I am posting this subject in three different groups to hopefully get a
good cross section of ideas. I apologize ahead of time if this offends
anyone.
When one considers a workshop with metal and wood working capabilities,
what tradeoffs have you made to have a working shop in an alternate
homepower environment where every amp is precious?
Obviously hand nonpowered tools take on a special importance.
Cordless tools come to mind but which ones and what batteries?
When considerng stationary tools like drills, lathes, mills, saws,
grinders, etc., which ones fit best in an environment where one is off
grid?
Special operations like welding and using air compressors would seem to
need consideration because of their unique requirements.
I would be interested in hearing how others have approached this
situation and what implementations they have adopted.
Thanks for any suggestions or comments that you can offer.
TMT
"Ed Huntress" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
> "J. R. Carroll" <[email protected]> wrote in message
> news:[email protected]...
> >
> >
> >
> > "Ed Huntress" <[email protected]> wrote in message
> > news:[email protected]...
> > > "J. R. Carroll" <[email protected]> wrote in message
> > > news:[email protected]...
> > > >
> > > > "Ed Huntress" <[email protected]> wrote in message
> > > > news:[email protected]...
> > > > > "J. R. Carroll" <[email protected]> wrote in message
> > > > > news:[email protected]...
> > > > > >
> > > > > > "F. George McDuffee" <[email protected]> wrote in message
> > > > > > news:[email protected]...
> > > > >
> > > > If Detroit or Windsor can't stay busy or if GM files it won't be
> because
> > > > they couldn't get the answer right. It will be because they kept
> asking
> > > the
> > > > wrong damned question.
> > >
> > > And are you talking about a solution for 10% of the market, or are you
> > > claiming you have a general question and a general solution for it?
> >
> > It isn't a claim Ed, it is a proven philosophy and business model. It
will
> > work wherever you choose to run it if the infrastructure is in place.
>
> Proven for what percentage of the economy? Are you suggesting this is a
> general model that will sustain our economy as a whole? If so, how would
you
> apply it to, say, the manufacturing of shirts? What philosophy and
business
> model will let you make shirts at a price/quality tradeoff that competes
> with rural China or Bangladesh? Child labor could help, I suppose...
>
> >
> > > Because we can always make a positive anecdote of the virtues of 10%,
if
> > we
> > > neglect the fact that an economy is all 100%, and that the
consequences
> of
> > > what happens to the other 90% eventually catches up with all of us.
> > >
> > > Sooner or later, you have to answer the question of how you compete
with
> > 80
> > > cents/hour wages, when technology and business expertise can be
packaged
> > > into shipping containers and sent to Bangalore or Shanghai just as
> easily
> > as
> > > to Cleveland, and that clever ideas, hard work, and insight are
> > distributed
> > > quite evenly around the world.
> >
> > Focusing on wages is exactly the wrong thing to do. I paid the tool room
> > guys a five dollar premium to the market, provided excellent medical
> > benefits, paid time off, and contributed the legal maximum to our 401K
for
> > every employee at the time that was 4 to 1.
> > You are closer to the mark with the clever ideas part however and I
agree
> > that no one group has a lock on that.
>
> Your $5 premium probably was around 20% of 40% of your costs: as a round
> approximation, perhaps 8% of your cost of production, based on
> tooling-industry rules of thumb.
>
> When you're up against 80 cents/hour, how do you account for the 96%
> disadvantage? Do you think that improved efficiencies in general (not just
> yours, but those of the economy as a whole) can cover 96% differences? Any
> model that I know of, that points in that possible direction, is based on
> getting rid of all of those people you employ and adopting the values and
> standards of the Third World.
>
> And then business in general winds up hoist on its own petard.
>
> >
> > If you think that GM is tanking because of their labor contracts or
> pension
> > obligations you are just plain wrong. They suck hind tit because their
> > business model if for shit.
>
> So you're saying they can absorb $1,500/car just by having a better
business
> model than Toyota or Hyundai?
No, they can do that by properly understanding and then delivering to their
market. This is what they are utterly failing to do.
The difference in price between a Hyundai built in Arkansas and a GM product
built anywhere is much more than 1,500 dollars.
As a percentage it's about half.
>And then, after gaining a $1,500/car advantage
> over them simply through smarter organization, that they can maintain that
> advantage in a viciously competitive global market?
They do not gain any advantage with a reduced price and shouldn't try. Good
value is critical in purchasing but you are talking about racing to the
bottom and that is the stupidest thing I have seen in recent times. It does
not work.
>
> These are all fine assertions, John, but I'd like to see the specifics.
> Frankly, I don't believe you can "business-model" your way to success when
> you have the kind of legacy overhead that GM has. That is, unless your
> business model is based on moving all of your manufacturing offshore and
> abandoning your legacy entitlements to the federal government.
Just the opposite in most respects. You are smarter than this Ed.
>
Ed,
I am unable to continue this for the rest of today but I will.
I read what you have written about global markets and manufacturing. The
questions and their answer are largely contained in your own work and the
underlying research behind it. The need to present fresh facts doesn't
exist. There aren't really many fresh facts regardless. A fresh perspective
is the key, as I said. You answered, intelligently I might add, the wrong
question. Your work revolves around looking like a top notch vendor. This is
certainly necessary but it is also the WRONG WRONG WRONG perspective.
I get paid big bucks for this Ed and have yet to see anyone who will truly
embrace what I provide as a service fail to flourish . I also have enough
confidence in the results that I only take equity. I also, except once and
not directly, don't do "turn arounds". My advice under the turn around
scenario has consistently been "Get Out and do it Now".
The five dollar ratio to costs was 6 percent and we knew that percentage
very precisely.
--
John R. Carroll
Machining Solution Software, Inc.
Los Angeles San Francisco
www.machiningsolution.com
Prometheus <[email protected]> writes:
>On Fri, 17 Jun 2005 23:26:33 GMT, "CW" <[email protected]> wrote:
>
>>That's a little remembered fact. We could do it again.
>>
>>"Scott Lurndal" <[email protected]> wrote in message
>>news:[email protected]...
>>>
>>> I'll just point out that we didn't have that capacity in 1941, but
>>> we did by 1945.
>
>The US was a manfacturing based economy. Now, everyone seems
The US was coming out of a significant depression. There was
no "manufacturing based economy" in 1935 or 1940. If anything,
it was agriculture-based.
scott
>hell-bent on pretending we can get by with consumption as our
>watchword. When you get an entire generation or two who think that
>they are entitled to consume and feel no need to produce, it doesn't
>create the kind of environment that allows a society to ratchet up
>production that quickly. It's a different world now.
>
>
I second what Robert Bonomi has said. What's wrong with good old
fashioned human power? Such machinery was once very common. Take a
look at some pictures of old machinery, and you will find an apprentice
who is busy turning a flywheel all day long, and observing his master
at work, thereby gaining a firsthand knoiwledge which no number of
words can communicate. Nowadays, however, such flywheel turners tend
to be very expensive. Therefore, I recommend that you build yourself a
squirrelcage apparatus, and purchase a greyhound to run in it. Retired
racing greyhounds are put to death if nobody wants them. I know a lady
who has a retired racer, and he is a wonderful pet. A racer is happy
when he is racing. This is of the very nature of a racer. So give a
veteran a job, for god's sake, and build a squirrelcage power plant.
Mike Mandaville
providing meaningful solutions for the workaday world
And for those who might think that fart gas, otherwise known as bio
gas, is unrealistic, here is the Mother Earth News "Plowboy Interview"
of L. John Fry, who powered his farm with a generator turned by an
engine which ran on this gas. This engine ran non-stop for six solid
years:
http://journeytoforever.org/biofuel_library/MENintvus/fryintvu.html
Only real solution for running tools at home is a generator. A propane
generator might be the way to go if you already have auxilary heat that
way. Typically the machines don't run terribly long at a stretch,
except maybe a sander. My jointer and table saw only run a few minutes
max.
If your pace is slow, hand tools will get it all done. Watched alone
in the wilderness the other night. He did amazing time with cutting
through several feet of spruce tree with a large western hand saw.
Alan
I think there are other considerations besides efficiency. This depends
on your method of power generation, and how often you work. Cordless
tools can be useful because you can charge them when you have peak
power available from your source. The same is true for compressed air.
If your home's battery bank is fully charged, you can divert your
energy to building spare power for the shop in your cordless batteries,
and building up compression in your air tank.
I also think that, depending on how you work, the loads may not be so
bad. You most likely don't crank your saws constantly for hours on end.
You use these things in bursts. You may be able schedule your work so
that the extra load from these machines is manageable.
FYI...I have had several emails expressing interest in this discussion.
Some of them are from viewers in Florida who commented that this topic
is revelant to their situation after last year's storms. It would seem
that many were without power for many weeks/months and were living
subsistence energy wise for a long period of time while they were
trying to rebuild their lives and property.
As one person said.." you never realize how much you rely on your power
drill until you don't have the juice to run it".
TMT
On Sun, 19 Jun 2005 11:33:52 -0400, "John P Bengi" <JBengi
(spamm)@(spamm) yahoo,com> AKA gimmy bob, pizza girl, piezo guru,
larry lix, etc. etc. wrote:
>That troll still lives here? Does he ever talk home power or still just a
>troll?
>
>I was wondering if I should take him out of my bozo bin yet?
Let's see, you responded directly to one of my posts in this very same
thread, on June 14th http://tinyurl.com/b4cds. How were you able to do
that if I'm filtered? Busted yourself again there Gymmy Boob.
As I've warned you before, so long as you're posting 24-7 in dozens of
groups, you're going to have trouble keeping track of which lies each
of your identities has told. If you were to get off your butt once in
a while and walk around a bit instead, perhaps the increased
circulation would make it easier for you to keep things straight.
Wayne
Thanks for the reply.
I would agree that cordless tools have a spot in the AHP workshop since
one can recharge them during off load hours.
Where would one find 12v motors in the suitable HP and speeds to
retrofit something like a table saw?
In considering this subject, a lineshaft approach does come to mind but
unfortunately you rarely see the needed equipment at HD or Lowes. I am
not to crazy about chucking all the stationary power tools that have
taken me decades to collect. Also, lineshafts take up room, linedriven
tools are required to stay in one place and cannot be mounted on wheels
to optimize shop space as needed. A workshop should be no larger than
necessary for the heating/cooling aspect that also takes energy.
TMT
I would agree but an VFD that is unnecessary is a current draw that is
not needed.
Like any system, one needs to plan a workshop as a whole.
At this point, I could go single phase, 3 phase or DC motors on on all
my machines. One of the reasons why I started this discussion was to
make that decision based partially on the experiences of others who
have hopefully gone before me.
TMT
Thanks for your posting.
Your discussion is one of the major reasons for me starting this
thread. As I soon discovered when I started research into the design of
an AHP workshop...that the continuing progression of technology
(especially that of inverter design) changes the approach that one
should take in implementing a AHP system today.
While the lure to go "no power" is strong, I am no Luddite. Power
tools, both portable and stationary, have their place in a AHP
workshop. The opportunity to leverage consumer offerings allows one to
use conventional tools with minimal hassles. I also have a large
collection of older metal and wood working tools that would be awkward
to convert to something other than AC. In the past, I have always had a
policy of trying to do as little a modification as possible to a tool
since it is never a simple as it first seems. Machine tools were
designed with certain speed and torque requirements in mind and when
one departs from these, the tool's performance suffers.
Thanks for your input and please always feel welcome to contribute to
any of my discussions.
TMT
Interesting comments by a former Fed chairman:
NewsMax.com Wires
Friday, June 10, 2005
"Former Fed Chairman Paul Volcker said he doesn't see how the U.S.
can keep borrowing and consuming while letting foreign countries do
all the producing.
It's a recipe for American economic disaster.
On Thursday the Wall Street Journal reported bluntly that
"Mr. Volcker thinks a crisis is likely."
[snip]"
Rest of article here:
http://www.newsmax.com/archives/articles/2005/6/9/161923.shtml
JLD
OMFG!! You have to be kidding me Mr Libertarian. The question is, do
you spend 2 billion at home, or in China? Do you honestly think it's a
good sign that we send $2 billion to foreign countries instead of
spending it here at home?
We have plenty of 3rd-world states here in the USA that could use $2
billion a day. I'm guessing that you live in one of them.
Me wrote:
> In article <[email protected]>,
> Cliff <[email protected]> wrote:
>
> > Found a live one, eh?
> > One day they will demand their VALUE back ...... as promised
> > by that paper ....
> >
> > Then those taxes will ......
> > --
> > Cliff
>
> Naw, we will just Nationalize their Dept, just like they did with
> ours, years ago....Payback is a bitch...isn't it.....
> Remeber the Red chineese never did pay us back for WWII........
>
>
> Me
You think? It was the Nationalist Chinese we assisted in WWII, not the
Reds. IIRC, Mao and buddies didn't take over until '49, at which time
the Nationalists boogied to Formosa (aka Taiwan). The Reds have never
owed us anything but a hard time, in their philosophy, which they have
given us time after time.
>>>When you get a browser that actually supports bottom posting I will join
>>>you. Until then fuck off with your trolling.
>>Yes John, do that - fuck off!
>Why?
Well John, to put it politely, YOU shit in your own nest!
And the rest of us cannot operate with the dag hanging from your arse.
Plus the methane is unpalatable/unsusable, as is the Host.
In article <[email protected]>,
Too_Many_Tools <[email protected]> wrote:
>I am posting this subject in three different groups to hopefully get a
>good cross section of ideas. I apologize ahead of time if this offends
>anyone.
>
>When one considers a workshop with metal and wood working capabilities,
>what tradeoffs have you made to have a working shop in an alternate
>homepower environment where every amp is precious?
>
>Obviously hand nonpowered tools take on a special importance.
>
>Cordless tools come to mind but which ones and what batteries?
cordless tools violate the 'every amp is precious' premise.
Charging batteries is *extremely* ineffcient.
>When considerng stationary tools like drills, lathes, mills, saws,
>grinders, etc., which ones fit best in an environment where one is off
>grid?
PTO-driven ones. The 'drive' can come from nerly anything -- a water-wheel,
a steam-engine, a tread-mill, etc. Even an electric motor, in extreme
circumstance. :)
>Special operations like welding and using air compressors would seem to
>need consideration because of their unique requirements.
Welding -- gas, instead of electric arc.
Air compressor -- gasoline/deiesel engint, steam-powered.
"wmbjk" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
> On 14 Jun 2005 12:07:53 -0700, "Too_Many_Tools"
> <[email protected]> wrote:
>
We have a few limitations - Hypertherm 600 suffers nuisance
> cut-outs above 45 Amps. It will also temporarily shut down if the
> compressor starts mid-cut. So I let the compressor tank fill, then
> shut the pump power off before starting the cut.
I only use my compressor for about 15-30 minutes a day. Right now I'm using
a gasoline generator to run it but I am considering the possibility of using
a belt-driven generator and replacing the AC motor with a 12 VDC motor. For
my purposes it won't matter much if it takes a little longer (lower gear
ratio on the compressor) to fill the tank. I also always manage to find
something to do while compressor is filling the tank anyway. The main
problem I see with a 12 volt compressor is motor life and having to change
the brushes etc.
I also use more human-powered tools than I would if I was connected to the
grid. For example I make custom picture frames and I can either (in most
cases) use a big noisy double-miter saw that uses a lot of power and throws
sawdust all over the place or use a foot-powered chopper that makes hardly
any noise and produces wood chips that I expect will be suitable fuel for
the woodgas generator that I plan to build in the not-to-distant future.
A few people mentioned that cordless tools are ineffecient but hey, it sure
is nice to be able to grab a cordless drill when you only need to drill a
couple of small holes and not have to go start anything up or turn anything
else on.
"Scott Willing" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
> On 15 Jun 2005 11:36:20 -0700, "Too_Many_Tools"
> <[email protected]> wrote:
>
> >Thanks for the reply.
> >
> >I would agree that cordless tools have a spot in the AHP workshop since
> >one can recharge them during off load hours.
> >
> >Where would one find 12v motors in the suitable HP and speeds to
> >retrofit something like a table saw?
> >
> >In considering this subject, a lineshaft approach does come to mind but
> >unfortunately you rarely see the needed equipment at HD or Lowes. I am
> >not to crazy about chucking all the stationary power tools that have
> >taken me decades to collect. Also, lineshafts take up room, linedriven
> >tools are required to stay in one place and cannot be mounted on wheels
> >to optimize shop space as needed. A workshop should be no larger than
> >necessary for the heating/cooling aspect that also takes energy.
> >
> >TMT
>
> I really hesitate to jump in on this topic, but I advise you to make
> sure to do your research carefully before pursuing the replacement of
> AC motors with DC motors.
>
> In the early days of homepower which was nearly universally 12V on the
> primary side, this was a pretty common practice, but in the overall
> picture of things today I'm not sure it's warranted in the general
> case.
>
> At one time I was given to understand that DC motors are just innately
> more efficient than AC. It appears that this is not necessarily so,
> and has much to do with the crappy design and build quality of
> "shovelware" AC motors than any basic electromechanical principles. To
> know whether you would actually be further ahead after a DC
> conversion, you would have to consider each case individually.
> Ignoring power factor, a 12V load of power "x" draws 10 times the
> current that an 120VAC load will draw. Will the losses you avoid by
> bypassing the inverter get chewed up in the wire? How close to the
> battery room will the workshop be?
I absolutely agree with what you are saying. This is why the on-grid folks
are using Tesla's design and not Edison's DC idea. For a house I also think
it's probably not worth the trouble to run massive wires everywhere in order
to use DC effeciently. Of course the higher the voltage the smaller the
wire required, which brings you right back to 115VAC. Probably better to
have a few extra batteries and a couple of extra solar panels (or whatever)
to cover the loss of effeciency. When I first started reading about wind
generators about 20 or so years ago they were talking about 120 volt
generators charging batteries in series equaling 120 VDC. According to the
author most appliances wouldn't care if it was AC or DC. This idea is
definately simpler than having to buy and connect an expensive sine wave
inverter but I suspect that today's electronics might be a bit more
particular about their input current than a 20 year old dishwasher or vacuum
cleaner. If someone wanted to try it I suppose the best thing to do would
be to buy a new whatever and make sure you can return it. If it explodes
you go get your money back. And of course there's always the problem of
short circuits burning the house down.
However, for a stand-alone workshop that is to be powered seperately I would
consider using DC as opposed to running a gasoline/diesel generator on one
or two tools that I use regularly. For those that I only use occasionally
for me it's no big deal to start up a little generator (most of my saws etc
run fine from a Honda eu2000). As someone else pointed out running a
compressor during peak sunlight or wind times (or when a generator happens
to be running) and filling the tank can, at least in my case, supply enough
air to do quite a bit of work later without having to use any additional
power. Leaks, in this case, cannot be allowed to exist!
>
> I started out at 12V primary by virtue of buying a house with an
> existing PV system. Like many frontier homebrew systems, it had
> started as a purely DC system to which an inverter was added later.
>
> Having no plumbing in the house, I've acquired a number of small 12V
> pumps for various specific purposes, such as our bucket shower.
> Fortunately this hasn't represented a significant investment. With
> each system upgrade I left myself options for going to a higher
> primary voltage, and recently made the move to 24V when we replaced
> our chargerless mod square wave inverter with a sine wave
> inverter/charger. At some distant point in the future we might even
> make the jump to 48V, but for the moment, 24V was "just right."
>
> The punchline is that our little pumps (and other 12V DC loads) are
> now running off a 24V/12V DC-DC converter. In the overall picture of
> things this crazy scenario actually still makes sense here, but again
> these are *small* loads.
Lol. As long as you don't plug a battery charger into it to charge the
batteries it's running off of ;-)
>
> The moral is that when you choose to run DC loads, you're creating
> specialized equipment and there are serious implications that might
> not be immediately obvious. If you stick with AC loads, your wire runs
> can be far longer for a given power throughput / wire guage, you can
> reconfigure the primary side of your system without affecting anything
> on the load side, use a common AC generator when it's more convenient
> or more sensible to do so, or take your gear with you and use it
> elsewhere.
I keep toying with the idea (12 volt motors) but I still use a gasoline
generator for the sizeable, short use loads. When it comes right down to it
I'm probably only using about 2 to 3 gallons of gasoline per month to run my
tools to produce around $15,000 worth of revenue. From a business
standpoint this is an insignificant expenditure. I simply manage the use of
my power tools and do work in batches. I don't work after the sun goes down
(usually, unless it's a RUSH order).
>
> Having "inherited" a mixed DC/AC system and lived with it, off-grid,
> for five years, there is no question in my mind that the new house we
> build here will be wired almost entirely for conventional AC and will
> likely have only some emergency lighting (power room!), and perhaps a
> few very special-purpose devices and outlets wired for DC.
>
> YMMV.
>
> -=s
>
"Matt Stawicki" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
On Wed, 15 Jun 2005 07:36:34 -0700, F. George McDuffee
<[email protected]> wrote:
><snip>
>>When one considers a workshop with metal and wood working capabilities,
>>what tradeoffs have you made to have a working shop in an alternate
>>homepower environment where every amp is precious?
><snip>
>Given the current economic/social/political environment your
>concerns are well founded, however I think the primary or basic
>problem will not be limited or unavailable [electrical] power,
>but rather the more pervasive and dangerous problem of a lack of
>spare parts, raw materials and most critical HSS and carbide
>tools and blanks.
>
>Whether by design or stupidity, the American
>manufacturing/industrial infrastructure is rapidly being
>destroyed, primarily by management "outsourcing" and plant
>transfer.
>
>With the trade deficit [current account trade balance]
>approaching 2 billion dollars *PER DAY* it does not require a
>degree in rocket science or a tarot deck to see that the time is
>near when imports by the U.S. economy will be on a C.O.D. or even
>a "pre-pay" basis [in gold, not dollars].
>
>Given the U.S. has a very limited (and rapidly diminishing)
>domestic production capacity for machine tools [lathes, mills,
>gear shapers, etc.], C.N.C. controllers, and perhaps most
>critical M2 HSS and carbide inserts, this means the entire house
>of cards will collapse as the existing machinery wears out,
>replacements are unobtainable, and repair cannot be attempted.
>
>Re-industrialization will be very expensive, time consuming and
>dangerous, as even the most basic industries such as iron
>foundries will have to be reestablished. Indeed, a generation or
>more will be required, as the evolution, techniques and lessons
>of the period 1890-1930 will have to be retraced, with no
>assurance that the time required will be available before America
>must again meet a serious international challenge to its
>existence / hegemony.
>
>
Well, hell. Might as well just cash in your chips now. Take a quick
vacation, and then head for your local crematorium.
Sheesh, George. You really need to get out more:-)
Matt
Somehow methinks supply and demand will take care of itself.
"Too_Many_Tools" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
> Thanks for the reply.
>
> I would agree that cordless tools have a spot in the AHP workshop since
> one can recharge them during off load hours.
>
> Where would one find 12v motors in the suitable HP and speeds to
> retrofit something like a table saw?
While searching for a fan motor I came across some substantial DC motors on
eBay a while back. I think they may have been blower motors for furnaces or
air conditioners. What I had in mind was using a belt drive. I would think
it might be more difficult to find one that has the right shaft for a saw,
especially one with reverse threads. Come to think of it a DC powered saw
might make it possible (or at least safer) to use fluorescent lights in a
shop since it would not be running at 60 Hz.
Grainger has DC motors too.
http://www.grainger.com/Grainger/searchresults.jsp?xi=xi
>
> In considering this subject, a lineshaft approach does come to mind but
> unfortunately you rarely see the needed equipment at HD or Lowes. I am
> not to crazy about chucking all the stationary power tools that have
> taken me decades to collect. Also, lineshafts take up room, linedriven
> tools are required to stay in one place and cannot be mounted on wheels
> to optimize shop space as needed. A workshop should be no larger than
> necessary for the heating/cooling aspect that also takes energy.
>
> TMT
>
"Scott Willing" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
> On 15 Jun 2005 11:36:20 -0700, "Too_Many_Tools"
> <[email protected]> wrote:
>
> >Thanks for the reply.
> >
>
> I started out at 12V primary by virtue of buying a house with an
> existing PV system. Like many frontier homebrew systems, it had
> started as a purely DC system to which an inverter was added later.
>
> Having no plumbing in the house, I've acquired a number of small 12V
> pumps for various specific purposes, such as our bucket shower.
Just curious, but how do you go to the bathroom? Composting toilet?
Outhouse?
"Scott Willing" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
> On Thu, 16 Jun 2005 09:30:54 -0700, "Ulysses"
> <[email protected]> wrote:
>
> >
> >"Scott Willing" <[email protected]> wrote in message
> >news:[email protected]...
> >> On 15 Jun 2005 11:36:20 -0700, "Too_Many_Tools"
> >> <[email protected]> wrote:
> >>
> >> >Thanks for the reply.
> >> >
> >>
> >> I started out at 12V primary by virtue of buying a house with an
> >> existing PV system. Like many frontier homebrew systems, it had
> >> started as a purely DC system to which an inverter was added later.
> >>
> >> Having no plumbing in the house, I've acquired a number of small 12V
> >> pumps for various specific purposes, such as our bucket shower.
> >
> >Just curious, but how do you go to the bathroom? Composting toilet?
>
> Yes and no. :-) We have a simple sawdust bucket toilet that sits
> beside a commercial composting toilet, now retired. I'm going to tear
> out the latter and build a nicer bucket toilet when the time is
> available.
>
> Long story, but the commercial toilet is, IMHO, a waste of money.
> (Fortunately, wasn't my decision; came with the house.) A bucket
> toilet is superior to it in every way.
>
> Most so-called composting toilets, including this one, are actually
> evaporating toilets and don't compost per se.
I don't see how ANY of them could actually compost anything when you are
always adding new material. My composting takes place in the compost heap.
That actually works.
>
> >Outhouse?
>
> There are two of those here, also retired.
>
> We have shallow groundwater, and an outhouse is an potentially nasty
> polluter. Actually septic systems can be just as bad - so many people
> manage to pollute their wells with those too. Above-ground aerobic
> composting is the way to go IMHO.
>
> -=s
Yea. I built a composting toilet and replaced it with a bigger version (30
gallon) of the bucket toilet. I overcame the weight problem by putting a
drain at the bottom that goes into a hole (covered, of course) and I used
weeds chopped with a lawnmower or peat moss when there are no weeds instead
of sawdust. My well is about 300 feet away and down 126 feet. I've given
some thought to having it go into a solar still and then only clean water
would reach the ground. Haven't figured out yet how to clean the solar
still though. Might be ugly and stinky.
"wmbjk" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
> On Thu, 16 Jun 2005 15:43:10 GMT, "Pete C." <[email protected]>
> wrote:
>
> >Too_Many_Tools wrote:
> >>
> >> I would agree but an VFD that is unnecessary is a current draw that is
> >> not needed.
> >>
> >> Like any system, one needs to plan a workshop as a whole.
> >>
> >> At this point, I could go single phase, 3 phase or DC motors on on all
> >> my machines. One of the reasons why I started this discussion was to
> >> make that decision based partially on the experiences of others who
> >> have hopefully gone before me.
> >>
> >> TMT
> >
> >I've been following this thread with some interest and now have some
> >thoughts and comments to add to it.
> >
> >I may have missed something along the way, but I don't recall you
> >specifying what type(s) of alternative energy sources you have
> >available. This makes quite a difference in determining the best
> >options.
> >
> >As an example, if your alternate source(s) provide mechanical power such
> >as found with water power, wind power, or a solar boiler driving a
> >turbine or steam engine, then air power could be quite advantageous.
> >
> >A source of mechanical energy can directly drive a compressor head,
> >saving the extremely inefficient conversions to electricity and back.
> >Compressed air is easy and economical to store in large volumes and is
> >free from the chemical hazards of batteries. Useable service life of
> >compressed air tanks is much higher than batteries as well.
>
> Wind driven compressor -> storage tank -> air motors? Could be OK if
> one had a really windy site, lots of surplus pressure vessels, and a
> plenty of rotor diameter. To get an idea of the diameter versus work
> produced, check out the size and pumping rates of Bowjon well pumps.
>
> >In addition to the obvious air tools, compressed air can also be used to
> >power things such as refrigeration if you use the belt driven type
> >refrigeration compressors.
>
> Mechanical drive all the way to the pump? That would work well with a
> large mill, when the wind is blowing, and be as efficient as these
> http://www.deanbennett.com/windmills.htm. But in that application
> there's the advantage of easy storage for when there's no wind.
>
> >Those mechanical energy sources can also simultaneously drive electrical
> >generators to charge conventional batteries for loads such as lighting.
>
> Which is why the conventional rotor/alternator is so popular with home
> power users. Ours is similar to this one
> http://www.windenergy.com/whisper_200.htm.
>
> >Battery charging for cordless tools is no less efficient that the
> >charging of your "regular" battery string, as long as the charging is
> >limited to peak energy generation times.
>
> For the usual home power setup, cordless tools are no more and no less
> advantageous than they are on-grid. Unless the power setup is very
> small, the double conversion isn't worth trying to work around.
>
> >The efficiency of converting DC from your battery string to AC so you
> >can use conventional appliances is fairly good with modern inverters.
> >The conversion efficiency also improves when you use a higher voltage
> >battery string since inverters switching higher voltages at lower
> >currents will have lower resistive / heat losses.
