Challenge To krw, Salmon Egg, CS, charles Perry Re Power-Save, KVAR and Power reduction
Politically Incorrect
the Power-save and KVAR Power Reducers are scams.
so, please be so kind as to educate us ignorant folk
http://www1.eere.energy.gov/industry/bestpractices/pdfs/power_factor.pdf
Apparently the US Department of Energy and Alcoa Aluminum are party to the
scam. Please provide your analysis of the above referenced document and
explain how they are deceiving us. Explain how their results are
scientifically impossible and therefore part of a conspiracy to scam the
unsuspecting.
http://www1.eere.energy.gov/industry/bestpractices/pdfs/mc60405.pdf
Please provide analysis showing that this report completely contradicts the
science of electricity.
http://www.pserc.wisc.edu/Sauer_Reactive%20Power_Sep%202003.pdf
Peter Sauer of the University of Illinois is apparently a scammer, in your
estimation. Please analyze his paper and tell us poor unwashed how he is
deceiving us.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Reactive_power#Real.2C_reactive.2C_and_apparent_power
Being that Wikipedia is nothing but lies, please verify that the article
referenced is nothing but a lie and how it contributes to the scamming of
America
http://www.allaboutcircuits.com/vol_2/chpt_11/2.html
Detail the lies in this article from allaboutcircuits dot com
http://www.the-power-factor-site.com/
Please provide detail about the lies that are being promulgated in the above
presentation. We the great unwashed rely on your expertise to keep us from
being the victims of scams
To Mr CS, who started the thread about the Power-Save 1200, and who later
gleefully piled on me, please be advised that the folks here who have been
so adamant that power-Save and KVAR are scams, you should be aware that
these folks have demonstrated no knowledge of the research and the science
of the last 25 years in the subject of reactive power and power factor
optimization. They may know something about some things, but that does not
mean they know everything about everything. Their refusal to do any
research, their refusal to read the reports and the papers and the RESULT of
real time installation, their failure to make a few calls, shows them for
what they are - pompous asses who bray and kick and call names. But they do
not research. They are unwilling to educate themselves.After all, if they
were to do so, they might learn something. They might realize they are wrong
about something. they might have to admit that they don't know everything.
There IS science behind this. Do your research and check references and see
for your self. But stop pretending you know everything. Stop pretending that
you are the be all and end all of science. You're woefully lacking.
Charles Perry
"Politically Incorrect" <bill...@tastelessjokes.org> wrote in message
news:tZCdna5xaOAfzWbb...@comcast.com...
> You folks purport to be experts. You state categorically that devices like
> the Power-save and KVAR Power Reducers are scams.
Why don't you stop posting links that are irrelevent to your application of
the product. A cap at a motor helps. A cap at the meter when the motors
are in the facility does not reduce your consumption. Easy as that. Let me
explain it in terms you might understand. A bullet proof vest, properly
worn, will stop small arms fire to the torso. However, if you put it in the
closet, drive to the local quicky mart, and get shot, it won't help. It is
all in the location of the product.
So please stop posting that anyone on here says caps don't help. They do IF
you put them in the appropriate place. Any power systems analysis program
can be used to prove what we are saying. Very very simple lab demos can
prove it also.
For someone billed on kW (like a residence) the following may reduce the
bill:
Utility....Meter....wire....CAP.Motor
The following will not:
Utility....Meter.Cap...wire....motor
Notice the importance of location. It is not uncommon for scammers to play
on the ignorance of consumers to sell such things. They pull out reports
that say caps are great and save all kinds of energy and then try to
convince the consumer that their magic box will save money the same way.
The problem is that the magic box has to be at the load, not the meter.
I challenge you to get a first year power systems analysis book and perform
a few calculations and see if you get different answers depending on where
you place the cap relative to the wiring and the load.
Charles Perry P.E.
Roy
It's alarming to what extent scammers would go to peddle their wares...I
am going to do a DOE query to an agent I email from time to time and see
what they really have to say about his claims.
