Defra is paying for the climate change research
Pat Gardiner
everybody involved with him into serious trouble, I should make it
clear that the controversial climate change research at Norwich is
largely commissioned and paid for by Defra.
Hopelessly corrupt Defra pays the bill and got what it paid for: dodgy
science to suit their long term objectives.
Then went too far when they employed bully boys to harass and
intimidate those witnessing faking of data and determined to expose
serious crime.
Anyway the Americans are on that case now too. They know who was
involved in attempted harassment intimidation and will no doubt deal
with them at their convenience.
Anyone want to buy redundant wind turbines?
--
Regards
Pat Gardiner
Release and independently audit the results of testing British pigs
for MRSA and C.Diff now!
www.go-self-sufficient.com and http://animal-epidemics.blogspot.com/
Old Codger
> As the resident stalker will obviously not be happy until he has got
> everybody involved with him into serious trouble, I should make it
> clear that the controversial climate change research at Norwich is
> largely commissioned and paid for by Defra.
The resident troll is obviously not even capable of doing simple research:
From the CRU site:
Acknowledgements
This list is not fully exhaustive, but we would like to acknowledge the
support of the following *funders* (in alphabetical order):
British Council, British Petroleum, Broom's Barn Sugar Beet
Research Centre, Central Electricity Generating Board, Centre for
Environment, Fisheries and Aquaculture Science (CEFAS), Commercial
Union, Commission of European Communities (CEC, often referred to now as
EU), Council for the Central Laboratory of the Research Councils
(CCLRC), Department of Energy, Department of the Environment (DETR, now
DEFRA), Department of Health, Department of Trade and Industry (DTI),
Eastern Electricity, Engineering and Physical Sciences Research Council
(EPSRC), Environment Agency, Forestry Commission, Greenpeace
International, International Institute of Environmental Development
(IIED), Irish Electricity Supply Board, KFA Germany, Leverhulme Trust,
Ministry of Agriculture, Fisheries and Food (MAFF), National Power,
National Rivers Authority, Natural Environmental Research Council
(NERC), Norwich Union, Nuclear Installations Inspectorate, Overseas
Development Administration (ODA), Reinsurance Underwriters and
Syndicates, Royal Society, Scientific Consultants, Science and
Engineering Research Council (SERC), Scottish and Northern Ireland Forum
for Environmental Research, Shell, Stockholm Environment Agency,
Sultanate of Oman, Tate and Lyle, UK Met. Office, UK Nirex Ltd., United
Nations Environment Plan (UNEP), United States Department of Energy,
United States Environmental Protection Agency, Wolfson Foundation and
the World Wildlife Fund for Nature (WWF).
> Hopelessly corrupt Defra pays the bill and got what it paid for: dodgy
> science to suit their long term objectives.
Defra pays only a minimal part of the bills.
> Then went too far when they employed bully boys to harass and
> intimidate those witnessing faking of data and determined to expose
> serious crime.
Who are you accusing of being "bully boys"?
> Anyway the Americans are on that case now too. They know who was
> involved in attempted harassment intimidation and will no doubt deal
> with them at their convenience.
More fantasy Pat?
> Anyone want to buy redundant wind turbines?
Only 30% maximum utilisation and requires equivalent base load stations
to cope when the wind is not blowing, or blowing too hard.
As I have said before, one cannot believe a word Pat writes.
--
Old Codger
e-mail use reply to field
What matters in politics is not what happens, but what you can make
people believe has happened. [Janet Daley 27/8/2003]
Buddenbrooks
"Old Codger" <oldc...@anyoldwhere.net> wrote in message
news:4b0c16f0$0$2525$da0f...@news.zen.co.uk...
> Only 30% maximum utilisation and requires equivalent base load stations
> to cope when the wind is not blowing, or blowing too hard.
>
I do not know what the payback period is for a wind turbine, but assuming
it is significantly less than the functional life
I cannot really see the objections to them. I have seen hundreds of them
across the German countryside, from lowland fields to the top of hills.
They look odd at first, but soon look as OK as most human structures.
As for having to match electrical need to base load stations, there are ways
to store electricity, pumping water to a reservoir and others. Additionally
the introduction of remote controllable off peak devices such as washing
machines means the load can be dynamic and reflect power available.
The power issue is not going away and I would rather see wind farms than
rationing.
Peter Duncanson
OMIGOD! It's a massive international conspiracy!
We are all doomed. Doomed, I tell you. ;-)
--
Peter Duncanson, UK
(in uk.business.agriculture)
Pat Gardiner
Nothing above contradicts anything I have said. The list is in
alphabetical order
Looks like mostly taxpayer's money one way or the other, often from
Defra front organisations.
You probably are doomed. I can only assume that you wish to hurry the
process in disreputable company.
Jill
news:wnVOm.19539$Z_5....@newsfe10.ams2...
>
> "Old Codger" <oldc...@anyoldwhere.net> wrote in message
> news:4b0c16f0$0$2525$da0f...@news.zen.co.uk...
> > Only 30% maximum utilisation and requires equivalent base load stations
>> to cope when the wind is not blowing, or blowing too hard.
>>
>
> I do not know what the payback period is for a wind turbine, but assuming
> it is significantly less than the functional life
I thought that was the problem - in most situations the costs of
installation and their payback period is so close to, or even more than, the
functional life, that while they seem a great answer for places like us up
here, they are, in fact, not viable.
