nailed down another variable has popped
up. It's been a bit like playing whack-a-mole. :-)
> People who start out buying equipment in the hope, that if they keep
> adding to the list, they will end up with a system that fulfills their
> energy requirement are just wasting time and money.
I dunno. We all learn new things differently, and that may what it takes
for some people to achieve a desired level of comfort.
I'm enough of a cheapskate that I usually run around pestering people
with questions and study (over-study?) anything new before I let myself
go shopping. I'm not actually sure that my approach really saves me
anything... :-/
Eeyore
bea...@gmail.com wrote:
> Ah Morris. You are experimenting with new ways to produce energy.
I thought they were fundamentally very old ways actually.
Graham
bea...@gmail.com
> beal...@gmail.com wrote:
> > Ah Morris. You are experimenting with new ways to produce energy. That
> > is a wonderful thing. It is also totally different to my point which
> > is about experimenting with solar power (or any other energy source)
> > to see if it will do a job. In this case there is no need to
> > experiment.
>
> Point taken. Still, it's worth remembering that a lot of this is new to
> a lot of people (like me) and that there's a certain amount of "fiddlin'
> around" that goes into acquiring a "gut feel" for any unfamiliar technology.
>
> I envy your PV experience (and your home installation!) - but I'd
> probably need to liberate a bit of magic smoke before I was completely
> comfortable working just with formulas. I'm not sure if that's human
> nature or just because I learn better by burning my fingers.
Ah yes. Tell a young child not to touch because it is hot means
nothing until the child has a reference for "hot".
Even with the correct formula there is plenty of burnt fingers. Fact
of life. But following correct design procedures can make the
difference between first and third degree burns.
>
> > System sizing and design is well documented. In your case, you get
> > your fluidyne engine to work, great. But when it come to using it in a
> > power system it is just a number. It provides "X" number of watts, end
> > of story.
>
> I've been working overtime to push it in that direction. So far, every
> time I've thought I had it all nailed down another variable has popped
> up. It's been a bit like playing whack-a-mole. :-)
The boilermakers solution, hit it with a hammer, if that doesn't work
get a bigger hammer.
>
> > People who start out buying equipment in the hope, that if they keep
> > adding to the list, they will end up with a system that fulfills their
> > energy requirement are just wasting time and money.
>
> I dunno. We all learn new things differently, and that may what it takes
> for some people to achieve a desired level of comfort.
Oh yes,
>
> I'm enough of a cheapskate that I usually run around pestering people
> with questions and study (over-study?) anything new before I let myself
> go shopping. I'm not actually sure that my approach really saves me
> anything... :-/
Only cash.
wmbjk...@citlink.net
>You know wayne, if you had ever learned to design a system you would
>understand that I have reduced my daily load.
No, in fact you've more than tripled your consumption since starting.
Here are a few of your own numbers to tell the tale:
Sept 20 1999 (approx. day 5840) - "375 watt hours per day average"
Oct 8 2003 (approx. day 7665) - "1.2 kWh/day"
Jul 30 2007 (approx. day 8760) - "1343" (watt hours)
You've even explained the reason for the expansion by writing in your
peculiar vernacular on Sep 2 2003: "I too have experianced the
creeping lifestyle energy consumption".
What's incredible even by Usenet standards is that no matter how many
times your newest foolishness is busted by the old, like a
self-sentenced Sisyphus you compulsively belch out more phony claims
such as "Worked as planned from day one". Or should we assume that
your "design" included tripling the size and using three different
inverters and 5 different sets of batteries?
> Changing the inverter is of no
>consequence to my systems performance.
Wrong again. If your setup really does get your batteries charged
"before noon most days" as you've previously claimed <snorf>, then
having a larger inverter would allow you to make use of the
afternoon's otherwise wasted energy. IOW, you'd be able to run that
air compressor and clothes washer off the solar setup rather than the
generator. Most "experimenters" would consider that a worthwhile gain,
and any real "designer" wouldn't need the concept explained. But let
me guess, the reason it won't work for *you* has something to do with
Wayne Wayne Wayne, or wankers, or cowboys, or "ubiquitous
experimenters".
Anyway, if past performance is any indication, you're about to serve
up a fresh batch of ghioloney. Hurry up will ya' so I can add it all
to http://www.citlink.net/~wmbjk/tbfduwisdumb.htm.
Wayne
wmbjk...@citlink.net
>People who start out buying equipment in the hope, that if they keep
>adding to the list, they will end up with a system that fulfills their
>energy requirement are just wasting time and money.
Nonsense. Most solar setups that are enlarged make some use of the
original hardware. For example, one poster described how after 2+
decades he's still using his original 45W modules despite making his
setup 3 times larger over the years. Sound familiar? And when it does
happen that hardware can't be incorporated into an upgraded setup,
then it's generally easy enough to peddle on Ebay for a large
proportion of its original cost. Summary - starting out small with
solar is a low-risk proposition. As everyone else has already
explained, getting hands-on experience is usually a smart thing to do.
I'll add that it's not something that should be denigrated, especially
by a hypocritical quack.
Wayne
Anonymouse
>> Dude -- I set my computer clock to 1969 and then only pay 19 cents a gal
>> for gas!
>
> Aah, that's the problem. My computer is too new! I gotta get back my old
> IBM punch card unit. Cya in '69.
I tried to calculate the square root of 69 without a computer...
My answer was eight something.
z
@news.qwest.net:
> z wrote:
>
>> Really? I don't see that many people experimenting with solar on this
>> group. At least not recently. Some questions about wire size and
>> some people wondering if they can run X off solar or wind -- but not
>> a lot of actual experimentation.
>
> Zack...
>
> That you don't see something doesn't mean it's not there. ;-)
>
> I post as often as I think people will tolerate - I'm afraid that if I
> posted more, it'd be interpreted as pushing products rather than trying
> to encourage DIYers.
>
> We're experimenting with two "flavors" of solar-powered fluidyne
> engines: a low-temperature model constructed (mostly) of 4" schedule-40
> PVC drain pipe that we've tortured until it runs - and a
> high-temperature fluidyne constructed of iron, copper, and aluminum
> that (I'm hoping) will be completely assembled and tested today.
Right. You guys are experimenting for real. Or Ulysses with his EU2000
wind generator or to a lesser degree my hydro setup -- You form a
hypothesis, modify the system, make observations.
to quote the OP:
---
Experiment to see if I can run my lights on solar.
Experiment to see if I can open a hanger door with solar.
Experiment to see if I can use solar where I live.
Experiment to see if I can run my computer on solar.
Experiment to see if I can (enter reason here) with solar.
---
You aren't doing any of those things or even close!!!
Bruce Richmond
> On May 31, 3:07 am, Ulysses <jimknela...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>
>
>
>
>
> > On May 29, 4:58 pm, beal...@gmail.com wrote:
>
> > > On May 30, 2:35 am, "Ulysses" <eatmys...@spamola.com/> wrote:
>
> > > > <beal...@gmail.com> wrote in message
>
> > > > Actually this is exactly what they did. The formula used for system
> > > sizing is well documented and works for any size system.
>
> > > > What would you say is the minimum sizing for inverters
> > > > (total watts output) and electriciy consumption (kWh/day) for an average
> > > > family of four with all the usual appliances, not including air conditioning
> > > > and a half dozen computers and monstrous TVs and stereos (or electric
> > > > welders, but some basic garage-type tools)?
>
> > > Bit of a contradiction here. First it is an average family of four
> > > then it is a family of four that is not average.
>
> > I'm not sure what the contradiction is here. Do *most* people have
> > monstrous TVs and welders? I can't consider myself quite average
> > because I just have a 27" TV and I keep seeing electronic gadgets that
> > many people can't seem to live without and I don't even know what they
> > are or what they are for.