Roy Q.T.
Urban Technician
[I don't make em, I just fix em]
Roy
support to his claims - I personally don't bother with power factors in
residential work and only take them into consideration when & if it's a
Large Commercial or Industrial job with very long runs of wire - other
than then, PF are relatively of no consequence.
bud--
> Let me
> explain it in terms you might understand. A bullet proof vest, properly
> worn, will stop small arms fire to the torso. However, if you put it in the
> closet, drive to the local quicky mart, and get shot, it won't help. It is
> all in the location of the product.
LOL
>
> So please stop posting that anyone on here says caps don't help. They do IF
> you put them in the appropriate place.
>
> For someone billed on kW (like a residence) the following may reduce the
> bill:
>
> Utility....Meter....wire....CAP.Motor
But still rather negligible for residential.
>
> The following will not:
>
> Utility....Meter.Cap...wire....motor
Amazing how little effect.
>
>
> Notice the importance of location. It is not uncommon for scammers to play
> on the ignorance of consumers to sell such things. They pull out reports
> that say caps are great and save all kinds of energy and then try to
> convince the consumer that their magic box will save money the same way.
> The problem is that the magic box has to be at the load, not the meter.
As you said for someone billed on kWh. I think part of the scam is that
pf correction helps if your billing has a penalty for reactive power
'consumed'. Doesn't help residential, but scammers don't know or forget
to mention that.
Also where used, the correction has to be matched to the reactive load
at the time. Does your box, Incorrect, change the pf correction with the
load? Or does it always apply the same correction - increasing the
current when there is not enough reactive load?
And some of the scammers say the current is decreased and intentionally
or stupidly confuse that billing is for Wh, not VAh.
Incorrect (what an appropriate name), people here are well aware of what
pf correction is about. Everyone responding says your box is a scam.
No one supports you. Why do you suppose? Or is this an invention from
Area 51?
--
bud--
Michael A. Terrell
>
> Charles maybe his gadget has a monkey on a bike inside :)
A monkey powered troll? Interesting concept.
--
Service to my country? Been there, Done that, and I've got my DD214 to
prove it.
Member of DAV #85.
Michael A. Terrell
Central Florida
Roy
(Michael A. Terrell)
Roy wrote:
Charles maybe his gadget has a monkey on a bike inside :)
Mike wrote:
A monkey powered troll? Interesting concept.
--
Service to my country? Been there, Done that, and I've got my DD214 to
prove it.
Member of DAV #85.
Michael A. Terrell
Central Florida
He's probably got one powering his puter right now:-) Rwahahahaha !
krw
mike.t...@earthlink.net says...
> Roy wrote:
> >
> > Charles maybe his gadget has a monkey on a bike inside :)
>
>
> A monkey powered troll? Interesting concept.
Sure, he spanks it constantly.
--
Keith
Michael A. Terrell
Then he screams, 'Up your meds' as he goes after it, again. He's
going to kill the poor thing, one of these days. ;-)
Don Kelly
"Politically Incorrect" <bill...@tastelessjokes.org> wrote in message
news:tZCdna5xaOAfzWbb...@comcast.com...
---------------------
Yes, capacitors for power factor correction do work- this has been known for
something in the order of 100 years. Big deal. However they supply
capacitive reactive to balance the inductive reactive of motors and some
ballasts. Properly sized to the application, they do save money. Improperly
sized- they don't. They do not reduce the real power taken by the motor nor
losses in the motor ("downstream" from the capacitor. They do reduce power
losses upstream because the current is lower.
If you have residential service there are three factors that exist:
a) loads are generally resistive or nearly so- compensation is either
useless or provides negligable gains (cost benefits ratio stinks) .
b) Losses in equipment "downstream of the capacitors" are not reduced and
motors will not run cooler or have lower losses.
c)Residential metering is of KWh and measures only real power so putting the
capacitors at the entrance will not reduce power bills as the losses beyond
the capacitor are unchanged.