> >
> >Solar PV conversion efficiency is incredibly low to begin with and PV
> >cost is high so if that is your only energy source you really do need to
> >watch every miliamp.
>
> That depends. On very small systems, it's often true. Our setup isn't
> huge, and costs about as much as a medium priced SUV. The idle loads
> are about 100 Watts 24-7. That's a waste versus
> convenience/practicality issue, and it's a long way from watching
> every milliamp.
>
> >Of course, even with that inefficiency a solar PV
> >panel charging batteries for your cordless tools is just fine as long as
> >it has the capacity to keep up with your usage.
> >
> >For items like welders that require huge gulps of power it's really
> >difficult to get away from an IC engine / generator for practicality.
>
> Not necessarily. Home welding tends to be short duration. The hardware
> to supply that kind of power is actually affordable, and if one is
> designing the power system from scratch for what most would consider a
> normal home, then the extra inverter capacity isn't a big deal. In our
> case, for the house loads alone we could have gotten away with a
> single SW4024 plus a transformer for the 220V loads.
How is this done, getting 220V from 110? How do you get the two "hot"
wires? Are there 2 secondary windings on the transformer? Wouldn't they
need to be out of phase with each other?
In article <[email protected]>,
Ulysses <[email protected]> wrote:
>
>> Not necessarily. Home welding tends to be short duration. The hardware
>> to supply that kind of power is actually affordable, and if one is
>> designing the power system from scratch for what most would consider a
>> normal home, then the extra inverter capacity isn't a big deal. In our
>> case, for the house loads alone we could have gotten away with a
>> single SW4024 plus a transformer for the 220V loads.
>
>How is this done, getting 220V from 110? How do you get the two "hot"
>wires? Are there 2 secondary windings on the transformer? Wouldn't they
>need to be out of phase with each other?
The magic is "the right transformer'. <grin>
a 2:1 step-up tranformer.
120V primary
240V center-tapped secondary.
No magic. just good engineering.
"Anthony Matonak" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
> Ulysses wrote:
> > "Scott Willing" <[email protected]> wrote in message
> ...
> >>Most so-called composting toilets, including this one, are actually
> >>evaporating toilets and don't compost per se.
> >
> > I don't see how ANY of them could actually compost anything when you are
> > always adding new material. My composting takes place in the compost
heap.
> > That actually works.
>
> As I understand it, composting toilets always have a second compartment
> where the final composting takes place before the stuff is removed.
Yes, and so did mine. The problem I had was I built one that should have
had enough capacity for 5 people but I had to empty it somewhat every 2 or 3
days with 4 people using it. The stuff would sit in the drawer for only 2
days then have to be emptied into a compost heap. With my extra-large
bucket toilet I need to empty it every 7-10 days. Less work for me and a
lot less complicated. No moving parts.
I think in order for a composting toilet to work for a family of 4 it would
have to have a capacity of at least 200 gallons, probably more. It would be
huge and, if a drum type, would probably require an engine to turn it.
>
> >>We have shallow groundwater, and an outhouse is an potentially nasty
> >>polluter. Actually septic systems can be just as bad - so many people
> >>manage to pollute their wells with those too. Above-ground aerobic
> >>composting is the way to go IMHO.
> >
> > Yea. I built a composting toilet and replaced it with a bigger version
(30
> > gallon) of the bucket toilet. I overcame the weight problem by putting
a
> > drain at the bottom that goes into a hole (covered, of course) and I
used
> > weeds chopped with a lawnmower or peat moss when there are no weeds
instead
> > of sawdust. My well is about 300 feet away and down 126 feet. I've
given
> > some thought to having it go into a solar still and then only clean
water
> > would reach the ground. Haven't figured out yet how to clean the solar
> > still though. Might be ugly and stinky.
>
> You might instead use a solar evaporator so that only vapor escapes.
> The fellows doing those earthships (tire houses) did a bit of work on
> these things. I found a page of theirs...
> http://www.earthship.org/systems/sewage.php
Thanks for the idea. I'll look into it.
>
> Apparently they prefer to use a solar heated septic tank that drains
> into a large outdoor lined planter. Plants do seem to do a good job
> at both removing pollutants and evaporating water.
Probably wouldn't work for me because so little liquid leaves the toilet.
This methods seems to work well for flushing toilets though.
>
> Anthony
"Scott Willing" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
> On Fri, 17 Jun 2005 17:31:42 -0700, "Ulysses"
> <[email protected]> wrote:
>
> >
> >"Scott Willing" <[email protected]> wrote in message
> >news:[email protected]...
> >> On Thu, 16 Jun 2005 09:30:54 -0700, "Ulysses"
> >> <[email protected]> wrote:
> >>
> >> >
> >> >"Scott Willing" <[email protected]> wrote in message
> >> >news:[email protected]...
> >> >> On 15 Jun 2005 11:36:20 -0700, "Too_Many_Tools"
> >> >> <[email protected]> wrote:
> >> >>
> >> >> >Thanks for the reply.
> >> >> >
> >> >>
> >> >> I started out at 12V primary by virtue of buying a house with an
> >> >> existing PV system. Like many frontier homebrew systems, it had
> >> >> started as a purely DC system to which an inverter was added later.
> >> >>
> >> >> Having no plumbing in the house, I've acquired a number of small 12V
> >> >> pumps for various specific purposes, such as our bucket shower.
> >> >
> >> >Just curious, but how do you go to the bathroom? Composting toilet?
> >>
> >> Yes and no. :-) We have a simple sawdust bucket toilet that sits
> >> beside a commercial composting toilet, now retired. I'm going to tear
> >> out the latter and build a nicer bucket toilet when the time is
> >> available.
> >>
> >> Long story, but the commercial toilet is, IMHO, a waste of money.
> >> (Fortunately, wasn't my decision; came with the house.) A bucket
> >> toilet is superior to it in every way.
> >>
> >> Most so-called composting toilets, including this one, are actually
> >> evaporating toilets and don't compost per se.
> >
> >I don't see how ANY of them could actually compost anything when you are
> >always adding new material.
>
> I don't see a problem with that. I add fresh material to the top of
> our working pile once a week until the bin is full and we let 'er
> rest. The most active thermophilic zone *is* right near the top where
> the new material is added. Our working bin is toasting along at 120
> degrees F right at the moment.
Well yes, it seems like it SHOULD work. But you said you retired your
commercial toilets. There must be a reason why.
>
> We learned a lot from Joe Jenkin's "Humanure Handbook" e.g. that we
> don't need to do a lot of work turning the pile, and that doing so can
> actually kill the thermophilic action. That's exactly what we've found
> in practice. Haven't flipped a pile since.
Quite possibly one of the most useful books ever written. Most of what I
know about composting, pathogens, coli bacteria etc. came from that book. I
just make a hile in the top of my pile, add the new stuff, and cover it with
stuff from the sides of the pile.
>
> > My composting takes place in the compost heap.
> >That actually works.
>
> Yep.
>
> >>
> >> >Outhouse?
> >>
> >> There are two of those here, also retired.
> >>
> >> We have shallow groundwater, and an outhouse is an potentially nasty
> >> polluter. Actually septic systems can be just as bad - so many people
> >> manage to pollute their wells with those too. Above-ground aerobic
> >> composting is the way to go IMHO.
> >>
> >> -=s
> >Yea. I built a composting toilet and replaced it with a bigger version
(30
> >gallon) of the bucket toilet. I overcame the weight problem by putting a
> >drain at the bottom that goes into a hole (covered, of course) and I used
> >weeds chopped with a lawnmower or peat moss when there are no weeds
instead
> >of sawdust.
>
> I'm fortunate enough to have two small smallmills run by neighbors
> within a few miles. We tried leaves and stuff but kept bringing in too
> many bugs with 'em.
>
> > My well is about 300 feet away and down 126 feet.
>
> Excellent.
>
> > I've given
> >some thought to having it go into a solar still and then only clean water
> >would reach the ground. Haven't figured out yet how to clean the solar
> >still though. Might be ugly and stinky.
>
> One reason I like the bucket thing is 'cos the pee just goes into the
> pile where it contributes nitrogen and helps to keep it at the right
> moisture level.
>
> One of our problems with the commercial unit was that no matter what
> we did we would eventually end up with flies, e.g. fungus gnats,
> living in there. The buckets don't sit around long enough for anything
> to breed in 'em.
>
> I thought when we build the new house I might like to try a vault, but
> the fly thing really worries me. Plus, we're trying to keep to a
> single-story design with no stairs which kinda precludes that anyway.
> Best site we have is on a hill though, so there's still the
> possibility for ground-level access to a lower-level vault. Dunno.
>
> I'll keep the commercial toilet around just to install it
> (temporarily) for getting approvals... something prior residents here
> haven't had to concern themselves with.
>
> -=s
>
"Me" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
> In article <[email protected]>,
> "Ulysses" <[email protected]> wrote:
>
> > "wmbjk" <[email protected]> wrote in message
> > news:[email protected]...
> > > On Thu, 16 Jun 2005 15:43:10 GMT, "Pete C." <[email protected]>
> > > wrote:
> > >
>
> > >
> > > Not necessarily. Home welding tends to be short duration. The hardware
> > > to supply that kind of power is actually affordable, and if one is
> > > designing the power system from scratch for what most would consider a
> > > normal home, then the extra inverter capacity isn't a big deal. In our
> > > case, for the house loads alone we could have gotten away with a
> > > single SW4024 plus a transformer for the 220V loads.
> >
> > How is this done, getting 220V from 110? How do you get the two "hot"
> > wires? Are there 2 secondary windings on the transformer? Wouldn't
they
> > need to be out of phase with each other?
> >
> >
>
> Now here is a fellow that asks an inteligent question. If you take
> a dual winding secondary with 120 Vac on each winding, feeding it
> with a 120 Vac Primary, and connect the dual 120Vac windings in series
> you get 240Vac. The phase is determined on how you connect the two
> series windings. and they will either be inphase or 180 out of phase,
> depending on the connection.
>
> Me
Thank you :-)
"Me" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
> In article <[email protected]>,
> "Ulysses" <[email protected]> wrote:
>
> > "wmbjk" <[email protected]> wrote in message
> > news:[email protected]...
> > > On Thu, 16 Jun 2005 15:43:10 GMT, "Pete C." <[email protected]>
> > > wrote:
> > >
>
> > >
> > > Not necessarily. Home welding tends to be short duration. The hardware
> > > to supply that kind of power is actually affordable, and if one is
> > > designing the power system from scratch for what most would consider a
> > > normal home, then the extra inverter capacity isn't a big deal. In our
> > > case, for the house loads alone we could have gotten away with a
> > > single SW4024 plus a transformer for the 220V loads.
> >
> > How is this done, getting 220V from 110? How do you get the two "hot"
> > wires? Are there 2 secondary windings on the transformer? Wouldn't
they
> > need to be out of phase with each other?
> >
> >
>
> Now here is a fellow that asks an inteligent question. If you take
> a dual winding secondary with 120 Vac on each winding, feeding it
> with a 120 Vac Primary, and connect the dual 120Vac windings in series
> you get 240Vac. The phase is determined on how you connect the two
> series windings. and they will either be inphase or 180 out of phase,
> depending on the connection.
>
> Me
Something else I've wondered about is why is it sometimes called 220, other
times 230, and also 240VAC? Do the different voltages imply single or
double phase or is it just a matter of different voltages in different
geographic locations? My little Honda generator is rated at 125 VAC which
seems to be unusual and that would give us 250 VAC if it was ran through the
step-up transformer.
"lionslair at consolidated dot net" <"lionslair at consolidated dot net">
wrote in message news:[email protected]...
> Me wrote:
> > In article <[email protected]>,
> > "Ulysses" <[email protected]> wrote:
> >
> >
> >>"wmbjk" <[email protected]> wrote in message
> >>news:[email protected]...
> >>
> >>>On Thu, 16 Jun 2005 15:43:10 GMT, "Pete C." <[email protected]>
> >>>wrote:
> >>>
> >
> >
> >>>Not necessarily. Home welding tends to be short duration. The hardware
> >>>to supply that kind of power is actually affordable, and if one is
> >>>designing the power system from scratch for what most would consider a
> >>>normal home, then the extra inverter capacity isn't a big deal. In our
> >>>case, for the house loads alone we could have gotten away with a
> >>>single SW4024 plus a transformer for the 220V loads.
> >>
> >>How is this done, getting 220V from 110? How do you get the two "hot"
> >>wires? Are there 2 secondary windings on the transformer? Wouldn't
they
> >>need to be out of phase with each other?
> >>
> >>
> >
> >
> > Now here is a fellow that asks an inteligent question. If you take
> > a dual winding secondary with 120 Vac on each winding, feeding it
> > with a 120 Vac Primary, and connect the dual 120Vac windings in series
> > you get 240Vac. The phase is determined on how you connect the two
> > series windings. and they will either be inphase or 180 out of phase,
> > depending on the connection.
> >
> > Me
> Either 240V give or take a few due to coupling differences or
> Zero give or take a few due to coupling differences.
>
> When it is zero the phasing is wrong and must be reversed on one winding.
> Many electronic transformers have black dots on the 'true' winding lead
> to make phasing easier. Power is just the same simply a single frequency.
>
> Martin
>
> --
> Martin Eastburn
Since we are on the subject it occured to me that I have a 120 to 240 V
transformer that I removed from the first house I bought. The
not-real-bright person I bought the house from left it attached and hot with
a male plug sticking out where anyone walking by could run into it. I'll
have to dig it out of it's box-in-the-garage and see if I can make use of
it, now that I have some understanding of how it's supposed to work and be
connected :-)
\
In article <[email protected]>,
Ulysses <[email protected]> wrote:
>
>"Me" <[email protected]> wrote in message
>news:[email protected]...
>> In article <[email protected]>,
>> "Ulysses" <[email protected]> wrote:
>>
>> > "wmbjk" <[email protected]> wrote in message
>> > news:[email protected]...
>> > > On Thu, 16 Jun 2005 15:43:10 GMT, "Pete C." <[email protected]>
>> > > wrote:
>> > >
>>
>> > >
>> > > Not necessarily. Home welding tends to be short duration. The hardware
>> > > to supply that kind of power is actually affordable, and if one is
>> > > designing the power system from scratch for what most would consider a
>> > > normal home, then the extra inverter capacity isn't a big deal. In our
>> > > case, for the house loads alone we could have gotten away with a
>> > > single SW4024 plus a transformer for the 220V loads.
>> >
>> > How is this done, getting 220V from 110? How do you get the two "hot"
>> > wires? Are there 2 secondary windings on the transformer? Wouldn't
>they
>> > need to be out of phase with each other?
>> >
>> >
>>
>> Now here is a fellow that asks an inteligent question. If you take
>> a dual winding secondary with 120 Vac on each winding, feeding it
>> with a 120 Vac Primary, and connect the dual 120Vac windings in series
>> you get 240Vac. The phase is determined on how you connect the two
>> series windings. and they will either be inphase or 180 out of phase,
>> depending on the connection.
>>
>> Me
>
>Something else I've wondered about is why is it sometimes called 220, other
>times 230, and also 240VAC? Do the different voltages imply single or
>double phase or is it just a matter of different voltages in different
>geographic locations? My little Honda generator is rated at 125 VAC which
>seems to be unusual and that would give us 250 VAC if it was ran through the
>step-up transformer.
It's a matter of history. The "standard" -- for what was expected at the
outlet in a residence -- changed over the years as power distribution got
better.
Circa WW II line voltage was 110VAC. by the mid 50's, this had climbed to
115VAC. by the early 60's, 117VAC. By the late 60', 120V. The 'two hots'
circuit was frequently called "220", even when the actual voltage was as high
as 235 (2x117). "240" does seem to have mostly displaced the old name.
Anyway, if somebody mentions a number in the 110-120 "or so" range, they're
talking about the same thing. Ditto for anything in the 220-240 range.
"208" is a "special" value. as is "277". Both having to do with specific
arrangements of 'three-phase' circuits.
Your Honda is probably at claimed 125V because of *lousy* voltage regulation.
125V at 'no load', dropping to 120V (or lower) as the load increases.
"Robert Bonomi" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
> In article <[email protected]>,
> Ulysses <[email protected]> wrote:
> >
> >"Me" <[email protected]> wrote in message
> >news:[email protected]...
> >> In article <[email protected]>,
> >> "Ulysses" <[email protected]> wrote:
> >>
> >> > "wmbjk" <[email protected]> wrote in message
> >> > news:[email protected]...
> >> > > On Thu, 16 Jun 2005 15:43:10 GMT, "Pete C." <[email protected]>
> >> > > wrote:
> >> > >
> >>
> >> > >
> >> > > Not necessarily. Home welding tends to be short duration. The
hardware
> >> > > to supply that kind of power is actually affordable, and if one is
> >> > > designing the power system from scratch for what most would
consider a
> >> > > normal home, then the extra inverter capacity isn't a big deal. In
our
> >> > > case, for the house loads alone we could have gotten away with a
> >> > > single SW4024 plus a transformer for the 220V loads.
> >> >
> >> > How is this done, getting 220V from 110? How do you get the two
"hot"
> >> > wires? Are there 2 secondary windings on the transformer? Wouldn't
> >they
> >> > need to be out of phase with each other?
> >> >
> >> >
> >>
> >> Now here is a fellow that asks an inteligent question. If you take
> >> a dual winding secondary with 120 Vac on each winding, feeding it
> >> with a 120 Vac Primary, and connect the dual 120Vac windings in series
> >> you get 240Vac. The phase is determined on how you connect the two
> >> series windings. and they will either be inphase or 180 out of phase,
> >> depending on the connection.
> >>
> >> Me
> >
> >Something else I've wondered about is why is it sometimes called 220,
other
> >times 230, and also 240VAC? Do the different voltages imply single or
> >double phase or is it just a matter of different voltages in different
> >geographic locations? My little Honda generator is rated at 125 VAC
which
> >seems to be unusual and that would give us 250 VAC if it was ran through
the
> >step-up transformer.
>
> It's a matter of history. The "standard" -- for what was expected at the
> outlet in a residence -- changed over the years as power distribution got
> better.
>
> Circa WW II line voltage was 110VAC. by the mid 50's, this had climbed to
> 115VAC. by the early 60's, 117VAC. By the late 60', 120V. The 'two
hots'
> circuit was frequently called "220", even when the actual voltage was as
high
> as 235 (2x117). "240" does seem to have mostly displaced the old name.
>
> Anyway, if somebody mentions a number in the 110-120 "or so" range,
they're
> talking about the same thing. Ditto for anything in the 220-240 range.
> "208" is a "special" value. as is "277". Both having to do with specific
> arrangements of 'three-phase' circuits.
>
>
> Your Honda is probably at claimed 125V because of *lousy* voltage
regulation.
> 125V at 'no load', dropping to 120V (or lower) as the load increases.
>
Thanks (to both of you). I can now sleep better at night knowing that there
is no significant difference between 230 and 240 VAC ;-)
My little Honda generator is the inverter type so I suspect the voltage
regulation is extremely good. I don't recall ever having a need to check it
so I don't know offhand if it's accurate or not. I'll probably be checking
it soon though because this morning my circular saw was not starting (as
though it was not plugged in) and then my belt sander was having trouble
getting up to speed. I was also running a 40 amp battery charger so I may
have gone over capacity on the poor little Honda. But the Honda has about
12,000 hours on it (original engine) so I guess I can't expect too much from
it.
>
In article <[email protected]>,
lionslair at consolidated dot net <"lionslair at consolidated dot net"> wrote:
>Robert Bonomi wrote:
>
[[.. munch ..]]
>>
>> It's a matter of history. The "standard" -- for what was expected at the
>> outlet in a residence -- changed over the years as power distribution got
>> better.
>>
[[.. munch ..]]
>>
>> Your Honda is probably at claimed 125V because of *lousy* voltage regulation.
>> 125V at 'no load', dropping to 120V (or lower) as the load increases.
>>
>Our house in the mountains of No. Ca. was a few miles from a swinging
>transformer.
>Under low load, the transformer was at one voltage, as the current increased,
>the transformer switched in another set of windings up until it hit an end.
>The swinging transformer had massive make-before-break contacts that always rang
>(voltage hits) as it moved. I called the power company when it started hitting
>my lines heavy (I was logging them on my APC's) and they found a burnt contact.
>
At one point I lived "across the parking lot" from the local sub-station.
the feed came out of the substation, down *one* pole, with the transformer
and the drop to the 6 apartment building I was living in. the building
was turn-of-the-century construction, with -- I think -- still original
wiring. I could get an *nine* volt drop at the wall, by kicking on one
of my pieces of electronic test gear -- one that drew about 8 amps. *OUCH*.
Anyway, I'm across the street from a school, 2 blocks from a *big* hospital,
And had several other sizable 'commercial' users within a few blocks.
A line-voltage monitor showed as high as 133V in early AM, with it slowly and
somewhat erratically falling to about 127V by somewhere after 9AM on a
week-day.
*THAT* led to a call/complaint to the electric company, Demanding that
they get the voltage down to the 'proper' level. (That degree of excess
voltage _is_ hard on equipment, and other things. Reduces the effective
life of incandescent bulbs by about _half_, in fact.)
For some reason, customer service didn't want to believe me -- I guess
complaints about "too much power" are *really* rare. :)
They suggested that what I was reporting "couldn't be happening".
That whatever I was using to read the voltage must be 'in error'.
I pointed out that I had _five_ separate pieces of test equipment, by five
different manufacturers, that were all telling the _same_ story, within about
2V (analog readout uncertainty on some of the meters). That all were
industrial- and/or lab-grade gear. That the precision-reading unit (readable
to 1/4v or finer) had been used for 'reference checks' at half-a-dozen other
locations around the city, and registered 118.5 - 121.5 at *every* other
location. (About the only thing I didn't have was a _recording_ meter / data-
logger. :)
They _grudgingly_ agreed to send an engineer out to see me. He took
one look at my 'bench', and said "Hell, you've got better equipment there
than _I_ do." Then, looked at my readings and said "that's not right!"
(He didn't even bother to cross-check with his own gear.) Borrowed my phone,
called in to the office, and ordered an _immediate_ roll of a maintenance
team to the substation, and goes outside to wait for the crew to show up.
Which they did, in less than 15 minutes. Less than half an hour later,
my instrumentation is showing a "respectable" 117V. rising all the way
to 123V when the rest of the neighborhood shut down.
I even got a credit on my bill -- where they went back an re-figured what the
kilowatt-hours _should_ have been if they had not been delivering 'too high'
voltage. I'd only lived there a few months, but they back-credited to the
date I moved in. It was about 15% of everything I'd paid.
In article <[email protected]>,
John P Bengi <JBengi (spamm)@(spamm) yahoo,com> wrote:
>You must live in a tiny town if they sent out an Engineer for that...LOL
depends on how you qualify it. biggest town in the state. pop. circa 250K
>
>Did he have ditch digging caluses on his hands too?
*snicker*
>Nice going. Never give up when you know you are right.
>You would never get a rebate here for high voltage. power delivered is power
>billed.
It was _unexpected_. I hadn't asked for it.
It wasn't big bucks either. 30+ years ago, now, so I don't have any precise
recollection of amount -- but I'm pretty sure it was under $20. An apartment,
in summertime -- without A/C -- and with a gas stove, doesn't use a lot of
power.
In article <[email protected]>,
Tim Thomson <[email protected]> wrote:
>
>As a matter of fact would his metor not run less with some things like his
>fridge, vacuum, hair dryer, washing machine, dish washer, etc. What makes a
>power metor spin? If voltage goes up does the amp draw go down?
Are you familiar with "Ohm's Law"?
If the _resistance_ is a fixed value, guess what happens to the current (amps)
when the voltage goes up.
In article <[email protected]>,
Tim Thomson <[email protected]> wrote:
>Robert Bonomi wrote:
[[.. munch ..]]
>>
>> I even got a credit on my bill -- where they went back an re-figured what the
>> kilowatt-hours _should_ have been if they had not been delivering 'too high'
>> voltage. I'd only lived there a few months, but they back-credited to the
>> date I moved in. It was about 15% of everything I'd paid.
>
>I call bullshit on the credit! As if..............
I was there. You weren't. Your claim is bullsh*t.
Note: I didn't even _ask_ for that credit. They did it all by themselves.
Note: this was more than 30 years ago. And in a territory with a strong and
active regulatory agency. And a state Attorney General that *really* hated
that particular utility company -- they had previously *sued* him, requesting
that the court grant order him to 'cease and desist harassment', no less.
"J. R. Carroll" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
>
> "F. George McDuffee" <[email protected]> wrote in message
> news:[email protected]...
> > This may have been true at the higher levels at one time but with
> > telecommuting service sector jobs are also rapidly disappearing.
> > For example many low to mid level accounting jobs such as tax
> > returns are now done overseas. Where the jobs cannot be done
> > externally H1B visas allow worker importation.
>
> Perhaps, but half of my customers are in Europe and Asia. My feeling is
that
> the value you add is what customers are interested in. It goes right to
> their bottom line.
That's fine in your business, John. It's not so fine if you're making
injection moldings for consumer products or assembling car engines in
Detroit or Windsor.
--
Ed Huntress
On Thu, 16 Jun 2005 09:30:54 -0700, "Ulysses"
<[email protected]> wrote:
>
>"Scott Willing" <[email protected]> wrote in message
>news:[email protected]...
>> On 15 Jun 2005 11:36:20 -0700, "Too_Many_Tools"
>> <[email protected]> wrote:
>>
>> >Thanks for the reply.
>> >
>>
>> I started out at 12V primary by virtue of buying a house with an
>> existing PV system. Like many frontier homebrew systems, it had
>> started as a purely DC system to which an inverter was added later.
>>
>> Having no plumbing in the house, I've acquired a number of small 12V
>> pumps for various specific purposes, such as our bucket shower.
>
>Just curious, but how do you go to the bathroom? Composting toilet?
Yes and no. :-) We have a simple sawdust bucket toilet that sits
beside a commercial composting toilet, now retired. I'm going to tear
out the latter and build a nicer bucket toilet when the time is
available.
Long story, but the commercial toilet is, IMHO, a waste of money.
(Fortunately, wasn't my decision; came with the house.) A bucket
toilet is superior to it in every way.
Most so-called composting toilets, including this one, are actually
evaporating toilets and don't compost per se.
>Outhouse?
There are two of those here, also retired.
We have shallow groundwater, and an outhouse is an potentially nasty
polluter. Actually septic systems can be just as bad - so many people
manage to pollute their wells with those too. Above-ground aerobic
composting is the way to go IMHO.
-=s
On Thu, 16 Jun 2005 15:43:10 GMT, "Pete C." <[email protected]>
wrote:
>Too_Many_Tools wrote:
>>
>> I would agree but an VFD that is unnecessary is a current draw that is
>> not needed.
>>
>> Like any system, one needs to plan a workshop as a whole.
>>
>> At this point, I could go single phase, 3 phase or DC motors on on all
>> my machines. One of the reasons why I started this discussion was to
>> make that decision based partially on the experiences of others who
>> have hopefully gone before me.
>>
>> TMT
>
>I've been following this thread with some interest and now have some
>thoughts and comments to add to it.
>
>I may have missed something along the way, but I don't recall you
>specifying what type(s) of alternative energy sources you have
>available. This makes quite a difference in determining the best
>options.
>
>As an example, if your alternate source(s) provide mechanical power such
>as found with water power, wind power, or a solar boiler driving a
>turbine or steam engine, then air power could be quite advantageous.
>
>A source of mechanical energy can directly drive a compressor head,
>saving the extremely inefficient conversions to electricity and back.
>Compressed air is easy and economical to store in large volumes and is
>free from the chemical hazards of batteries. Useable service life of
>compressed air tanks is much higher than batteries as well.
Wind driven compressor -> storage tank -> air motors? Could be OK if
one had a really windy site, lots of surplus pressure vessels, and a
plenty of rotor diameter. To get an idea of the diameter versus work
produced, check out the size and pumping rates of Bowjon well pumps.
>In addition to the obvious air tools, compressed air can also be used to
>power things such as refrigeration if you use the belt driven type
>refrigeration compressors.
Mechanical drive all the way to the pump? That would work well with a
large mill, when the wind is blowing, and be as efficient as these
http://www.deanbennett.com/windmills.htm. But in that application
there's the advantage of easy storage for when there's no wind.
>Those mechanical energy sources can also simultaneously drive electrical
>generators to charge conventional batteries for loads such as lighting.
Which is why the conventional rotor/alternator is so popular with home
power users. Ours is similar to this one
http://www.windenergy.com/whisper_200.htm.
>Battery charging for cordless tools is no less efficient that the
>charging of your "regular" battery string, as long as the charging is
>limited to peak energy generation times.
For the usual home power setup, cordless tools are no more and no less
advantageous than they are on-grid. Unless the power setup is very
small, the double conversion isn't worth trying to work around.
>The efficiency of converting DC from your battery string to AC so you
>can use conventional appliances is fairly good with modern inverters.
>The conversion efficiency also improves when you use a higher voltage
>battery string since inverters switching higher voltages at lower
>currents will have lower resistive / heat losses.