>
> You have answered your own question.
>
His original statement just included some qualifiers to define what he
considered average. You took him to task for defining an average that
was different than what you consider average. Does the average family
have air conditioning? Depends on where you are doesn't it. Do they
have "half dozen computers and monstrous TVs and stereos"? Six
computers for four people doesn't seem likely, so he was ruling it
out. Doesn't seem contradictory to me.
>
>
>
>
>
> > > But lets look at the average energy use in Victoria. 15kWh/day
>
> > > System - 48V
> > > Inverter - 10kW
> > > Days Autonomy - 5
> > > Battery capacity - 2500 Ah
> > > Daily depth of Discharge - 14%
> > > Panels - 32 (Will vary with choice of panel)
>
> > OK, for example, here's my system:
>
> > 48V
> > Inverter - 3.6 kW
> > Battery capacity - 660 Ah (obviously wont last as long as 2500 Ah)
> > Daily depth of Discharge - 14%
>
> What is the daily kWhs
>
> > Panels - none, but I charge with a gasoline engine and alternator.
>
> Hardly alternative energy.
>
>
Depends how you define"alternative energy". Most people get their
electricity from the grid, so pretty much anything else could be
considered alternative energy. Not all alternatives are green.
Seems like overkill. Surely there are some things that are never
likely to be used at the same time. By taking that into account you
could have a smaller, less expensive system.
> > I would call that experimenting although it might not fit
> > precisely into your definition as far as solar is concerned, but in my
> > mind the principle is the same. Once we figured out everything and
> > jotted down how many amps everything uses it all became routine and we
> > don't think much about it any more. This is what I meant by "doing
> > things differently."
>
> Seen this concept many times, build a system, then work out a
> lifestyle to fit it.
You make it sound like accepting that you can't run everything at the
same time for a major savings in system cost is a bad thing.
> I did it all on paper. Designed and built a system to provide the
> lifestyle I wanted. Not constrained by pre-conceived concepts from
> mains living. Nearly all twelve volts. Worked as planned from day one.
> I have played with new lighting as it comes along. Mostly as
> evaluation for a retailer.
"played"? Is that anything like experimenting? ;)
bea...@gmail.com
Oh absolutely, the point is though, that "experimenting" to see if
solar will run your (enter reason here) is nonsense.
Solar will run your house, shed, boat, garden lights, it's just a
matter of calculating the size system required and deciding whether
you are prepared to pay for it. Building a system and then trying to
match your lifestyle to what you have is silly when you can design and
build a system to match your lifestyle.
While building my house I had tried different lights all around the
place to see what I could do. But the system sizing didn't change. I
know how much energy I use and the placement of lights did not change
that.
Bruce Richmond
Of course they know they can get it to run. The "experimenting" is to
find out on a small scale just how much of a system they need to make
it run acceptably well.
> Solar will run your house, shed, boat, garden lights, it's just a
> matter of calculating the size system required and deciding whether
> you are prepared to pay for it. Building a system and then trying to
> match your lifestyle to what you have is silly when you can design and
> build a system to match your lifestyle.
When you calculate the size of the system you include a safety factor
to allow for the fact that it could be overcast for a few days, use
estimated outputfrom the panels, and try to make it so the user
doesn't need to think about the load on the system. By building the
small system the experimenter could find that his location provides
more than the original estimate (because of the safety factor built
into that estimate). He may find that the chances of having five
overcast days in a row are almost nonexistant and figure that it would
be less expensive to use a generator in such rare cases than to invest
a lot more in batteries.
As for the comment about adapting ones lifestyle to the system, it
seems you had already accepted a lifestyle that eases the load on your
system. I don't see it as a bad thing if others choose to make a few
changes to their lifestyle in an attempt to save a few bucks. The
only problem I would have with it is if they bitch about it when it
was part of the plan from the start.
bea...@gmail.com
Not true at all. Decide on what sort of lifestyle you want. Design a
system to provide it. No experimenting required. A correctly sized and
designed system will work as expected.
>
> > Solar will run your house, shed, boat, garden lights, it's just a
> > matter of calculating the size system required and deciding whether
> > you are prepared to pay for it. Building a system and then trying to
> > match your lifestyle to what you have is silly when you can design and
> > build a system to match your lifestyle.
>
> When you calculate the size of the system you include a safety factor
> to allow for the fact that it could be overcast for a few days, use
> estimated outputfrom the panels, and try to make it so the user
> doesn't need to think about the load on the system. By building the
> small system the experimenter could find that his location provides
> more than the original estimate (because of the safety factor built
> into that estimate). He may find that the chances of having five
> overcast days in a row are almost nonexistant and figure that it would
> be less expensive to use a generator in such rare cases than to invest
> a lot more in batteries.
Again not true,
1) The "safety factor" is part of the calculation.
2) The output from the panels is stated by the manufacturer, why
estimate?
3) You always have to consider the load.
4) "Build a small system" nonsense, Use the correct formula foe sizing
and design with information from, say, NASA and your system will
perform as calculated.
5) # of cloudy days, again, NASA or the local weather station.
6) "use a generator in such rare cases than to invest a lot more in
batteries" The formula for sizing allows you to set the number of days
of autonomy. This along with daily load and, temperature correction
determines the size of the battery bank. No need to guess.
>
> As for the comment about adapting ones lifestyle to the system, it
> seems you had already accepted a lifestyle that eases the load on your
> system. I don't see it as a bad thing if others choose to make a few
> changes to their lifestyle in an attempt to save a few bucks.
This is the "SIZING" part of design
> The only problem I would have with it is if they bitch about it when it
> was part of the plan from the start.
Too bloody right mate.
>
> > While building my house I had tried different lights all around the
> > place to see what I could do. But the system sizing didn't change. I
> > know how much energy I use and the placement of lights did not change
> > that.
>
> > > > > Certainly, you can't run an air compressor from
> > > > > a 700 watt inveter and you can't recharge your batteries with too few
> > > > > panels and it's easy enough to figure out your comsumption and how
> > > > > many batteries you need and how much power you have to put back in
> > > > > them for everything to work smoothly but the rest of it, the way I see
> > > > > it, is experimenting.
>
> > > > All been done before.
>
> > > > > I actually have a second VFX3648 but it is always off. When I bought
> > > > > my system I expected that the two inverters might not be enough and I
> > > > > might have to double my system someday.
>
> > > > > Right now I'm "experimenting" (sorry) with Google Groups because my
> > > > > newsgroup server appears to have died. I hope this works.
>
> > > > Been there, done that. Google Groups seems to work ok.
>
> > > > > > No, I used to sell systems, arthritis and age caught up with
>
> ...
>
> read more »
bea...@gmail.com
> On Sat, 31 May 2008 08:42:32 -0700 (PDT), beal...@gmail.com wrote:
> >You know wayne, if you had ever learned to design a system you would
> >understand that I have reduced my daily load.
>
> No, in fact you've more than tripled your consumption since starting.
> Here are a few of your own numbers to tell the tale:
Ok, I'll help you embarrass yourself.
>
> Sept 20 1999 (approx. day 5840) - "375 watt hours per day average"
This system was "built", as opposed to "designed" in the mid eighties
as I have mentioned before.
It is still in service today, although one of the 45W panels has had
an incident as it were. Still it keeps a radio going. It is not a part
of my second system.
It was built on a guess, just like your current system. The difference
is that I learned to design systems properly while you chose to just
throw mony at your mistake until it it would work during daylight
hours.