I have read the references and there is nothing in them to contradict what
Salmon Egg, Charles Perry, etc have been saying. However, there is
definitely nothing in them to support some of your claims and hyperbole. You
don't seem to understand the references that you presented (even the watered
down ones) - they are fine but some of your claims are not. That is the
problem- Power factor correction with capacitors is fine but don't claim
benefits that don't exist. Those claims are the scam.
By the way, I know Pete Sauer as a colleague in the same line of business
and same academic background (just that I am older and retired for several
years). --
Don Kelly dh...@shawcross.ca
remove the X to answer
Roy
- You're probably the largest share holder in this scamsters company.
®
Michael A. Terrell
>
> Wop ! ChairmanOfTheBored - is Monkey Power-Saving of interest to you ???
> - You're probably the largest share holder in this scamsters company.
> ®
Not to mention all the monkeys he's traumatized. ;(
Politically Incorrect
found another refernece for you experts to look at
http://www.onsemi.com/pub/Collateral/HBD853-D.PDF
my own research continues to show a whole science of power factor
correction, along with a whole industry. Study after study, business after
business, all point to the same conclusion - placing capacitors into the
electrrical system, WORKS
well, I'm tired of dealing with people who think they know everything when
the fact is they have done no research whatsover. the only scammers on this
newsgroup are those who proclaim their expertise, even though they have done
no research and and dont know what they are talking about.
hasta la vista, babies
"Politically Incorrect" <bill...@tastelessjokes.org> wrote in message
news:tZCdna5xaOAfzWbb...@comcast.com...
Politically Incorrect
found another one, morons. why dont you all spend some time educating
yourselves before you start accusing opther people of being scammers.
http://www.lmphotonics.com/pwrfact.htm
you're the kind of people who used to claim that the earth is the center of
the universe and by the way, it's flat.
heaven forbid that you should ever spend any time learning anything new.
the technology is based in SCIENCE, and it WORKS
END OF STORY
"Politically Incorrect" <bill...@tastelessjokes.org> wrote in message
news:k_SdnaNBPJwLZmHb...@comcast.com...
bi...@abc.net
I have been reading your posting since they started and agree that for
household use power factor correction will NOT reduce costs.
In industry you have a totally different situation, in the UK most factories
running large inductive loads have automatic power correction systems
fitted.
With these, the system switches capacitors in and out of circuit to give the
best power factory possible, as in industry power fact does effect the
costs.
So, yes power factor correction does work if applied where it will make a
difference to running costs, i.e. in industry.
In the home do not waste your money on it as the electricity supply will not
measure the difference.
In a past job I used to design mains frequency inductive heating systems and
always recommend my customers to use power factor correction in their
factories.
BillB
Stuart
<bi...@abc.net> wrote:
> In the home do not waste your money on it as the electricity supply will
> not measure the difference.
With the UK government's determination to force everyone to use "energy
saving" light bulbs and ban filament bulbs we'll soon need to apply PFC
the other way. Whilst they may use less watts, the PF is poor and although
it may not affect the householders bills it's going to reflect back to the
generators in a detrimental fashion.
--
Stuart Winsor
From is valid but subject to change without notice if it gets spammed.
For Barn dances and folk evenings in the Coventry and Warwickshire area
See: http://www.barndance.org.uk
daestrom
"Stuart" <SW_N...@dsl.pipex.com> wrote in message
news:4f2995c6b...@dsl.pipex.com...
> In article <kucLi.80544$1G1....@newsfe2-win.ntli.net>,
> <bi...@abc.net> wrote:
>> In the home do not waste your money on it as the electricity supply will
>> not measure the difference.
>
> With the UK government's determination to force everyone to use "energy
> saving" light bulbs and ban filament bulbs we'll soon need to apply PFC
> the other way. Whilst they may use less watts, the PF is poor and although
> it may not affect the householders bills it's going to reflect back to the
> generators in a detrimental fashion.