>
>Solar PV conversion efficiency is incredibly low to begin with and PV
>cost is high so if that is your only energy source you really do need to
>watch every miliamp.
That depends. On very small systems, it's often true. Our setup isn't
huge, and costs about as much as a medium priced SUV. The idle loads
are about 100 Watts 24-7. That's a waste versus
convenience/practicality issue, and it's a long way from watching
every milliamp.
>Of course, even with that inefficiency a solar PV
>panel charging batteries for your cordless tools is just fine as long as
>it has the capacity to keep up with your usage.
>
>For items like welders that require huge gulps of power it's really
>difficult to get away from an IC engine / generator for practicality.
Not necessarily. Home welding tends to be short duration. The hardware
to supply that kind of power is actually affordable, and if one is
designing the power system from scratch for what most would consider a
normal home, then the extra inverter capacity isn't a big deal. In our
case, for the house loads alone we could have gotten away with a
single SW4024 plus a transformer for the 220V loads. Instead we used
dual inverters, which eliminated the need for the transformer, and
provided sufficient power for most anything used in the usual home
shop.
> A decent welder / generator can serve two needs and may be the most
>practical solution.
Welder generators aren't a good match for backup duty, or even for
backup charging. Their advantage is portability for welding, and
they're only best (in the home power context) when you need high amps
for short periods. For any application that needs longer run times
supplying small loads, something like the Honda EU series is far
better. After a few years of living off-grid, like many others I found
that a DC backup generator that works independently of the
inverter/chargers is nice to have. The one I built drives a $5 scrap
Delco 27SI, and only produces about 2000 Watts. When there's no sun or
wind, we can do nicely on about 4 hours run time per day, at a
charging rate that's similar to when the other sources are on line.
>If you've got really good water power available you could probably use
>it to drive the head from an engine driven welder. A DC inverter type
>welder could probably be modified to accept DC from a large battery
>bank, but that would require you to have a fairly high voltage battery
>string to be practical.
Like some of the other comments in this thread (line shafts for
instance), that suggestion may be feasible. But unless one has way
more time than money, conventional methods are more practical.
>Someone else posted about the differences in energy needs of a shop vs.
>home. They had more or less the correct idea, but got their terminology
>a bit out of whack. A shop has mostly high peak energy loads at low duty
>cycles and a home has mostly low peak loads with high duty cycles. The
>total energy consumption over the course of a day could be similar
>depending on how busy the shop is.
That was probably me you're talking about, and my terminology was
quite correct for our setup. Occasionally our shop energy use is
higher than for our house, but usually it's the other way around by a
big margin. Normal power tool energy consumption in a home shop is
lost in the noise of an all-electric home's consumption. Welders,
plasma cutters, chop saws, table saws, planers, etc. are all high
power, but relatively low energy because of their short run times.
Keep in mind that we're talking *home* shop here, which I consider to
be small projects by one person. Many off-gridders go the route of
putting a high percentage of their loads onto propane, leaving much
less for the actual power system to do. For them, shop energy
consumption may indeed cause the need for a much larger system, or the
pain and cost of running a big generator. But we're very nearly 100%
solar/wind powered. We don't even have propane, and fuel use for
backup generator and the welder/generator combined isn't much
different than what some folks consume in a season of mowing a big
lawn with a garden tractor.
Here are a couple of my projects from my off-grid shop. I only needed
the engine-driven welder a few times, mostly for its portability.
http://www.citlink.net/~wmbjk/images/horizontals%20only.jpg top 40' of
a 65' free-standing wind generator tower (in progress)
http://www.citlink.net/~wmbjk/images/tower%20top.JPG tower nearly
finished and erected
http://www.citlink.net/~wmbjk/frank.htm cactus transport
Wayne
On Tue, 21 Jun 2005 08:59:00 +1000, George Ghio <[email protected]>
wrote:
>John P Bengi wrote:
>> Take the hook out of your mouth George. The troll has struck paydirt with
>> you.
>Sitll laughing
Perhaps laughing is easier than admitting that your sole supporter is
the infamous Gymmy Bob, a loon who hopes to set a record for most
posting IDs. I notice that despite being mocked for it, neither of you
has posted any details about your off-grid workshops. Here, allow me -
If Gymmy/Bengi/Larry Lix/pizza girl actually owns the few Watts of PV
he's claimed, then the combined solar output of the Blunder-Loon power
company is less than 2kWhrs per day, or about as much as a cheapie
generator from Home Depot produces in 30 minutes. If you could sell
the energy at retail, the income would be about $73 per year, which is
$74 more than the two of you together are worth as fertilizer.
Wayne
On Mon, 20 Jun 2005 15:14:16 -0500, Scott Willing
<[email protected]> wrote:
>
>The argument is that posts get separated from their threads for a
>multitude of reasons
Only quote the specific bits that you are responding directly to.
You need the context but not the rest.
--
Cliff
On Fri, 17 Jun 2005 02:01:17 GMT, Me <[email protected]> wrote:
>In article <[email protected]>,
> Cliff <[email protected]> wrote:
>
>> Found a live one, eh?
>> One day they will demand their VALUE back ...... as promised
>> by that paper ....
>>
>> Then those taxes will ......
>> --
>> Cliff
>
>Naw, we will just Nationalize their Dept, just like they did with
>ours, years ago....Payback is a bitch...isn't it.....
>Remeber the Red chineese never did pay us back for WWII........
Sure. Why not. Oh wait, perhaps it's because they have 2 billion
people to fight for them, and a good hunk of our industry. Remember
we won WWII because we could build a couple of war machines for every
one that the axis powers destroyed. I know, we've still got capacity
to produce tanks and planes, but not on the scale needed to beat China
with brute manufacturing force- Detroit would have been good for that,
but that's gone now. We also used to have a nation of people who
loved to work hard and innovate to get ahead. Now we've got a bunch
of overgrown whiny fat kids who sit on their asses and watch the tube
all day, people who can't even spill coffee on themselves without
running to find a lawyer, and whole piles of jerks who can't wait to
take the pill-of-the-week to make up for the fact that they're
sad/lonely/impotent/lazy/fat/distracted/herpes-ridden.
How, exactly, are we supposed to enforce our claim on anything? Using
the poor to kill random brown people every couple of years isn't an
indication of strength, it's more akin to schoolyard bullying.
On Fri, 17 Jun 2005 23:26:33 GMT, "CW" <[email protected]> wrote:
>That's a little remembered fact. We could do it again.
>
>"Scott Lurndal" <[email protected]> wrote in message
>news:[email protected]...
>>
>> I'll just point out that we didn't have that capacity in 1941, but
>> we did by 1945.
The US was a manfacturing based economy. Now, everyone seems
hell-bent on pretending we can get by with consumption as our
watchword. When you get an entire generation or two who think that
they are entitled to consume and feel no need to produce, it doesn't
create the kind of environment that allows a society to ratchet up
production that quickly. It's a different world now.
"F. George McDuffee" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
> <snip>
> >> Our excuse for killing off manufacturing in the UK was Thatcher.
> >> What's America's excuse ?
> >
> >Free trade. There are highly regarded experts from both ends of the
> >political spectrum who say it's necessary.
> >
> >They all have jobs in the service sector and are relatively immune from
> >foreign competition themselves.
> ============================================
> This may have been true at the higher levels at one time but with
> telecommuting service sector jobs are also rapidly disappearing.
> For example many low to mid level accounting jobs such as tax
> returns are now done overseas. Where the jobs cannot be done
> externally H1B visas allow worker importation.
Perhaps, but half of my customers are in Europe and Asia. My feeling is that
the value you add is what customers are interested in. It goes right to
their bottom line.
--
John R. Carroll
Machining Solution Software, Inc.
Los Angeles San Francisco
www.machiningsolution.com
It's nice to know the CONTEXT or the question before
the response, for one thing.
More may be below .... go reread it all <G>.
On Mon, 20 Jun 2005 15:14:16 -0500, Scott Willing
<[email protected]> wrote:
>On Mon, 20 Jun 2005 18:20:28 GMT, "Vaughn Simon"
><[email protected]> wrote:
>
>>
>>"Scott Willing" <[email protected]> wrote in message
>>news:[email protected]...
>>> On Thu, 16 Jun 2005 20:19:43 -0500, Scott Willing
>>
>> Please people! Trim your posts. If you do so, you will not only save
>>bandwidth, but you will save readers lots of scrolling and they will be much
>>more likely to actually read your post. To trim, all you have to do is
>>highlight the area to be eliminated and hit your "Del" key.
>
>I apologize, but first you must permit me to utter a good-natured
>"Duh."
>
>For everyone who says "trim" there will be at least one who says "trim
>under pain of death." Yes, trimming is considered by many to be a sin
>on usenet, especially by those who were here before the great unwashed
>masses gained access... and also have control issues.
>
>The argument is that posts get separated from their threads for a
>multitude of reasons, and purists (which I'm decidedly not) insist
>that the entire thread be kept intact, so when alien archeologists
>studying the leftover bits of blown-out humanity don't have to work so
>hard to figure out the context. As for me, well, I think a little
>judicious trimming goes a long way towards readability.
>
>In this case I did feel it especially important to retain the thread
>as the trail was a little cold on this one... or so I thought.
>
>BTW, the same purists (aka usenet nazis) will slap your willy for
>top-posting too, and they really get their knickers in a knot about
>it. We can only assume their mommies overdid the spanking a bit... and
>that they really, *really* liked it.
>
>Anyway, wrt to trimming, it's "damned if you do, damned if you don't."
>
>BTW#2 - lest you think I'm unsympathetic to bandwidth issues, I'm on a
>freaking "28.8k" dial that usually gives me 26.4k... a number I'd
>never even heard of before moving here.
>
>Now, in deference to your preference, and also for the dirty pleasure
>of sticking it in the face of my favorite usenet nazi, I'll trim the
>rest of your post. <gasp! horrors!>
>
>-=s
--
Cliff
On Sun, 19 Jun 2005 07:38:27 -0700, Larry Jaques <novalidaddress@di> wrote:
> I'm looking forward with trepidation to the History Channel show
> "Boneyard" this week, starting tonight:
Oh, it's a series? Great - Tivo recorded it for me last night, I saw
this morning. I _love_ how it finds stuff like this for me.
> I'm keeping a box of Kleenex on the couch when I watch it.
> Sadly, it marks the end of an era.
Wot, they won't keep breaking stuff?
On Wed, 15 Jun 2005 07:36:34 -0700, F. George McDuffee
<[email protected]> wrote:
><snip>
>>When one considers a workshop with metal and wood working capabilities,
>>what tradeoffs have you made to have a working shop in an alternate
>>homepower environment where every amp is precious?
><snip>
>Given the current economic/social/political environment your
>concerns are well founded, however I think the primary or basic
>problem will not be limited or unavailable [electrical] power,
>but rather the more pervasive and dangerous problem of a lack of
>spare parts, raw materials and most critical HSS and carbide
>tools and blanks. =20
>
>Whether by design or stupidity, the American
>manufacturing/industrial infrastructure is rapidly being
>destroyed, primarily by management "outsourcing" and plant
>transfer.
>
>With the trade deficit [current account trade balance]
>approaching 2 billion dollars *PER DAY* it does not require a
>degree in rocket science or a tarot deck to see that the time is
>near when imports by the U.S. economy will be on a C.O.D. or even
>a "pre-pay" basis [in gold, not dollars]. =20
>
>Given the U.S. has a very limited (and rapidly diminishing)
>domestic production capacity for machine tools [lathes, mills,
>gear shapers, etc.], C.N.C. controllers, and perhaps most
>critical M2 HSS and carbide inserts, this means the entire house
>of cards will collapse as the existing machinery wears out,
>replacements are unobtainable, and repair cannot be attempted.
>
>Re-industrialization will be very expensive, time consuming and
>dangerous, as even the most basic industries such as iron
>foundries will have to be reestablished. Indeed, a generation or
>more will be required, as the evolution, techniques and lessons
>of the period 1890-1930 will have to be retraced, with no
>assurance that the time required will be available before America
>must again meet a serious international challenge to its
>existence / hegemony.=20
>
>
Well, hell. Might as well just cash in your chips now. Take a quick
vacation, and then head for your local crematorium.=20
Sheesh, George. You really need to get out more:-)
Matt
Too_Many_Tools wrote:
>
> I would agree but an VFD that is unnecessary is a current draw that is
> not needed.
>
> Like any system, one needs to plan a workshop as a whole.
>
> At this point, I could go single phase, 3 phase or DC motors on on all
> my machines. One of the reasons why I started this discussion was to
> make that decision based partially on the experiences of others who
> have hopefully gone before me.
>
> TMT
I've been following this thread with some interest and now have some
thoughts and comments to add to it.
I may have missed something along the way, but I don't recall you
specifying what type(s) of alternative energy sources you have
available. This makes quite a difference in determining the best
options.
As an example, if your alternate source(s) provide mechanical power such
as found with water power, wind power, or a solar boiler driving a
turbine or steam engine, then air power could be quite advantageous.
A source of mechanical energy can directly drive a compressor head,
saving the extremely inefficient conversions to electricity and back.
Compressed air is easy and economical to store in large volumes and is
free from the chemical hazards of batteries. Useable service life of
compressed air tanks is much higher than batteries as well.
In addition to the obvious air tools, compressed air can also be used to
power things such as refrigeration if you use the belt driven type
refrigeration compressors.
Those mechanical energy sources can also simultaneously drive electrical
generators to charge conventional batteries for loads such as lighting.
Battery charging for cordless tools is no less efficient that the
charging of your "regular" battery string, as long as the charging is
limited to peak energy generation times.
The efficiency of converting DC from your battery string to AC so you
can use conventional appliances is fairly good with modern inverters.
The conversion efficiency also improves when you use a higher voltage
battery string since inverters switching higher voltages at lower
currents will have lower resistive / heat losses.
Solar PV conversion efficiency is incredibly low to begin with and PV
cost is high so if that is your only energy source you really do need to
watch every miliamp. Of course, even with that inefficiency a solar PV
panel charging batteries for your cordless tools is just fine as long as
it has the capacity to keep up with your usage.
For items like welders that require huge gulps of power it's really
difficult to get away from an IC engine / generator for practicality. A
decent welder / generator can serve two needs and may be the most
practical solution.
If you've got really good water power available you could probably use
it to drive the head from an engine driven welder. A DC inverter type
welder could probably be modified to accept DC from a large battery
bank, but that would require you to have a fairly high voltage battery
string to be practical.
Someone else posted about the differences in energy needs of a shop vs.
home. They had more or less the correct idea, but got their terminology
a bit out of whack. A shop has mostly high peak energy loads at low duty
cycles and a home has mostly low peak loads with high duty cycles. The
total energy consumption over the course of a day could be similar
depending on how busy the shop is.
Pete C.
"The subject is 'workshop in an alternate homepower environment', but
it has
degenerated to YAWVGM (yet-another-wayne-versus-geor=ADge-match). ..."
I am glad that someone remembers....thanks to all those who contributed
positively to this thread so far.
If you have more to contribute on subject, please feel free to offer
it.
Thanks in advance,
TMT
wmbjk wrote:
> On Tue, 21 Jun 2005 00:54:27 +1000, George Ghio <[email protected]>
> wrote:
>
> wmbjk wrote-
>
>>>What a surprise, not so much of a whiff of information about the topic
>>>at hand. I suggest that it's only fair when criticizing others, that
>>>you ought to be explaining how *you* handle supplying power to an
>>>off-grid workshop. Especially since you're cross-posting to a group
>>>that isn't familiar with your claims of being both an expert welder
>>>*and* a "solar power consultant". Here, let me help you...
>>>
>>>George believes that after professing to have a couple of decades
>>>experience as a professional in the solar biz, that it makes infinite
>>>sense that he's hauled some 15 *tons* of fuel to his own place
>>>(without even counting wood for space heating), and must start a
>>>generator for any load over a few hundred Watts. He's also of the
>>>opinion that many of society's ills can be traced to a dependence on
>>>powered devices (as in: anything *he* doesn't have), and says he wants
>>>for nothing on one (1) kWhr per day. That's $3 per month electricity
>>>for you grid-connected folks. While most off-grinders who live in an
>>>area as sunny as George's quickly learn the benefits of solar water
>>>heating, George intends to wait for the concept to be proven before
>>>spending a few hundred bucks on it. And most important of all, he
>>>absolutely can't stand to hear about people who've done it better,
>>>which is just about everyone else. Which explains why he's found
>>>bitter fault with most of the regulars in the energy groups. Does that
>>>about cover the high points George? You're welcome.
>>>
>>>Wayne
>
>
>>The fact that TMT has had an overload of help with the subject
>
>
> OPs come and go, and the discussion goes on. But it's obvious that you
> had absolutely nothing to offer in the thread even *before* this
> so-called overload of help. That's for the simple reason that your
> idea of a powering an off-grid workshop, is to buy and fuel a
> generator. Which in your lingo, makes everyone who's ever used a
> generator to power a remote job site or camp site, a "solar power
> consultant".
>
>
>>a warning about your own incompetence
>
>
> Warnings from you are worth slightly less than warnings about the
> necessity for tinfoil hats.
>
>
>>I am sure that he has already
>>worked out that he will have to decide what to do to suit his own needs.
>
>
> No, it wouldn't matter if he came back specifically to ask you for
> details. All you can offer is: "I've been using a generator for 20
> years, and it really pisses me off that so many people have managed
> things that I cannot".
>
>
>>Your fictions are only the mutterings of a sad case who still can not
>>post a sensable account of his energy use let alone anyone else's.
>
>
> I've lived in, and worked out of, an actual solar/wind powered home
> and workshop for nearly ten years. Both have the amenities that most
> people consider "normal", and together they require about 50 gallons
> of backup fuel per year. A respected regular in the energy newsgroups
> has publicly affirmed my descriptions of our place after visiting
> here. The only fiction is from a bitter old Aussie fart who doesn't
> like having to admit that his own so-called "solar powered" home in
> fact gets the majority of its power from burning fuel that must be
> hauled in, a situation he apparently hopes to ameliorate by
> criticizing anyone who's done better.
>
> Wayne
Ok Wayne, we will try again.
I have on several occasions posted my entire energy use. Accounting for
every fuel and source of energy, laid out by the day, week, month and year.
I am able to do so because I: 1) designed my system to meet my needs,
and 2) monitor my system.
OTOH you have failed to be able to define your two days of autonomy (at
the also nondisclosed reduced level of use) let alone what your energy
use is for everything.
The truth is that no one in their right mind would or indeed should take
advice from a person who can not define some thing as simple as days of
autonomy.
You have no idea, have never had an idea, will never have an idea what
your system uses or produces. Let alone define your entire energy use
for all applications. Yet you claim tens years experiance. Which is just
half as long as I have been off grid.
Hence the warning about your advice. The warning stands as valid.
I am onboard totally with you on this one. Must be the Great Lakes
environment...LOL Hot huh?
"daestrom" <daestrom@NO_SPAM_HEREtwcny.rr.com> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
>
> "John P Bengi" <JBengi (spamm)@(spamm) yahoo,com> wrote in message
> news:[email protected]...
> > Leave the child alone. He doesn't know anything.
> >
>
> Nor, does George seem to contribute anything other than his definition of
> 'days of autonomy' and his harping on Wayne about it. George might
consider
> some help since his 'days of autonomy' mantra seems to have taken over his
> entire existence and pushed out any other helpful contributions.
>
> The subject is 'workshop in an alternate homepower environment', but it
has
> degenerated to YAWVGM (yet-another-wayne-versus-george-match).
>
> The OP might as well just start a new thread to ask any new questions,
these
> two guys will not contribute anything more to the discussion, and most of
us
> recognize the YAWVGM and ignore the thread from here on.
>
>
> Moving on.....
> daestrom
>
>
On Tue, 21 Jun 2005 00:54:27 +1000, George Ghio <[email protected]>
wrote:
wmbjk wrote-
>
>> What a surprise, not so much of a whiff of information about the topic
>> at hand. I suggest that it's only fair when criticizing others, that
>> you ought to be explaining how *you* handle supplying power to an
>> off-grid workshop. Especially since you're cross-posting to a group
>> that isn't familiar with your claims of being both an expert welder
>> *and* a "solar power consultant". Here, let me help you...
>>
>> George believes that after professing to have a couple of decades
>> experience as a professional in the solar biz, that it makes infinite
>> sense that he's hauled some 15 *tons* of fuel to his own place
>> (without even counting wood for space heating), and must start a
>> generator for any load over a few hundred Watts. He's also of the
>> opinion that many of society's ills can be traced to a dependence on
>> powered devices (as in: anything *he* doesn't have), and says he wants
>> for nothing on one (1) kWhr per day. That's $3 per month electricity
>> for you grid-connected folks. While most off-grinders who live in an
>> area as sunny as George's quickly learn the benefits of solar water
>> heating, George intends to wait for the concept to be proven before
>> spending a few hundred bucks on it. And most important of all, he
>> absolutely can't stand to hear about people who've done it better,
>> which is just about everyone else. Which explains why he's found
>> bitter fault with most of the regulars in the energy groups. Does that
>> about cover the high points George? You're welcome.
>>
>> Wayne
>The fact that TMT has had an overload of help with the subject
OPs come and go, and the discussion goes on. But it's obvious that you
had absolutely nothing to offer in the thread even *before* this
so-called overload of help. That's for the simple reason that your
idea of a powering an off-grid workshop, is to buy and fuel a
generator. Which in your lingo, makes everyone who's ever used a
generator to power a remote job site or camp site, a "solar power
consultant".
>a warning about your own incompetence
Warnings from you are worth slightly less than warnings about the
necessity for tinfoil hats.
>I am sure that he has already
>worked out that he will have to decide what to do to suit his own needs.
No, it wouldn't matter if he came back specifically to ask you for
details. All you can offer is: "I've been using a generator for 20
years, and it really pisses me off that so many people have managed
things that I cannot".
>Your fictions are only the mutterings of a sad case who still can not
>post a sensable account of his energy use let alone anyone else's.
I've lived in, and worked out of, an actual solar/wind powered home
and workshop for nearly ten years. Both have the amenities that most
people consider "normal", and together they require about 50 gallons
of backup fuel per year. A respected regular in the energy newsgroups
has publicly affirmed my descriptions of our place after visiting
here. The only fiction is from a bitter old Aussie fart who doesn't
like having to admit that his own so-called "solar powered" home in
fact gets the majority of its power from burning fuel that must be
hauled in, a situation he apparently hopes to ameliorate by
criticizing anyone who's done better.
Wayne
"John P Bengi" <JBengi (spamm)@(spamm) yahoo,com> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
> Leave the child alone. He doesn't know anything.
>
Nor, does George seem to contribute anything other than his definition of
'days of autonomy' and his harping on Wayne about it. George might consider
some help since his 'days of autonomy' mantra seems to have taken over his
entire existence and pushed out any other helpful contributions.
The subject is 'workshop in an alternate homepower environment', but it has
degenerated to YAWVGM (yet-another-wayne-versus-george-match).
The OP might as well just start a new thread to ask any new questions, these
two guys will not contribute anything more to the discussion, and most of us
recognize the YAWVGM and ignore the thread from here on.
Moving on.....
daestrom
Leave the child alone. He doesn't know anything.
"George Ghio" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
>
>
> wmbjk wrote:
> > On Tue, 21 Jun 2005 00:54:27 +1000, George Ghio <[email protected]>
> > wrote:
> >
> > wmbjk wrote-
> >
> >>>What a surprise, not so much of a whiff of information about the topic
> >>>at hand. I suggest that it's only fair when criticizing others, that
> >>>you ought to be explaining how *you* handle supplying power to an
> >>>off-grid workshop. Especially since you're cross-posting to a group
> >>>that isn't familiar with your claims of being both an expert welder
> >>>*and* a "solar power consultant". Here, let me help you...
> >>>
> >>>George believes that after professing to have a couple of decades
> >>>experience as a professional in the solar biz, that it makes infinite
> >>>sense that he's hauled some 15 *tons* of fuel to his own place
> >>>(without even counting wood for space heating), and must start a
> >>>generator for any load over a few hundred Watts. He's also of the
> >>>opinion that many of society's ills can be traced to a dependence on
> >>>powered devices (as in: anything *he* doesn't have), and says he wants
> >>>for nothing on one (1) kWhr per day. That's $3 per month electricity
> >>>for you grid-connected folks. While most off-grinders who live in an
> >>>area as sunny as George's quickly learn the benefits of solar water
> >>>heating, George intends to wait for the concept to be proven before
> >>>spending a few hundred bucks on it. And most important of all, he
> >>>absolutely can't stand to hear about people who've done it better,
> >>>which is just about everyone else. Which explains why he's found
> >>>bitter fault with most of the regulars in the energy groups. Does that
> >>>about cover the high points George? You're welcome.
> >>>
> >>>Wayne
> >
> >
> >>The fact that TMT has had an overload of help with the subject
> >
> >
> > OPs come and go, and the discussion goes on. But it's obvious that you
> > had absolutely nothing to offer in the thread even *before* this
> > so-called overload of help. That's for the simple reason that your
> > idea of a powering an off-grid workshop, is to buy and fuel a
> > generator. Which in your lingo, makes everyone who's ever used a
> > generator to power a remote job site or camp site, a "solar power
> > consultant".
> >
> >
> >>a warning about your own incompetence
> >
> >
> > Warnings from you are worth slightly less than warnings about the
> > necessity for tinfoil hats.
> >
> >
> >>I am sure that he has already
> >>worked out that he will have to decide what to do to suit his own needs.
> >
> >
> > No, it wouldn't matter if he came back specifically to ask you for
> > details. All you can offer is: "I've been using a generator for 20
> > years, and it really pisses me off that so many people have managed
> > things that I cannot".
> >
> >
> >>Your fictions are only the mutterings of a sad case who still can not
> >>post a sensable account of his energy use let alone anyone else's.
> >
> >
> > I've lived in, and worked out of, an actual solar/wind powered home
> > and workshop for nearly ten years. Both have the amenities that most
> > people consider "normal", and together they require about 50 gallons
> > of backup fuel per year. A respected regular in the energy newsgroups
> > has publicly affirmed my descriptions of our place after visiting
> > here. The only fiction is from a bitter old Aussie fart who doesn't
> > like having to admit that his own so-called "solar powered" home in
> > fact gets the majority of its power from burning fuel that must be
> > hauled in, a situation he apparently hopes to ameliorate by
> > criticizing anyone who's done better.
> >
> > Wayne
>
> Ok Wayne, we will try again.
>
> I have on several occasions posted my entire energy use. Accounting for
> every fuel and source of energy, laid out by the day, week, month and
year.
>
> I am able to do so because I: 1) designed my system to meet my needs,
> and 2) monitor my system.
>
> OTOH you have failed to be able to define your two days of autonomy (at
> the also nondisclosed reduced level of use) let alone what your energy
> use is for everything.
>
> The truth is that no one in their right mind would or indeed should take
> advice from a person who can not define some thing as simple as days of
> autonomy.
>
> You have no idea, have never had an idea, will never have an idea what
> your system uses or produces. Let alone define your entire energy use
> for all applications. Yet you claim tens years experiance. Which is just
> half as long as I have been off grid.
>
> Hence the warning about your advice. The warning stands as valid.
Jeff Dantzler wrote:
>
> Interesting comments by a former Fed chairman:
>
> NewsMax.com Wires
> Friday, June 10, 2005
>
> "Former Fed Chairman Paul Volcker said he doesn't see how the U.S.
> can keep borrowing and consuming while letting foreign countries do
> all the producing.
>
> It's a recipe for American economic disaster.
>
> On Thursday the Wall Street Journal reported bluntly that
> "Mr. Volcker thinks a crisis is likely."
>
> [snip]"
>
> Rest of article here:
>
> http://www.newsmax.com/archives/articles/2005/6/9/161923.shtml
>
> JLD
I believe the theory here is that the US is supposed to be producing and
exporting "intellectual property" with value that will offset the value
of the "hard goods" we import. Unfortunately this is not working since
we are also exporting our capacity to generate "IP" with all of the
overseas outsourcing, and we don't have an exclusive on the capacity to
produce "IP" to begin with.
What we'll end up with is a bunch of lawyers feeding off of each other
in the downward spiral as we end up with no capacity to produce anything
for ourselves and consequently no money to import what we need. We'll
end up rather like the undeveloped parts of the world are now.
Pete C.
wmbjk wrote:
>
> On Thu, 16 Jun 2005 15:43:10 GMT, "Pete C." <[email protected]>
> wrote:
>
> >Too_Many_Tools wrote:
> >>
> >> I would agree but an VFD that is unnecessary is a current draw that is
> >> not needed.
> >>
> >> Like any system, one needs to plan a workshop as a whole.
> >>
> >> At this point, I could go single phase, 3 phase or DC motors on on all
> >> my machines. One of the reasons why I started this discussion was to
> >> make that decision based partially on the experiences of others who
> >> have hopefully gone before me.
> >>
> >> TMT
> >
> >I've been following this thread with some interest and now have some
> >thoughts and comments to add to it.
> >
> >I may have missed something along the way, but I don't recall you
> >specifying what type(s) of alternative energy sources you have
> >available. This makes quite a difference in determining the best
> >options.
> >
> >As an example, if your alternate source(s) provide mechanical power such
> >as found with water power, wind power, or a solar boiler driving a
> >turbine or steam engine, then air power could be quite advantageous.