> Oct 8 2003 (approx. day 7665) - "1.2 kWh/day"
> Jul 30 2007 (approx. day 8760) - "1343" (watt hours)
This is the system that was "Designed" to provide 1.5kWh/day. Which it
does quite well and has done ever since it was turned on.
With new appliances replacing those that needed to be replaced (TV,
computer, and better lighting options etc.)I have slowly but steadily
reducing my daily load. June 2 2008 - 850Wh. Mind you that is a bit
lower that my current average of around 1100Wh.
The biggest gain has been from replacing 6 MR16 QH lamps with a daily
use of 360Wh with 13 48LED MR16 lamps with a daily use of 86Wh.
>
> You've even explained the reason for the expansion by writing in your
> peculiar vernacular on Sep 2 2003: "I too have experianced the
> creeping lifestyle energy consumption".
I was in 2003. Isn't technology grand.
>
> What's incredible even by Usenet standards is that no matter how many
> times your newest foolishness is busted by the old, like a
> self-sentenced Sisyphus you compulsively belch out more phony claims
> such as "Worked as planned from day one". Or should we assume that
> your "design" included tripling the size and using three different
> inverters and 5 different sets of batteries?
So. 1st System 4 sets of batteries. 3 sets of which were second hand.
2nd system 1 set of correctly sized batteries
>
> > Changing the inverter is of no
> >consequence to my systems performance.
>
> Wrong again. If your setup really does get your batteries charged
> "before noon most days" as you've previously claimed <snorf>, then
> having a larger inverter would allow you to make use of the
> afternoon's otherwise wasted energy. IOW, you'd be able to run that
> air compressor and clothes washer off the solar setup rather than the
> generator. Most "experimenters" would consider that a worthwhile gain,
> and any real "designer" wouldn't need the concept explained. But let
> me guess, the reason it won't work for *you* has something to do with
> Wayne Wayne Wayne, or wankers, or cowboys, or "ubiquitous
> experimenters".
Wrong again waynie. If I change my inverter it will be for the purpose
of reducing printing costs in cash, time and energy.
My system is still designed for 1.5kWh/day. Which is what I require.
The washing machine and any power tools are my choice as to how I deal
with them, not yours. My system provides my needs while your system
dictates your routine. Thank you for again proving that you have no
concept of the relationship between the numbers and system design.
bea...@gmail.com
wmbjk...@citlink.net
>On Jun 2, 12:23 am, wmbjkREM...@citlink.net wrote:
>> On Sat, 31 May 2008 08:42:32 -0700 (PDT), beal...@gmail.com wrote:
>> >You know wayne, if you had ever learned to design a system you would
>> >understand that I have reduced my daily load.
>>
>> No, in fact you've more than tripled your consumption since starting.
>> Here are a few of your own numbers to tell the tale:
>> Sept 20 1999 (approx. day 5840) - "375 watt hours per day average"
>
>This system was "built", as opposed to "designed" in the mid eighties
>as I have mentioned before.
In plain English, you started small.
>It is still in service today, although one of the 45W panels has had
>an incident as it were. Still it keeps a radio going. It is not a part
>of my second system.
Then the components are in use, and not a "waste" as you've tried to
paint the idea of starting small.
>It was built on a guess
It was built to a limited budget. Why try to pretend that you could
have made it larger? Why denigrate others who have limited budgets?
>> Oct 8 2003 (approx. day 7665) - "1.2 kWh/day"
>> Jul 30 2007 (approx. day 8760) - "1343" (watt hours)
>
>This is the system that was "Designed" to provide 1.5kWh/day. Which it
>does quite well and has done ever since it was turned on.
IOW, after nearly 20 years, during which time you came to Usenet and
bragged on the joys of living on 375Wh per day and insulted anyone who
didn't accept your wisdumb, you came into some money and bought a
larger setup. Then you unilaterally redefined day 7000 as day 1, began
claiming that "design" was the answer to every question, and that
getting 95+% of your energy from burning fuel is something that
entitles you to invent fault with anybody who dares laugh at your
one-man cargo cult.
>With new appliances replacing those that needed to be replaced (TV,
>computer, and better lighting options etc.)I have slowly but steadily
>reducing my daily load. June 2 2008 - 850Wh. Mind you that is a bit
>lower that my current average of around 1100Wh.
Then you have an excess of 400Wh to exploit, more than enough to
eliminate the generator from the "design", and perhaps enough for an
electric refrigerator. So why are you still burning propane and
routinely running a generator? Most off-gridders can't wait to get
away from that stuff. But what could they possibly know, eh ghinius?
>The biggest gain has been from replacing 6 MR16 QH lamps with a daily
>use of 360Wh with 13 48LED MR16 lamps with a daily use of 86Wh.
If two people each use readily available 12W CFs to light their
personal space for 8 hours, then the total energy use would be 192Wh
per day. So what ever possessed you to go decades using almost twice
as much? And why have you been pretending for so long that your
lighting strategy was something special when it was actually wasteful?
>> You've even explained the reason for the expansion by writing in
your
>> peculiar vernacular on Sep 2 2003: "I too have experianced the
>> creeping lifestyle energy consumption".
>
>I was in 2003. Isn't technology grand.
Then you've been aware for at least 5 years that home energy
consumption frequently changes with advances in technology. So why
have you spent so much time on Usenet hypocritically bashing others
for expanding their setups as their needs changed?
>> What's incredible even by Usenet standards is that no matter how many
>> times your newest foolishness is busted by the old, like a
>> self-sentenced Sisyphus you compulsively belch out more phony claims
>> such as "Worked as planned from day one". Or should we assume that
>> your "design" included tripling the size and using three different
>> inverters and 5 different sets of batteries?
>
>So. 1st System 4 sets of batteries. 3 sets of which were second hand.
5 sets of batteries is a record. I haven't heard of anyone in my
personal travels, or read about anyone else who's come close.
Congratulations!
>2nd system 1 set of correctly sized batteries
LOL 4 sets in 20 years, and 1 set in the last 5. No wonder you feel
entitled to plague the newsgroups with such gems as "six 12V - 100Ah
batteries in series will be 100Ah at 12V twelve 12V - 100Ah
batteries in series will be 100Ah at 24V Adding batteries to a series
string does not add capacity but increases voltage".
http://www.citlink.net/~wmbjk/tbfduwisdumb.htm
>> > Changing the inverter is of no
>> >consequence to my systems performance.
>>
>> Wrong again. If your setup really does get your batteries charged
>> "before noon most days" as you've previously claimed <snorf>, then
>> having a larger inverter would allow you to make use of the
>> afternoon's otherwise wasted energy. IOW, you'd be able to run that
>> air compressor and clothes washer off the solar setup rather than the
>> generator. Most "experimenters" would consider that a worthwhile gain,
>> and any real "designer" wouldn't need the concept explained. But let
>> me guess, the reason it won't work for *you* has something to do with
>> Wayne Wayne Wayne, or wankers, or cowboys, or "ubiquitous
>> experimenters".
>
>Wrong again waynie. If I change my inverter it will be for the purpose
>of reducing printing costs in cash, time and energy.
Well sure, why would you want to use the opportunity to eliminate the
joy and expense of generator use from the "design"? The mind boggles.
>My system is still designed for 1.5kWh/day. Which is what I require.
You just finished writing that you now average 1.1kWh per day. After
such a long history of undeniable contradicting yourself, you gotta'
be some kind of slow learner if you can't keep your "facts" straight
for a single post.
>The washing machine and any power tools are my choice as to how I deal
>with them, not yours.
I'm not trying to make any choices for you. In fact, I enjoy knowing
that you're living the reward for your boneheadedness. I'm merely
pointing out that it's mind-numbingly moronic to burn fuel if you
don't have to, and deranged to claim that bad choices are an example
of good "design".