>
Here in the states, a lot of CFL have power factor correction built right
into the electronic ballast. So they 'look' like something very close to a
resistor to the supply.
daestrom
daestrom
>
> found another one, morons. why dont you all spend some time educating
> yourselves before you start accusing opther people of being scammers.
> http://www.lmphotonics.com/pwrfact.htm
>
> you're the kind of people who used to claim that the earth is the center
> of the universe and by the way, it's flat.
>
> heaven forbid that you should ever spend any time learning anything new.
>
> the technology is based in SCIENCE, and it WORKS
>
You spend so much time trying to prove your point, you don't even read (or
understand) the references you come up with.
In the case of the first one (DOE and Alcoa), if you *READ* it, you'll see
that correcting the power factor saved Alcoa from the 'severe power factor
penalties' they were paying. Tell me, do you know of any residential
service where the resident pays 'severe power factor penalties'?? No,
because there is no such penalties in residential service tariffs.
So installing capacitors on a residential system will *not* save them from
'severe power factor penalties' simply because the homeowner isn't paying
any such penalty in the first place.
As its been pointed out innumerable times, the residential kwh meter is
*not* affected by low pf current. The meter always registers just the
*real* power component of the current. Reducing current while raising the
power factor does *not* change the rate the disk rotates.
In this latest reference of yours above, the discussion is about a poor
power factor increasing the losses *in the supply system*. Tell us, how
many residential customers pay for the losses their loads cause *in the
supply system* (i.e. the power companies equipment, not the homeowners)?
But you fail to notice (or chose to ignore) this reference's example of a
poor power factor and the increase of losses by 78% doesn't tell you how
many real watts of power are saved.
If an entire home runs with a pf of 0.75 (such as the motor in this
particular reference), and it uses about 15 kwh of energy per day, then the
*losses* of such a system are on the order of only 0.75 kwh of energy per
day or less. If we are *very* generous and assume that half of those losses
are in the motor itself and the other half are in house wiring (the real
split is much more in the motor and very little in the house wiring), then
the house wiring losses are 0.375 kwh of energy per day. Using this
reference's numbers for pf correction to 0.95, we could reduce the *house
wiring* losses down to about 0.211 kwh of energy per day. A savings of
0.184 kwh/day. That's less than two cents a day. After an entire year,
less than $8.
On the other hand, if we put the power factor correction equipment at the
service panel just downstream of the meter, then the only 'losses' that are
going to be affected are those in that very short length of wire between the
meter and the power factor correction equipment. With that setup, the
losses in the motor and all the wiring and equipment from the motor back to
the point where the power factor correction equipment attaches to the system
are still there. So a 'whole house' power factor correction will not change
the electric bill in any perceivable amount.
Large industrial users can benefit from pf correction because 1) they may be
subject to penalty fees if they don't correct their pf, so avoiding those
fees is worthwhile and 2) with in-factory distribution and transformers and
the large loads they have, the losses in the 'in-factory' distribution can
be large enough to make it worth while.
Another application that benefits from pf correction is when the *supply*
capabilities are limited. Off-grid folks that use inverters can see a
benefit. Not because pf correction reduces *energy* consumption very much,
but because it reduces the current load on the inverter. Inverters are
limited in how much *current* they can produce regardless of the power
factor of that current. So to maximize the real power available out of an
inverter, it is wise to make sure the load is as close to unity power factor
as possible. But if you don't understand the difference between the current
rating of an inverter and the power rating, that's a whole other problem.
Bottom line is *scammer*, that although power factor correction can reduce
the losses of any inductive system, the savings are so small for a
residential customer that they will probably *never* recover the cost of
installing such correction.
Promising to cut *electrical losses* by 50% without telling the homeowner
just how much those losses are is very misleading and bogus. It misleads
the consumer into thinking they're going to see a huge drop in their
electric bill. As if your *scam* is going to reduce their total energy
consumption by 50%. If instead you tell the homeowner you're going to save
them about 0.2 kwh /day, then you wouldn't be *scamming* people with this
nonsense.