> >
> >A source of mechanical energy can directly drive a compressor head,
> >saving the extremely inefficient conversions to electricity and back.
> >Compressed air is easy and economical to store in large volumes and is
> >free from the chemical hazards of batteries. Useable service life of
> >compressed air tanks is much higher than batteries as well.
>
> Wind driven compressor -> storage tank -> air motors? Could be OK if
> one had a really windy site, lots of surplus pressure vessels, and a
> plenty of rotor diameter. To get an idea of the diameter versus work
> produced, check out the size and pumping rates of Bowjon well pumps.
Should be comparable or better efficiency than a wind driven generator
charging batteries. In either case you're capturing and storing the
intermittently produced power for later use and a more convenient rate.
A compressor powered by water or a solar steam generator would work well
also.
Various electric utilities have been experimenting with compressed air
storage as a way to store power from excess generating capacity during
off peak times for use later during the peak times. They also do this
with pumped hydro, but CAS is far more practical than pumped hydro in a
homepower environment.
>
> >In addition to the obvious air tools, compressed air can also be used to
> >power things such as refrigeration if you use the belt driven type
> >refrigeration compressors.
>
> Mechanical drive all the way to the pump? That would work well with a
> large mill, when the wind is blowing, and be as efficient as these
> http://www.deanbennett.com/windmills.htm. But in that application
> there's the advantage of easy storage for when there's no wind.
No, not mechanically driven. The refrigeration compressor would be belt
driven from an air motor. The thermostat simply opens the air valve when
it needs to spin up the compressor. Again the ultimate source of power
does not have to be wind, and in fact with CAS it's even easier to
combine energy captured from multiple sources. No need to worry about
charge controllers when you're simply pumping air into a big tank.
>
> >Those mechanical energy sources can also simultaneously drive electrical
> >generators to charge conventional batteries for loads such as lighting.
>
> Which is why the conventional rotor/alternator is so popular with home
> power users. Ours is similar to this one
> http://www.windenergy.com/whisper_200.htm.
The point is that batteries can only accept a charge at a certain rate,
potentially wasting captured energy during peaks. There is no such
limitation with an air tank, unless it's already at max capacity. Air
tanks are also a lot less expensive and lower maintenance than battery
strings. By combining both an electrical generator and an air compressor
on the wind plant you can better capture peak output.
The efficiency of directly utilizing the energy of the compressed air
for mechanical applications is also higher. Instead of capturing wind
energy, converting to electricity, storing in a battery, converting to
AC, converting to mechanical energy with a motor, converting to
compressed air with a compressor coupled to the motor and then utilizing
the compresses air to fire your nail gun, you eliminate four conversion
steps.
>
> >Battery charging for cordless tools is no less efficient that the
> >charging of your "regular" battery string, as long as the charging is
> >limited to peak energy generation times.
>
> For the usual home power setup, cordless tools are no more and no less
> advantageous than they are on-grid. Unless the power setup is very
> small, the double conversion isn't worth trying to work around.
I know, but someone posted elsewhere in the thread that charging
cordless tools was horrifically inefficient.
>
> >The efficiency of converting DC from your battery string to AC so you
> >can use conventional appliances is fairly good with modern inverters.
> >The conversion efficiency also improves when you use a higher voltage
> >battery string since inverters switching higher voltages at lower
> >currents will have lower resistive / heat losses.
> >
> >Solar PV conversion efficiency is incredibly low to begin with and PV
> >cost is high so if that is your only energy source you really do need to
> >watch every miliamp.
>
> That depends. On very small systems, it's often true. Our setup isn't
> huge, and costs about as much as a medium priced SUV. The idle loads
> are about 100 Watts 24-7. That's a waste versus
> convenience/practicality issue, and it's a long way from watching
> every milliamp.
This is where you really need the hybrid system. You run the inverter to
power your conventional appliances. When you are not running the
appliances you turn the inverter off. You run your lighting and TV and
whatnot that are your much higher duty cycle items from DC and avoid the
conversion.
>
> >Of course, even with that inefficiency a solar PV
> >panel charging batteries for your cordless tools is just fine as long as
> >it has the capacity to keep up with your usage.
> >
> >For items like welders that require huge gulps of power it's really
> >difficult to get away from an IC engine / generator for practicality.
>
> Not necessarily. Home welding tends to be short duration. The hardware
> to supply that kind of power is actually affordable, and if one is
> designing the power system from scratch for what most would consider a
> normal home, then the extra inverter capacity isn't a big deal. In our
> case, for the house loads alone we could have gotten away with a
> single SW4024 plus a transformer for the 220V loads. Instead we used
> dual inverters, which eliminated the need for the transformer, and
> provided sufficient power for most anything used in the usual home
> shop.
Perhaps your home welding is less than mine. I've got a Miller
Syncrowave 250 that I love and it can see quite a bit of use on project
weekends. I'm thinking your inverters would gag at the 240v 100a gulps
the Syncrowave takes, even if the typical gulp is only about 10 seconds
duration. On a big project those 10 second gulps add up to quite a few
minutes.
I'm on-grid, but having recently moved to an area with much better solar
and wind potential I'm investigating options to take advantage of those
sources.
>
> > A decent welder / generator can serve two needs and may be the most
> >practical solution.
>
> Welder generators aren't a good match for backup duty, or even for
> backup charging. Their advantage is portability for welding, and
> they're only best (in the home power context) when you need high amps
> for short periods. For any application that needs longer run times
> supplying small loads, something like the Honda EU series is far
> better. After a few years of living off-grid, like many others I found
> that a DC backup generator that works independently of the
> inverter/chargers is nice to have. The one I built drives a $5 scrap
> Delco 27SI, and only produces about 2000 Watts. When there's no sun or
> wind, we can do nicely on about 4 hours run time per day, at a
> charging rate that's similar to when the other sources are on line.
I didn't really intend the welder / generator to be used for backup to
the regular power system. I really meant it more as an option for
powering larger shop tools.
If you want to make it a bit more efficient in this capacity you can
build an automatic transfer switch so that when you are not drawing a
load from the generator to operate say a 5 hp table saw, the capacity
can be diverted to a charger to add some extra power to your regular
battery string.
>
> >If you've got really good water power available you could probably use
> >it to drive the head from an engine driven welder. A DC inverter type
> >welder could probably be modified to accept DC from a large battery
> >bank, but that would require you to have a fairly high voltage battery
> >string to be practical.
>
> Like some of the other comments in this thread (line shafts for
> instance), that suggestion may be feasible. But unless one has way
> more time than money, conventional methods are more practical.
Modifying a DC inverter welder which are pretty inexpensive these days
is likely the most efficient way to get quality welding capacity from a
home power system. No line shaft required, and no need for oversized
inverters or load shedding.
>
> >Someone else posted about the differences in energy needs of a shop vs.
> >home. They had more or less the correct idea, but got their terminology
> >a bit out of whack. A shop has mostly high peak energy loads at low duty
> >cycles and a home has mostly low peak loads with high duty cycles. The
> >total energy consumption over the course of a day could be similar
> >depending on how busy the shop is.
>
> That was probably me you're talking about, and my terminology was
> quite correct for our setup. Occasionally our shop energy use is
> higher than for our house, but usually it's the other way around by a
> big margin. Normal power tool energy consumption in a home shop is
> lost in the noise of an all-electric home's consumption. Welders,
> plasma cutters, chop saws, table saws, planers, etc. are all high
> power, but relatively low energy because of their short run times.
Shop = big gulps, house = long sips :)
>
> Keep in mind that we're talking *home* shop here, which I consider to
> be small projects by one person. Many off-gridders go the route of
> putting a high percentage of their loads onto propane, leaving much
> less for the actual power system to do. For them, shop energy
> consumption may indeed cause the need for a much larger system, or the
> pain and cost of running a big generator. But we're very nearly 100%
> solar/wind powered. We don't even have propane, and fuel use for
> backup generator and the welder/generator combined isn't much
> different than what some folks consume in a season of mowing a big
> lawn with a garden tractor.
Well, my home shop which is just for me, includes a Bridgeport mill, a
metal lathe, the big honkin' TIG welder mentioned earlier, a CNC router,
60gal compressor, 10" table saw, an electric forklift and a host of
smaller items like sawsalls and grinders.
This is of course partly attributable to my preference for metal
projects which tend to require bigger tools and more power tools than
woodworking.
>
> Here are a couple of my projects from my off-grid shop. I only needed
> the engine-driven welder a few times, mostly for its portability.
>
> http://www.citlink.net/~wmbjk/images/horizontals%20only.jpg top 40' of
> a 65' free-standing wind generator tower (in progress)
> http://www.citlink.net/~wmbjk/images/tower%20top.JPG tower nearly
> finished and erected
> http://www.citlink.net/~wmbjk/frank.htm cactus transport
>
> Wayne
Nice projects. Someday I'd like to do that. Somehow it seems to cost
more to live self sufficient off-grid than it does to just pay the
utilities...
Just out of curiosity how do you make a living?
Pete C.
On Tue, 21 Jun 2005 18:41:15 +1000, George Ghio <[email protected]>
wrote:
>wmbjk wrote:
>> On Tue, 21 Jun 2005 00:54:27 +1000, George Ghio <[email protected]>
>> wrote:
>> I've lived in, and worked out of, an actual solar/wind powered home
>> and workshop for nearly ten years. Both have the amenities that most
>> people consider "normal", and together they require about 50 gallons
>> of backup fuel per year. A respected regular in the energy newsgroups
>> has publicly affirmed my descriptions of our place after visiting
>> here. The only fiction is from a bitter old Aussie fart who doesn't
>> like having to admit that his own so-called "solar powered" home in
>> fact gets the majority of its power from burning fuel that must be
>> hauled in, a situation he apparently hopes to ameliorate by
>> criticizing anyone who's done better.
>>
>> Wayne
>Ok Wayne, we will try again.
>
>I have on several occasions posted my entire energy use. Accounting for
>every fuel and source of energy, laid out by the day, week, month and year.
Apparently you believe that "accounting" for energy production is
somehow better than actually producing energy. Let's see how that
works - 1kWhr is about enough to power a contractor grade table for 40
minutes. Or it might power a homeowner-grade MIG welder for 20
minutes. Still, that level of production might be sufficient for a
putterer, except that in your case, you'd still need a five times
larger inverter, and would then have to run the generator to power the
house, having exhausted the day's production in but minutes of shop
use.
>I am able to do so because I: 1) designed my system to meet my needs,
>and 2) monitor my system.
Doing without, and getting the bulk of your energy from fuel that must
be bought and hauled, isn't anything to be proud of for someone who
claims to be a professional. I can't count the number of amateurs I
know who've done better.
>OTOH you have failed to be able to define your two days of autonomy (at
>the also nondisclosed reduced level of use) let alone what your energy
>use is for everything.
As I've said many times, I will *never* write anything you demand.
>The truth is that no one in their right mind would or indeed should take
>advice from a person who can not define some thing as simple as days of
>autonomy.
I've answered hundreds of emails from folks who are considering making
the move to off-grid, and are curious to hear how that's worked out
from someone who's already done it. The fact that I won't play along
here under the pretense that you're an expert probably won't have much
affect on their level of interest one way or another.
>You have no idea, have never had an idea, will never have an idea what
>your system uses or produces. Let alone define your entire energy use
>for all applications.
My setup provides virtually all the energy to power a "normally"
equipped home. *That* is the part I find useful, not diddling with
spreadsheets to "prove" something to a quack.
> Yet you claim tens years experiance.
I *have* ten years experience. You've read from a respected regular
that nothing is misrepresented. Your habit of denying the undeniable
has made you a laughing stock.
> Which is just
>half as long as I have been off grid.
Living off a propane and generator based system with a tiny solar
supplement for all those years is only proof that you're satisfied to
do something poorly for much longer than most. Living in a hot climate
while claiming to be a master fabricator, yet failing after 20 years
to build a simple solar water heating system is pathetic. Even so, no
one would bother to call you on that feebleness except for the fact
that you repeatedly indulge in gratuitous insults.
>Hence the warning about your advice. The warning stands as valid.
What "stands" is your boneheaded insistence on making a fool of
yourself.
Now, do you have *anything* to say about off-grid workshops? No, I
didn't think so.
Wayne
wmbjk wrote:
> On Tue, 21 Jun 2005 18:41:15 +1000, George Ghio <[email protected]>
> wrote:
>
>
>>wmbjk wrote:
>>
>>>On Tue, 21 Jun 2005 00:54:27 +1000, George Ghio <[email protected]>
>>>wrote:
>
>
>>>I've lived in, and worked out of, an actual solar/wind powered home
>>>and workshop for nearly ten years. Both have the amenities that most
>>>people consider "normal", and together they require about 50 gallons
>>>of backup fuel per year. A respected regular in the energy newsgroups
>>>has publicly affirmed my descriptions of our place after visiting
>>>here. The only fiction is from a bitter old Aussie fart who doesn't
>>>like having to admit that his own so-called "solar powered" home in
>>>fact gets the majority of its power from burning fuel that must be
>>>hauled in, a situation he apparently hopes to ameliorate by
>>>criticizing anyone who's done better.
>>>
>>>Wayne
>
You can't get anything right can you. First, I am an American. Born and
raised in San Diego.
Second, I can and have outlined my energy use for for all resources.
The assumptions you make are the fiction. You do not know what your
system does. You copied a design and when it failed to work you doubled
the solar and wind input.
>
>>Ok Wayne, we will try again.
>>
>>I have on several occasions posted my entire energy use. Accounting for
>>every fuel and source of energy, laid out by the day, week, month and year.
>
>
> Apparently you believe that "accounting" for energy production is
> somehow better than actually producing energy. Let's see how that
> works - 1kWhr is about enough to power a contractor grade table for 40
> minutes. Or it might power a homeowner-grade MIG welder for 20
> minutes. Still, that level of production might be sufficient for a
> putterer, except that in your case, you'd still need a five times
> larger inverter, and would then have to run the generator to power the
> house, having exhausted the day's production in but minutes of shop
> use.
>
Being able to account for energy use is simply the result of knowing
what you are doing.
A "putterer" is one who claims he can use a MIG welder in both
directions. Please note Wayne that the direction to run a MIG torch is
in the direction of the gas flow. A MIG torch is not, as you seem to
think, a hot melt glue gun.
A "putterer" does not hold a ticket for "Unlimited Thickness Structuial
Steel" So what's your ticket.
My work shop use has no effect on the house system as there is no
connection between them.
My fuel use is, Petrol, 20 L per fortnight(14 days) This runs the Gen
set of course, also the tractor, motorcycle and chainsaw.
Yes I use wood and propane in the house. So what?
So, yes I can account for my entire energy use.
Is this important? Yes.
Why?
Because if you dont know what is going in or what is going out you don't
know what your system is doing. Which is really just not knowing what
you are doing.
>
>>I am able to do so because I: 1) designed my system to meet my needs,
>>and 2) monitor my system.
>
>
> Doing without, and getting the bulk of your energy from fuel that must
> be bought and hauled, isn't anything to be proud of for someone who
> claims to be a professional. I can't count the number of amateurs I
> know who've done better.
>
>
>>OTOH you have failed to be able to define your two days of autonomy (at
>>the also nondisclosed reduced level of use) let alone what your energy
>>use is for everything.
>
>
> As I've said many times, I will *never* write anything you demand.
>
Tell the truth Wayne, you can't post what you don't know.
>
>>The truth is that no one in their right mind would or indeed should take
>>advice from a person who can not define some thing as simple as days of
>>autonomy.
>
>
> I've answered hundreds of emails from folks who are considering making
> the move to off-grid, and are curious to hear how that's worked out
> from someone who's already done it. The fact that I won't play along
> here under the pretense that you're an expert probably won't have much
> affect on their level of interest one way or another.
God help them.
>
>
>>You have no idea, have never had an idea, will never have an idea what
>>your system uses or produces. Let alone define your entire energy use
>>for all applications.
>
>
> My setup provides virtually all the energy to power a "normally"
> equipped home. *That* is the part I find useful, not diddling with
> spreadsheets to "prove" something to a quack.
>
>
>>Yet you claim tens years experiance.
>
>
> I *have* ten years experience. You've read from a respected regular
> that nothing is misrepresented. Your habit of denying the undeniable
> has made you a laughing stock.
>
So you claim.
Nothing is represented.
>
>>Which is just
>>half as long as I have been off grid.
>
>
> Living off a propane and generator based system with a tiny solar
> supplement for all those years is only proof that you're satisfied to
> do something poorly for much longer than most. Living in a hot climate
> while claiming to be a master fabricator, yet failing after 20 years
> to build a simple solar water heating system is pathetic. Even so, no
> one would bother to call you on that feebleness except for the fact
> that you repeatedly indulge in gratuitous insults.
>
Ah well, you see I do have a simple solar hot water system. What I do
not have yet is the parbolic system.
>
>>Hence the warning about your advice. The warning stands as valid.
>
>
> What "stands" is your boneheaded insistence on making a fool of
> yourself.
>
> Now, do you have *anything* to say about off-grid workshops? No, I
> didn't think so.
Off grid workshops, as I have said already, are as indivdual as the
people who use them. Asking for advice, which can only be generic at
best, is fine but in the end the workshop must meet your needs, not
Wayne's needs or George's needs.
My most commonly used tool is a drill. I use battery drills with leads
because they are readily avaliable. I have six at the moment. With an
eighteen A/hour gell cell and two battery drills I can install a 5kW
system on site in two days.
As most of my solar work is on site what good would a huge solar power
system at home do me. Can't drag that around with me can I?
As for my welder, why build a system big enough to run it for perhaps
five hours a month.
The reason I have the generator is because I bought it to build the
house. It is still serviceable and portable.
No Wayne your nonsense is just that. Nonsense.
You and I both run what we need to run.
The difference is that I do it by design and know what goes in and out.
I know I have five days autonomy at my daily load
You built a system then doubled the solar and wind to make it work and
still don't know why. You think you have two days autonomy at some airy
fairy reduced load.
The warning about your advice still stands as valid.
LOL. well said but trolls never listen. They just become more hostile and
more trolly.
"George Ghio" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
>
>
> wmbjk wrote:
> > On Tue, 21 Jun 2005 18:41:15 +1000, George Ghio <[email protected]>
> > wrote:
> >
> >
> >>wmbjk wrote:
> >>
> >>>On Tue, 21 Jun 2005 00:54:27 +1000, George Ghio <[email protected]>
> >>>wrote:
> >
> >
> >>>I've lived in, and worked out of, an actual solar/wind powered home
> >>>and workshop for nearly ten years. Both have the amenities that most
> >>>people consider "normal", and together they require about 50 gallons
> >>>of backup fuel per year. A respected regular in the energy newsgroups
> >>>has publicly affirmed my descriptions of our place after visiting
> >>>here. The only fiction is from a bitter old Aussie fart who doesn't
> >>>like having to admit that his own so-called "solar powered" home in
> >>>fact gets the majority of its power from burning fuel that must be
> >>>hauled in, a situation he apparently hopes to ameliorate by
> >>>criticizing anyone who's done better.
> >>>
> >>>Wayne
> >
>
> You can't get anything right can you. First, I am an American. Born and
> raised in San Diego.
>
> Second, I can and have outlined my energy use for for all resources.
>
> The assumptions you make are the fiction. You do not know what your
> system does. You copied a design and when it failed to work you doubled
> the solar and wind input.
> >
> >>Ok Wayne, we will try again.
> >>
> >>I have on several occasions posted my entire energy use. Accounting for
> >>every fuel and source of energy, laid out by the day, week, month and
year.
> >
> >
> > Apparently you believe that "accounting" for energy production is
> > somehow better than actually producing energy. Let's see how that
> > works - 1kWhr is about enough to power a contractor grade table for 40
> > minutes. Or it might power a homeowner-grade MIG welder for 20
> > minutes. Still, that level of production might be sufficient for a
> > putterer, except that in your case, you'd still need a five times
> > larger inverter, and would then have to run the generator to power the
> > house, having exhausted the day's production in but minutes of shop
> > use.
> >
> Being able to account for energy use is simply the result of knowing
> what you are doing.
>
> A "putterer" is one who claims he can use a MIG welder in both
> directions. Please note Wayne that the direction to run a MIG torch is
> in the direction of the gas flow. A MIG torch is not, as you seem to
> think, a hot melt glue gun.
>
> A "putterer" does not hold a ticket for "Unlimited Thickness Structuial
> Steel" So what's your ticket.
>
> My work shop use has no effect on the house system as there is no
> connection between them.
>
> My fuel use is, Petrol, 20 L per fortnight(14 days) This runs the Gen
> set of course, also the tractor, motorcycle and chainsaw.
>
> Yes I use wood and propane in the house. So what?
>
> So, yes I can account for my entire energy use.
>
> Is this important? Yes.
>
> Why?
>
> Because if you dont know what is going in or what is going out you don't
> know what your system is doing. Which is really just not knowing what
> you are doing.
>
>
>
> >
> >>I am able to do so because I: 1) designed my system to meet my needs,
> >>and 2) monitor my system.
> >
> >
> > Doing without, and getting the bulk of your energy from fuel that must
> > be bought and hauled, isn't anything to be proud of for someone who
> > claims to be a professional. I can't count the number of amateurs I
> > know who've done better.
> >
> >
> >>OTOH you have failed to be able to define your two days of autonomy (at
> >>the also nondisclosed reduced level of use) let alone what your energy
> >>use is for everything.
> >
> >
> > As I've said many times, I will *never* write anything you demand.
> >
> Tell the truth Wayne, you can't post what you don't know.
>
> >
> >>The truth is that no one in their right mind would or indeed should take
> >>advice from a person who can not define some thing as simple as days of
> >>autonomy.
> >
> >
> > I've answered hundreds of emails from folks who are considering making
> > the move to off-grid, and are curious to hear how that's worked out
> > from someone who's already done it. The fact that I won't play along
> > here under the pretense that you're an expert probably won't have much
> > affect on their level of interest one way or another.
>
> God help them.
>
> >
> >
> >>You have no idea, have never had an idea, will never have an idea what
> >>your system uses or produces. Let alone define your entire energy use
> >>for all applications.
> >
> >
> > My setup provides virtually all the energy to power a "normally"
> > equipped home. *That* is the part I find useful, not diddling with
> > spreadsheets to "prove" something to a quack.
> >
> >
> >>Yet you claim tens years experiance.
> >
> >
> > I *have* ten years experience. You've read from a respected regular
> > that nothing is misrepresented. Your habit of denying the undeniable
> > has made you a laughing stock.
> >
> So you claim.
>
> Nothing is represented.
> >
> >>Which is just
> >>half as long as I have been off grid.
> >
> >
> > Living off a propane and generator based system with a tiny solar
> > supplement for all those years is only proof that you're satisfied to
> > do something poorly for much longer than most. Living in a hot climate
> > while claiming to be a master fabricator, yet failing after 20 years
> > to build a simple solar water heating system is pathetic. Even so, no
> > one would bother to call you on that feebleness except for the fact
> > that you repeatedly indulge in gratuitous insults.
> >
> Ah well, you see I do have a simple solar hot water system. What I do
> not have yet is the parbolic system.
> >
> >>Hence the warning about your advice. The warning stands as valid.
> >
> >
> > What "stands" is your boneheaded insistence on making a fool of
> > yourself.
> >
> > Now, do you have *anything* to say about off-grid workshops? No, I
> > didn't think so.
>
> Off grid workshops, as I have said already, are as indivdual as the
> people who use them. Asking for advice, which can only be generic at
> best, is fine but in the end the workshop must meet your needs, not
> Wayne's needs or George's needs.
>
> My most commonly used tool is a drill. I use battery drills with leads
> because they are readily avaliable. I have six at the moment. With an
> eighteen A/hour gell cell and two battery drills I can install a 5kW
> system on site in two days.
>
> As most of my solar work is on site what good would a huge solar power
> system at home do me. Can't drag that around with me can I?
>
> As for my welder, why build a system big enough to run it for perhaps
> five hours a month.
>
> The reason I have the generator is because I bought it to build the
> house. It is still serviceable and portable.
>
> No Wayne your nonsense is just that. Nonsense.
>
> You and I both run what we need to run.
>
> The difference is that I do it by design and know what goes in and out.
> I know I have five days autonomy at my daily load
>
> You built a system then doubled the solar and wind to make it work and
> still don't know why. You think you have two days autonomy at some airy
> fairy reduced load.
>
> The warning about your advice still stands as valid.
wmbjk wrote:
>
> On Thu, 16 Jun 2005 21:55:15 GMT, "Pete C." <[email protected]>
> wrote:
>
> ><compressed air storage> Should be comparable or better efficiency than a wind driven generator
> >charging batteries.
>
> Perhaps in some niches... but in any event a practical home power
> setup needs some batteries, and charging them with wind, assuming
> there's wind to harvest, is highly recommended. So you're talking
> about *adding* systems because you believe it's worth the trouble, but
> you haven't supplied any numbers or examples to back up your position.
See my notes below re: saving four steps of energy conversion for
applications where you are able to use air power directly such as nail
guns and die grinders. Four fewer conversion steps *has* to be more
efficient.
>
> > They also do this
> >with pumped hydro, but CAS is far more practical than pumped hydro in a
> >homepower environment.
>
> But both are less practical than batteries.
Not by a long shot, especially for a large scale installation as a power
utility would use. It is far cheaper and lower maintenance to use a
large air or water reservoir than to use a huge string of batteries with
limited life spans and hazardous lead and acid to dispose of properly at
every battery replacement.
The batteries in your string may last what, perhaps 8 years? A large air
tank that is drained regularly and kept in an area not exposed to
weather should easily last 80 years. When it finally is failing all you
have is scrap steel to dispose of and you can actually get a few dollars
for it.
>
> >No, not mechanically driven. The refrigeration compressor would be belt
> >driven from an air motor. The thermostat simply opens the air valve when
> >it needs to spin up the compressor. Again the ultimate source of power
> >does not have to be wind, and in fact with CAS it's even easier to
> >combine energy captured from multiple sources. No need to worry about
> >charge controllers when you're simply pumping air into a big tank.
>
> How big a tank? I think you're going to find a fly in the ointment
> once you run some numbers on air consumption. And if air power could
> be so efficient and practical, why do you believe it is that
> off-gridders, often known to be innovative and unafraid of breaking
> with convention, haven't flocked to the concept?
Perhaps because I haven't seen the concept even proposed in any
alternate energy books. As far as I know CAS and PH are both fairly new
concepts that originated from electric utilities need for a way to store
excess generating capacity during off peak times for use in peak shaving
later.
>
> >The point is that batteries can only accept a charge at a certain rate,
> >potentially wasting captured energy during peaks.
>
> There's isn't any peak power wasting problem that I'm aware of with
> home power systems, since the cost of generating prevents people from
> buying excess capacity. Can you give an example of the problem you're
> citing?
This would primarily apply to wind generation where peak gusts could
produce power faster than the batteries could accept it, causing that
power to be dissipated by the charge controller.
Hydro could have a similar case where excess capacity could go
uncaptured after heavy rains.
Solar PV is inherently pretty immune from generating peaks.
>
> >The efficiency of directly utilizing the energy of the compressed air
> >for mechanical applications is also higher. Instead of capturing wind
> >energy, converting to electricity, storing in a battery, converting to
> >AC, converting to mechanical energy with a motor, converting to
> >compressed air with a compressor coupled to the motor and then utilizing
> >the compresses air to fire your nail gun, you eliminate four conversion
> >steps.
>
> You left out the AC to DC conversion of the turbine, and assumed that
> energy used must be stored in a battery first. It's true that
> compressed air for tools is a very inefficient process, on-grid or
> off. Yet I've managed quite well with the just the same sort of
> compressor that grid-connected folks use. I could do wind-powered shop
> air more easily than most, but I wouldn't dream of adding another
> system to cure an inefficiency that's such a small part of the big
> picture.
Ok, so five less conversion stages.
It's all relative. The more use your shop has, the more potential
savings. If the shop demand is such that you'll require more generating
capacity, more storage capacity and more inverter capacity then there
may well be cost savings since components for an air system are cheaper.
If you an over-the-top green type, perhaps the ability to eliminate or
keep to an absolute minimum the need for big ol' lead acid hydrogen and
corrosive fume belching batteries might be a positive.
>
> Coincidentally, I have a neighbor who plans a Bowjon type installation
> (low tower, bulky rotor, single-stage compressor) for shop air using
> multiple surplus storage tanks. I've suggested that since he hasn't
> any wind power at present and could really use some, that the time and
> money he's going to put into the new setup would be better spent on a
> conventional wind genny and a tall tower.
Any reason not to combine both and put up your tall tower with the
electric gen up top and hang a compressor at a lower point on the same
tower?
>
> >This is where you really need the hybrid system. You run the inverter to
> >power your conventional appliances. When you are not running the
> >appliances you turn the inverter off.
>
> That's one of those convenience/practicalities tradeoffs. Many
> appliances don't like being de-powered, and it's a nuisance to fight
> it. IMO, biting the bullet for full time capacity is one of those
> things that goes a long way to making off-grid living palatable for
> the average person. After a hard day of pining over the dearth of
> rural ballet, the last thing you want is to have to reprogram the
> clock on the microwave. :-)
True, maximizing efficiency does require active management of the
system. Some things can be automated, and I've even seen a few
microwaves where you can disable the clock though.