> My system provides my needs
Anybody can shift 85% of their energy loads onto propane and wood
burning, 10% onto a generator, and redefine the rest as their "needs".
But you're the only one who thinks it's something to brag about and
that it entitles you to bash others. Again, congratulations.
Wayne
bea...@gmail.com
> On Mon, 2 Jun 2008 02:31:03 -0700 (PDT), beal...@gmail.com wrote:
> >On Jun 2, 12:23 am, wmbjkREM...@citlink.net wrote:
> >> On Sat, 31 May 2008 08:42:32 -0700 (PDT), beal...@gmail.com wrote:
> >> >You know wayne, if you had ever learned to design a system you would
> >> >understand that I have reduced my daily load.
>
> >> No, in fact you've more than tripled your consumption since starting.
> >> Here are a few of your own numbers to tell the tale:
> >> Sept 20 1999 (approx. day 5840) - "375 watt hours per day average"
>
> >This system was "built", as opposed to "designed" in the mid eighties
> >as I have mentioned before.
>
> In plain English, you started small.
In plain English, I started with a complete cockup. Just like you.
Unlike you I didn't keep throwing money at a bad design until it would
work during daylight hours. In other words, also plain English, I
accepted the fact that design by "experimenting" was a dead loss.
>
> >It is still in service today, although one of the 45W panels has had
> >an incident as it were. Still it keeps a radio going. It is not a part
> >of my second system.
>
> Then the components are in use, and not a "waste" as you've tried to
> paint the idea of starting small.
>
> >It was built on a guess
>
> It was built to a limited budget. Why try to pretend that you could
> have made it larger? Why denigrate others who have limited budgets?
Budget is a problem for everyone at some stage, but it certainly does
not preclude good design. It just affects the size of that good
design.
>
> >> Oct 8 2003 (approx. day 7665) - "1.2 kWh/day"
> >> Jul 30 2007 (approx. day 8760) - "1343" (watt hours)
>
> >This is the system that was "Designed" to provide 1.5kWh/day. Which it
> >does quite well and has done ever since it was turned on.
>
> IOW, after nearly 20 years, during which time you came to Usenet and
> bragged on the joys of living on 375Wh per day and insulted anyone who
> didn't accept your wisdumb, you came into some money and bought a
> larger setup. Then you unilaterally redefined day 7000 as day 1, began
> claiming that "design" was the answer to every question, and that
> getting 95+% of your energy from burning fuel is something that
> entitles you to invent fault with anybody who dares laugh at your
> one-man cargo cult.
Ok, like you I entered the world of solar power on a guess and thought
I was clever, no I thought I was great. I had light and a TV. It was
still a cockup, bereft of any design of worth. And again unlike you,
who has persisted with a poor design which limits you to the life of a
lizard, I learned to correctly design a solar power system that meets
a need.
>
> >With new appliances replacing those that needed to be replaced (TV,
> >computer, and better lighting options etc.)I have slowly but steadily
> >reducing my daily load. June 2 2008 - 850Wh. Mind you that is a bit
> >lower that my current average of around 1100Wh.
>
> Then you have an excess of 400Wh to exploit, more than enough to
> eliminate the generator from the "design", and perhaps enough for an
> electric refrigerator. So why are you still burning propane and
> routinely running a generator? Most off-gridders can't wait to get
> away from that stuff. But what could they possibly know, eh ghinius?
You keep persisting that I am using a generator to run my house. This
is a lie. I use an alternator as a battery charger, perhaps five times
during winter to maintain the level of charge in my batteries. The
"generator" you keep harping on is in the workshop a hundred meters
away.
>
> >The biggest gain has been from replacing 6 MR16 QH lamps with a daily
> >use of 360Wh with 13 48LED MR16 lamps with a daily use of 86Wh.
>
> If two people each use readily available 12W CFs to light their
> personal space for 8 hours, then the total energy use would be 192Wh
> per day. So what ever possessed you to go decades using almost twice
> as much? And why have you been pretending for so long that your
> lighting strategy was something special when it was actually wasteful?
Because the system was designed around readily available lighting of
good quality at the time.
>
> >> You've even explained the reason for the expansion by writing in
> your
> >> peculiar vernacular on Sep 2 2003: "I too have experianced the
> >> creeping lifestyle energy consumption".
>
> >I was in 2003. Isn't technology grand.
>
> Then you've been aware for at least 5 years that home energy
> consumption frequently changes with advances in technology. So why
> have you spent so much time on Usenet hypocritically bashing others
> for expanding their setups as their needs changed?
>
> >> What's incredible even by Usenet standards is that no matter how many
> >> times your newest foolishness is busted by the old, like a
> >> self-sentenced Sisyphus you compulsively belch out more phony claims
> >> such as "Worked as planned from day one". Or should we assume that
> >> your "design" included tripling the size and using three different
> >> inverters and 5 different sets of batteries?
>
> >So. 1st System 4 sets of batteries. 3 sets of which were second hand.
>
> 5 sets of batteries is a record. I haven't heard of anyone in my
> personal travels, or read about anyone else who's come close.
> Congratulations!
>
> >2nd system 1 set of correctly sized batteries
>
> LOL 4 sets in 20 years, and 1 set in the last 5. No wonder you feel
> entitled to plague the newsgroups with such gems as "six 12V - 100Ah
> batteries in series will be 100Ah at 12V twelve 12V - 100Ah
> batteries in series will be 100Ah at 24V Adding batteries to a series
> string does not add capacity but increases voltage".http://www.citlink.net/~wmbjk/tbfduwisdumb.htm
>
>
>
> >> > Changing the inverter is of no
> >> >consequence to my systems performance.
>
> >> Wrong again. If your setup really does get your batteries charged
> >> "before noon most days" as you've previously claimed <snorf>, then
> >> having a larger inverter would allow you to make use of the
> >> afternoon's otherwise wasted energy. IOW, you'd be able to run that
> >> air compressor and clothes washer off the solar setup rather than the
> >> generator. Most "experimenters" would consider that a worthwhile gain,
> >> and any real "designer" wouldn't need the concept explained. But let
> >> me guess, the reason it won't work for *you* has something to do with
> >> Wayne Wayne Wayne, or wankers, or cowboys, or "ubiquitous
> >> experimenters".
>
> >Wrong again waynie. If I change my inverter it will be for the purpose
> >of reducing printing costs in cash, time and energy.
>
> Well sure, why would you want to use the opportunity to eliminate the
> joy and expense of generator use from the "design"? The mind boggles.
Still lying about the generator use, eh.
>
> >My system is still designed for 1.5kWh/day. Which is what I require.
>
> You just finished writing that you now average 1.1kWh per day. After
> such a long history of undeniable contradicting yourself, you gotta'
> be some kind of slow learner if you can't keep your "facts" straight
> for a single post.
Bla Bla bla. Same old nonsense. "AVERAGE" means:
noun: A statistic describing the location of a distribution; "it set
the norm for American homes"
verb: Amount to or come to an average, without loss or gain; "The
number of hours I work per work averages out to 40"
adj: Around the middle of a scale of evaluation of physical measures;
"an orange of average size"; "intermediate capacity"; "a plane with
intermediate range"; "medium bombers"
adj: Approximating the statistical norm or average or expected value;
"the average income in New England is below that of the nation"; "of
average height for his age"; "the mean annual rainfall"
adj: Relating to or constituting the middle value of an ordered set of
values (or the average of the middle two in an even-numbered set);
"the median value of 17, 20, and 36 is 20"; "the median income for the
year was $15,000"
And then there is you: adj: Lacking special distinction, rank, or
status
>
> >The washing machine and any power tools are my choice as to how I deal
> >with them, not yours.