It would be good to see renewables having some serious investment so that
places like us here, surrounded by natural potential, might build more
sustainable communities by selling power to the rest of you.
:))
--
--
regards
Jill Bowis
Domestic Poultry and Waterfowl Solutions
Herbaceous; Herb and Alpine Nursery
Seasonal Farm Food
http://www.kintaline.co.uk
grey...@mail.com
>
> In article <wnVOm.19539$Z_5....@newsfe10.ams2>, Buddenbrooks
><knights...@budweiser.com> writes
>>
>>"Old Codger" <oldc...@anyoldwhere.net> wrote in message
>>news:4b0c16f0$0$2525$da0f...@news.zen.co.uk...
>>> Only 30% maximum utilisation and requires equivalent base load stations
>>> to cope when the wind is not blowing, or blowing too hard.
>>>
>>
>>I do not know what the payback period is for a wind turbine, but
>>assuming it is significantly less than the functional life
>
> normal projected lifespan of 20-25. These can, and have been, disputed.
> Some of the variation comes not just with the size, but also where they
> are sited, i.e. what infrastructure of roads, cabling, etc., is
> required. A base for a 120 m turbine can take as much as 3000 tons of
> concrete on a soft substrate such as peat, but less on rocky ground.
>
>
Depends on how much your likliest customer for the electricity is
going to pay, which may depend on steadiness of supply. While ago, a
calculation here (.ie) showed that it was completely uneconomic.
There have been bad experiences here on building these things on
blanket bog. As always, ignore grants on basic calculations, just add
them in when you decide on building. (They wouldn't pay a grant if it
would pay otherwise)
--
greymaus
.
.
...
Derek Moody
>
> "Old Codger" <oldc...@anyoldwhere.net> wrote in message
> news:4b0c16f0$0$2525$da0f...@news.zen.co.uk...
> > Only 30% maximum utilisation and requires equivalent base load stations
> > to cope when the wind is not blowing, or blowing too hard.
> >
>
> I do not know what the payback period is for a wind turbine, but assuming
> it is significantly less than the functional life
> I cannot really see the objections to them. I have seen hundreds of them
The economics just don't add up. Very few would be built if there were not
a political imperative and a significant 'green' price premium for the
product. The so-called carbon neutrality ignores the cost of production and
installation too.
It's truly sad that virtually all the operating profits from wind energy are
political whilst a large proportion of the operating costs of nuclear are
political.
> across the German countryside, from lowland fields to the top of hills.
> They look odd at first, but soon look as OK as most human structures.
>
> As for having to match electrical need to base load stations, there are ways
> to store electricity, pumping water to a reservoir and others. Additionally
> the introduction of remote controllable off peak devices such as washing
> machines means the load can be dynamic and reflect power available.
>
> The power issue is not going away and I would rather see wind farms than
> rationing.
I'd rather see reactors. There's a good site for one not far from here.
Cheerio,
--
Buddenbrooks
"Malcolm" <Mal...@indaal.demon.co.uk> wrote in message
news:dFaYiyL7XEDLFwt$@indaal.demon.co.uk...
>
, i.e. what infrastructure of roads, cabling, etc., is
> required. A base for a 120 m turbine can take as much as 3000 tons of
> concrete on a soft substrate such as peat, but less on rocky ground.
>
May not be so important as these will be available at the end of life for
the replacement.
Electricity is a key feature of our life and it can go up in price a long
way before we would do without.
Buddenbrooks
"Jill" <ma...@NOSPAMkintaline.co.uk> wrote in message
news:7n2vojF...@mid.individual.net...
> It would be good to see renewables having some serious investment so that
> places like us here, surrounded by natural potential, might build more
> sustainable communities by selling power to the rest of you.
>
It will also improve job prospects and infrastructure.
I wonder if electricity was charged 'fob' so you paid for what left the
power station rather than what arrives at your meter and you paid the losses
in transmission
people would be keener for local sources.
Jill
> "Jill" <ma...@NOSPAMkintaline.co.uk> wrote in message
> news:7n2vojF...@mid.individual.net...
>> It would be good to see renewables having some serious investment so
>> that places like us here, surrounded by natural potential, might
>> build more sustainable communities by selling power to the rest of
>> you.
>
>
> It will also improve job prospects and infrastructure.
Which is part of what we call sustainability :) ,
>
> I wonder if electricity was charged 'fob' so you paid for what left
> the power station rather than what arrives at your meter and you paid
> the losses in transmission
> people would be keener for local sources.
my brain is rather full of other things, can you explain ?
--
regards
Jill Bowis
www.kintaline.co.uk - where we are, what we do: Kintaline Plant and Poultry
Centre
grey...@mail.com
>
> In article <slrnhgoqri.j...@maus.org>, grey...@mail.com
> writes> Developers in the UK get a large annual subsidy from the taxpayer, often
> amounting to more than the amount earned from the electricity. Other
> countries also subsidise the building of windfarms, e.g. Spain and
> Germany, and probably others. Doesn't Ireland do the same?
>
> There is some evidence (probably not enough) that the bad experiences
> with building on peat bogs in Ireland have been taken note of in the UK.
>
AFAIK, and I stopped asking when I went through the figures, here
they will give a grant for erection and then you are on your own.