And trotting out references about industrial customers that save huge sums
(by avoiding 'severe pf penalties') as 'proof' of your claims is just
further fraud.
daestrom
Michael A. Terrell
>
> In article <kucLi.80544$1G1....@newsfe2-win.ntli.net>,
> <bi...@abc.net> wrote:
> > In the home do not waste your money on it as the electricity supply will
> > not measure the difference.
>
> With the UK government's determination to force everyone to use "energy
> saving" light bulbs and ban filament bulbs we'll soon need to apply PFC
> the other way. Whilst they may use less watts, the PF is poor and although
> it may not affect the householders bills it's going to reflect back to the
> generators in a detrimental fashion.
First they took away your guns, then your lightbulbs. It's no wonder
you're all in the dark. ;-)
Stuart
daestrom <daestrom@NO_SPAM_HEREtwcny.rr.com> wrote:
> Here in the states, a lot of CFL have power factor correction built
> right into the electronic ballast. So they 'look' like something very
> close to a resistor to the supply.
It is certainly possible and I am sure that better quality ones will have
but there is nothing on the packs to say yay or nay and keeping costs
down, shaving fractions of a penny off the price, particularly in the face
of cheap eastern imports, is the name of the game here.
There was recently a lot of complaints about them in the IET journal from
people who probably know more than I. Some of them clearly from a power
generation background.
Roy
On Fri, 28 Sep 2007 19:35:00 -0400, "daestrom"
<daestrom@NO_SPAM_HEREtwcny.rr.com> wrote:
/ Snipped /
Very well said... and true.
PF simply is not, nor should not be a concern at the consumer/home
level.
Oh Go Fuck Yourself Asshole !
You're in The Level of Sewers & Feces yet you fave the audacity to
respond like you know it all....we already know you by your Stink....
You Cocksucking Motherfucker
Keep hitting up my replies & post and we'll have plenty of this going on
here.
You Don't even know how to clean your shit coated
ass...TurdmanOfTheBored.
Roy
Re: Challenge To krw, Salmon Egg, CS, charles Perry Re Power-Save,...
Group: alt.engineering.electrical Date: Sun, Sep 30, 2007, 1:49pm
(EDT-3) From: RUB...@crackasmile.org (ChairmanOfTheBored)
On Sun, 30 Sep 2007 13:47:50 -0700, ChairmanOfTheBored
<RUB...@crackasmile.org> wrote:
Charles maybe his gadget has a monkey on a bike inside :)
am going to do a DOE query to an agent I email from time to time and see
what they really have to say about his claims.
of age in a previous post. Face it, RoyTard... You're an idiot.
Oh... and I forgot... also a LIAR.
We'll see Turdman.....we'll see.
If you ever get off that crack pipe., no wonder all you can do is
inflame this web address with your pathetic replies to this newsgroup.
Jealous Ones Envy....
Don Kelly
"ChairmanOfTheBored" <RUB...@crackasmile.org> wrote in message
news:3m81g31dbt6bsnk2q...@4ax.com...
>
> You're no more than a goddamned WebTV retard, and you prove it with
> every post you make.
------------------------------
Why don't you children carry on your love talk privately so the rest of us
need not see you cluttering up this thread with puerile use of boringly foul
language in place of anything intelligible?
Michael A. Terrell
>
> Why don't you children carry on your love talk privately so the rest of us
> need not see you cluttering up this thread with puerile use of boringly foul
> language in place of anything intelligible?-
Why did you have to qote all of it? That makes kill filters rather
useless.
Michael A. Terrell
>
> Kind of like you...
Yawn. You would have to work for the rest of your life to even com
up anywhere close to useless. I doubt you could even reach used car
salesman let alore useless, dimbulb.