>
> I'm not trying to make any choices for you. In fact, I enjoy knowing
> that you're living the reward for your boneheadedness. I'm merely
> pointing out that it's mind-numbingly moronic to burn fuel if you
> don't have to, and deranged to claim that bad choices are an example
> of good "design".
>
> > My system provides my needs
>
> Anybody can shift 85% of their energy loads onto propane and wood
> burning, 10% onto a generator, and redefine the rest as their "needs".
> But you're the only one who thinks it's something to brag about and
> that it entitles you to bash others. Again, congratulations.
Anybody can throw money at a badly designed system until it will work
during daylight hours. That doesn't mean they know anything about
designing a system, only that they have more money than brains.
We all have budgets, why denigrate those who live within theirs.
>
> Wayne
wmbjk...@citlink.net
>On Jun 3, 1:13 am, wmbjkREM...@citlink.net wrote:
>> On Mon, 2 Jun 2008 02:31:03 -0700 (PDT), beal...@gmail.com wrote:
>> >On Jun 2, 12:23 am, wmbjkREM...@citlink.net wrote:
>> >> On Sat, 31 May 2008 08:42:32 -0700 (PDT), beal...@gmail.com wrote:
>> In plain English, you started small.
>
>In plain English, I started with a complete cockup. Just like you.
After 13 years I'm still using my original batteries and inverters,
and everything's in good shape. How is that like your being on your
5th set of batteries and shopping for your third inverter? I've always
generated >95% of my energy from solar and wind. How is that like your
getting <5%? I've never bought an ounce of propane for this house. How
is that like your buying and hauling, what, 6000 gallons? When I say
"my energy needs", I mean everything, including workshop, which itself
includes substantial welding and other real shop tools. How is that
like your pretending that the workshop, laundry, etc. is some sort of
separate issue that you can divorce to make your "system" appear
better?
>Unlike you I didn't keep throwing money at a bad design
You've more than *tripled* the size of your setup, and have been
"throwing" money at hardware and fuel for decades, *constantly*. So
what's the point of trying to disguise the process and the economics
with semantics?
>I accepted the fact that design by "experimenting" was a dead loss.
Pretend all you like, but it's plain that you've been making one
change after another, yet still haven't come close to becoming
energy-independent. A smarter person would long ago have experimented
to harvest the excess energy you claim to be wasting, and thereby
eliminate the need for routine generator use. Not that I believe *you*
could do anything so easy. That's because considering your compulsion
for deception, it's virtually certain that you've wildly overstated
the excess, and understated the generator time. Not to mention that a
more energetic person in your sunny location would also have added
solar water heating instead of spending many times as much effort in a
chair, pounding out contradictory and self-destructive essays
inventing fault.
>> >It was built on a guess
>>
>> It was built to a limited budget. Why try to pretend that you could
>> have made it larger? Why denigrate others who have limited budgets?
>
>Budget is a problem for everyone at some stage, but it certainly does
>not preclude good design. It just affects the size of that good
>design.
Your strange habit of calling it a good design does not make it so. A
need for routine generator use, for laundry for example, is a major
deficiency that most of us aren't willing to accept. Of those who must
live with such limitations, none that I know of would claim that it
proves they're a "designer" entitled to bash others suffering similar
limitations. Your insistence at tap-dancing loads that don't fit into
a separate category is nothing more than phony accounting, just like
your self-titles of "designer" and" power consultant" are phony. Or in
plain English, BS.
>> >With new appliances replacing those that needed to be replaced (TV,
>> >computer, and better lighting options etc.)I have slowly but steadily
>> >reducing my daily load. June 2 2008 - 850Wh. Mind you that is a bit
>> >lower that my current average of around 1100Wh.
>>
>> Then you have an excess of 400Wh to exploit, more than enough to
>> eliminate the generator from the "design", and perhaps enough for an
>> electric refrigerator. So why are you still burning propane and
>> routinely running a generator? Most off-gridders can't wait to get
>> away from that stuff. But what could they possibly know, eh ghinius?
>
>You keep persisting that I am using a generator to run my house. This
>is a lie.
>The "generator" you keep harping on is in the workshop a hundred meters
>away.
No one other than you plays silly word games and pretends that every
load over 600W is somehow separate. Besides, once again you've
forgotten some previous wisdumb, where you wrote that you could run
your clothes washer off the inverter "if I wanted to" or some such.
Why not try some critical thinking for a change - ask yourself what
*you'd* say if someone wrote that half their loads were powered 100%
by one "system", and the other half was powered by a generator, and
that such silly accounting entitled them to criticize others. If that
was a fair strategy then it would qualify every chronically-short
setup as first-rate. Face it, you'd call BS in a heartbeat. Not just
for the obvious reasons, but because you never miss a chance to be a
hypocrite.
> I use an alternator as a battery charger, perhaps five times
>during winter to maintain the level of charge in my batteries.
>>
>> >The biggest gain has been from replacing 6 MR16 QH lamps with a daily
>> >use of 360Wh with 13 48LED MR16 lamps with a daily use of 86Wh.
>>
>> If two people each use readily available 12W CFs to light their
>> personal space for 8 hours, then the total energy use would be 192Wh
>> per day. So what ever possessed you to go decades using almost twice
>> as much? And why have you been pretending for so long that your
>> lighting strategy was something special when it was actually wasteful?
>
>Because the system was designed around readily available lighting of
>good quality at the time.
Baloney. How many times have you pretended that your lighting was
something special, even though we now find out that it needed
replacement in order to catch up with the efficiency of stuff that was
readily available from Home Depot at least a decade ago?
>> Well sure, why would you want to use the opportunity to eliminate the
>> joy and expense of generator use from the "design"? The mind boggles.
>
>Still lying about the generator use, eh.
On planet Ghio it might be a lie to say that your home requires
routine generator use to function. Let's see how similar our planets
are - can you name any Earth-dwellers who believe that running small,
routine loads off a generator is somehow the hallmark of great solar
design?
>> >My system is still designed for 1.5kWh/day. Which is what I require.
>>
>> You just finished writing that you now average 1.1kWh per day. After
>> such a long history of undeniable contradicting yourself, you gotta'
>> be some kind of slow learner if you can't keep your "facts" straight
>> for a single post.
>
>Bla Bla bla. Same old nonsense. "AVERAGE" means:
Weasel away, but consider that most readers have figured out that you
either don't have any excess, or are too pigheaded to make use of it.
Perhaps you just like the smell of gasoline in the morning.
>> > My system provides my needs
Anybody who buys a generator alone could say the exact same thing. And
if after that they turn the hypocrisy volume up to 11, then they'll
get ridiculed just as you have. It's unlikely they'd earn 2 free web
sites though, you'll always be the record-holder on that count.
http://www.citlink.net/~wmbjk/tbfduwisdumb.htm
http://www.lowexpecations.com/
>We all have budgets, why denigrate those who live within theirs.
I try to help people who have limited budgets. Just this afternoon I
answered a call to find a substitute for a ridiculously overpriced
circuit breaker. Savings - some $150. I do like denigrating imbeciles
though, and I don't much care how much money they have. You just
happen to be a broke nitwit. You might try winning a lottery to see if
it changes anyone's opinion of your wisdumb.
Wayne
bea...@gmail.com
> On Mon, 2 Jun 2008 16:41:29 -0700 (PDT), beal...@gmail.com wrote:
> >On Jun 3, 1:13 am, wmbjkREM...@citlink.net wrote:
> >> On Mon, 2 Jun 2008 02:31:03 -0700 (PDT), beal...@gmail.com wrote:
> >> >On Jun 2, 12:23 am, wmbjkREM...@citlink.net wrote:
> >> >> On Sat, 31 May 2008 08:42:32 -0700 (PDT), beal...@gmail.com wrote:
> >> In plain English, you started small.