Specially, since the economic crisies hit the country, there is a
`slight delay' in actually paying out any grant. (Windfarms, as far
as I can see, are liked by governments because they make the ratio of
`renewable' energy look good very quickly). I would say that acountry
that produces and uses a _lot_ of electricity, like the UK, could
absorb a small percentage that was very expensive to produce.
Again, AFAIK, they have stopped increasing the windfarm industry in
Denmark because it starting to impact in real costs.
There would not be that much blanket bog in Great Britain comparable
with that in Erris?. Maybe NorthWest Scotland?
grey...@mail.com
> writes
>>Again, AFAIK, they have stopped increasing the windfarm industry in
>>Denmark because it starting to impact in real costs.
>>
>>
>>There would not be that much blanket bog in Great Britain comparable
>>with that in Erris?. Maybe NorthWest Scotland?
>>
> blanket bogs, some 6,600 sq km at the last count, plus a further 12,000
> sq km of mixed heather moorland/peatland.
>
> We've fewer raised bogs (mostly in the Central Belt and NE Scotland, but
> then you've dug all yours up and burnt them!
Easy come, Easy go. There are cultivated fields under the blanket bog
in Erris, dated to around 4-6000 BCE
Buddenbrooks
" Jill" <ne...@NOSPAMkintaline.co.uk> wrote in message
news:7n4c2fF...@mid.individual.net...
>> I wonder if electricity was charged 'fob' so you paid for what left
>> the power station rather than what arrives at your meter and you paid
>> the losses in transmission
>> people would be keener for local sources.
>
> my brain is rather full of other things, can you explain ?
>
The price of electricity to the consumer is the same wherever you are,
dependent only on supplier.
Obviously transmission losses are higher the farther the transmission
path.
So if you have a wind farm a mile away you should pay less for 'delivery'
than if you get it from a generation station 100 miles away.
This would then mean those having to look at a wind farm would get a
discount on electricity. Places like London would pay more than villagers
living near a power generation station.
Old Codger
Really?
> The list is in alphabetical order
That much is obvious.
> Looks like mostly taxpayer's money one way or the other,
Wriggling Pat? You said: "I should make it clear that the
controversial climate change research at Norwich is largely commissioned
and paid for by Defra." Now you say "mostly taxpayers money", which is
not the same thing at all.
> often from Defra front organisations.
Which are the "Defra front organisations" Pat and to what extent is each
funded by DEFRA?
> You probably are doomed. I can only assume that you wish to hurry the
> process in disreputable company.
Never mind the insults, you are the one scrabbling around to justify one
more of your fantastic claims.
I repeat, one cannot believe a word you write.
The CRU was established in 1972 within the School of Environmental
science in the UEA. It is *NOT* part of DEFRA although it does receive
some funding from DEFRA along with other parts of government, the EU,
industry and others. DEFRA's influence, if it exists at all, will be
minimal.
Old Codger
>
> "Old Codger" <oldc...@anyoldwhere.net> wrote in message
> news:4b0c16f0$0$2525$da0f...@news.zen.co.uk...
> > Only 30% maximum utilisation and requires equivalent base load stations
>> to cope when the wind is not blowing, or blowing too hard.
>>
>
> I do not know what the payback period is for a wind turbine, but
> assuming it is significantly less than the functional life
That might be a reckless assumption. They are built only because they
are heavily subsidised both in the build and in the operation. In
addition to our contribution as taxpayers we also contribute as
electricity consumers (there is a green levy).
> I cannot really see the objections to them. I have seen hundreds of them
> across the German countryside, from lowland fields to the top of hills.
> They look odd at first, but soon look as OK as most human structures.
Indeed, I often wonder what sort of controversy would accompany the
building of old fashioned windmills if these had only just been invented.
> As for having to match electrical need to base load stations, there are
> ways to store electricity, pumping water to a reservoir and others.
That can be done only on a relatively small scale in England and, I
suspect, even in Wales and Scotland it soon becomes uneconomical.
> Additionally
> the introduction of remote controllable off peak devices such as washing
> machines means the load can be dynamic and reflect power available.
Just think of the associated bureaucracy.
> The power issue is not going away and I would rather see wind farms than
> rationing.
Indeed, but without the essential base load stations we will get both,
and possibly also power cuts.
This government has delayed building new power stations, nuclear or
coal, until it is too late to have them up and running before the
current ones are decommissioned.
grey...@mail.com
> writes
> found under blanket bogs close to where I live. Raised bogs can be a lot
> older - up to 9000 years in Eire, I believe.
>
When I was going to school, they taught that it would take tens of
thousands of years for them to form. OTOH, cars attempt to drive
across what used to be a roadside drinking pond that we used before
piped water, which since has sedged up.
Buddenbrooks
.
>
> Just think of the associated bureaucracy.
>
No beurocracy, every unit is programmed to only switch on if electricity
is below a selected price.
So heating and washing machines would be set to only work while
electricity is cheaper.
Old Codger
So we would all have to buy new washing machines, dishwashers, cookers,
microwaves etc. and only use them when the electricity was cheap enough?
Buddenbrooks
> Buddenbrooks wrote:
>>
>> "Old Codger" <oldc...@anyoldwhere.net> wrote in message
>> news:4b0d6806$0$2528$da0f...@news.zen.co.uk...
>> .
>>>
>>> Just think of the associated bureaucracy.