>
> > You run your lighting and TV and
> >whatnot that are your much higher duty cycle items from DC and avoid the
> >conversion.
>
> The conversion losses are lamentable, but not generally worth working
> around. As Scott mentioned, after you've fought that battle for a
> while, you're ready for straight AC in order to eliminate the
> diddling.
Guess you just need to setup a heat exchanger from your inverter(s) to
capture the waste heat for your DHW.
>
> >Perhaps your home welding is less than mine. I've got a Miller
> >Syncrowave 250 that I love and it can see quite a bit of use on project
> >weekends. I'm thinking your inverters would gag at the 240v 100a gulps
> >the Syncrowave takes, even if the typical gulp is only about 10 seconds
> >duration. On a big project those 10 second gulps add up to quite a few
> >minutes.
>
> The fuses definitely couldn't handle it - 400A limit (24V system).
> What kind of *home* welding are you doing that takes 24k Watts input?
Pretty run of the mill stuff actually. The last moderate welding project
was building the CNC router which is framed mostly from 14ga square
steel tubing (http://wpnet.us/cnc_router.htm).
While the welder is rated at 250a and the full output at reduced duty
cycle is 310a, most of the time I'm running in the 150-175a range.
>
> People can size for whatever they can afford, but if I had the need
> for more indoor stick/TIG, I'd be after one of these
> http://cgi.ebay.com/ws/eBayISAPI.dll?ViewItem&category=57039&item=7524207277,
> which should be a comfortable fit with our setup. But I find I rarely
> stick weld indoors above about 120A, although I use the Powemig 255 up
> to its max more often. The only really heavy stuff I have to work on
> are the tractors, and that's only occasionally. Since they don't fit
> inside, and neither does the smoke and dust of heavy work, I roll an
> engine-driven unit outdoors.
I primarily use TIG, if for no other reason than I'm most comfortable
with it. I also do aluminum from time to time.
The last time I did stick was a quick repair to my snow blower in the
middle of a storm. Even for that I would have used TIG if I was going to
take the time to do it right vs. just weld through the snow pack. I
won't be doing much of that anymore either since I'm in TX now and don't
get much snow.
>
> >I didn't really intend the welder / generator to be used for backup to
> >the regular power system. I really meant it more as an option for
> >powering larger shop tools.
>
> The auto-idle feature of a good unit will make that bearable, if the
> tools' idle use is compatible. Still, the generator is going to be
> either idling or roaring in between power tool use, at an average of
> about $2 per hour in fuel. When we first moved onto our site, but
> before we had the power system set up temporarily, I was stuck with
> the welder generator. The running hours add up quickly, and I wouldn't
> recommend it to anyone else except for occasional or temporary use, or
> because there was no alternative, or if it's for a job that pays
> enough to cover the expenses and aggravation.
Any generator is going to be most efficient at or near full rated
output. Load management is always difficult.
>
> >Modifying a DC inverter welder which are pretty inexpensive these days
> >is likely the most efficient way to get quality welding capacity from a
> >home power system. No line shaft required, and no need for oversized
> >inverters or load shedding.
>
> Everyone has different needs, wants, and budget, but I think you'll
> find that more and more people have a potential combination of house
> loads that need such capacity that shop use isn't a leap. Around here
> for instance are many who need to power the surge of a 2 hp well pump,
Soft start inverter drive to a three phase well pump with an unloader
valve? :)
> along with other use concurrent. It can be done with a smaller
> inverter and a generator, but it's sure nice to get that generator
> time down if you can. We used to have a couple nearby who had a
> generator/battery/inverter setup, over 10 hours generator time per
> day. That's about 4000 hours and 2000 gallons of fuel per year. I
> think the fuel cost, repair costs, and eventual generator replacement
> cost were big factors in their pulling out after a few years. Even a
> modest amount of PV could have cut that generator time in half, and
> would have been far cheaper in the long run. Better still, the cost of
> that (very nice) generator and fuel could have bought a combination of
> hardware including a much smaller generator needing only a few hours
> per week run time.
The only way to get reasonable efficiency out of a gen/bat/inv setup is
to size the generator to just barely above the average load and run it
24x7, and that requires a pretty specialized generator to handle that
duty. Not something I'd consider unless I had my own nat gas well, or
bio-gas generator.
>
> >Somehow it seems to cost
> >more to live self sufficient off-grid than it does to just pay the
> >utilities...
>
> Not necessarily. Cashing out of a grid-connected place allowed us to
> retire, start with a clean slate, and as the yuppies say, "leverage"
> the advantages of home power to help keep the big picture cost down.
> Cheap land, lower taxes, fewer utilities (still need the phone
> company) are some of the benefits.
Looks like you had to go to some extremes to get your Internet
connectivity. When I was moving to TX I had to base my house choice on
the availability of high speed connectivity. I investigated satellite,
but unfortunately it doesn't work well with VPN. I ended up on cable
which works well.
>In talking to off-gridders, I find
> that the main factor affecting success isn't so much the power issues,
> but whether the folks can afford and are comfortable with truly rural
> living. For most, that usually means retirement or telecommuting, and
> precludes having children at home. For those who need to commute or be
> close to school busses etc., they're usually stuck with paying the
> premium for grid access. Then again, when they want to generate their
> own power, they can have cheaper and more efficient systems, and use
> the grid for storage.
Well, I telecommute now. Trading a cubicle in a windowless concrete
dungeon for a sunny window office with a purring cat on the windowsill
is a wonderful thing.
Since I'm also single and also quite mechanically and technically
inclined, in theory I could do the off-grid in the middle of nowhere
thing. In the event my job changed and I was no longer able to
telecommute I'd be f'd though.
Unfortunately I don't really expect I'll ever be able to retire. I'm
theoretically making good money these days, at least it looks good on
paper. Unfortunately the economy is such that unless you are a DINK
you're still barely covering living expenses.
Perhaps as I'm able to build up some AE projects I'll be able to cut
operating expenses enough to start to get ahead.
Pete C.
On Sun, 26 Jun 2005 14:10:24 GMT, "daestrom"
<daestrom@NO_SPAM_HEREtwcny.rr.com> wrote:
>
>"John P Bengi" <JBengi (spamm)@(spamm) yahoo,com> wrote in message
>news:[email protected]...
>> Leave the child alone. He doesn't know anything.
>>
>
>Nor, does George seem to contribute anything other than his definition of
>'days of autonomy' and his harping on Wayne about it. George might consider
>some help since his 'days of autonomy' mantra seems to have taken over his
>entire existence and pushed out any other helpful contributions.
>
>The subject is 'workshop in an alternate homepower environment', but it has
>degenerated to YAWVGM (yet-another-wayne-versus-george-match).
>
>The OP might as well just start a new thread to ask any new questions, these
>two guys will not contribute anything more to the discussion, and most of us
>recognize the YAWVGM and ignore the thread from here on.
You're mostly right, but don't discount the lesson served up by
George's setup. It's a perfect example of tunnel-vision design,
decreased utility, and how to spend less in the beginning, but more in
the long run. For those considering hiring an installer, it also
demonstrates the importance of seeking out one with well-rounded
experience, as opposed to someone with what I call "contractor's"
disease. That's where a tradesman can't see the forest for the trees,
and continues to make the same assumptions and mistakes for an entire
career.
Wayne
Cliff wrote:
>
> On Thu, 16 Jun 2005 20:19:43 -0500, Scott Willing
> <[email protected]> wrote:
>
> >This isn't even quite as extreme as the example I was thinking of.
> >I'll see if I can dig up another cite, but I think it's probably in a
> >magazine here so don't hold your breath.
>
> USA is an island in Japan.
Why would the Japanese devalue their product by putting "Made in USA" on
it?
Pete C.
wmbjk wrote:
>
> On Fri, 17 Jun 2005 18:02:44 GMT, "Pete C." <[email protected]>
> wrote:
>
> >See my notes below re: saving four steps of energy conversion for
> >applications where you are able to use air power directly such as nail
> >guns and die grinders. Four fewer conversion steps *has* to be more
> >efficient.
>
> You only need to calculate the numbers for volume and consumption, as
> I'm in agreement that with good wind, it's feasible that a resourceful
> scrounger could put up sufficient rotor area.
You would need the right location and the right shop use to make it
practical. Good wind and a custom cabinet shop perhaps.
>
> > It is far cheaper and lower maintenance to use a
> >large air or water reservoir than to use a huge string of batteries with
> >limited life spans and hazardous lead and acid to dispose of properly at
> >every battery replacement.
>
> Excellent point, and I've committed it to memory in case I decide to
> do a utility-scale installation. :-)
>
> >The batteries in your string may last what, perhaps 8 years?
>
> They're nearly ten years old now, and I won't be surprised if they
> make 15 or 20. But home power systems pretty well always need *some*
> batteries, so all we're talking about is whether the size could be
> reduced somewhat by an additional system. And keep in mind that a
> primary goal of home power (at least at my place), is to minimize the
> energy that makes a trip through the batteries.
That's pretty good battery life, you must keep on top of the
maintenance.
>
> >Perhaps because I haven't seen the concept even proposed in any
> >alternate energy books. As far as I know CAS and PH are both fairly new
> >concepts that originated from electric utilities need for a way to store
> >excess generating capacity during off peak times for use in peak shaving
> >later.
>
> Well, since my uh, somewhat unconventional neighbor ;-) thought of
> doing compressed air, I think that if it were viable for home power,
> it should have become popular by now. The subject of home power scale
> pumped hydro comes up here regularly, and those impossible numbers can
> be found in the archives.
PH is indeed not feasible for 99.9% of potential homepower locations,
CAS is far more feasible.
>
> >This would primarily apply to wind generation where peak gusts could
> >produce power faster than the batteries could accept it, causing that
> >power to be dissipated by the charge controller.
>
> I've never heard of that being an issue, and it certainly hasn't come
> up at my place, which has a high ratio of wind charging capacity to
> battery size, and some pretty gusty winds.
I don't have any cites for it, but it seems quite reasonable to me to
think that there could be windy times when the gen is capable of
supplying more power than the charger is drawing, much like the gas
generator running with the potential to supply say 4kw and a load on it
of only 2kw.
>
> >Any reason not to combine both and put up your tall tower with the
> >electric gen up top and hang a compressor at a lower point on the same
> >tower?
>
> I think that once you run some numbers, you'll find that an air system
> with the capacity you're thinking of will need several big rotors.
> While I do have a small wind turbine scabbed onto my tower some
> distance from the top, I couldn't add even one Bowjon type thing the
> same way. Cheap rotors (multi-piece sheet metal) end up being pretty
> heavy. IIRC, the Bowjon has a gearbox as well as the pump.
Tower loading is always an important thing to keep track of.
>
> >Guess you just need to setup a heat exchanger from your inverter(s) to
> >capture the waste heat for your DHW.
>
> If you're serious, I'd like to see some numbers. How much can the
> waste heat from 12kWhrs of inverter use raise the temperature of 80
> gallons of water? And how practical is it to capture that by adding
> yet another element to a solar water-heating system?
Well, they have systems for recapturing waste heat from showers
available commercially. They also have the energy recovery ventilators
to recover some of the heat from the stale air they are exhausting.
Someone's done the math on those items and determined that it's
worthwhile.
Unless you're in a cold climate where you can always directly utilize
the waste heat for space heating I'd think there would be some merit to
using it for preheat of water to the DHW system. Probably also slightly
increase the life and efficiency of the inverter.
>
> >Soft start inverter drive to a three phase well pump with an unloader
> >valve? :)
>
> Except for the unloader valve which isn't required, that's an approach
> I've recommended previously here, partly because the drop in wire size
> can save a few bucks on a deep hole. But you're still talking about a
> good-sized inverter, plus a transformer, plus a VFD. Considering the
> other benefits of dual inverters, our preference was to do that
> instead, even though at 1/2hp a VFD wasn't required here, so the
> savings on that didn't count.
What's the transformer for? Most applications for VFDs that I've seen
don't use them. Many of the small to mid sized VFDs are specifically
rated to take single phase input and they're also a lot more reasonably
priced these days. At some point I'll replace the rotary phase converter
(home built, $20 in materials) on my Bridgeport with a VFD.
>
> >The only way to get reasonable efficiency out of a gen/bat/inv setup is
> >to size the generator to just barely above the average load and run it
> >24x7, and that requires a pretty specialized generator to handle that
> >duty. Not something I'd consider unless I had my own nat gas well, or
> >bio-gas generator.
>
> Why do you say 24-7? An affordable startup concept I've recommended to
> a few is an inverter/charger, batteries, and a Honda EU series. Run
> the generator, say, every day for a couple of hours at max output
> during peak load times, and for several hours every so often for
> battery health. Add solar, wind, etc. as budget allows until generator
> time is minimal. For example - DR1512, EU2000, and a string of
> batteries from Sam's Club - perhaps $2k total.
That can work fine as long as the goal is to gradually add other
sources. If the plan is to stick with the generator as you comment I was
replying to implied, then the 24x7 operation is what should allow you to
operate at peak efficiency.
>
> >Looks like you had to go to some extremes to get your Internet
> >connectivity.
>
> We were fortunate to be the telco's guinea pig for a couple of radio
> systems. The current one gives us multiple POTS lines (although we
> only use one) plus DSL. Standard bill, same as if we were hard-wired.
> Satellite intenet and next gen wi-fi brings similar connectivity to
> just about anyone who needs it.
I looked into satellite not long ago when I was moving to TX. Looks like
it's fine for general use, but it doesn't handle VPN for telecommuting
well at all.
Where I ended up I have cable modem which I got with the package deal
that comes with the expanded digital cable, and two phone lines from the
telco in a rotary hunt group with flat rate long distance. Work pays for
the cable modem and the second phone line, so I get quite a bit of
communications capability and halfway decent TV pretty cheap.
>
> >Perhaps as I'm able to build up some AE projects I'll be able to cut
> >operating expenses enough to start to get ahead.
>
> You have a home shop and an idea for a cheaper alternative to
> batteries, the cost of which home power users love to complain about.
> Do I need to spell it out for you? ;-)
Well, up first on my list is a solar water heater to take over for the
electric one the place came with. Should be a really easy project that
will have a short payback time. Solar A/C will be a bit more
complicated.
Pete C.
yourname wrote:
>
> >
> > Another fly in the oiment on your battery remark.....if batteries are so
> > much effecient
> > at storaging .Why are repair shop using air tools instead battery powered
> > tools.
>
> 1] Habit; they were taught with air tools
> 2] They don't care a whit about efficiency
> 3] Seen a 300ft/lb cordless impact wrench lately?
> 4] electricity+gasoline=bad
Partly true, but the big ones in the auto shop environment are cost and
durability. Air tools are much more durable than most battery powered
tools, and their cost relative to their performance is low since the
real power source for all those air tools is one big compressor and it
is directly providing mechanical energy to the tool.
Pete C.
Robert Bonomi wrote:
> In article <[email protected]>,
> lionslair at consolidated dot net <"lionslair at consolidated dot net"> wrote:
> >Robert Bonomi wrote:
> >
> [[.. munch ..]]
> >>
> >> It's a matter of history. The "standard" -- for what was expected at the
> >> outlet in a residence -- changed over the years as power distribution got
> >> better.
> >>
> [[.. munch ..]]
> >>
> >> Your Honda is probably at claimed 125V because of *lousy* voltage regulation.
> >> 125V at 'no load', dropping to 120V (or lower) as the load increases.
> >>
> >Our house in the mountains of No. Ca. was a few miles from a swinging
> >transformer.
> >Under low load, the transformer was at one voltage, as the current increased,
> >the transformer switched in another set of windings up until it hit an end.
> >The swinging transformer had massive make-before-break contacts that always rang
> >(voltage hits) as it moved. I called the power company when it started hitting
> >my lines heavy (I was logging them on my APC's) and they found a burnt contact.
> >
>
> At one point I lived "across the parking lot" from the local sub-station.
> the feed came out of the substation, down *one* pole, with the transformer
> and the drop to the 6 apartment building I was living in. the building
> was turn-of-the-century construction, with -- I think -- still original
> wiring. I could get an *nine* volt drop at the wall, by kicking on one
> of my pieces of electronic test gear -- one that drew about 8 amps. *OUCH*.
>
> Anyway, I'm across the street from a school, 2 blocks from a *big* hospital,
> And had several other sizable 'commercial' users within a few blocks.
> A line-voltage monitor showed as high as 133V in early AM, with it slowly and
> somewhat erratically falling to about 127V by somewhere after 9AM on a
> week-day.
>
> *THAT* led to a call/complaint to the electric company, Demanding that
> they get the voltage down to the 'proper' level. (That degree of excess
> voltage _is_ hard on equipment, and other things. Reduces the effective
> life of incandescent bulbs by about _half_, in fact.)
>
> For some reason, customer service didn't want to believe me -- I guess
> complaints about "too much power" are *really* rare. :)
>
> They suggested that what I was reporting "couldn't be happening".
> That whatever I was using to read the voltage must be 'in error'.
>
> I pointed out that I had _five_ separate pieces of test equipment, by five
> different manufacturers, that were all telling the _same_ story, within about
> 2V (analog readout uncertainty on some of the meters). That all were
> industrial- and/or lab-grade gear. That the precision-reading unit (readable
> to 1/4v or finer) had been used for 'reference checks' at half-a-dozen other
> locations around the city, and registered 118.5 - 121.5 at *every* other
> location. (About the only thing I didn't have was a _recording_ meter / data-
> logger. :)
>
> They _grudgingly_ agreed to send an engineer out to see me. He took
> one look at my 'bench', and said "Hell, you've got better equipment there
> than _I_ do." Then, looked at my readings and said "that's not right!"
> (He didn't even bother to cross-check with his own gear.) Borrowed my phone,
> called in to the office, and ordered an _immediate_ roll of a maintenance
> team to the substation, and goes outside to wait for the crew to show up.
> Which they did, in less than 15 minutes. Less than half an hour later,
> my instrumentation is showing a "respectable" 117V. rising all the way
> to 123V when the rest of the neighborhood shut down.
>
> I even got a credit on my bill -- where they went back an re-figured what the
> kilowatt-hours _should_ have been if they had not been delivering 'too high'
> voltage. I'd only lived there a few months, but they back-credited to the
> date I moved in. It was about 15% of everything I'd paid.
I call bullshit on the credit! As if..............
John P Bengi wrote:
> You must live in a tiny town if they sent out an Engineer for that...LOL
>
> Did he have ditch digging caluses on his hands too?
>
> Nice going. Never give up when you know you are right.
>
> You would never get a rebate here for high voltage. power delivered is power
> billed.
>
> "Robert Bonomi" <[email protected]> wrote in message
> news:[email protected]...
> > In article <[email protected]>,
> > lionslair at consolidated dot net <"lionslair at consolidated dot net">
> wrote:
> > >Robert Bonomi wrote:
> > >
> > [[.. munch ..]]
> > >>
> > >> It's a matter of history. The "standard" -- for what was expected at
> the
> > >> outlet in a residence -- changed over the years as power distribution
> got
> > >> better.
> > >>
> > [[.. munch ..]]
> > >>
> > >> Your Honda is probably at claimed 125V because of *lousy* voltage
> regulation.
> > >> 125V at 'no load', dropping to 120V (or lower) as the load increases.
> > >>
> > >Our house in the mountains of No. Ca. was a few miles from a swinging
> > >transformer.
> > >Under low load, the transformer was at one voltage, as the current
> increased,
> > >the transformer switched in another set of windings up until it hit an
> end.
> > >The swinging transformer had massive make-before-break contacts that
> always rang
> > >(voltage hits) as it moved. I called the power company when it started
> hitting
> > >my lines heavy (I was logging them on my APC's) and they found a burnt
> contact.
> > >
> >
> > At one point I lived "across the parking lot" from the local sub-station.
> > the feed came out of the substation, down *one* pole, with the transformer
> > and the drop to the 6 apartment building I was living in. the building
> > was turn-of-the-century construction, with -- I think -- still original
> > wiring. I could get an *nine* volt drop at the wall, by kicking on one
> > of my pieces of electronic test gear -- one that drew about 8 amps.
> *OUCH*.
> >
> > Anyway, I'm across the street from a school, 2 blocks from a *big*
> hospital,
> > And had several other sizable 'commercial' users within a few blocks.
> > A line-voltage monitor showed as high as 133V in early AM, with it slowly
> and
> > somewhat erratically falling to about 127V by somewhere after 9AM on a
> > week-day.
> >
> > *THAT* led to a call/complaint to the electric company, Demanding that
> > they get the voltage down to the 'proper' level. (That degree of excess
> > voltage _is_ hard on equipment, and other things. Reduces the effective
> > life of incandescent bulbs by about _half_, in fact.)
> >
> > For some reason, customer service didn't want to believe me -- I guess
> > complaints about "too much power" are *really* rare. :)
> >
> > They suggested that what I was reporting "couldn't be happening".
> > That whatever I was using to read the voltage must be 'in error'.
> >
> > I pointed out that I had _five_ separate pieces of test equipment, by five
> > different manufacturers, that were all telling the _same_ story, within
> about
> > 2V (analog readout uncertainty on some of the meters). That all were
> > industrial- and/or lab-grade gear. That the precision-reading unit
> (readable
> > to 1/4v or finer) had been used for 'reference checks' at half-a-dozen
> other
> > locations around the city, and registered 118.5 - 121.5 at *every* other
> > location. (About the only thing I didn't have was a _recording_ meter /
> data-
> > logger. :)
> >
> > They _grudgingly_ agreed to send an engineer out to see me. He took
> > one look at my 'bench', and said "Hell, you've got better equipment there
> > than _I_ do." Then, looked at my readings and said "that's not right!"
> > (He didn't even bother to cross-check with his own gear.) Borrowed my
> phone,
> > called in to the office, and ordered an _immediate_ roll of a maintenance
> > team to the substation, and goes outside to wait for the crew to show up.
> > Which they did, in less than 15 minutes. Less than half an hour later,
> > my instrumentation is showing a "respectable" 117V. rising all the way
> > to 123V when the rest of the neighborhood shut down.
> >
> > I even got a credit on my bill -- where they went back an re-figured what
> the
> > kilowatt-hours _should_ have been if they had not been delivering 'too
> high'
> > voltage. I'd only lived there a few months, but they back-credited to the
> > date I moved in. It was about 15% of everything I'd paid.
> >
As a matter of fact would his metor not run less with some things like his
fridge, vacuum, hair dryer, washing machine, dish washer, etc. What makes a
power metor spin? If voltage goes up does the amp draw go down?
I would give my left nut to have a little more voltage. Switch mode power
supplies love a slightly higher voltage and often run cooler when they are run
at max voltage.
Too_Many_Tools wrote:
> I am posting this subject in three different groups to hopefully get a
> good cross section of ideas. I apologize ahead of time if this offends
> anyone.
>
> When one considers a workshop with metal and wood working capabilities,
> what tradeoffs have you made to have a working shop in an alternate
> homepower environment where every amp is precious?
>
> Obviously hand nonpowered tools take on a special importance.
>
> Cordless tools come to mind but which ones and what batteries?
>
> When considerng stationary tools like drills, lathes, mills, saws,
> grinders, etc., which ones fit best in an environment where one is off
> grid?
>
> Special operations like welding and using air compressors would seem to
> need consideration because of their unique requirements.
>
> I would be interested in hearing how others have approached this
> situation and what implementations they have adopted.
>
> Thanks for any suggestions or comments that you can offer.
>
> TMT
>
ok things that you need a genny/huge inverter for (1) air compressor
1.1kw + , (2) arc/mig,tig welder 2.2kw + , some large routers and table
saws . the list is endless . I at presant can run my 12speed pillar
drill or chop saw (not both) from my 1 kw mod inverter . high batt
voltage will help you start large motors so use in day light hours only
(solar)
Greetings and Salutations....
On Wed, 15 Jun 2005 17:29:43 GMT, Richard the Dreaded Libertarian
<[email protected]> wrote:
>On Wed, 15 Jun 2005 07:36:34 -0700, F.George wrote:
>> <snip>
>> Given the current economic/social/political environment your
>> concerns are well founded, however I think the primary or basic
>> problem will not be limited or unavailable [electrical] power,
>> but rather the more pervasive and dangerous problem of a lack of
>> spare parts, raw materials and most critical HSS and carbide
>> tools and blanks.
>>
>> Whether by design or stupidity, the American
>> manufacturing/industrial infrastructure is rapidly being
>> destroyed, primarily by management "outsourcing" and plant
>> transfer.
>
>Thank you, Chicken Little.
Hum...so you DON'T think it is a problem that America
is losing the knowledge, skills and tools to manufacture
even the basic tools we need to keep society going and the
infrastructure kept up?
>
>> With the trade deficit [current account trade balance]
>> approaching 2 billion dollars *PER DAY* it does not require a
>> degree in rocket science or a tarot deck to see that the time is
>> near when imports by the U.S. economy will be on a C.O.D. or even
>> a "pre-pay" basis [in gold, not dollars].
>
>Odd, that's not what my crystal ball tells me. ;-)
>
>And that "trade deficit" is the stupidest boogeyman ever perpetrated -
>well, at least up in the top five stupid boogeymen - since the
>nervous nellies found out that it's a scary buzzword.
>
>Do you even have any idea what a "trade deficit" _is_? It means
>we have two billion dollars more per day to spend on their crap
>than they have to spend on our crap. That means WE ARE TWO BILLION
>DOLLARS RICHER THAN THEY ARE!!!!! PER DAY!!!!!!!!!!
>
>You have a significant "trade deficit" with the grocery store.
>How much do you spend there? Maybe $100.00/week? That's a ONE
>HUNDRED DOLLARS PER WEEK TRADE DEFICIT with the grocery store.
>They don't buy anything from you, do they?
>
>And imagine your employer's trade deficit with _you_! He buys
>your labor for, what, $50K, $100K/year? How much stuff do you
>buy from him? Your EMPLOYER HAS A SERIOUS TRADE DEFICIT WITH
>YOU!!!!!
>
>"Trade Deficit". Pfaugh!
>
>Thanks!
>Rich
>UT o
While your point may have some validity here, the
major difference is that the money in your examples is
circulating INSIDE the USA. The dollars spent in a
foreign market are dollars that are taken out of the
economy "forever".
As an analogy, if dollars are the life-blood
of the economy, foreign trade is like cutting an
artery.
Now...The fact of the matter is that SOME of
those dollars DO come back in, but, since it is a
DEFICIT, far more are going out than are coming in.
Those dollars have to be replaced in the economy
somehow. One "bad" way is to simply print more
money. While this gets more bucks in circulation,
it also cuts down on the value of each dollar.
We have to remember that the world economy
is more like a war than a cheerful family gathering.
All the countries in the world are jockeying to
gain advantage over the other countries, and, one
way to do that is to drain the cash of one country.
America, although economically large, is
not infinite, and, if we believed we were, we would
be fools. The fact that the dollar has dropped
in relative value on the world market is proof that
the deficits are having their desired effects. Also,
remember that the growing European Union can (and
perhaps already has) become a larger economic power
than America.
Finally, there is the basic problem that
the world, in general, is not a friendly place.
Countries that were our friends are now our
enemies; countries that were our enemies are
now our friends; The only lesson we can
learn from this is that this is likely to
happen again, so, to end up totally dependent
on another country for our major manufacturing
is a stupid thing to do.
Regards
Dave Mundt
"F. George McDuffee" wrote:
>
> <snip>
> >How about making the share holders liable for the debt. They are after all
> >"owners" of the companies :-)
> <snip>
> This simply echos a legal fiction. In fact 'shareholders' have
> almost no control, ...
No fiction, fact. All you have to do is to get a majority to agree w/
you, go to annual meeting and vote w/ you, and you can do whatever you
want...
<snip>
>How about making the share holders liable for the debt. They are after all
>"owners" of the companies :-)
<snip>
This simply echos a legal fiction. In fact 'shareholders' have
almost no control, otherwise the corporations would have been
forced to declare dividends rather than hording cash, and the
executives would have received human salaries. While there is
more than ample "blame" to go around, the major enablers were the
financial institutions that handled the IPOs, made the loans,
audited the books, created the "special purpose entities,"
managed the pension funds, etc. As such, these should be the
people that get the big "hair cut" [like down to their knees]
rather than the employees or taxpayers [who tend to be the
shareholders when the music stops].
On Wed, 22 Jun 2005 07:50:58 -0700, F. George McDuffee
<[email protected]> wrote:
>
>Second problem is that this gives the Chinese an opening wedge
>into the U.S. major appliance market with an existing brand and
>dealer network, directly threatening #1 Whirlpool with all the
>jobs and local taxes revenue they represent.
IIRC Whirlpool is already in big trouble.
--
Cliff
On Wed, 22 Jun 2005 07:50:58 -0700, F. George McDuffee
<[email protected]> wrote:
>Second problem is that this gives the Chinese an opening wedge
>into the U.S. major appliance market with an existing brand and
>dealer network, directly threatening #1 Whirlpool with all the
>jobs and local taxes revenue they represent.