>
> >In plain English, I started with a complete cockup. Just like you.
>
> After 13 years I'm still using my original batteries and inverters,
> and everything's in good shape. How is that like your being on your
> 5th set of batteries and shopping for your third inverter? I've always
> generated >95% of my energy from solar and wind. How is that like your
> getting <5%? I've never bought an ounce of propane for this house. How
> is that like your buying and hauling, what, 6000 gallons? When I say
> "my energy needs", I mean everything, including workshop, which itself
> includes substantial welding and other real shop tools. How is that
> like your pretending that the workshop, laundry, etc. is some sort of
> separate issue that you can divorce to make your "system" appear
> better?
>
> >Unlike you I didn't keep throwing money at a bad design
Ok wayne, crunch time again. Got your running shoes handy.
Show us the numbers for you system. Come on, it's so simple, even I
can do it.
Tell us what your loads are, how many watts each item uses and how
long they are run for.
After all, this information is the basis of solar system design.
Tell us about the joys of arranging to stay home simply because of all
the things that need to be run while the sun shines.
No numbers, no hope, no credibility.
Solar Flare
More lies from the expert. 13 years ad his batteries have been used to
weld?...ROFLMFAO.
Anybody with half a brain (right up your alley) knows you are full of crap,
now.
Let's see some pictures of the inside of your batteries while you weld. I
didn't think so...loser.
<wmbjk...@citlink.net> wrote in message
news:g8jb449m0nm58j8un...@4ax.com...
> After 13 years I'm still using my original batteries and inverters,
> and everything's in good shape. How is that like your being on your
> 5th set of batteries and shopping for your third inverter? I've always
> generated >95% of my energy from solar and wind. How is that like your
> getting <5%? I've never bought an ounce of propane for this house. How
> is that like your buying and hauling, what, 6000 gallons? When I say
> "my energy needs", I mean everything, including workshop, which itself
> includes substantial welding and other real shop tools. How is that
> like your pretending that the workshop, laundry, etc. is some sort of
> separate issue that you can divorce to make your "system" appear
> better?
>
> Wayne
>
wmbjk...@citlink.net
<solar...@hotmale.invalid> wrote:
>Most people don't called using a 60 watt Weller soldering pencil welding.
You've been reading the ghinius too much if you think you can get away
with making up your own reality.
Welding equipment http://www.citlink.net/~wmbjk/welding_equipment.htm
(250A MIG, 185A inverter stick-TIG, 40A plasma cutter)
A few of my more interesting welding projects.
http://www.citlink.net/~wmbjk/overshot.htm
http://www.citlink.net/~wmbjk/testtank.htm
http://www.citlink.net/~wmbjk/tracker.htm
http://www.citlink.net/~wmbjk/frank.htm
http://www.citlink.net/~wmbjk/images/main/tower%20move%20from%20inside.JPG
The turbine tower was the only project where an engine-driven machine
was used, and only then because a bit of the work was done too far
outside the shop for cords to reach.
>More lies from the expert.
I never call myself an expert. But I suppose that compared to nitwits
like you I might as well be NASA.
> 13 years ad his batteries have been used to
>weld?...ROFLMFAO.
If you'd done more and blathered less, then you wouldn't need to be
told that fabricating is primarily about cutting and fitting. Mostly
110V power tools, short bursts of 1500W for chop saws and up to 6000W
for plasma cutting. Most of my MIG welding takes about 4000W, stick
and TIG up to about 8000W, but rarely for more than a few minutes at a
time and often only for seconds. Deduct about 1000W generally from
those numbers to account for net charging (concurrent with normal
house loads). I have seen draws that exceeded 400A (24V), but those
tend to be surges and well under my surge capacity of 16kW. Summary -
the type of fabricating I do takes larger-than-average inverter
capacity, some of it 220V. But battery loads are nothing special since
we have a setup large enough to power a relatively normal house, which
needs as much power, and usually more energy.
>Anybody with half a brain (right up your alley) knows you are full of crap,
>now.
No, nitwit, anybody with a brain now knows that you're just another
pretender who needs Usenet lessons to understand the difference
between power and energy. Not that they'll ever sink in.
>Let's see some pictures of the inside of your batteries while you weld. I
>didn't think so...loser.
You've got some kind of nerve to ask for pictures of anything Gymmy
Bob. I've yet to see a photo from you of so much as a D cell. Which
combined with your frequently displayed lack of experience (as
displayed above), and all the nym-shifting, convinced me from the
start that you're a solar Walter Mitty. Of course the malformed
sentences, drunken thinking, and lazy top-posting certainly applied
the exclamation point.
Wayne
Solar Flare
ROFLMFAO
Got any pictures showing I haven't shown any pictures?? Where's your proof
this time?
<wmbjk...@citlink.net> wrote in message
news:qk7d44lrgol3a43ag...@4ax.com...
bea...@gmail.com
>
> >We all have budgets, why denigrate those who live within theirs.
>
> I try to help people who have limited budgets. Just this afternoon I
> answered a call to find a substitute for a ridiculously overpriced
> circuit breaker. Savings - some $150. I do like denigrating imbeciles
> though, and I don't much care how much money they have. You just
> happen to be a broke nitwit. You might try winning a lottery to see if
> it changes anyone's opinion of your wisdumb.
>
> Wayne
"Who was that masked man?"
"I dunno, but he sure do run perty. Can't hardly see im fer the dust."
No numbers, no hope, no credibility.
The real story.
It’s the mid eighties, we had two properties, both on the never never.
One a house in the suburbs the other a bush block.
Interest rates are approaching 18%, It’s getting hard to keep up and
feed a family of four, two of which are under the age of five.
When it came right down to it one of the properties had to go. If we
sold the bush block we could make a few more payments on the house. Of
course in the end we would be right back where we were, or, we could
sell the house and go bush.
Of course there is not a lot of work in the bush, at least not like
the city. Oh to hell with it. We sold the house, paid our outstanding
bills, cut up the credit cards and moved into a couple of caravans
(trailers to the yanks) with an annex between them. Candles and a gas
lamp. What fun.
I would sit up after everyone had been tucked up in bed and work on
the house plans. There were also the 12 hour shifts at the quarry six
days a week.
At the end of the day I would race down into the pit and hand load a
couple of tonne of rock into the trailer. Tell you what, being young
is a great thing.
During these early times I also built (note that I did not say
designed) my first solar power system. Four state of the art solar
panels (45W Solarex) and two twelve volt batteries in parallel with a
shunt charge controller.
Finished the house plans and gave them to a friend who put them into
an acceptable format for the council. With approval we started to
build. We got as far as the foundations and a third of the frame when
I had a heart attack. I was forty-two.
People shook their heads and said that: my dream was finished, that I
would never build the house, that I would have to go back to the city.
I said “Bull Shit”.
Things were hard. Six months wait for by-pass surgery. Batteries died
and were replaced with second hand. All too often.
Two years after surgery I was nearly back to a normal lifestyle and
there was an ad in the paper saying that a Solar Power Design course
was going to be run.
Didn’t have to be told twice, within a couple of weeks I was in
school. What an eye opener. What was before, a black art, was now a
simple calculation.
Years working on the house. Could have built it faster except we would
did not want to be in debt to the banks ever again. Me and the misses,
more than 100 tonnes of stone, concrete and steel with our own hands
and the occasional helpful friend.