>>>
>>
>> No beurocracy, every unit is programmed to only switch on if electricity
>> is below a selected price.
>> So heating and washing machines would be set to only work while
>> electricity is cheaper.
>
> So we would all have to buy new washing machines, dishwashers, cookers,
> microwaves etc. and only use them when the electricity was cheap enough?
>
Wi-Fi enabled appliances are only a marketing decision away :) .
The electronics in devices like a washing machine which already contain
an electronic controller would be negligible.
Load shedding during periods of excess demand will be far better than
area wide blackouts. Better every other street light shuts off over a larger
are rather than all the lights in a section.
Better street lights shut down than traffic lights.
Derek Moody
<URL:mailto:oldc...@anyoldwhere.net> wrote:
> Buddenbrooks wrote:
> >
> > No beurocracy, every unit is programmed to only switch on if
> > electricity is below a selected price.
> > So heating and washing machines would be set to only work while
> > electricity is cheaper.
>
> So we would all have to buy new washing machines, dishwashers, cookers,
> microwaves etc. and only use them when the electricity was cheap enough?
The interim option is smart-plugs.
You load the washing machine, turn it 'on' and when the price is right the
plug starts the cycle. If baby has run out of nappies you hit 'override'
and take the extra cost.
Derek Moody
> > the introduction of remote controllable off peak devices such as washing
> > machines means the load can be dynamic and reflect power available.
>
> Just think of the associated bureaucracy.
It just needs appropriate metering. Plugs that can intercept the pricing
signals and begin a cycle only at a presettable value have already been
demonstrated. They can operate on several settings, including ones suitable
for: Equipment that can happily turn off at any time the E price rises.
Devices that must complete once they've started but needn't start until
the price is low.
Freezers that must occasionally get a cooling boost no matter what the
E price.
andrew
> As for having to match electrical need to base load stations, there are
> ways to store electricity, pumping water to a reservoir and others.
> Additionally the introduction of remote controllable off peak devices such
> as washing machines means the load can be dynamic and reflect power
> available.
I've talked about this before, there is a body that says: if the grid is
allowed to vary frequency with demand (we're talking about .1Hz max swing)
then there is a mechanism by which the market alter its behavious on both
the supply and demand side. IF frequency LO then supply power AND/OR NOT
use fridge/washingmachine/dishwasher etc. Vice versa when frequency rises
with the wholesale price varying inversely with the frequency.
As the shape of the diurnal demand curve is pretty static and varying
largely only in magnitude between seasons the algorithm can yous this and a
bit of fuzzy logic to iron out peaks and troughs.
AJH
grey...@mail.com
> years, assuming rainfall and sphagnum growth to be constant.
>
Piped water came in around 1960 or so. Giving that pond was about 2'
deep, 50 years has it sedged up fairly well, enough that one idiot
tried to drive acrsss and sank (plastic rubbish around front and back
bumper meant that a 4wd tractor was needed to pull it, and a glob of
muck, out) (Depends on what is the finished state needed for the test,
this is still in the muck stage.. if flammible_when_dried is the
finished stage, I suppose your figures may be right). I have seen
crawlers involved in forestry with 3' wide wooden pads on the
already_wide tracks. I presume the trees all fell over when they got
high enough with so little root support.
Peter Duncanson
I don't know what electricity tariffs exist elsewhere but here the price
is much lower at night than during the day. I normally run the washing
machine and tumble dryer at night. It would be useful if these
appliances had time switches so that I could programme the start time.
--
Peter Duncanson, UK
(in uk.business.agriculture)
Buddenbrooks
"Peter Duncanson" <ma...@peterduncanson.net> wrote in message
news:ufssg553sbj49hfhb...@4ax.com...
> On Thu, 26 Nov 2009 09:02:37 +0000, Derek Moody
>>
> is much lower at night than during the day. I normally run the washing
> machine and tumble dryer at night. It would be useful if these
> appliances had time switches so that I could programme the start time.
>
I believe trials of sending data over mains network have proven
disappointing, otherwise it would be easy for
the electricity suppliers to control the load. Failing that broadband or
even a signal on the back of the time standard transmitter at Droitwich
could control appliances.
Keeping generators at optimum efficiency and adjusting the load is very
'green' and many loads do not care. Shutting down a storage heater for
10mins because at the end of a football match the worlds have turned a
kettle on is effective nd nonintrusive.
Buddenbrooks
"andrew" <ne...@sylva.icuklive.co.uk> wrote in message
news:7n74j9F...@mid.individual.net...
> Buddenbrooks wrote:
> I've talked about this before, there is a body that says: if the grid is
> allowed to vary frequency with demand (we're talking about .1Hz max swing)
I think specific comms signal is far more flexible.
If it became standard feature a degree of subtle control may be needed.
Disconnect load in smaller chunks.
Surfer!
<ma...@peterduncanson.net> writes
<snip>
>I don't know what electricity tariffs exist elsewhere but here the price
>is much lower at night than during the day. I normally run the washing
>machine and tumble dryer at night. It would be useful if these
>appliances had time switches so that I could programme the start time.
>
they start.
--
Surfer!
andrew
>
> "andrew" <ne...@sylva.icuklive.co.uk> wrote in message
> news:7n74j9F...@mid.individual.net...
>> Buddenbrooks wrote:
> > I've talked about this before, there is a body that says: if the grid
> > is
>> allowed to vary frequency with demand (we're talking about .1Hz max
>> swing)
>
>
> I think specific comms signal is far more flexible.