VWWall
> ------------------------------
> Why don't you children carry on your love talk privately so the rest of us
> need not see you cluttering up this thread with puerile use of boringly foul
> language in place of anything intelligible?
>
I think they're putting us on! It's just not possible for one, let
alone two, people to be that ignorant/stupid. One can't be that
stupid--he's even learned how to change his nym! Wait 'til he learns
how to change the rest of his headers--he'll be a real nuisance!
On the other hand they may be a couple of small boys that have just
learned some naughty words, and are trying them for effect. ;-)
--
VWW, P.E.
Roy
From: vw...@DEADearthlink.net (VWWall)
Well'., I don't like it any more than you guys do, but He doesn't have a
Private Venue - Plus I do not like being abused or called names., I
don't use those phrases lightly but that dude seems to bring out the
worsts in others.....Older guys always got a kick out of hearing us city
boys swear., he must like being cursed at.
Like I said; I hate verbally abusive superiors & rude people in power .,
this has been my shot at getting back at them...Be that as it may: I am
sorry that innocent eyes may have had to witness it.
Tired of verbose bullies & I'm not taking it any more !
Roy Q.T
E.E. Technician
what ever you do ~ "Have a Nice Day"
®
Don Kelly
"Michael A. Terrell" <mike.t...@earthlink.net> wrote in message
news:47030CC9...@earthlink.net...
> Don Kelly wrote:
>
> Why did you have to qote all of it? That makes kill filters rather
> useless.
>
point made- thank you
Don Kelly
news:1631-470...@storefull-3258.bay.webtv.net...
Roy Q.T
E.E. Technician
The problem is that he likes to hear someone talk dirty to him- why oblige
him by dropping to that level?
--
Don Kelly dh...@shawcross.ca
remove the X to answer
----------------------------
Roy
Re: Challenge To krw, Salmon Egg, CS, charles Perry Re Power-Save,...
(EDT-3) From: RUB...@crackasmile.org (ChairmanOfTheBored)
On Sun, 30 Sep 2007 23:53:01 -0400, ROY...@webtv.net (Roy) wrote:
Re: Challenge To krw, Salmon Egg, CS, charles Perry Re Power-Save,...
Group: alt.engineering.electrical Date: Sun, Sep 30, 2007, 1:49pm
(EDT-3) From: RUB...@crackasmile.org (ChairmanOfTheBored) On Sun, 30
Sep 2007 13:47:50 -0700, ChairmanOfTheBored <RUB...@crackasmile.org>
wrote:
On Thu, 27 Sep 2007 13:36:18 -0400, ROY...@webtv.net (Roy) wrote:
Charles maybe his gadget has a monkey on a bike inside :) It's alarming
to what extent scammers would go to peddle their wares...I am going to
do a DOE query to an agent I email from time to time and see what they
really have to say about his claims. This from a total
retard that claimed to be a mere ten years of age in a previous post.
Face it, RoyTard... You're an idiot. Oh... and I forgot...
also a LIAR.
We'll see Turdman.....we'll see.
If you ever get off that crack pipe., no wonder all you can do is
inflame this web address with your pathetic replies to this newsgroup.
Usenet is NOT a "web address", you total fucking retard!
You're no more than a goddamned WebTV retard, and you prove it
with every post you make.
You still fucking with that Hater - that was last month, so, Step The
Fuck Off ! Oh' and GET A LIFE CREEP !
Roy
Re: Challenge To krw, Salmon Egg, CS, charles Perry Re Power-Save,...
From: RUB...@crackasmile.org (ChairmanOfTheBored)
The RoyTard is back.
Damn... for a couple days there, we thought we'd actually
pissed you off enough to STAY THE FUCK OUT, you WebTardTV RETARD!
Bwuahahahahahaha!
Blow It Out Your Ass - Turdman !
you're the only Retard here., If your dicks so big as you stated in your
other Idiotic reply Bend Over & Go Fuck Yourself.