The system I had “built” worked, but was a mismatched pile of
components. It could have been reworked with a suitable injection of
cash, although it would never be a well designed system.
I “Designed” a new system. I worked out what I wanted to run and how I
wanted to run it. I looked at pumps, lights, TVs, cooking, heating,
hot water and dozens of other small things.
I didn’t spend a cent until I knew what I was going to power and how
it would be powered.
Then I went shopping. I bought what was required (all top quality) and
assembled it correctly and turned it on, fifteen years ago. It’s still
running.
Over the years new technology has come along. I have owned three TVs
in this time. Each one a little bit larger than the last, using a
little bit less energy than the last.
One piece of technology I have never used is CF lamps. I simply don’t
like them. Others love them. They are a direct replacement for
incandescent lamps which I have never used where we live. I use lights
where I need them. That is seldom applicable to this style of lamp.
Being a cook, I hate electric cooking almost as much as I hate eating
micro waved food. I don’t have either.
I heat my house with wood. Why not? I have a sustainable timber
resource.
I accept new technology where it suites my needs. LED lamps have
allowed me to light the whole of my office and lounge room for a very
small energy expenditure. (approx, 24W) Certainly much less than CF
lamps. And being MR16 packages they are a direct replacement for the
10 Watt dichroic lamps I was using.
I am able to consider a new laser printer because of the savings, but,
the new printer requires more energy (1000W) than my current inverter
(600W) can supply. I am therefore considering a 1500W inverter to
replace my 600 Watt. This change, if I decide to make it, does not
change my systems parameters of 1.5kWh/day. To change that I would
have to upgrade my battery set and panel array.
My only AC loads in the house are the computer, printer and modem with
the occasional cake mixer for the odd birthday cake.
You can “Build” a system as I did in the first place, or, you can
“Design” a system as I did in the second place. I know which one will
perform better, as well as being better value for your buck.
Now, the above is a list of my crimes against humanity, well,
according to wayne.
Wayne also says that I should use the excess energy from my panels
that would otherwise be lost. You can’t loose energy. The only loss is
in his head. He has allowed technology to dictate his lifestyle. He
built a system that will not meet his needs outside of daylight
hours.
One and a half days of cloud and it is full time generator for wayne.
Wayne says that the laundry belongs in the house. Tradition says that
the laundry belongs in the laundry. My laundry is in the workshop with
the large power tools, after all a washing machine is a large power
tool for washing cloths. We use a solar powered cloths line for drying
our laundry.
Wayne claims that I use my generator to run the house. Truth is, there
is no place to connect the generator to the house. I do use a 35A
alternator as a battery charger, perhaps five or six times during
winter, as required, due to too many days of bad weather.
Wayne claims to have designed his system, but, is unable to define his
loads or input. He did not design his system at all. He copied it from
a magazine, found it would not supply his energy requirement and threw
money at it until it would at least work during daylight hours. He has
yet (after ten years) to prove otherwise.
He also claimed to have built his house. Truth is, that after being
questioned about this claim he changed his story to that of being the
general contractor. As the GC he failed to oversee the work being
done. He allowed building to start on a green concrete floor then
complained about it cracking and blamed the subcontractor. He has
blamed other subcontractors for his failings as GC as well.
Why is wayne so mad at me? Simple, he put up a web site saying “Look
at what I did”.
I had a look and then had the gall to ask what he had actually had
done.
i.e. What were the loads? You would have thought I had kicked his old
mother down a well the way he carried on.
I’m still asking the same question and he is still carrying on like a
pork chop and not a load in sight.
wmbjk...@citlink.net
>there was an ad in the paper saying that a Solar Power Design course
>was going to be run.
>
>Didn’t have to be told twice, within a couple of weeks I was in
>school. What an eye opener. What was before, a black art, was now a
>simple calculation.
Black art?! It was pure ghinius to have believed that grade-school
math required a course to understand.
>Then I went shopping. I bought what was required (all top quality) and
>assembled it correctly and turned it on, fifteen years ago.
Let's see if you can follow along here with some of the "black art"
math. Here are two of your previous quotes:
Sept 20 1999 - "375 watt hours per day average"
Oct 8 2003 - "1.2 kWh/day"
Therefore, the great epiphany of "design" <snorf> occurred sometime
between 1999 and 2003, which makes it between 9 and 5 years ago, not
15. And we can be sure of the dates because you wrote on Mar 1 2001:
"I have just installed my fourth set of batteries". Which means that
your 5th (current) set was installed less than 7 years ago.
Now I ask you a very simple question: What is the point of writing new
BS considering how often you bust yourself with previous wisdumb?
> I am therefore considering a 1500W inverter to
>replace my 600 Watt. This change, if I decide to make it, does not
>change my systems parameters of 1.5kWh/day. To change that I would
>have to upgrade my battery set and panel array.
You've previously claimed that your batteries are charged most days
before noon. I never believed that because "subverting" a charge
controller to "float" at 15V is a sure sign of running short and
trying to prevent throttling of supply. But if it were true, then
considering 480W of PV, one could conservatively estimate 2*350=700Wh
wasted "most" afternoons. If we define "most" as 5 days per week,
that's 3.5kWh per week, against your stated weekly consumption of
8.4kWh.
So here is another very simple question: Who in their right mind
would waste fuel running a generator if they have an untapped surplus
of >40%?
>Wayne also says that I should use the excess energy from my panels
>that would otherwise be lost. You can’t loose energy.
The word you were aiming for is "lose" Mr. Editar, and you're still
boneheadedly dead-wrong. In terms of PV charge controllers, once
batteries are full, energy that otherwise could have been utilized is
lost. http://www.thefreedictionary.com/dict.asp?Word=lost "3. Not used
to one's benefit or advantage: a lost opportunity."
>Tradition says that
>the laundry belongs in the laundry. My laundry is in the workshop with
>the large power tools, after all a washing machine is a large power
>tool for washing cloths.
That's a standout quack-quote even by your warped standards. It
definitely qualifies for
http://www.citlink.net/~wmbjk/tbfduwisdumb.htm. But you're surely
going to produce more, so I'll wait to do the update.
Wayne
bea...@gmail.com
> to one's benefit or advantage: a lost opportunity."
>
> >Tradition says that
> >the laundry belongs in the laundry. My laundry is in the workshop with
> >the large power tools, after all a washing machine is a large power
> >tool for washing cloths.
>
> That's a standout quack-quote even by your warped standards. It
> going to produce more, so I'll wait to do the update.
>
> Wayne
Ok wayne, crunch time again. Got your running shoes handy.
Show us the numbers for you system. Come on, it's so simple, even I
can do it.
Tell us what your loads are, how many watts each item uses and how
long they are run for.
After all, this information is the basis of solar system design.
Tell us about the joys of arranging to stay home simply because of all
the things that need to be run while the sun shines.
No numbers, no hope, no credibility.
bea...@gmail.com
>
> The word you were aiming for is "lose" Mr. Editar,
Just another small example of your total ignorance of all subjects.
Yes the word is "Lose" which shows that you remember what you were
taught in the sixth grade.
BUT, and this is the where your ignorance shines like a beacon in the
night, the word "Editing" covers several levels of expertise in
writing. I don't do copy editing even though I can spell "Editor".
Solar Flare
should. Stop answering his silly rants. You know the sun and loneliness has
affected his brain. Anybody that claims a million kW off a 24volt battery
bank has a loose screw and a blatant lying complex. Don't feed his OCD.
<bea...@gmail.com> wrote in message
news:2da22b4c-f243-4072...@c19g2000prf.googlegroups.com...
wmbjk...@citlink.net
>On Jun 6, 1:12 am, wmbjkREM...@citlink.net wrote:
>> On Wed, 4 Jun 2008 23:09:15 -0700 (PDT), beal...@gmail.com wrote:
>> >there was an ad in the paper saying that a Solar Power Design course
>> >was going to be run.