Far more expensive and difficult too!
>
> If it became standard feature a degree of subtle control may be needed.
> Disconnect load in smaller chunks.
Some things can be disconnected, like freezers and fridges and heating
elements, subject to tolerable temperature limits. Many other things need a
discrete amount of electricity in a given period to complete a task so
their needs will be scheduled. The fuzzy logic would be the means by which
a device decides, by considering the previous day's profile, when it is
worth buying the necessary KWhrs to complete its task. As soon as that
decision is taken then the grid will react, microscopically, and this
information of demand is instantly available for consumers to see, or
indeed if the demand goes right up a generator may decide to release
reserves to the grid.
AJH
Old Codger
> Pat Gardiner wrote:
>
>> Then went too far when they employed bully boys to harass and
>> intimidate those witnessing faking of data and determined to expose
>> serious crime.
>
> Who are you accusing of being "bully boys"?
Pat Gardiner did not respond. It is therefore reasonable to assume that
he cannot identify any "bully boys" and therefore there are no "bully boys".
Old Codger
> Pat Gardiner wrote:
>
>
> Wriggling Pat? You said: "I should make it clear that the
> controversial climate change research at Norwich is largely commissioned
> and paid for by Defra." Now you say "mostly taxpayers money", which is
> not the same thing at all.
>
>> often from Defra front organisations.
>
> Which are the "Defra front organisations" Pat and to what extent is each
> funded by DEFRA?
Once again Pat Gardiner has not responded. It is therefore reasonable
to assume that he cannot identify any "Defra front organisations" in the
list of funders on the CRU website.
Peter Duncanson
The ones I have need to have the power on before the start button will
have any effect. It is not possible to leave the appliance so that it
will run as soon as power is applied, so an external time switch is no
help. This is probably sensible from a safety point of view.
Buddenbrooks
>> I think specific comms signal is far more flexible.
>
> Far more expensive and difficult too!
>>
I have a �5 from Aldi radio controlled clock which receives a data packet
which could also include control bytes.
>> If it became standard feature a degree of subtle control may be
>> needed.
>> Disconnect load in smaller chunks.
>
or
> indeed if the demand goes right up a generator may decide to release
> reserves to the grid.
>
That is supply side adjustment I was suggesting load shedding to match
generation capability.
grey...@mail.com
Internet over electriciy mains is available in France. Voice
telephone over e.lines was widely used in the mines in Zambia, back
in late 1960's, I think that there is a problem with transformers,
not unsurmountable.
andrew
> or
>> indeed if the demand goes right up a generator may decide to release
>> reserves to the grid.
>>
>
> That is supply side adjustment I was suggesting load shedding to match
> generation capability.
I know you were but I was pointing out the view that the market would
balance this better if the price became dependant on the grid frequency.
Indeed if battery powered cars become common a householder may judge it
worth their while trading battery life and charge-discharge cycle
inefficiency against the difference in price between peak and off peak
rates.
AJH
Buddenbrooks
> Buddenbrooks wrote:
> I know you were but I was pointing out the view that the market would
> balance this better if the price became dependant on the grid frequency.
>
I m not sure it is necessary to use frequency as a control mechanism when
there is plans to have electronic remote readable meters in every house.
If there is a command/control combs link available, why not use it?
I assume that transformers are optimized for maximum efficiency at 50Hz
and that hum filters in audio equipment are also optimized. Notch filters
will not work very well if the fundamental moves.
People may well find the 100Hz mains hum, which we are all used to, far
more noticeable.
Also commands can be subtle, at times of over load, turn supply off in
property the residents are out. Leave heating for old, vulnerable and MPs
on.
Buddenbrooks
<grey...@mail.com> wrote in message
news:slrnhgtskn.3...@maus.org...
> On 2009-11-26, Buddenbrooks <knights...@budweiser.com> wrote:
, I think that there is a problem with transformers,
> not unsurmountable.
>
I believe also street lighting was found to act as fine aerials for all the
interference in the ether.
It would probably be the way to go if universal broadband was not planned
for the UK
Jane Gillett
What about surges in water use in this instance? At present, it would be
random so somewhat smoothed out but if a significant number of washing
machines are programmed to fill at the same time isn't this going to cause
problems?
Also starting surges when a number of macjhines on a line start together?
Jane
> Cheerio,
--
Jane G : j.gi...@higherstert.co.uk : S Devon
Tim Lamb
<knights...@budweiser.com> writes
>
>"andrew" <ne...@sylva.icuklive.co.uk> wrote in message
>news:7n8c2iF...@mid.individual.net...
>> Buddenbrooks wrote:
>> I know you were but I was pointing out the view that the market would
>> balance this better if the price became dependant on the grid frequency.
>>
>
> I m not sure it is necessary to use frequency as a control mechanism
>when there is plans to have electronic remote readable meters in every
>house.
Hmm... we have two. Conventional mobile telephones slotted into the
meters. AFAIK this is phone *home* only with no provision for any
switching commands.
regards
--
Tim Lamb
Buddenbrooks
"Tim Lamb" <t...@marfordfarm.demon.co.uk> wrote in message
news:fNCh5AGy...@marfordfarm.demon.co.uk...