I'll point out the GE does not run unprofitable divisoins
for a great length of time and has been in the home
appliance business for a LONG time as such things go.
http://www.geappliances.com/
Two decades ago they were a leader in the use of 3D
CAD/CAM systems at their Appliance Park facility near
Louisville, KY.
Probably the first 3D sheetmetal software for 3D
CAD/CAM came out of their efforts ...
--
Cliff
<Snipped>
Hi Matt, Where've you been? Crankin' out too many parts to get into any of
the ongoing arguments? <g>
Hey, remember that little 3-48 x .054" set screw? We finally got it running
pretty good on the Tsugami. We're making it out of 416HT stainless and are
using a Habegger adjustable thread rolling die. Almost full thread profile
right to the ends. So far, so good. (crossed fingers).
I better get out of here before I get flamed for not being on-topic enough.
John
----== Posted via Newsfeeds.Com - Unlimited-Uncensored-Secure Usenet News==----
http://www.newsfeeds.com The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World! 120,000+ Newsgroups
----= East and West-Coast Server Farms - Total Privacy via Encryption =----
"wmbjk" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
> On Thu, 16 Jun 2005 21:55:15 GMT, "Pete C." <[email protected]>
> wrote:
>
>
> ><compressed air storage> Should be comparable or better efficiency than a
wind driven generator
> >charging batteries.
>
> Perhaps in some niches... but in any event a practical home power
> setup needs some batteries, and charging them with wind, assuming
> there's wind to harvest, is highly recommended. So you're talking
> about *adding* systems because you believe it's worth the trouble, but
> you haven't supplied any numbers or examples to back up your position.
>
> > They also do this
> >with pumped hydro, but CAS is far more practical than pumped hydro in a
> >homepower environment.
>
> But both are less practical than batteries.
>
> >No, not mechanically driven. The refrigeration compressor would be belt
> >driven from an air motor. The thermostat simply opens the air valve when
> >it needs to spin up the compressor. Again the ultimate source of power
> >does not have to be wind, and in fact with CAS it's even easier to
> >combine energy captured from multiple sources. No need to worry about
> >charge controllers when you're simply pumping air into a big tank.
>
> How big a tank? I think you're going to find a fly in the ointment
> once you run some numbers on air consumption. And if air power could
> be so efficient and practical, why do you believe it is that
> off-gridders, often known to be innovative and unafraid of breaking
> with convention, haven't flocked to the concept?
Another fly in the oiment on your battery remark.....if batteries are so
much effecient
at storaging .Why are repair shop using air tools instead battery powered
tools.
>
> >The point is that batteries can only accept a charge at a certain rate,
> >potentially wasting captured energy during peaks.
>
> There's isn't any peak power wasting problem that I'm aware of with
> home power systems, since the cost of generating prevents people from
> buying excess capacity. Can you give an example of the problem you're
> citing?
>
> >The efficiency of directly utilizing the energy of the compressed air
> >for mechanical applications is also higher. Instead of capturing wind
> >energy, converting to electricity, storing in a battery, converting to
> >AC, converting to mechanical energy with a motor, converting to
> >compressed air with a compressor coupled to the motor and then utilizing
> >the compresses air to fire your nail gun, you eliminate four conversion
> >steps.
>
> You left out the AC to DC conversion of the turbine, and assumed that
> energy used must be stored in a battery first. It's true that
> compressed air for tools is a very inefficient process, on-grid or
> off. Yet I've managed quite well with the just the same sort of
> compressor that grid-connected folks use. I could do wind-powered shop
> air more easily than most, but I wouldn't dream of adding another
> system to cure an inefficiency that's such a small part of the big
> picture.
>
> Coincidentally, I have a neighbor who plans a Bowjon type installation
> (low tower, bulky rotor, single-stage compressor) for shop air using
> multiple surplus storage tanks. I've suggested that since he hasn't
> any wind power at present and could really use some, that the time and
> money he's going to put into the new setup would be better spent on a
> conventional wind genny and a tall tower.
>
> >This is where you really need the hybrid system. You run the inverter to
> >power your conventional appliances. When you are not running the
> >appliances you turn the inverter off.
>
> That's one of those convenience/practicalities tradeoffs. Many
> appliances don't like being de-powered, and it's a nuisance to fight
> it. IMO, biting the bullet for full time capacity is one of those
> things that goes a long way to making off-grid living palatable for
> the average person. After a hard day of pining over the dearth of
> rural ballet, the last thing you want is to have to reprogram the
> clock on the microwave. :-)
>
> > You run your lighting and TV and
> >whatnot that are your much higher duty cycle items from DC and avoid the
> >conversion.
>
> The conversion losses are lamentable, but not generally worth working
> around. As Scott mentioned, after you've fought that battle for a
> while, you're ready for straight AC in order to eliminate the
> diddling.
>
> >Perhaps your home welding is less than mine. I've got a Miller
> >Syncrowave 250 that I love and it can see quite a bit of use on project
> >weekends. I'm thinking your inverters would gag at the 240v 100a gulps
> >the Syncrowave takes, even if the typical gulp is only about 10 seconds
> >duration. On a big project those 10 second gulps add up to quite a few
> >minutes.
>
> The fuses definitely couldn't handle it - 400A limit (24V system).
> What kind of *home* welding are you doing that takes 24k Watts input?
>
> People can size for whatever they can afford, but if I had the need
> for more indoor stick/TIG, I'd be after one of these
>
http://cgi.ebay.com/ws/eBayISAPI.dll?ViewItem&category=57039&item=7524207277
,
> which should be a comfortable fit with our setup. But I find I rarely
> stick weld indoors above about 120A, although I use the Powemig 255 up
> to its max more often. The only really heavy stuff I have to work on
> are the tractors, and that's only occasionally. Since they don't fit
> inside, and neither does the smoke and dust of heavy work, I roll an
> engine-driven unit outdoors.
>
> >I didn't really intend the welder / generator to be used for backup to
> >the regular power system. I really meant it more as an option for
> >powering larger shop tools.
>
> The auto-idle feature of a good unit will make that bearable, if the
> tools' idle use is compatible. Still, the generator is going to be
> either idling or roaring in between power tool use, at an average of
> about $2 per hour in fuel. When we first moved onto our site, but
> before we had the power system set up temporarily, I was stuck with
> the welder generator. The running hours add up quickly, and I wouldn't
> recommend it to anyone else except for occasional or temporary use, or
> because there was no alternative, or if it's for a job that pays
> enough to cover the expenses and aggravation.
>
> >Modifying a DC inverter welder which are pretty inexpensive these days
> >is likely the most efficient way to get quality welding capacity from a
> >home power system. No line shaft required, and no need for oversized
> >inverters or load shedding.
>
> Everyone has different needs, wants, and budget, but I think you'll
> find that more and more people have a potential combination of house
> loads that need such capacity that shop use isn't a leap. Around here
> for instance are many who need to power the surge of a 2 hp well pump,
> along with other use concurrent. It can be done with a smaller
> inverter and a generator, but it's sure nice to get that generator
> time down if you can. We used to have a couple nearby who had a
> generator/battery/inverter setup, over 10 hours generator time per
> day. That's about 4000 hours and 2000 gallons of fuel per year. I
> think the fuel cost, repair costs, and eventual generator replacement
> cost were big factors in their pulling out after a few years. Even a
> modest amount of PV could have cut that generator time in half, and
> would have been far cheaper in the long run. Better still, the cost of
> that (very nice) generator and fuel could have bought a combination of
> hardware including a much smaller generator needing only a few hours
> per week run time.
>
> >Somehow it seems to cost
> >more to live self sufficient off-grid than it does to just pay the
> >utilities...
>
> Not necessarily. Cashing out of a grid-connected place allowed us to
> retire, start with a clean slate, and as the yuppies say, "leverage"
> the advantages of home power to help keep the big picture cost down.
> Cheap land, lower taxes, fewer utilities (still need the phone
> company) are some of the benefits. In talking to off-gridders, I find
> that the main factor affecting success isn't so much the power issues,
> but whether the folks can afford and are comfortable with truly rural
> living. For most, that usually means retirement or telecommuting, and
> precludes having children at home. For those who need to commute or be
> close to school busses etc., they're usually stuck with paying the
> premium for grid access. Then again, when they want to generate their
> own power, they can have cheaper and more efficient systems, and use
> the grid for storage.
>
> Wayne
>
----== Posted via Newsfeeds.Com - Unlimited-Uncensored-Secure Usenet News==----
http://www.newsfeeds.com The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World! 120,000+ Newsgroups
----= East and West-Coast Server Farms - Total Privacy via Encryption =----
"wmbjk" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
> On Thu, 16 Jun 2005 21:55:15 GMT, "Pete C." <[email protected]>
> wrote:
>
>
> ><compressed air storage> Should be comparable or better efficiency than a
wind driven generator
> >charging batteries.
>
> Perhaps in some niches... but in any event a practical home power
> setup needs some batteries, and charging them with wind, assuming
> there's wind to harvest, is highly recommended. So you're talking
> about *adding* systems because you believe it's worth the trouble, but
> you haven't supplied any numbers or examples to back up your position.
>
> > They also do this
> >with pumped hydro, but CAS is far more practical than pumped hydro in a
> >homepower environment.
>
> But both are less practical than batteries.
>
> >No, not mechanically driven. The refrigeration compressor would be belt
> >driven from an air motor. The thermostat simply opens the air valve when
> >it needs to spin up the compressor. Again the ultimate source of power
> >does not have to be wind, and in fact with CAS it's even easier to
> >combine energy captured from multiple sources. No need to worry about
> >charge controllers when you're simply pumping air into a big tank.
>
> How big a tank? I think you're going to find a fly in the ointment
> once you run some numbers on air consumption. And if air power could
> be so efficient and practical, why do you believe it is that
> off-gridders, often known to be innovative and unafraid of breaking
> with convention, haven't flocked to the concept?
Another fly in the oiment on your battery remark.....if batteries are so
much effecient
at storaging .Why are repair shop using air tools instead battery powered
tools.
>
> >The point is that batteries can only accept a charge at a certain rate,
> >potentially wasting captured energy during peaks.
>
> There's isn't any peak power wasting problem that I'm aware of with
> home power systems, since the cost of generating prevents people from
> buying excess capacity. Can you give an example of the problem you're
> citing?
>
> >The efficiency of directly utilizing the energy of the compressed air
> >for mechanical applications is also higher. Instead of capturing wind
> >energy, converting to electricity, storing in a battery, converting to
> >AC, converting to mechanical energy with a motor, converting to
> >compressed air with a compressor coupled to the motor and then utilizing
> >the compresses air to fire your nail gun, you eliminate four conversion
> >steps.
>
> You left out the AC to DC conversion of the turbine, and assumed that
> energy used must be stored in a battery first. It's true that
> compressed air for tools is a very inefficient process, on-grid or
> off. Yet I've managed quite well with the just the same sort of
> compressor that grid-connected folks use. I could do wind-powered shop
> air more easily than most, but I wouldn't dream of adding another
> system to cure an inefficiency that's such a small part of the big
> picture.
>
> Coincidentally, I have a neighbor who plans a Bowjon type installation
> (low tower, bulky rotor, single-stage compressor) for shop air using
> multiple surplus storage tanks. I've suggested that since he hasn't
> any wind power at present and could really use some, that the time and
> money he's going to put into the new setup would be better spent on a
> conventional wind genny and a tall tower.
>
> >This is where you really need the hybrid system. You run the inverter to
> >power your conventional appliances. When you are not running the
> >appliances you turn the inverter off.
>
> That's one of those convenience/practicalities tradeoffs. Many
> appliances don't like being de-powered, and it's a nuisance to fight
> it. IMO, biting the bullet for full time capacity is one of those
> things that goes a long way to making off-grid living palatable for
> the average person. After a hard day of pining over the dearth of
> rural ballet, the last thing you want is to have to reprogram the
> clock on the microwave. :-)
>
> > You run your lighting and TV and
> >whatnot that are your much higher duty cycle items from DC and avoid the
> >conversion.
>
> The conversion losses are lamentable, but not generally worth working
> around. As Scott mentioned, after you've fought that battle for a
> while, you're ready for straight AC in order to eliminate the
> diddling.
>
> >Perhaps your home welding is less than mine. I've got a Miller
> >Syncrowave 250 that I love and it can see quite a bit of use on project
> >weekends. I'm thinking your inverters would gag at the 240v 100a gulps
> >the Syncrowave takes, even if the typical gulp is only about 10 seconds
> >duration. On a big project those 10 second gulps add up to quite a few
> >minutes.
>
> The fuses definitely couldn't handle it - 400A limit (24V system).
> What kind of *home* welding are you doing that takes 24k Watts input?
>
> People can size for whatever they can afford, but if I had the need
> for more indoor stick/TIG, I'd be after one of these
>
http://cgi.ebay.com/ws/eBayISAPI.dll?ViewItem&category=57039&item=7524207277
,
> which should be a comfortable fit with our setup. But I find I rarely
> stick weld indoors above about 120A, although I use the Powemig 255 up
> to its max more often. The only really heavy stuff I have to work on
> are the tractors, and that's only occasionally. Since they don't fit
> inside, and neither does the smoke and dust of heavy work, I roll an
> engine-driven unit outdoors.
>
> >I didn't really intend the welder / generator to be used for backup to
> >the regular power system. I really meant it more as an option for
> >powering larger shop tools.
>
> The auto-idle feature of a good unit will make that bearable, if the
> tools' idle use is compatible. Still, the generator is going to be
> either idling or roaring in between power tool use, at an average of
> about $2 per hour in fuel. When we first moved onto our site, but
> before we had the power system set up temporarily, I was stuck with
> the welder generator. The running hours add up quickly, and I wouldn't
> recommend it to anyone else except for occasional or temporary use, or
> because there was no alternative, or if it's for a job that pays
> enough to cover the expenses and aggravation.
>
> >Modifying a DC inverter welder which are pretty inexpensive these days
> >is likely the most efficient way to get quality welding capacity from a
> >home power system. No line shaft required, and no need for oversized
> >inverters or load shedding.
>
> Everyone has different needs, wants, and budget, but I think you'll
> find that more and more people have a potential combination of house
> loads that need such capacity that shop use isn't a leap. Around here
> for instance are many who need to power the surge of a 2 hp well pump,
> along with other use concurrent. It can be done with a smaller
> inverter and a generator, but it's sure nice to get that generator
> time down if you can. We used to have a couple nearby who had a
> generator/battery/inverter setup, over 10 hours generator time per
> day. That's about 4000 hours and 2000 gallons of fuel per year. I
> think the fuel cost, repair costs, and eventual generator replacement
> cost were big factors in their pulling out after a few years. Even a
> modest amount of PV could have cut that generator time in half, and
> would have been far cheaper in the long run. Better still, the cost of
> that (very nice) generator and fuel could have bought a combination of
> hardware including a much smaller generator needing only a few hours
> per week run time.
>
> >Somehow it seems to cost
> >more to live self sufficient off-grid than it does to just pay the
> >utilities...
>
> Not necessarily. Cashing out of a grid-connected place allowed us to
> retire, start with a clean slate, and as the yuppies say, "leverage"
> the advantages of home power to help keep the big picture cost down.
> Cheap land, lower taxes, fewer utilities (still need the phone
> company) are some of the benefits. In talking to off-gridders, I find
> that the main factor affecting success isn't so much the power issues,
> but whether the folks can afford and are comfortable with truly rural
> living. For most, that usually means retirement or telecommuting, and
> precludes having children at home. For those who need to commute or be
> close to school busses etc., they're usually stuck with paying the
> premium for grid access. Then again, when they want to generate their
> own power, they can have cheaper and more efficient systems, and use
> the grid for storage.
>
> Wayne
>
----== Posted via Newsfeeds.Com - Unlimited-Uncensored-Secure Usenet News==----
http://www.newsfeeds.com The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World! 120,000+ Newsgroups
----= East and West-Coast Server Farms - Total Privacy via Encryption =----
"wmbjk" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
> On Thu, 16 Jun 2005 21:55:15 GMT, "Pete C." <[email protected]>
> wrote:
>
>
> ><compressed air storage> Should be comparable or better efficiency than a
wind driven generator
> >charging batteries.
>
> Perhaps in some niches... but in any event a practical home power
> setup needs some batteries, and charging them with wind, assuming
> there's wind to harvest, is highly recommended. So you're talking
> about *adding* systems because you believe it's worth the trouble, but
> you haven't supplied any numbers or examples to back up your position.
>
> > They also do this
> >with pumped hydro, but CAS is far more practical than pumped hydro in a
> >homepower environment.
>
> But both are less practical than batteries.
>
> >No, not mechanically driven. The refrigeration compressor would be belt
> >driven from an air motor. The thermostat simply opens the air valve when
> >it needs to spin up the compressor. Again the ultimate source of power
> >does not have to be wind, and in fact with CAS it's even easier to
> >combine energy captured from multiple sources. No need to worry about
> >charge controllers when you're simply pumping air into a big tank.
>
> How big a tank? I think you're going to find a fly in the ointment
> once you run some numbers on air consumption. And if air power could
> be so efficient and practical, why do you believe it is that
> off-gridders, often known to be innovative and unafraid of breaking
> with convention, haven't flocked to the concept?
Another fly in the oiment on your battery remark.....if batteries are so
much effecient
at storaging .Why are repair shop using air tools instead battery powered
tools.
>
> >The point is that batteries can only accept a charge at a certain rate,
> >potentially wasting captured energy during peaks.
>
> There's isn't any peak power wasting problem that I'm aware of with
> home power systems, since the cost of generating prevents people from
> buying excess capacity. Can you give an example of the problem you're
> citing?
>
> >The efficiency of directly utilizing the energy of the compressed air
> >for mechanical applications is also higher. Instead of capturing wind
> >energy, converting to electricity, storing in a battery, converting to
> >AC, converting to mechanical energy with a motor, converting to
> >compressed air with a compressor coupled to the motor and then utilizing
> >the compresses air to fire your nail gun, you eliminate four conversion
> >steps.
>
> You left out the AC to DC conversion of the turbine, and assumed that
> energy used must be stored in a battery first. It's true that
> compressed air for tools is a very inefficient process, on-grid or
> off. Yet I've managed quite well with the just the same sort of
> compressor that grid-connected folks use. I could do wind-powered shop
> air more easily than most, but I wouldn't dream of adding another
> system to cure an inefficiency that's such a small part of the big
> picture.
>
> Coincidentally, I have a neighbor who plans a Bowjon type installation
> (low tower, bulky rotor, single-stage compressor) for shop air using
> multiple surplus storage tanks. I've suggested that since he hasn't
> any wind power at present and could really use some, that the time and
> money he's going to put into the new setup would be better spent on a
> conventional wind genny and a tall tower.
>
> >This is where you really need the hybrid system. You run the inverter to
> >power your conventional appliances. When you are not running the
> >appliances you turn the inverter off.
>
> That's one of those convenience/practicalities tradeoffs. Many
> appliances don't like being de-powered, and it's a nuisance to fight
> it. IMO, biting the bullet for full time capacity is one of those
> things that goes a long way to making off-grid living palatable for
> the average person. After a hard day of pining over the dearth of
> rural ballet, the last thing you want is to have to reprogram the
> clock on the microwave. :-)
>
> > You run your lighting and TV and
> >whatnot that are your much higher duty cycle items from DC and avoid the
> >conversion.
>
> The conversion losses are lamentable, but not generally worth working
> around. As Scott mentioned, after you've fought that battle for a
> while, you're ready for straight AC in order to eliminate the
> diddling.
>
> >Perhaps your home welding is less than mine. I've got a Miller
> >Syncrowave 250 that I love and it can see quite a bit of use on project
> >weekends. I'm thinking your inverters would gag at the 240v 100a gulps
> >the Syncrowave takes, even if the typical gulp is only about 10 seconds
> >duration. On a big project those 10 second gulps add up to quite a few
> >minutes.
>
> The fuses definitely couldn't handle it - 400A limit (24V system).
> What kind of *home* welding are you doing that takes 24k Watts input?
>
> People can size for whatever they can afford, but if I had the need
> for more indoor stick/TIG, I'd be after one of these
>
http://cgi.ebay.com/ws/eBayISAPI.dll?ViewItem&category=57039&item=7524207277
,
> which should be a comfortable fit with our setup. But I find I rarely
> stick weld indoors above about 120A, although I use the Powemig 255 up
> to its max more often. The only really heavy stuff I have to work on
> are the tractors, and that's only occasionally. Since they don't fit
> inside, and neither does the smoke and dust of heavy work, I roll an
> engine-driven unit outdoors.
>
> >I didn't really intend the welder / generator to be used for backup to
> >the regular power system. I really meant it more as an option for
> >powering larger shop tools.
>
> The auto-idle feature of a good unit will make that bearable, if the
> tools' idle use is compatible. Still, the generator is going to be
> either idling or roaring in between power tool use, at an average of
> about $2 per hour in fuel. When we first moved onto our site, but
> before we had the power system set up temporarily, I was stuck with
> the welder generator. The running hours add up quickly, and I wouldn't
> recommend it to anyone else except for occasional or temporary use, or
> because there was no alternative, or if it's for a job that pays
> enough to cover the expenses and aggravation.
>
> >Modifying a DC inverter welder which are pretty inexpensive these days
> >is likely the most efficient way to get quality welding capacity from a
> >home power system. No line shaft required, and no need for oversized
> >inverters or load shedding.
>
> Everyone has different needs, wants, and budget, but I think you'll
> find that more and more people have a potential combination of house
> loads that need such capacity that shop use isn't a leap. Around here
> for instance are many who need to power the surge of a 2 hp well pump,
> along with other use concurrent. It can be done with a smaller
> inverter and a generator, but it's sure nice to get that generator
> time down if you can. We used to have a couple nearby who had a
> generator/battery/inverter setup, over 10 hours generator time per
> day. That's about 4000 hours and 2000 gallons of fuel per year. I
> think the fuel cost, repair costs, and eventual generator replacement
> cost were big factors in their pulling out after a few years. Even a
> modest amount of PV could have cut that generator time in half, and
> would have been far cheaper in the long run. Better still, the cost of
> that (very nice) generator and fuel could have bought a combination of
> hardware including a much smaller generator needing only a few hours
> per week run time.
>
> >Somehow it seems to cost
> >more to live self sufficient off-grid than it does to just pay the
> >utilities...
>
> Not necessarily. Cashing out of a grid-connected place allowed us to
> retire, start with a clean slate, and as the yuppies say, "leverage"
> the advantages of home power to help keep the big picture cost down.
> Cheap land, lower taxes, fewer utilities (still need the phone
> company) are some of the benefits. In talking to off-gridders, I find
> that the main factor affecting success isn't so much the power issues,
> but whether the folks can afford and are comfortable with truly rural
> living. For most, that usually means retirement or telecommuting, and
> precludes having children at home. For those who need to commute or be
> close to school busses etc., they're usually stuck with paying the
> premium for grid access. Then again, when they want to generate their
> own power, they can have cheaper and more efficient systems, and use
> the grid for storage.
>
> Wayne
>
----== Posted via Newsfeeds.Com - Unlimited-Uncensored-Secure Usenet News==----
http://www.newsfeeds.com The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World! 120,000+ Newsgroups
----= East and West-Coast Server Farms - Total Privacy via Encryption =----
"wmbjk" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
> On Thu, 16 Jun 2005 21:55:15 GMT, "Pete C." <[email protected]>
> wrote:
>
>
> ><compressed air storage> Should be comparable or better efficiency than a
wind driven generator
> >charging batteries.
>
> Perhaps in some niches... but in any event a practical home power
> setup needs some batteries, and charging them with wind, assuming
> there's wind to harvest, is highly recommended. So you're talking
> about *adding* systems because you believe it's worth the trouble, but
> you haven't supplied any numbers or examples to back up your position.
>
> > They also do this
> >with pumped hydro, but CAS is far more practical than pumped hydro in a
> >homepower environment.
>
> But both are less practical than batteries.
>
> >No, not mechanically driven. The refrigeration compressor would be belt
> >driven from an air motor. The thermostat simply opens the air valve when
> >it needs to spin up the compressor. Again the ultimate source of power
> >does not have to be wind, and in fact with CAS it's even easier to
> >combine energy captured from multiple sources. No need to worry about
> >charge controllers when you're simply pumping air into a big tank.
>
> How big a tank? I think you're going to find a fly in the ointment
> once you run some numbers on air consumption. And if air power could
> be so efficient and practical, why do you believe it is that
> off-gridders, often known to be innovative and unafraid of breaking
> with convention, haven't flocked to the concept?
Another fly in the oiment on your battery remark.....if batteries are so
much effecient
at storaging .Why are repair shop using air tools instead battery powered
tools.
>
> >The point is that batteries can only accept a charge at a certain rate,
> >potentially wasting captured energy during peaks.
>
> There's isn't any peak power wasting problem that I'm aware of with
> home power systems, since the cost of generating prevents people from
> buying excess capacity. Can you give an example of the problem you're
> citing?
>
> >The efficiency of directly utilizing the energy of the compressed air
> >for mechanical applications is also higher. Instead of capturing wind
> >energy, converting to electricity, storing in a battery, converting to
> >AC, converting to mechanical energy with a motor, converting to
> >compressed air with a compressor coupled to the motor and then utilizing
> >the compresses air to fire your nail gun, you eliminate four conversion
> >steps.
>
> You left out the AC to DC conversion of the turbine, and assumed that
> energy used must be stored in a battery first. It's true that
> compressed air for tools is a very inefficient process, on-grid or
> off. Yet I've managed quite well with the just the same sort of
> compressor that grid-connected folks use. I could do wind-powered shop
> air more easily than most, but I wouldn't dream of adding another
> system to cure an inefficiency that's such a small part of the big
> picture.
>
> Coincidentally, I have a neighbor who plans a Bowjon type installation
> (low tower, bulky rotor, single-stage compressor) for shop air using
> multiple surplus storage tanks. I've suggested that since he hasn't
> any wind power at present and could really use some, that the time and
> money he's going to put into the new setup would be better spent on a
> conventional wind genny and a tall tower.
>
> >This is where you really need the hybrid system. You run the inverter to
> >power your conventional appliances. When you are not running the
> >appliances you turn the inverter off.
>
> That's one of those convenience/practicalities tradeoffs. Many
> appliances don't like being de-powered, and it's a nuisance to fight
> it. IMO, biting the bullet for full time capacity is one of those
> things that goes a long way to making off-grid living palatable for
> the average person. After a hard day of pining over the dearth of
> rural ballet, the last thing you want is to have to reprogram the
> clock on the microwave. :-)
>
> > You run your lighting and TV and
> >whatnot that are your much higher duty cycle items from DC and avoid the
> >conversion.
>
> The conversion losses are lamentable, but not generally worth working
> around. As Scott mentioned, after you've fought that battle for a
> while, you're ready for straight AC in order to eliminate the
> diddling.
>
> >Perhaps your home welding is less than mine. I've got a Miller
> >Syncrowave 250 that I love and it can see quite a bit of use on project
> >weekends. I'm thinking your inverters would gag at the 240v 100a gulps
> >the Syncrowave takes, even if the typical gulp is only about 10 seconds
> >duration. On a big project those 10 second gulps add up to quite a few
> >minutes.
>
> The fuses definitely couldn't handle it - 400A limit (24V system).
> What kind of *home* welding are you doing that takes 24k Watts input?
>
> People can size for whatever they can afford, but if I had the need
> for more indoor stick/TIG, I'd be after one of these
>
http://cgi.ebay.com/ws/eBayISAPI.dll?ViewItem&category=57039&item=7524207277
,
> which should be a comfortable fit with our setup. But I find I rarely
> stick weld indoors above about 120A, although I use the Powemig 255 up
> to its max more often. The only really heavy stuff I have to work on
> are the tractors, and that's only occasionally. Since they don't fit
> inside, and neither does the smoke and dust of heavy work, I roll an
> engine-driven unit outdoors.
>
> >I didn't really intend the welder / generator to be used for backup to
> >the regular power system. I really meant it more as an option for
> >powering larger shop tools.
>
> The auto-idle feature of a good unit will make that bearable, if the
> tools' idle use is compatible. Still, the generator is going to be
> either idling or roaring in between power tool use, at an average of
> about $2 per hour in fuel. When we first moved onto our site, but
> before we had the power system set up temporarily, I was stuck with
> the welder generator. The running hours add up quickly, and I wouldn't
> recommend it to anyone else except for occasional or temporary use, or
> because there was no alternative, or if it's for a job that pays
> enough to cover the expenses and aggravation.
>
> >Modifying a DC inverter welder which are pretty inexpensive these days
> >is likely the most efficient way to get quality welding capacity from a
> >home power system. No line shaft required, and no need for oversized
> >inverters or load shedding.
>
> Everyone has different needs, wants, and budget, but I think you'll
> find that more and more people have a potential combination of house
> loads that need such capacity that shop use isn't a leap. Around here
> for instance are many who need to power the surge of a 2 hp well pump,
> along with other use concurrent. It can be done with a smaller
> inverter and a generator, but it's sure nice to get that generator
> time down if you can. We used to have a couple nearby who had a
> generator/battery/inverter setup, over 10 hours generator time per
> day. That's about 4000 hours and 2000 gallons of fuel per year. I
> think the fuel cost, repair costs, and eventual generator replacement
> cost were big factors in their pulling out after a few years. Even a
> modest amount of PV could have cut that generator time in half, and
> would have been far cheaper in the long run. Better still, the cost of
> that (very nice) generator and fuel could have bought a combination of
> hardware including a much smaller generator needing only a few hours
> per week run time.