>>
>> >Didn’t have to be told twice, within a couple of weeks I was in
>> >school. What an eye opener. What was before, a black art, was now a
>> >simple calculation.
>>
>> Black art?! It was pure ghinius to have believed that grade-school
>> math required a course to understand.
>>
>> >Then I went shopping. I bought what was required (all top quality) and
>> >assembled it correctly and turned it on, fifteen years ago.
>>
>> Let's see if you can follow along here with some of the "black art"
>> math. Here are two of your previous quotes:
>>
>> Sept 20 1999 - "375 watt hours per day average"
>> Oct 8 2003 - "1.2 kWh/day"
>>
>> Therefore, the great epiphany of "design" <snorf> occurred sometime
>> between 1999 and 2003, which makes it between 9 and 5 years ago, not
>> 15. And we can be sure of the dates because you wrote on Mar 1 2001:
>> "I have just installed my fourth set of batteries". Which means that
>> your 5th (current) set was installed less than 7 years ago.
Cat got your tongue? Do you imagine that the newbs you were trying to
impress by starting this thread somehow won't be able to see through
your pathetic attempt to snow them with an easily-exposed bald-faced
lie about how your "system" has been working for 15 years even though
it's only existed for <7? Or are you thinking that a BS factor of ~3X
is minor compared to some of your previous calamities like the 10XBS
factor 1200W-12V-10A lecture, or the 12000XBS factor 300k wire advice?
>> Now I ask you a very simple question: What is the point of writing
new
>> BS considering how often you bust yourself with previous wisdumb?
Your silence begs another question. How much of your "power
consulting" took place *before* you were struck by the (Tm) Deezine
Revelation?
>> > I am therefore considering a 1500W inverter to
>> >replace my 600 Watt. This change, if I decide to make it, does not
>> >change my systems parameters of 1.5kWh/day. To change that I would
>> >have to upgrade my battery set and panel array.
>>
>> You've previously claimed that your batteries are charged most days
>> before noon. I never believed that because "subverting" a charge
>> controller to "float" at 15V is a sure sign of running short and
>> trying to prevent throttling of supply. But if it were true, then
>> considering 480W of PV, one could conservatively estimate 2*350=700Wh
>> wasted "most" afternoons. If we define "most" as 5 days per week,
>> that's 3.5kWh per week, against your stated weekly consumption of
>> 8.4kWh.
>>
>> So here is another very simple question: Who in their right mind
>> would waste fuel running a generator if they have an untapped surplus
>> of >40%?
More silence! Dang, you've only provided 2 feeble excuses so far - "my
choice" and "nothing to loose". I was sure that you were good for at
least one more. Perhaps you're getting too old for your shtick and
it's time that your chair be rolled into the Old BS Artists' Home.
>> >Wayne also says that I should use the excess energy from my panels
>> >that would otherwise be lost. You can’t loose energy.
>>
>> The word you were aiming for is "lose" Mr. Editar, and you're still
>> boneheadedly dead-wrong. In terms of PV charge controllers, once
>> batteries are full, energy that otherwise could have been utilized is
>> lost.http://www.thefreedictionary.com/dict.asp?Word=lost"3. Not used
>> to one's benefit or advantage: a lost opportunity."
>>
>> >Tradition says that
>> >the laundry belongs in the laundry. My laundry is in the workshop with
>> >the large power tools, after all a washing machine is a large power
>> >tool for washing cloths.
>>
>> That's a standout quack-quote even by your warped standards. It
>> definitely qualifies forhttp://www.citlink.net/~wmbjk/tbfduwisdumb.htm. But you're surely
>> going to produce more, so I'll wait to do the update.
>>
>> Wayne
>
>Ok wayne, crunch time again.
George, your habit of starting threads with a logic-free post that
nobody agrees with, attacking straw men, elaborating with wildly
exaggerated BS about yourself, and then defending that by BSing about
others, has *never* worked, and I can't imagine why you ever believed
it could. Have you considered experimenting <chuckle> with your M.O.?
Why not try pretending that you're a person of normal intelligence,
perhaps by only writing when you can answer a specific question with a
genuinely useful response. Yes, that would cut the number of your
posts down to almost none, but you'd be miles farther ahead and have a
ton of free time that could be applied toward finally achieving some
modicum of energy independence.
Wayne
wmbjk...@citlink.net
>On Jun 6, 1:12 am, wmbjkREM...@citlink.net wrote:
>
>>
>> The word you were aiming for is "lose" Mr. Editar,
>
>Just another small example of your total ignorance of all subjects.
>Yes the word is "Lose"
No kidding? Are you sure, because some edatirs like to use an
alternate spelling. For example - "An inverter running at its max
continous rateing will loose X number of watts as heat."
http://groups.google.com/group/alt.solar.photovoltaic/msg/09bb77f1f5ed4192
"you cant loose. "
http://groups.google.com/group/alt.solar.photovoltaic/msg/b156a1d21601952d,
etc.
> which shows that you remember what you were
>taught in the sixth grade.
>
>BUT, and this is the where your ignorance shines like a beacon in the
>night, the word "Editing" covers several levels of expertise in
>writing. I don't do copy editing
I take that to mean that you practice some level of "expertise"
*below* copy editing. What exactly would that be Mr. Edotar? And it
begs the question - if someone requires the services of an editor, why
would they hire you instead of somebody who knows how to spell?
> even though I can spell "Editor".
Perhaps your writing course didn't cover parody. Or more likely you're
pretending to forget the spelling variations at your own web site
http://www.citlink.net/~wmbjk/tbfduwisdumb.htm.
Wayne
bea...@gmail.com
The only noise we hear is the slap of your feet fading into the
distance, once again, when faced with the simple request for the
actual loads on your system
Ok wayne, crunch time again. Got your running shoes handy.
Show us the numbers for your system. Come on, it's so simple, even I
bea...@gmail.com
> On Thu, 5 Jun 2008 17:14:32 -0700 (PDT), beal...@gmail.com wrote:
> >On Jun 6, 1:12 am, wmbjkREM...@citlink.net wrote:
>
> >> The word you were aiming for is "lose" Mr. Editar,
>
> >Just another small example of your total ignorance of all subjects.
> >Yes the word is "Lose"
>
> No kidding? Are you sure, because some edatirs like to use an
> alternate spelling. For example - "An inverter running at its max
> "you cant loose. "http://groups.google.com/group/alt.solar.photovoltaic/msg/b156a1d2160...,
> etc.
>
> > which shows that you remember what you were
> >taught in the sixth grade.
>
> >BUT, and this is the where your ignorance shines like a beacon in the
> >night, the word "Editing" covers several levels of expertise in
> >writing. I don't do copy editing
>
> I take that to mean that you practice some level of "expertise"
> *below* copy editing. What exactly would that be Mr. Edotar? And it
> begs the question - if someone requires the services of an editor, why
> would they hire you instead of somebody who knows how to spell?
>
> > even though I can spell "Editor".
>
> Perhaps your writing course didn't cover parody. Or more likely you're
> pretending to forget the spelling variations at your own web sitehttp://www.citlink.net/~wmbjk/tbfduwisdumb.htm.
>
> Wayne
The questions that have waited for an answer for ten years;
What are the loads of your system, how many watts do they use, how
long do they run.
The only sound to break the silence for the last ten years is the slap
of your feet fading into the distance every time these questions are
asked.
Watt meter definitions:
World - A device to measure the electrical load of an appliance.
Wayne - A party trick to impress people with.