> In message <V0KPm.16741$Lu6....@newsfe05.ams2>, Buddenbrooks
>
> meters. AFAIK this is phone *home* only with no provision for any
> switching commands.
>
I would expect that it would have to be part of major initiative, either
finance more power stations or finance a control infrastructure.
Since the government is keen on universal broadband it would be easy to
piggy back off it with wifi. I believe Swindon council is going for 100%
free wifi throughout the town.
Buddenbrooks
"Jane Gillett" <j.gi...@higherstert.co.uk> wrote in message
news:50c0aaae3...@higherstert.co.uk...
> What about surges in water use in this instance? At present, it would be
> random so somewhat smoothed out but if a significant number of washing
> machines are programmed to fill at the same time isn't this going to cause
> problems?
>
> Also starting surges when a number of macjhines on a line start together?
>
No worse than everyone going for a pee during half time on a televised TV
football match.
Power surge could be handled by having a random delay on switch on built
in.
andrew
>
> "andrew" <ne...@sylva.icuklive.co.uk> wrote in message
> news:7n8c2iF...@mid.individual.net...
>> Buddenbrooks wrote:
> > I know you were but I was pointing out the view that the market would
>> balance this better if the price became dependant on the grid frequency.
>>
>
> I m not sure it is necessary to use frequency as a control mechanism
> when
> there is plans to have electronic remote readable meters in every house.
> If there is a command/control combs link available, why not use it?
Sure but it isn't present so one cannot use it, I'll not argue the case for
dynamic demand because its a concept and takes a bit of getting used to.
The main point is the infrastructure doesn't need changing because it's all
there, all that is needed to implement it is a change in the requirement to
average 50Hz over a 24hr period and a tariff that stores the increment of
units against a time stamp, essentially something that counts the flashes
on a digital meter and notes the time. As you note a consumer would be free
to override any automatic controls as pay the extra.
>
> I assume that transformers are optimized for maximum efficiency at
> 50Hz
> and that hum filters in audio equipment are also optimized. Notch filters
> will not work very well if the fundamental moves.
> People may well find the 100Hz mains hum, which we are all used to,
> far
> more noticeable.
Red Herring alert!
For a given amount of generation capacity there is no reason the frequency
need vary outside its current lawful limits to achieve this.
>
> Also commands can be subtle, at times of over load, turn supply off in
> property the residents are out. Leave heating for old, vulnerable and MPs
> on.
As I said, fuzzy logic could smooth out anomalies, it would all be similar
to sniping on ebay, some you win...
AJH
Oh No
I can't think that anyone would wear such a thing. If its a random
delay, how would you know when to go to the toilet?
Regards
--
Charles Francis
moderator sci.physics.foundations.
charles (dot) e (dot) h (dot) francis (at) googlemail.com (remove spaces and
braces)
Buddenbrooks
> Sure but it isn't present so one cannot use it,
Ah the British disease, don't do a job properly faf about with a Heath
Robinson solution.
Within the range of acceptable deviation from 50 Hz how many steps would you
think acceptable.
What range of load control will that give?
A digital system would give from single device at a specific address to a
full domestic shutdown in national disaster mode.
Also more likely, shutdown of non-bill payers.
I agree that shifting frequency is a neat method of least intrusive control.
I dislike disrupting system function to allow control. Better to keep the
supply function optimized to the requirement of supplying power and have a
distinct control channel.
Mains has a frequency tolerance because of operational difficulties and
practicalities of keeping precisely to a frequency, if you make the
frequency carry control information you then tighten the specification and
make keeping to the required frequency more difficult.
Buddenbrooks
"Oh No" <No...@charlesfrancis.wanadoo.co.uk> wrote in message
news:K2AQtYFP...@charlesfrancis.wanadoo.co.uk...
> Thus spake Buddenbrooks <knights...@budweiser.com>
>
> I can't think that anyone would wear such a thing. If its a random
> delay, how would you know when to go to the toilet?
>
:) Washing machines, toilets have a local store of water which allows for
use even if mains is unavailable for a few minutes.
Oh No
>> Thus spake Buddenbrooks <knights...@budweiser.com>
>>
>> I can't think that anyone would wear such a thing. If its a random
>> delay, how would you know when to go to the toilet?
>>
>
>
>:) Washing machines, toilets have a local store of water which allows
>for use even if mains is unavailable for a few minutes.
I'm afraid my humour got a little obscure. I was commenting on the
wisdom of a device which probably requires surgery, and has other
drawbacks.
Buddenbrooks
>>:) Washing machines, toilets have a local store of water which allows
>>for use even if mains is unavailable for a few minutes.
>
>
> I'm afraid my humour got a little obscure. I was commenting on the
> wisdom of a device which probably requires surgery, and has other
> drawbacks.
>
I recognized that, hence the ' :) '
andrew
>
> "andrew" <ne...@sylva.icuklive.co.uk> wrote in message
> news:7navfdF...@mid.individual.net...
> > Sure but it isn't present so one cannot use it,
>
> Ah the British disease,
Now, Now Tony let's not degenerate to that sort of argument!
> don't do a job properly faf about with a Heath
> Robinson solution.
To me it looks simple and elegant with market feedback rather than a
concoction of bits and pieces.
>
> Within the range of acceptable deviation from 50 Hz how many steps would
> you think acceptable.