>
> >Somehow it seems to cost
> >more to live self sufficient off-grid than it does to just pay the
> >utilities...
>
> Not necessarily. Cashing out of a grid-connected place allowed us to
> retire, start with a clean slate, and as the yuppies say, "leverage"
> the advantages of home power to help keep the big picture cost down.
> Cheap land, lower taxes, fewer utilities (still need the phone
> company) are some of the benefits. In talking to off-gridders, I find
> that the main factor affecting success isn't so much the power issues,
> but whether the folks can afford and are comfortable with truly rural
> living. For most, that usually means retirement or telecommuting, and
> precludes having children at home. For those who need to commute or be
> close to school busses etc., they're usually stuck with paying the
> premium for grid access. Then again, when they want to generate their
> own power, they can have cheaper and more efficient systems, and use
> the grid for storage.
>
> Wayne
>
----== Posted via Newsfeeds.Com - Unlimited-Uncensored-Secure Usenet News==----
http://www.newsfeeds.com The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World! 120,000+ Newsgroups
----= East and West-Coast Server Farms - Total Privacy via Encryption =----
Me wrote:
> In article <[email protected]>,
> "Ulysses" <[email protected]> wrote:
>
>
>>"wmbjk" <[email protected]> wrote in message
>>news:[email protected]...
>>
>>>On Thu, 16 Jun 2005 15:43:10 GMT, "Pete C." <[email protected]>
>>>wrote:
>>>
>
>
>>>Not necessarily. Home welding tends to be short duration. The hardware
>>>to supply that kind of power is actually affordable, and if one is
>>>designing the power system from scratch for what most would consider a
>>>normal home, then the extra inverter capacity isn't a big deal. In our
>>>case, for the house loads alone we could have gotten away with a
>>>single SW4024 plus a transformer for the 220V loads.
>>
>>How is this done, getting 220V from 110? How do you get the two "hot"
>>wires? Are there 2 secondary windings on the transformer? Wouldn't they
>>need to be out of phase with each other?
>>
>>
>
>
> Now here is a fellow that asks an inteligent question. If you take
> a dual winding secondary with 120 Vac on each winding, feeding it
> with a 120 Vac Primary, and connect the dual 120Vac windings in series
> you get 240Vac. The phase is determined on how you connect the two
> series windings. and they will either be inphase or 180 out of phase,
> depending on the connection.
>
> Me
Either 240V give or take a few due to coupling differences or
Zero give or take a few due to coupling differences.
When it is zero the phasing is wrong and must be reversed on one winding.
Many electronic transformers have black dots on the 'true' winding lead
to make phasing easier. Power is just the same simply a single frequency.
Martin
--
Martin Eastburn
@ home at Lion's Lair with our computer lionslair at consolidated dot net
NRA LOH, NRA Life
NRA Second Amendment Task Force Charter Founder
----== Posted via Newsfeeds.Com - Unlimited-Uncensored-Secure Usenet News==----
http://www.newsfeeds.com The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World! 120,000+ Newsgroups
----= East and West-Coast Server Farms - Total Privacy via Encryption =----
Greetings and Salutations...
On Thu, 16 Jun 2005 07:01:33 -0700, F. George McDuffee
<[email protected]> wrote:
>On Thu, 16 Jun 2005 02:42:11 +0100, Andy Dingley
><[email protected]> wrote:
>
>>On Wed, 15 Jun 2005 18:30:40 GMT, [email protected] (Dave Mundt) wrote:
>>
>>>
>>> Hum...so you DON'T think it is a problem that America
>>>is losing the knowledge, skills and tools to manufacture
>>>even the basic tools we need to keep society going and the
>>>infrastructure kept up?
>>
>>Our excuse for killing off manufacturing in the UK was Thatcher.
>>What's America's excuse ?
>==============================
>Our buzzwords are "maximizing sharholder value" with "free
>market" for the rondo.
Yea, I have held for QUITE some time that the biggest
problem with America's businesses is that the MOMENT they
suck up to that investor money tit, they lose sight of
the ORIGINAL purpose of the business (to produce a goods or
service, sell it, and, make a decent profit off it) and become
focused completely on the idea of sucking as much money
out of the customer's pockets as possible, and producing the
bare minimum product to get this to happen.
>
>People go out and drink too much even though they know they will
>have a hang over the next day. The major difference in this case
>is that the people who are enjoying the party are not the ones
>who will suffer the hangover (and have to pay the bar tab).
>
This is true, too...folks have a long history of
making bad decisions. The best we can do is try to make
better ones...and hopefully, learn from our mistakes before
the crisis gets so bad that we cannot survive.
Keep your powerder dry.
Dave Mundt
Pete C. wrote:
> wmbjk wrote:
>
>>On Fri, 17 Jun 2005 18:02:44 GMT, "Pete C." <[email protected]>
>>wrote:
>>
>>
>>>See my notes below re: saving four steps of energy conversion for
>>>applications where you are able to use air power directly such as nail
>>>guns and die grinders. Four fewer conversion steps *has* to be more
>>>efficient.
>>
>>You only need to calculate the numbers for volume and consumption, as
>>I'm in agreement that with good wind, it's feasible that a resourceful
>>scrounger could put up sufficient rotor area.
>
>
> You would need the right location and the right shop use to make it
> practical. Good wind and a custom cabinet shop perhaps.
>
>
>>>It is far cheaper and lower maintenance to use a
>>>large air or water reservoir than to use a huge string of batteries with
>>>limited life spans and hazardous lead and acid to dispose of properly at
>>>every battery replacement.
>>
>>Excellent point, and I've committed it to memory in case I decide to
>>do a utility-scale installation. :-)
>>
>>
>>>The batteries in your string may last what, perhaps 8 years?
>>
>>They're nearly ten years old now, and I won't be surprised if they
>>make 15 or 20. But home power systems pretty well always need *some*
>>batteries, so all we're talking about is whether the size could be
>>reduced somewhat by an additional system. And keep in mind that a
>>primary goal of home power (at least at my place), is to minimize the
>>energy that makes a trip through the batteries.
>
>
> That's pretty good battery life, you must keep on top of the
> maintenance.
>
>
>>>Perhaps because I haven't seen the concept even proposed in any
>>>alternate energy books. As far as I know CAS and PH are both fairly new
>>>concepts that originated from electric utilities need for a way to store
>>>excess generating capacity during off peak times for use in peak shaving
>>>later.
>>
>>Well, since my uh, somewhat unconventional neighbor ;-) thought of
>>doing compressed air, I think that if it were viable for home power,
>>it should have become popular by now. The subject of home power scale
>>pumped hydro comes up here regularly, and those impossible numbers can
>>be found in the archives.
>
>
> PH is indeed not feasible for 99.9% of potential homepower locations,
> CAS is far more feasible.
>
>
>>>This would primarily apply to wind generation where peak gusts could
>>>produce power faster than the batteries could accept it, causing that
>>>power to be dissipated by the charge controller.
>>
>>I've never heard of that being an issue, and it certainly hasn't come
>>up at my place, which has a high ratio of wind charging capacity to
>>battery size, and some pretty gusty winds.
>
>
> I don't have any cites for it, but it seems quite reasonable to me to
> think that there could be windy times when the gen is capable of
> supplying more power than the charger is drawing, much like the gas
> generator running with the potential to supply say 4kw and a load on it
> of only 2kw.
>
>
>>>Any reason not to combine both and put up your tall tower with the
>>>electric gen up top and hang a compressor at a lower point on the same
>>>tower?
>>
>>I think that once you run some numbers, you'll find that an air system
>>with the capacity you're thinking of will need several big rotors.
>>While I do have a small wind turbine scabbed onto my tower some
>>distance from the top, I couldn't add even one Bowjon type thing the
>>same way. Cheap rotors (multi-piece sheet metal) end up being pretty
>>heavy. IIRC, the Bowjon has a gearbox as well as the pump.
>
>
> Tower loading is always an important thing to keep track of.
>
>
>>>Guess you just need to setup a heat exchanger from your inverter(s) to
>>>capture the waste heat for your DHW.
>>
>>If you're serious, I'd like to see some numbers. How much can the
>>waste heat from 12kWhrs of inverter use raise the temperature of 80
>>gallons of water? And how practical is it to capture that by adding
>>yet another element to a solar water-heating system?
>
>
> Well, they have systems for recapturing waste heat from showers
> available commercially. They also have the energy recovery ventilators
> to recover some of the heat from the stale air they are exhausting.
> Someone's done the math on those items and determined that it's
> worthwhile.
>
> Unless you're in a cold climate where you can always directly utilize
> the waste heat for space heating I'd think there would be some merit to
> using it for preheat of water to the DHW system. Probably also slightly
> increase the life and efficiency of the inverter.
>
>
>>>Soft start inverter drive to a three phase well pump with an unloader
>>>valve? :)
>>
>>Except for the unloader valve which isn't required, that's an approach
>>I've recommended previously here, partly because the drop in wire size
>>can save a few bucks on a deep hole. But you're still talking about a
>>good-sized inverter, plus a transformer, plus a VFD. Considering the
>>other benefits of dual inverters, our preference was to do that
>>instead, even though at 1/2hp a VFD wasn't required here, so the
>>savings on that didn't count.
>
>
> What's the transformer for? Most applications for VFDs that I've seen
> don't use them. Many of the small to mid sized VFDs are specifically
> rated to take single phase input and they're also a lot more reasonably
> priced these days. At some point I'll replace the rotary phase converter
> (home built, $20 in materials) on my Bridgeport with a VFD.
>
>
>>>The only way to get reasonable efficiency out of a gen/bat/inv setup is
>>>to size the generator to just barely above the average load and run it
>>>24x7, and that requires a pretty specialized generator to handle that
>>>duty. Not something I'd consider unless I had my own nat gas well, or
>>>bio-gas generator.
>>
>>Why do you say 24-7? An affordable startup concept I've recommended to
>>a few is an inverter/charger, batteries, and a Honda EU series. Run
>>the generator, say, every day for a couple of hours at max output
>>during peak load times, and for several hours every so often for
>>battery health. Add solar, wind, etc. as budget allows until generator
>>time is minimal. For example - DR1512, EU2000, and a string of
>>batteries from Sam's Club - perhaps $2k total.
>
>
> That can work fine as long as the goal is to gradually add other
> sources. If the plan is to stick with the generator as you comment I was
> replying to implied, then the 24x7 operation is what should allow you to
> operate at peak efficiency.
>
>
>>>Looks like you had to go to some extremes to get your Internet
>>>connectivity.
>>
>>We were fortunate to be the telco's guinea pig for a couple of radio
>>systems. The current one gives us multiple POTS lines (although we
>>only use one) plus DSL. Standard bill, same as if we were hard-wired.
>>Satellite intenet and next gen wi-fi brings similar connectivity to
>>just about anyone who needs it.
>
>
> I looked into satellite not long ago when I was moving to TX. Looks like
> it's fine for general use, but it doesn't handle VPN for telecommuting
> well at all.
>
> Where I ended up I have cable modem which I got with the package deal
> that comes with the expanded digital cable, and two phone lines from the
> telco in a rotary hunt group with flat rate long distance. Work pays for
> the cable modem and the second phone line, so I get quite a bit of
> communications capability and halfway decent TV pretty cheap.
>
>
>>>Perhaps as I'm able to build up some AE projects I'll be able to cut
>>>operating expenses enough to start to get ahead.
>>
>>You have a home shop and an idea for a cheaper alternative to
>>batteries, the cost of which home power users love to complain about.
>>Do I need to spell it out for you? ;-)
>
>
> Well, up first on my list is a solar water heater to take over for the
> electric one the place came with. Should be a really easy project that
> will have a short payback time. Solar A/C will be a bit more
> complicated.
>
> Pete C.
Pointless exercise with Wayne. He can talk the legs off a donkey but
still can't explain his claim of two days autonomy for his system.
And yes he does all his real work during daylight hours.
wmbjk wrote:
> On Tue, 28 Jun 2005 09:36:36 +1000, George Ghio <[email protected]>
> wrote:
>
>
>>
>>wmbjk wrote:
>>
>>>On 26 Jun 2005 19:48:32 -0700, "Too_Many_Tools"
>
>
>>>Here's a sample day's work (yesterday's) in an off-grid workshop. The
>>>project was building the last 2 of 5 scissor trusses for a friend's
>>>aircraft hangar. All material was scrap - chords of 2" and 1.5"
>>>schedule 40 pipe. Long braces from T posts, shorter ones from 5/8"
>>>sucker rod. Most of the material was cut a few days ago. I wore out 3
>>>chop saw blades (medium quality ones) which should give you an idea of
>>>run time. The trusses are 40' wide, but built in halves. Each half
>>>took about 30 minutes to lay out and prep, including about 15 minutes
>>>use of a 4" side grinder. Then 26 welds per side, flip, another 26
>>>welds. Layout, prep, and welding - about one hour total per half, with
>>>a long break between each one to cool off. I built 4 halves, about 100
>>>minutes welding for the day. I didn't check the current draw, but the
>>>machine was set at 280 inches per second, 18 Volts, with .035" solid
>>>wire. Perhaps 5kW input. Charging rate was medium, there was good sun,
>>>but almost no wind, which was nice because I could leave the shop
>>>doors open. When I quit for the day, my wife commented that battery
>>>state of charge had dropped 6 Amp hours, and that she'd used the AC in
>>>the office for a couple of hours. On this project, like most others
>>>here, there wasn't any penalty for being off-grid, which is way cool
>>>IMO.
>>>
>>>Wayne
>>
>>
>>Ah Wayne, it looks like your saying 5kW for 1.6 hours and claiming that
>>it equates to 6 amp hours.
>>
>>Would you like to refrase that amd perhaps look at the maths.
>>
>>You use of units may be suspect. And your numbers would suggest that you
>>can only work when the sun is out.
>>
>>5Kw input for 1.6 hours at 24V looks suspiciously like 333Ah.
>
>
> I started at about 8AM, and I finished up at about 4PM. During that
> time, 2000 Watts of tracked PV was doing its job, along with a tiny
> bit of help from 1300 Watts of wind generator in the AM. Duh!
We now know that you have 2000 watts of PV and 1300 Watts of wind.
Actual PV & wind production numbers, Watt hours will do.
Do you even know what was produced and used during that day?
If, and it is a big if, you in fact were producing energy at the rated
output for say 6 hours of the day which would be on the order of 19.7kWh
and you drew another 144Wh from the batteries, well you can see the
problem. You say 5kW input. Your numbers are vague at best.
Please, just once in your life try to bring some truth to your numbers.
>
> Even after all your pathetic nonsense, I'm still astonished that with
> your claimed 20 years of experience, that you need such simple
> concepts explained to you. Haven't you learned *anything*? How the
> hell can you function? As usual, whatever you do, don't admit that you
> just wrote perhaps *the* biggest blunder of your Usenet career, or
> apologise for it. But if you had one iota of shame, you'd go stand in
> the corner for the next 20 years.
>
> BTW, in your haste to act the fool, you failed to notice an actual
> mistake - that I wrote "inches per second" wire speed when I should
> have written inches per *minute*. Can't you do *anything* right?
>
> Wayne
Well lets see. All you had to do was account for the numbers you used.
5kW input wonderful. Yes I made a mistake, I used 100 minutes when in
fact you meant 8 hours. Sorry. So this would be 5kW for 8 hours which is
of course 40kWh which is 1666.66 Amp hours. Is this your wonderful two
days autonomy at work.
Now Wayne would you like to account for the energy you used in a
coherent manner? 5kW or 5kWh? Do you know the difference?
The biggest blunder - YOURS.
Who cares about inches per minute or seconds. What does the welder draw
in watts? How many amps, what material thickness, how much penetration?
Or are we still talking about your hot melt glue gun.
It is easy to tell when you are out of your depth. The deeper you are
the more you foam at the mouth.
Your numbers do not add up. You now have another chance to explain your
numbers. So wipe your nose and the foam off your chin, get out your
calculator, and make some sense of your numbers.
George
On Tue, 28 Jun 2005 09:36:36 +1000, George Ghio <[email protected]>
wrote:
>
>
>wmbjk wrote:
>> On 26 Jun 2005 19:48:32 -0700, "Too_Many_Tools"
>> Here's a sample day's work (yesterday's) in an off-grid workshop. The
>> project was building the last 2 of 5 scissor trusses for a friend's
>> aircraft hangar. All material was scrap - chords of 2" and 1.5"
>> schedule 40 pipe. Long braces from T posts, shorter ones from 5/8"
>> sucker rod. Most of the material was cut a few days ago. I wore out 3
>> chop saw blades (medium quality ones) which should give you an idea of
>> run time. The trusses are 40' wide, but built in halves. Each half
>> took about 30 minutes to lay out and prep, including about 15 minutes
>> use of a 4" side grinder. Then 26 welds per side, flip, another 26
>> welds. Layout, prep, and welding - about one hour total per half, with
>> a long break between each one to cool off. I built 4 halves, about 100
>> minutes welding for the day. I didn't check the current draw, but the
>> machine was set at 280 inches per second, 18 Volts, with .035" solid
>> wire. Perhaps 5kW input. Charging rate was medium, there was good sun,
>> but almost no wind, which was nice because I could leave the shop
>> doors open. When I quit for the day, my wife commented that battery
>> state of charge had dropped 6 Amp hours, and that she'd used the AC in
>> the office for a couple of hours. On this project, like most others
>> here, there wasn't any penalty for being off-grid, which is way cool
>> IMO.
>>
>> Wayne
>
>
>Ah Wayne, it looks like your saying 5kW for 1.6 hours and claiming that
>it equates to 6 amp hours.
>
>Would you like to refrase that amd perhaps look at the maths.
>
>You use of units may be suspect. And your numbers would suggest that you
>can only work when the sun is out.
>
>5Kw input for 1.6 hours at 24V looks suspiciously like 333Ah.
I started at about 8AM, and I finished up at about 4PM. During that
time, 2000 Watts of tracked PV was doing its job, along with a tiny
bit of help from 1300 Watts of wind generator in the AM. Duh!
Even after all your pathetic nonsense, I'm still astonished that with
your claimed 20 years of experience, that you need such simple
concepts explained to you. Haven't you learned *anything*? How the
hell can you function? As usual, whatever you do, don't admit that you
just wrote perhaps *the* biggest blunder of your Usenet career, or
apologise for it. But if you had one iota of shame, you'd go stand in
the corner for the next 20 years.
BTW, in your haste to act the fool, you failed to notice an actual
mistake - that I wrote "inches per second" wire speed when I should
have written inches per *minute*. Can't you do *anything* right?
Wayne
Glenn Ashmore wrote:
> Actually the US worked with both the Nationalists and the Communists during
> WWII. The Chinese Communists were very helpful during WWII. The
> Nationalist government, army and police were largely corrupt while the
> Communist were much better disciplined and effective at fighting the
> Japanese. That is also why it was so easy for them to chase the
> Nationalists off the mainland. We supplied them with quite a bit of arms
> and equipment. The communists returned any escaped POWs to US units while
> the nationalist were just as likely to give them back to the Japanese if the
> money was right.
>
> It was only after the war when the Communists started gaining ground and Mao
> aligned himself closer to Stalin that we started getting nervous.
>
Glenn- I was looking at your site a while back.. Very Cool. How's it coming?
"wmbjk" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
> On Fri, 17 Jun 2005 15:14:41 -0500, "Arnold Walker"
> <[email protected]> wrote:
>
> >"wmbjk" <[email protected]> wrote in message
> >news:[email protected]...
>
> >> How big a tank? I think you're going to find a fly in the ointment
> >> once you run some numbers on air consumption. And if air power could
> >> be so efficient and practical, why do you believe it is that
> >> off-gridders, often known to be innovative and unafraid of breaking
> >> with convention, haven't flocked to the concept?
>
> >Another fly in the oiment on your battery remark.....if batteries are so
> >much effecient
> >at storaging .Why are repair shop using air tools instead battery powered
> >tools.
>
> For the same reason that I use many air tools in my own shop - because
> they're often lighter, cheaper, and more compact than electric
> versions. Sometimes efficiency isn't very important.
>
> Now, if compressed air is so much more efficient than batteries, then
> why do *you* think that we're seeing ICE/battery hybrid cars driving
> around, but not ICE/air hybrids?
>
> Wayne
Because it is pure PC instead of science for starts.
There are and have been air powered cars...they are lighter for a hybrid
version
than a battery hybrid.Since all you do is add a burner in most cases.
Brayton cycle in a turbine ....Or rankine or sterling in a piston .
>
>
----== Posted via Newsfeeds.Com - Unlimited-Uncensored-Secure Usenet News==----
http://www.newsfeeds.com The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World! 120,000+ Newsgroups
----= East and West-Coast Server Farms - Total Privacy via Encryption =----
Cliff wrote:
> On Mon, 20 Jun 2005 15:14:16 -0500, Scott Willing
> <[email protected]> wrote:
>
>
>>The argument is that posts get separated from their threads for a
>>multitude of reasons
>
>
> Only quote the specific bits that you are responding directly to.
> You need the context but not the rest.
I seem to remember you snipping my posts in order to alter the context..
John
Robert Bonomi wrote:
> In article <[email protected]>,
> Ulysses <[email protected]> wrote:
>
>>"Me" <[email protected]> wrote in message
>>news:[email protected]...
>>
>>>In article <[email protected]>,
>>> "Ulysses" <[email protected]> wrote:
>>>
>>>
>>>>"wmbjk" <[email protected]> wrote in message
>>>>news:[email protected]...
>>>>
>>>>>On Thu, 16 Jun 2005 15:43:10 GMT, "Pete C." <[email protected]>
>>>>>wrote:
>>>>>
>>>
>>>>>Not necessarily. Home welding tends to be short duration. The hardware
>>>>>to supply that kind of power is actually affordable, and if one is
>>>>>designing the power system from scratch for what most would consider a
>>>>>normal home, then the extra inverter capacity isn't a big deal. In our
>>>>>case, for the house loads alone we could have gotten away with a
>>>>>single SW4024 plus a transformer for the 220V loads.
>>>>
>>>>How is this done, getting 220V from 110? How do you get the two "hot"
>>>>wires? Are there 2 secondary windings on the transformer? Wouldn't
>>
>>they
>>
>>>>need to be out of phase with each other?
>>>>
>>>>
>>>
>>>Now here is a fellow that asks an inteligent question. If you take
>>>a dual winding secondary with 120 Vac on each winding, feeding it
>>>with a 120 Vac Primary, and connect the dual 120Vac windings in series
>>>you get 240Vac. The phase is determined on how you connect the two
>>>series windings. and they will either be inphase or 180 out of phase,
>>>depending on the connection.
>>>
>>>Me
>>
>>Something else I've wondered about is why is it sometimes called 220, other
>>times 230, and also 240VAC? Do the different voltages imply single or
>>double phase or is it just a matter of different voltages in different
>>geographic locations? My little Honda generator is rated at 125 VAC which
>>seems to be unusual and that would give us 250 VAC if it was ran through the
>>step-up transformer.
>
>
> It's a matter of history. The "standard" -- for what was expected at the
> outlet in a residence -- changed over the years as power distribution got
> better.
>
> Circa WW II line voltage was 110VAC. by the mid 50's, this had climbed to
> 115VAC. by the early 60's, 117VAC. By the late 60', 120V. The 'two hots'
> circuit was frequently called "220", even when the actual voltage was as high
> as 235 (2x117). "240" does seem to have mostly displaced the old name.
>
> Anyway, if somebody mentions a number in the 110-120 "or so" range, they're
> talking about the same thing. Ditto for anything in the 220-240 range.
> "208" is a "special" value. as is "277". Both having to do with specific
> arrangements of 'three-phase' circuits.
>
>
> Your Honda is probably at claimed 125V because of *lousy* voltage regulation.
> 125V at 'no load', dropping to 120V (or lower) as the load increases.
>
>
>
I've seen 125V used in high density housing - simply to lower the current in
the same wires.
Our house in the mountains of No. Ca. was a few miles from a swinging transformer.
Under low load, the transformer was at one voltage, as the current increased,
the transformer switched in another set of windings up until it hit an end.
The swinging transformer had massive make-before-break contacts that always rang
(voltage hits) as it moved. I called the power company when it started hitting
my lines heavy (I was logging them on my APC's) and they found a burnt contact.
So at one time or another, depending on load and speed of the swinger - it could
be many voltages.
Martin
--
Martin Eastburn
@ home at Lion's Lair with our computer lionslair at consolidated dot net
NRA LOH, NRA Life
NRA Second Amendment Task Force Charter Founder
----== Posted via Newsfeeds.Com - Unlimited-Uncensored-Secure Usenet News==----
http://www.newsfeeds.com The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World! 120,000+ Newsgroups
----= East and West-Coast Server Farms - Total Privacy via Encryption =----
F. George McDuffee <[email protected]> writes:
>Several people have indicated the Current Accounts Ballance of
>Payments [trade] deficit was meaningless.
>
>Among other problems, accumulation of U.S. dollars allows the
>purchase of U.S. companies, and the transfer of U.S. jobs. See
>Reuters article below for details of how the jobs at Maytag were
>traded for cheap imports. Another example is the sale by IBM of
>their line of personal computers.
And the doomsayers were saying this about Japan when a Japanese
businessman bought pebble beach in the 80's. He
subsequently sold it back to an American consoritium for a
significant loss.
scott
(Note that quoting an entire article from reuters is not considered
fair use. An excerpt, yes, but for the entire article you should have
just included a URL.)
On Mon, 20 Jun 2005 21:42:58 GMT, Gunner <[email protected]>
wrote:
>On Mon, 20 Jun 2005 18:20:28 GMT, "Vaughn Simon"
><[email protected]> wrote:
>
>>
>> Please people! Trim your posts. If you do so, you will not only save
>>bandwidth
>
>
>Bandwidth is a non issue. Not since the binary groups started putting
>3 hour movies on the net...
PEOPLE have bandwidth too.
WHY make us search an old post for new material
when there is none?
Poor clueless gunner ...
--
Cliff
On Wed, 15 Jun 2005 17:29:43 GMT, Richard the Dreaded Libertarian
<[email protected]> wrote:
>Rich
"Libertarian"?
LOL .....
http://www.rackjite.com/9looney.htm
I doubt that this one can wear shoes ..... knots,
you know ......
--
Cliff
Scott Willing wrote:
> On Wed, 15 Jun 2005 18:30:40 GMT, [email protected] (Dave Mundt) wrote:
>
>
>> Greetings and Salutations....
>>
>>On Wed, 15 Jun 2005 17:29:43 GMT, Richard the Dreaded Libertarian
>><[email protected]> wrote:
>>
>>
>>>On Wed, 15 Jun 2005 07:36:34 -0700, F.George wrote:
>>>
>>>><snip>
>>>>Given the current economic/social/political environment your
>>>>concerns are well founded, however I think the primary or basic
>>>>problem will not be limited or unavailable [electrical] power,
>>>>but rather the more pervasive and dangerous problem of a lack of
>>>>spare parts, raw materials and most critical HSS and carbide
>>>>tools and blanks.
>>>>
>>>>Whether by design or stupidity, the American
>>>>manufacturing/industrial infrastructure is rapidly being
>>>>destroyed, primarily by management "outsourcing" and plant
>>>>transfer.
>>>
>>>Thank you, Chicken Little.
>>
>> Hum...so you DON'T think it is a problem that America
>>is losing the knowledge, skills and tools to manufacture
>>even the basic tools we need to keep society going and the
>>infrastructure kept up?
>
>
> Consider the (tongue in cheek of course) upside: We're also exporting
> all the toxic aspects of manufacture and mind-numbing, RSI-prone jobs
> overseas, where the Chinese and others can gleefully destroy their
> corner of the environment and burn through workers without the pesky
> EPA or labour standards in the way. Although - if you remember ye
> olde "Asian brown cloud" - you might rightly regard this as farting
> down a tube, only to have the smell return eventually. It's a small
> planet.
>
> Last night on the news there was footage of armed government troops
> (police, whatever) forceably "relocating" Chinese farmers. Probably to
> make way for another widget factory to feed the Wal-Mart cash export
> conveyor.
>
> Ever tried to get through so much as a month -- a week -- without
> buying something made in China? Difficult and disturbing.
>
> I try to buy locally produced and supplied goods as much as possible.
> Being a Canuck, I look for Canadian-made goods first, then US-made
> goods. These days I consider myself lucky to find something made in
> the US much less in Canada. However I recently became aware that
> countries like the US (dunno about Canada) can set up special regions
> in overseas countries that are classified as sovereign extensions of
> the homeland.
Mexico -- Maquialldora.
> (Sorry the proper term escapes me.) In this way they can
> run sweatshops in wire-fenced compounds and legally print "Made in
> USA" on the goods produced there.
Don't think so.
>
> If that ain't double-speak, Mr. Orwell, I dunno what is.
>
> -=s
>
>
>
>>>>With the trade deficit [current account trade balance]
>>>>approaching 2 billion dollars *PER DAY* it does not require a
>>>>degree in rocket science or a tarot deck to see that the time is
>>>>near when imports by the U.S. economy will be on a C.O.D. or even
>>>>a "pre-pay" basis [in gold, not dollars].