It would be for the tariff provider to decide, market forces remember, if
someone sets an uncompetitive rate then it will cost them. Even now the way
electricity is sold with prices in half hourly slots it has led to non
optimum use of energy and capacity.
> What range of load control will that give?
I'm not sure what the strict relation is, currently the grid will be
accepting about 27GW and the legal lower frequency is around 49.5Hz with a
top limit of 50.5Hz, I wonder if one could model the grid as a single large
generator then we could see what the difference in the upper and lower
frequency powers was compared with a median of 27GW at 50Hz.
>
> I agree that shifting frequency is a neat method of least intrusive
> control. I dislike disrupting system function to allow control. Better to
> keep the supply function optimized to the requirement of supplying power
> and have a distinct control channel.
>
> Mains has a frequency tolerance because of operational difficulties and
> practicalities of keeping precisely to a frequency, if you make the
> frequency carry control information you then tighten the specification and
> make keeping to the required frequency more difficult.
I would have thought +-1Hz was likely to have insignificant effect on
efficiency so the only functional advantage of an average frequency of 50Hz
over 24hrs is for some timepieces (in the past the flyback control of a tv
was in sync with mains as well IIRC) or am I missing something?
BTW the "frequency carrying control" is not something someone arbitrarily
decides to impose on the grid, it's its natural reaction to loads or power
injections on it. The specification would still require generators to be
within these frequency limits at any time, they would just be rewarded
higher if they supply when the frequency is low.
AJH
Buddenbrooks
>
> I would have thought +-1Hz was likely to have insignificant effect on
> efficiency so the only functional advantage of an average frequency of
> 50Hz
> over 24hrs is for some timepieces (in the past the flyback control of a tv
> was in sync with mains as well IIRC) or am I missing something?
>
I think we are at cross purposes.
Using frequency control how would you handle that the demanded power was
110% of generation capability?
andrew
You cannot in any scenario, apart from possibly the one where electric car
batteries are used as a buffer, the dynamic demand concept just offers a
different means of preventing demand exceeding capacity in the short term.
Of course we are both just considering spreading the load on an existing
capacity, none of this takes into account whether the prime energy source
is available.
AJH
Buddenbrooks
> Of course we are both just considering spreading the load on an existing
> capacity, none of this takes into account whether the prime energy source
> is available.
>
I was considering a bidirectional comms system. The network has both
generation available and load demand data to play with.
andrew
> I was considering a bidirectional comms system. The network has both
> generation available and load demand data to play with.
Aargh! The grid frequency can is a feedback loop which both demand side and
generation side can respond to!
Anyway I missed out the bit about guesstimating what 1Hz variation would be
on the grid, which if it is linear will be 2%. We're running at 44GW now so
a variation of around a GW.
AJH
Buddenbrooks
> Buddenbrooks wrote:
>
> on the grid, which if it is linear will be 2%. We're running at 44GW now
so
> a variation of around a GW.
>
If the system is to respond to wind wave and other variable supplies and
system failures of generators or grid
then that is far too little.
andrew
That's the amount of power that can be removed or added at an average of
44GW before there's a need to respond by either increasing or decreasing
generation capacity! The decision to add or remove power is made by the
providers just as now or in your third party communicated system so the
granularity is the same. The Dynamic demand idea rewards both generators
and consumers to even out peaks.
AJH
Oz
>
>The ones I have need to have the power on before the start button will have any
>effect. It is not possible to leave the appliance so that it will run as soon as
>power is applied, so an external time switch is no help. This is probably
>sensible from a safety point of view.
Most half modern ones come with some sort of timing device built in.
The bugger is they can't empty and refill themselves automatically.
--
Oz
Oz
Top post.
Just have a telemetry channel as a TV digital channel or even mobile
phone digital channel. Even a very narrow bandwidth would allow vast
amounts of data can be sent, even depending on your electricity
provider. The detector would be mindblowingly cheap if produced in
quantity.
Buddenbrooks <knights...@budweiser.com> writes
--
Oz
Buddenbrooks
"Oz" <O...@mailcatch.com> wrote in message news:RA2LIWAD...@OzHome.com...
> Just have a telemetry channel as a TV digital channel or even mobile
> phone digital channel. Even a very narrow bandwidth would allow vast
> amounts of data can be sent, even depending on your electricity
> provider. The detector would be mindblowingly cheap if produced in
> quantity.
>
The technology of a fully monitored and controlled system would be cheap
and simple to implement.
The selection of what to shutdown may be more difficult.
Peter Duncanson
It is possible to imagine a more "advanced" system in which appliances,
household and industrial, phone the electricity supplier and request a
reservation (time slot) for consuming power. The appliance would
indicate its expected pattern of consumption. For example, a washing
machine might expect to use 2Kw for 20 minutes to heat the water for a
hot wash and whatever the motor on takes average for 1.5 hours during
washing and rinsing and then what it consumes for n minutes continuous
while spinning. The appliance would indicate whether it needs an
unbroken supply or whether it can cope with interruptions. The appliance
could also indicate the priority of its activity and a deadline by which
it should finish doing what it is required to do.
--
Peter Duncanson, UK
(in uk.business.agriculture)
Buddenbrooks
Perhaps devices when first attached could register themselves, power
profiles would be known from a central database.
Power control by microsoft registry :)
Peter Duncanson
Mumble, mumble, mumble... I suppose that a microsoft registry would be
more consistent than multiple competing incompatible solutions from the
Linux brigade.
Oz
> The technology of a fully monitored and controlled system would be cheap and
>simple to implement.
>The selection of what to shutdown may be more difficult.
A ranking of 1 to 100 would suffice, both for startup and terminate once
started.
--
Oz
Buddenbrooks
"Oz" <O...@mailcatch.com> wrote in message news:oaglujAa...@OzHome.com...
Does a dialysis machine in a private residence get a higher or lower
priority to corridor lighting in a hospital?
Which MPs house gets higher ranking?
I assume that a fully intelligent service would shut down washing machines,
storage heating etc and then leave a ration to the house to be administered
by a
personal profile. e.g. the house holder ranks which lights and if a kettle
is more important than the multimedia entertainment system.
It would also allow farms to allocate to milking systems for example and not
grain dryers and private heating and lighting.
Surfer!
sheets. I can live without the former but have to do the latter. :(
--
Surfer!
Oz
>
>"Oz" <O...@mailcatch.com> wrote in message news:oaglujAa...@OzHome.com...
>> Buddenbrooks <knights...@budweiser.com> writes
>>> The technology of a fully monitored and controlled system would be cheap
>>> and
>>>simple to implement.
>>>The selection of what to shutdown may be more difficult.
>>
>> A ranking of 1 to 100 would suffice, both for startup and terminate once
>> started.
>>
>
> Does a dialysis machine in a private residence get a higher or lower
>priority to corridor lighting in a hospital?
100 means 'on under all situations no matter what cost'.
Personally I would suggest a small generator as backup.
>
> Which MPs house gets higher ranking?
Those that pay. Remember its the device that decides, the phone just
gives current and predicted costs from the supplier.
>I assume that a fully intelligent service would shut down washing machines,
>storage heating etc and then leave a ration to the house to be administered
>by a
>personal profile. e.g. the house holder ranks which lights and if a kettle
>is more important than the multimedia entertainment system.
I think that is needlessly central. The decisions can be made at the
home level, only pricing needs to be sent down.
>It would also allow farms to allocate to milking systems for example and not
>grain dryers and private heating and lighting.
As long as they pay.
However pricing may well be more extreme with tea at half time costing
10x or more the basal rate, and night time costing perhaps half.
--
Oz
Buddenbrooks
"Oz" <O...@mailcatch.com> wrote in message news:IonNSuAF...@OzHome.com...
>
> As long as they pay.
>
For day-to-day cycles price is probably a good enough method, other than
50% will probably be incapable of
programming their home controller, so will pay the peak rate.
If the system is to be resilient then it will need to handle a major
failure requiring a sudden removal of a large % of the
generation capability. To do this supply will have to be removed whether or
not a user is willing to pay.
Oz
>
>"Oz" <O...@mailcatch.com> wrote in message news:IonNSuAF...@OzHome.com...
>>
>> As long as they pay.
>>
>
> For day-to-day cycles price is probably a good enough method, other than
>50% will probably be incapable of
>programming their home controller, so will pay the peak rate.
Sadly its more likely that machines will have a default that gives 90%
of the benefits.
No point being smart!
>If the system is to be resilient then it will need to handle a major
>failure requiring a sudden removal of a large % of the
>generation capability. To do this supply will have to be removed whether or
>not a user is willing to pay.
er, like, say, a power cut?
Like that never happens already?
--
Oz
Oz
>In message <RQ+LMIAi...@OzHome.com>, Oz <O...@mailcatch.com> writes
>>Peter Duncanson <ma...@peterduncanson.net> writes
>>>
>>>The ones I have need to have the power on before the start button will
>>>have any
>>>effect. It is not possible to leave the appliance so that it will run
>>>as soon as
>>>power is applied, so an external time switch is no help. This is probably
>>>sensible from a safety point of view.
>>
>>Most half modern ones come with some sort of timing device built in.
>>The bugger is they can't empty and refill themselves automatically.
>>
>The ironing doesn't do itself either,
hardly req'd with modern fabrics
>nor does the bed changes it's
>sheets.
under 60s
> I can live without the former but have to do the latter. :(
and the other 23h 59min of the day?
--
Oz
Peter Duncanson
<knights...@budweiser.com> wrote:
Following this discussion yesterday I managed to use twice as much
electricity and water as usual for washing a machine-load of clothes. I
forgot to put any detergent in the first time.
Peter Duncanson
wrote:
>
>In article <2ac7h511cpcbogds9...@4ax.com>, Peter Duncanson
><ma...@peterduncanson.net> writes
>
>>Following this discussion yesterday I managed to use twice as much
>>electricity and water as usual for washing a machine-load of clothes. I
>>forgot to put any detergent in the first time.
>>
>LOL!!
>
>So, now there's a need for a sensor in the washing machine which can
>detect whether or not you have added the required detergent for that
>particular setting on the machine. Should be a doddle!
Yes. Home automation just gets more and more interesting.
Buddenbrooks
"Malcolm" <Mal...@indaal.demon.co.uk> wrote in message
news:fh62E4HN...@indaal.demon.co.uk...
>
> So, now there's a need for a sensor in the washing machine which can
> detect whether or not you have added the required detergent for that
> particular setting on the machine. Should be a doddle!
>
I wonder when they will get around to having a large hopper in the machine
which then takes what it needs.
I guess a surface tension sensor would be required to determine amount to
add.