>>>
>>>Odd, that's not what my crystal ball tells me. ;-)
>>>
>>>And that "trade deficit" is the stupidest boogeyman ever perpetrated -
>>>well, at least up in the top five stupid boogeymen - since the
>>>nervous nellies found out that it's a scary buzzword.
>>>
>>>Do you even have any idea what a "trade deficit" _is_? It means
>>>we have two billion dollars more per day to spend on their crap
>>>than they have to spend on our crap. That means WE ARE TWO BILLION
>>>DOLLARS RICHER THAN THEY ARE!!!!! PER DAY!!!!!!!!!!
>>>
>>>You have a significant "trade deficit" with the grocery store.
>>>How much do you spend there? Maybe $100.00/week? That's a ONE
>>>HUNDRED DOLLARS PER WEEK TRADE DEFICIT with the grocery store.
>>>They don't buy anything from you, do they?
>>>
>>>And imagine your employer's trade deficit with _you_! He buys
>>>your labor for, what, $50K, $100K/year? How much stuff do you
>>>buy from him? Your EMPLOYER HAS A SERIOUS TRADE DEFICIT WITH
>>>YOU!!!!!
>>>
>>>"Trade Deficit". Pfaugh!
>>>
>>>Thanks!
>>>Rich
>>>UT o
>>
>> While your point may have some validity here, the
>>major difference is that the money in your examples is
>>circulating INSIDE the USA. The dollars spent in a
>>foreign market are dollars that are taken out of the
>>economy "forever".
>> As an analogy, if dollars are the life-blood
>>of the economy, foreign trade is like cutting an
>>artery.
>> Now...The fact of the matter is that SOME of
>>those dollars DO come back in, but, since it is a
>>DEFICIT, far more are going out than are coming in.
>>Those dollars have to be replaced in the economy
>>somehow. One "bad" way is to simply print more
>>money. While this gets more bucks in circulation,
>>it also cuts down on the value of each dollar.
>> We have to remember that the world economy
>>is more like a war than a cheerful family gathering.
>>All the countries in the world are jockeying to
>>gain advantage over the other countries, and, one
>>way to do that is to drain the cash of one country.
>> America, although economically large, is
>>not infinite, and, if we believed we were, we would
>>be fools. The fact that the dollar has dropped
>>in relative value on the world market is proof that
>>the deficits are having their desired effects. Also,
>>remember that the growing European Union can (and
>>perhaps already has) become a larger economic power
>>than America.
>> Finally, there is the basic problem that
>>the world, in general, is not a friendly place.
>>Countries that were our friends are now our
>>enemies; countries that were our enemies are
>>now our friends; The only lesson we can
>>learn from this is that this is likely to
>>happen again, so, to end up totally dependent
>>on another country for our major manufacturing
>>is a stupid thing to do.
>>
>> Regards
>> Dave Mundt
>
>
--
Will
Occasional Techno-geek
Upscale wrote:
> I equate that to pre-authorized chequing which I monitor very closely. For
> the most part, it works out ok, but for the times when your account is
> debited for something without your permission. And then comes the time when
> you've terminated all purchases from a company, but they continue to debit
> your account.
Had one of those, once. They billed and refused to credit 14 days after
I closed it down, and told me it "might" happen again. I closed the
account an hour later and threatened to sue them for the payment. I
didn't get the money back, but they sure as hell didn't get anything
else from me, nor will they ever.
Cliff expostulated:
| On Thu, 23 Jun 2005 17:39:39 -0500, "Morris Dovey"
| <[email protected]> wrote:
|
|| Maytag
|
| My impression of themis one of overpriced stuff that's
| no better than anyone else's.
Their top end (like their competitors' top end) products /are/ highly
priced. In at least Maytag's case the top end products are, in fact,
as good as they can make 'em. The R&D guys actually talk to the
production assemblers, pay attention to what they say, and make
product changes on the basis of their suggestions. More usually
(elsewhere) an assembly person has to tell a foreman who might or
might not tell a supervisor - and so on up the ladder until there's an
information "bridge" back down the chain to the R&D guys.
The Maytag link to the customer call center is disconcertingly direct.
When I first arrived I had a "recycled" R&D phone number and got calls
from CS call center operators demanding that problems be fixed *RIGHT
NOW!* That I wasn't the person they thought they were calling didn't
seem to make any difference - nor did the fact that I wasn't even a
Maytag employee. One gal told me that didn't matter and that I'd
better get up off my butt and *FIND OUT* who should be fixing this
problem and make 'em aware of it and have them get back to her
posthaste.
Maytag could never get away with showing a commercial of that scene
(can't admit right out loud in front of God and everybody that
someone's had a problem with /our/ product!); but after I came out of
shock I decided it was actually pretty impressive. Again, it's
noteworthy that in all of these "hot" calls the communication was
between "indians".
Convinced me that Maytag's problems are top-down rather than
bottom-up.
I'm not in a position to comment on "overpriced" - but I think that
when someone buys a washing machine (or whatever), not all of what's
being purchased arrives on the delivery truck.
Hmm. Reminds me of some current threads about CNC equipment and
perceived value (or lack thereof) of customer support organizations.
| Perhaps unerelated ... Sears seems to like to
| sell models that they (Sears) are the sole supplier
| of spare parts for .... so take a standard model,
| rebadge it & alter a few key failure prone or
| consumable items ...
That would match up pretty well with some of the (very biased)
comments I heard voiced around Newton. :-)
--
Morris Dovey
DeSoto Solar
DeSoto, Iowa USA
http://www.iedu.com/DeSoto/solar.html
Fantastic analysis and insight. Depressing though.
While working on my doctorate I took several HRD/HRM classes
which were mainly case studies. I was astounded by the number of
firms with management that had to hire consultants to find out
what it was they were producing, how they were producing it, what
workers they had, who they were producing it for, and most
critical, how it worked.
In several of the cases that were about 10-15 years apart, the
general descriptions of the firms were very similar. Some
checking indicates that these indeed were the same companies with
the same questions. FWIW, these companies are again in the news,
teetering on bankruptcy.
You may be right on a "corporate accident investigation board."
While the NTSB does an exemplary job of in-depth analysis or
major accidents, their efforts are too often short-circuited by
the standard "pilot error" explication [if the pilots died] by
the FAA, and then ignored. I am sure the same thing would occur
with the SEC. We won't bother to mention the FDA.
Good luck on your consulting.
===================================
On Thu, 23 Jun 2005 17:39:39 -0500, "Morris Dovey"
<[email protected]> wrote:
>F. George McDuffee expostulated:
>
>| It would be interesting to know how much in deductions the
>| corporation took on their tax returns over the last 5 or 10 years
>| for market research and product R&D. Article in Wed. June 22 WSJ
>| discusses shift in consumer priorities for major appliances from
>| stolid dependability to flash and glitz, which may help explain
>| why the "dependability people" are now in deep do-do.
>
>It's probably worthwhile to take note of the fact that I'm not a
>"Maytag Expert" and that I can't provide very much more than firsthand
>observations (that may or may not be safe to use as the basis for
>generalizations) and inexpert opinion - garnered while working as a
>software consultant with their R&D group. Since all of the products
>under development of which I had knowledge have been announced and/or
>shipped, I'm free to speak openly.
>
>On the R&D side, Maytag has extraordinarily competent engineers and
>researchers who're as enthusiastic and eager as any I've ever seen
>elsewhere. There aren't many of them - and they seemed much
>under-appreciated by their management. My thought was (and remains)
>that any of Maytag's competitors could ruin the firm simply by
>offering this one engineering group an industry competive wage and
>management guaranteed to provide genuine appreciation of past and
>future accomplishments. With careful research, a competitor could
>simultaneously put Maytag's future in grave jeopardy and greatly
>enhance their own prospects for as little as $500K/year. In my mind,
>for a Fortune 300 company this is tantamount to gross negligence on
>the part of management.
>
>| On the other hand, flash and glitz are only skin deep, and how
>| much can it cost and how long can it take to have a design studio
>| "re-skin" a washer or drier, and how much can it cost to shoot
>| metal flake paint in place of white? As an aside, the American
>| people deserve what they get on this one..
>
>Flash and glitz /are/ cheap and easy. Solid dependability and quality
>of function are more difficult and generally expensive to achieve - no
>surprises here. My task as a consultant was to provide a technical
>solution that was expected to drasticly reduce that expense. I
>provided the requested solution (which incorporated solutions to the
>usual variety of unanticipated side issues) and to the best of my
>knowlege, that package was shelved because it required a degree of
>interdepartmental cooperation/communication that too many of the
>first-line development managers weren't prepared to exercise.
>(Bummer!)
>
>A related issue had to do with more than healthy managerial resistance
>to technology more advanced than a motor-driven cycle controller -
>even after their horizontal-axis (front loading) Neptune washer had
>provided proof positive that micros are here to stay! I was by
>definition a "short timer" and that attitude was grindingly
>frustrating to me. I don't want to think about how frustrating it has
>to be for the R&D folks who're intending to stay with Maytag for the
>long haul...
>
>| In response to another reply, the questions about the likely
>| outcomes for senior management were rhetorical, although your
>| detailed answers were insightful. This helps explain the
>| "shortage" of engineers and the rapidly declining number of
>| engineering students. Even the "nerdest" engineer can look
>| up/around and see that while they (and the rest of the "product"
>| people) are taking it in the shorts big time, management and
>| finance are riding off with full boodle bags. While both groups
>| will have some time off, for the product people it will be a mad
>| scramble for another job so they can keep the house and the car,
>| while the management and finance people are resting in Cancun.
>|
>| Do you happen to know if the Maytag pension plans are fully
>| funded, or is this another "debt bomb" that will be lobbed into
>| the PBGC? How about medical care for current retirees? Off
>| Maytag and onto the taxpayers through Medicare?
>
>I don't know. Actually, I didn't pay much attention to anything
>unrelated to R&D and/or some specific product development. I sat
>through (too many) meetings and took notice of what was being said
>about the technology and politics involved with getting the
>vertical-axis (top loading) Neptune product working and out the door -
>and the implementation of a methodology to streamline development of
>all future cycle-based "whiteware".
>
>| We need something more than biased B-school case studies. What do
>| you think of an economic/financial equivalent to the NTSB that
>| would investigate major corporate "crash and burn" cases? These
>| could well be a job for Dr. Kavorikan and not a "crash-cart" and
>| life-support situation.
>|
>| In the aggregate the major loss/damage caused by not only Maytag,
>| but also Enron, Tyco, Ford, EMC, Delta, American, etc., etc., is
>| a total loss of confidence in the competence and motives of
>| management by not only their employees, but the majority of
>| stockholders and the American people.
>
>I'd encourage you to make an at least internal distinction between
>failures resulting from fundamental dishonesty with intent to
>defraud - and failures resulting from stupidity, lack of due
>diligence, etc. on the part of fundamentally well-intentioned people.
>If I were to choose a single cause for Maytag's failure to thrive
>(which would be a huge over-simplification), that cause would be the
>selection of a succession of CEO's who lacked the wisdom to define
>success and to lead their people in that direction.
>
>Your summary is basically true; but would you really expect that a
>government agency /could/ do more than throw good money after bad in
>these cases? If so, you're far more optimistic than I'd dare to be.
>
>One final comment. One of my first questions after starting work at
>Maytag (and I did ask every single person I worked with) was: "What
>does it take to make dirty clothes clean?". What I was after were
>things like how much water per pound of clothes during wash and rinse,
>how much agitation, how much cleaning agent, etc. with some kind of
>mathematical relationships and some numbers. No one knew! I was (and
>still am) dumbfounded that no one at Maytag had ever made a serious
>effort to define in engineering terms what it takes to make clothes
>clean. Think about the implications of that tidbit as you ponder
>business failure causes...
>
>
>It would be interesting to know how much in deductions the
>corporation took on their tax returns over the last 5 or 10 years
>for market research and product R&D. Article in Wed. June 22 WSJ
>discusses shift in consumer priorities for major appliances from
>stolid dependability to flash and glitz, which may help explain
>why the "dependability people" are now in deep do-do.
I know even a vacuum 5 gal cleaner looks like a toy-yo-yo all fancy &
you can't even dump it like the old ones all curves so much you have
to turn it upside down to dump it. & "Linda Lovelace" would be ashamed
of the way they suck....
On Thu, 23 Jun 2005 07:31:43 -0400, JohnM <[email protected]> wrote:
>Consider XP and the 'service packs', strange way to do
>things..
I suspect that one day they will do automatic online
updates ... and error reports via Email back to MS.
--
Cliff
"Cliff" <[email protected]> wrote in message
>
> I suspect that one day they will do automatic online
> updates ... and error reports via Email back to MS.
You can already configure it to update automatically. Most people don't like
that including myself. It's tantamount to turning almost complete control of
your computer over to someone else. (or some company).
I equate that to pre-authorized chequing which I monitor very closely. For
the most part, it works out ok, but for the times when your account is
debited for something without your permission. And then comes the time when
you've terminated all purchases from a company, but they continue to debit
your account.
On Thu, 23 Jun 2005 17:39:39 -0500, "Morris Dovey" <[email protected]>
wrote:
>Maytag
My impression of themis one of overpriced stuff that's
no better than anyone else's.
Perhaps unerelated ... Sears seems to like to
sell models that they (Sears) are the sole supplier
of spare parts for .... so take a standard model,
rebadge it & alter a few key failure prone or
consumable items ...
--
Cliff
Wayne whipped the cold steel out with:
snip T
>
>>Some people, unlike you, have a real life though.
>
>1. If you think that generators on their own make good sense for
>permanent off-grid workshops, then that's another subject that your
>sock puppet army doesn't know squat about.
>
....learning fast though Wayne. His latest trick is to post
"Henny Pennys" in the binary Groups. It involves
constructing a believable post (frontend/desktop view only)
and then inserting "There is a Virus in this post"..or
whatever comment.
Lame As...but for "homey folk" puts up a LOT of disruption.
I am not bringing "outside washing" to the table, I mention
this as he has just posted a binary Jpeg to this Group.
My server is listing it so other servers may well do so
also. Totally actionable buuuuut <Golden .net> is a known
host for Spammers and general miscreants <shrug>
>
>NNTP-Posting-Date: Wed, 15 Jun 2005 17:13:38 -0500
>From: "John P Bengi" <JBengi (spamm)@(spamm) yahoo,com>
>Newsgroups: alt.energy.homepower,rec.crafts.metalworking,rec.woodworking
>Subject: Re: Workshop In An Alternate Homepower Environment
>Message-ID: <[email protected]>
>
How is that a problem?
The cross-posting (another violation) is to text Groups.
In a text group one should reasonably expect to be able to
"set and forget - retrieve all" on subscribing to the Group
each day/week..yeh?
uh uh.. <shaking head> not when Binary can be posted here
AND retained on the list/server.
Gymmy Butt only has to up a small script as a binary and
Whammo!, readers on auto retrieve are in a whole world of
hurt!
GB wouldnt post malware you say??
Don't have me pissing myself laughing,, as soon as he works
out How To (without contaminating his own machine/system)
you can bet your last buck he will be "at it" amongst ALL
the Groups who are kicking his arse....~around 37 at last
count..that's the ones I know about, no doubt there is many
more..he is 24/7 on-line, this Jerk.
Between posting Shite all over UseNET, hacking his Sat TV
setup, running the WinnieBago to get his power (after
syphoning the fuel from the Road Repair Plant at night) and
taking ginseng capsules he hardly has time left to fart!
>2. Any guy who'd post under the name "pizza girl" shouldn't be allowed
>around electricity or power tools, unless it's for electroshock
>therapy, or for having a frontal lobotomy hole drilled.
>
...try Larry Lixxx for a variation<G>..this Dude is weird
as,, believe..and hey, I am an Ausssie and believe me, we
KNOW weird!!!<ROTFL>
>3. Two of your identities, including the one you're using now, already
>claimed to have killfiled me, so any response from you to my posts is
>just more BS.
>
..par for the course Wayne.. GB has no idea on Filters and
no care to find out..tis a word game buuut you already
worked that out :-)
Keep stickin it into the ArseHole Wayne..he does not like
that Cold Steel up his ribs - goes all quiet and
squeamish....for a while :->>>>>
cYA
--
Spark-em & RARK em with LecTroNuis
<snip>
>And that "trade deficit" is the stupidest boogeyman ever perpetrated -
>well, at least up in the top five stupid boogeymen - since the
>nervous nellies found out that it's a scary buzzword.
>
>Do you even have any idea what a "trade deficit" _is_? It means
>we have two billion dollars more per day to spend on their crap
>than they have to spend on our crap. That means WE ARE TWO BILLION
>DOLLARS RICHER THAN THEY ARE!!!!! PER DAY!!!!!!!!!!
<snip>
==================
Please forward this wonderful news to the International Monetary
Fund [IMF], the government of Argentina and the Argentinian
bondholders. It will cheer them no end.
On Mon, 20 Jun 2005 15:14:16 -0500, Scott Willing
<[email protected]> wrote:
>BTW, the same purists (aka usenet nazis) will slap your willy for
>top-posting too, and they really get their knickers in a knot about
>it. We can only assume their mommies overdid the spanking a bit... and
>that they really, *really* liked it.
It's nice to know the CONTEXT or the question before
the response, for one thing.
John P Bengi wrote:
> Try a normal browser like OE and get rid of that piece of junk Agent.
>
> "Cliff" <[email protected] <mailto:[email protected]>> wrote in message
> news:[email protected]...
> > It's nice to know the CONTEXT or the question before
> > the response, for one thing.
> >
> > More may be below .... go reread it all <G>.
> >
>
OE is Junk.
On Wed, 15 Jun 2005 18:30:40 GMT, [email protected] (Dave Mundt) wrote:
>
> Hum...so you DON'T think it is a problem that America
>is losing the knowledge, skills and tools to manufacture
>even the basic tools we need to keep society going and the
>infrastructure kept up?
Our excuse for killing off manufacturing in the UK was Thatcher.
What's America's excuse ?
On Thu, 16 Jun 2005 10:56:39 -0700, F. George McDuffee
<[email protected]> wrote:
><snip>
>>How about making the share holders liable for the debt. They are after all
>>"owners" of the companies :-)
><snip>
>This simply echos a legal fiction. In fact 'shareholders' have
>almost no control, otherwise the corporations would have been
>forced to declare dividends rather than hording cash, and the
>executives would have received human salaries. While there is
>more than ample "blame" to go around, the major enablers were the
>financial institutions that handled the IPOs, made the loans,
>audited the books, created the "special purpose entities,"
>managed the pension funds, etc. As such, these should be the
>people that get the big "hair cut" [like down to their knees]
>rather than the employees or taxpayers [who tend to be the
>shareholders when the music stops].
The neocons have a planned fix for this.
Default on Social Security (worthless junk bonds, like
T bills) and force the new money into stocks & T bills ...
where, if needed (and it will), it is all handy to be taxed again ....
Australia used to tax unrealized capital gains. Stock went up?
Pay taxes on it ... they still may for all I know .....
--
Cliff
I have received many emails on this.
I will repeat that it is a legal fiction that the stockholders
control a corporation. If this were not the case, corporations
would not be allowed to hoard cash (rather than paying
dividends), squander profits on extraneous and unrelated business
ventures of doubtful potential, and pay exorbitant executive
compensation and perquisites. Additionally, some stockholders
are more equal than others. Different classes of stock have been
introduced so that control is no longer proportional to
ownership.
The real controllers of corporations are their financers as they
can fund or not fund the operations, issue or not issue their
IPOs, etc. Note that in making " secured " loans, operational
[policy] control is achieved without any concurrent/concomitant
risk. As most of the problems of the basket case corporations
have been created, maintained and exacerbated by the availability
of " easy money, " it is only reasonable the people that supplied
the " easy money " [and earned enormous profits] should be forced
to stand the resulting losses.
When a corporation goes bankrupt and is either reorganized
[chapter 11] or liquidated [chapter 7] the stockholders generally
lose their entire investment. In too many cases the employees
are also the stockholders where the company has crammed their
defined contribution plan [401k] with the company stock. When a
corporation is reorganized, new stock is issued and may be used
to " pay off " the unsecured creditors. Stock in the old
corporation is worthless. Another typical scam is to create an
ESOP or employee stock ownership program, where the employees may
own stock but have no voting rights. It is this " vapor paper "
that several corporations are proposing to use to pay their
obligations to the PBGC.
While it would have not affect on the terminal corporations we
have been discussing, it would be worthwhile to force the
remaining major US corporations to distribute 50% [or more] of
all claimed annual earnings as dividends. This would prevent the
pyramiding of phantom profits from year to year, flush out bogus
acquisition assets such as " good will " and capitalized R&D,
frustrate attempts to create cash hoards to be squandered on CEOs
" pipe dreams " [generally with kickbacks] and force any real
corporate profits into the mainstream economy. DRIPs [dividend
reinvestment programs] would allow any stockholder that still
believe they are better served by having their share of the
[claimed] earnings to be " retained " by the corporation for "
reinvestment " to do so.
============================
On Thu, 16 Jun 2005 10:56:39 -0700, F. George McDuffee
<[email protected]> wrote:
><snip>
>>How about making the share holders liable for the debt. They are after all
>>"owners" of the companies :-)
><snip>
>This simply echos a legal fiction. In fact 'shareholders' have
>almost no control, otherwise the corporations would have been
>forced to declare dividends rather than hording cash, and the
>executives would have received human salaries. While there is
>more than ample "blame" to go around, the major enablers were the
>financial institutions that handled the IPOs, made the loans,
>audited the books, created the "special purpose entities,"
>managed the pension funds, etc. As such, these should be the
>people that get the big "hair cut" [like down to their knees]
>rather than the employees or taxpayers [who tend to be the
>shareholders when the music stops].
>
Energy meters spin by the combination of current and voltage creating torque
on the non-ferrous disc as it tries to get out of the magnetic AC fluxes
created at 90 degrees to each other.
On resistive devices and most devices the current and power goes up as the
voltage increases. You bulb will be brighter etc..
On synchronous devices like AC motor compressors and furnace fans etc. the
speed is locked to the power line frequency. 60Hzx 2 changes x 60 sec/min /
#poles in the motor will pas the electromagnetic pole that creates the
torque and you typically get 1800 RPM. This is fairly constant, which means
the work that it puts out is constant also (constant workload) When you
lower the voltage to the motor now is has to draw more current to do the
same work and can eventually burn out by overheating from the high current.
BTW: If you have a disc or equivalent in your Electric Meter you can
determine the load of your house going through the meter at any given time
by clocking it with a stopwatch.
Look at you meter and observe the disc. You should notice a little black
mark passing on the edge of the disc every revolution. Time a couple of
these revolutions and mark the time (in seconds) down. I usually do about 60
seconds worth. There also may be fractional marks if your meter is moving
really slow and don't have an hour to wait (exag)
Also notice on the front of the nameplate of your meter there is a "disc
constant" noted as kH. This is the amount of energy (in watthours) that the
meter has measured each revolution of the disc. It will probably read
something like kH 7.2 or kH 12. This is the part that is tightly regulated
for accuracy.
Now apply it to this formula:
revs x kH x time(secs) / 3600. sec per hour
This will give you your home load in watts (power). This technique can be
useful to check the power of appliances to see where you hard earned energy
dollars are going each month by shutting off all the breakers except one and
looking for the energy pigs.
If you have a solid state kilowatthour meter on your house there will be a
blinking LED or simulated disc in LCD but the same thing will apply. Look
for a constant for the "equivalent disc revs" or LED kH.
Best of luck.
"Tim Thomson" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
>
> As a matter of fact would his metor not run less with some things like his
> fridge, vacuum, hair dryer, washing machine, dish washer, etc. What makes
a
> power metor spin? If voltage goes up does the amp draw go down?
> I would give my left nut to have a little more voltage. Switch mode power
> supplies love a slightly higher voltage and often run cooler when they are
run
> at max voltage.
>
John P Bengi Boob wrote:
> The common voltage in Canada was always 120/240v.
Bullshit. If you REALLY worked for a 'medium sized generation company' you would
have known that.
It was 110 then started climbing. It was most likely even below the 110 level
many years ago. As more and more load was added to existing networks, the
voltage HAD to climb in order to provide more power on the same distribution
lines. It's a money saving move by the generation/distribution companies.
When there is low network loading here, the line voltage will climb to 127
volts. During peak demand, it will go down to 110 to 115 volt range.
snipped rest of very suspicious posting..
On Fri, 17 Jun 2005 09:18:47 -0400, "Glenn Ashmore" <[email protected]>
wrote:
>Actually the US worked with both the Nationalists and the Communists during
>WWII. The Chinese Communists were very helpful during WWII. The
>Nationalist government, army and police were largely corrupt while the
>Communist were much better disciplined and effective at fighting the
>Japanese. That is also why it was so easy for them to chase the
>Nationalists off the mainland. We supplied them with quite a bit of arms
>and equipment. The communists returned any escaped POWs to US units while
>the nationalist were just as likely to give them back to the Japanese if the
>money was right.
>
>It was only after the war when the Communists started gaining ground and Mao
>aligned himself closer to Stalin that we started getting nervous.
Yep. Not that any of the wingers would know that. Or the
revisionists, working way at history in the US.
The Communists were the reformers. They'd had enough of
the corruption.
The US may have pushed them towards Stalin by supporting
the corrupt Nationalists.
Where's Hamei when you need him?
--
Cliff
On Tue, 14 Jun 2005 20:19:59 -0400, "John P Bengi" <JBengi
(spamm)@(spamm) yahoo,com> wrote:
>"wmbjk" <[email protected]> wrote in message
>news:[email protected]...
>> On 14 Jun 2005 12:55:15 -0700, "FriscoSoxFan" <[email protected]>
>> wrote:
>>
>> >1. Go to a big power tool store.
>> >2. Buy a generator.
>> >3. Buy a whole bunch of gas.
>> >4. Start said generator
>> >5. Plug in tools
>> >6. Build.
>>
>> Booo! Hissss! Generators as a sole source are often the worst choice
>> for home power. Their only advantage is low up-front cost. But in the
>> long run they'll cost more, and are no fun to live with compared to
>> solar/wind/inverter/battery. Home use tends to be relatively high
>> energy but low power, while shop use tends to be high power but low
>> energy. So adding shop power usually means increasing charging sources
>> and batteries a little, but making the inverters substantially larger.
>> And if one were to choose a generator well suited for shop use, it's
>> likely to be way too big for backup on a properly sized home power
>> setup.
>>
>> Wayne
>Some people, unlike you, have a real life though.
1. If you think that generators on their own make good sense for
permanent off-grid workshops, then that's another subject that your
sock puppet army doesn't know squat about.
2. Any guy who'd post under the name "pizza girl" shouldn't be allowed
around electricity or power tools, unless it's for electroshock
therapy, or for having a frontal lobotomy hole drilled.
3. Two of your identities, including the one you're using now, already
claimed to have killfiled me, so any response from you to my posts is
just more BS.
Wayne
On Fri, 17 Jun 2005 17:42:09 -0700, "Ulysses"
<[email protected]> wrote:
>"wmbjk" <[email protected]> wrote in message
>news:[email protected]...
>> In our
>> case, for the house loads alone we could have gotten away with a
>> single SW4024 plus a transformer for the 220V loads.
>How is this done, getting 220V from 110? How do you get the two "hot"
>wires? Are there 2 secondary windings on the transformer? Wouldn't they
>need to be out of phase with each other?
http://www.xantrex.com/web/id/114/p/1/pt/5/product.asp
Wayne
On Thu, 16 Jun 2005 20:19:43 -0500, Scott Willing
<[email protected]> wrote:
>This isn't even quite as extreme as the example I was thinking of.
>I'll see if I can dig up another cite, but I think it's probably in a
>magazine here so don't hold your breath.
USA is an island in Japan.
>BTW, a related article mentions Rep Tom Delay was working dilligently
>to ensure that US labour laws wouldn't be enforced there.
IIRC He also has part ownership ...
--
Cliff
On Fri, 24 Jun 2005 19:10:57 -0500, "Morris Dovey" <[email protected]>
wrote:
>Cliff expostulated:
>
>| On Thu, 23 Jun 2005 17:39:39 -0500, "Morris Dovey"
>| <[email protected]> wrote:
>|
>|| Maytag
>|
>| My impression of themis one of overpriced stuff that's
>| no better than anyone else's.
>
>Their top end (like their competitors' top end) products /are/ highly
>priced. In at least Maytag's case the top end products are, in fact,
>as good as they can make 'em. The R&D guys actually talk to the
>production assemblers, pay attention to what they say, and make
>product changes on the basis of their suggestions. More usually
>(elsewhere) an assembly person has to tell a foreman who might or
>might not tell a supervisor - and so on up the ladder until there's an
>information "bridge" back down the chain to the R&D guys.
None of that would give any hint of what actually failed in the
field and flooded out the end customer or anything similar.
For that you'd need to know what went wrong, not just
how to make it cheaper.
--
Cliff
Cliff (in [email protected]) said:
| On Fri, 24 Jun 2005 19:10:57 -0500, "Morris Dovey"
| <[email protected]> wrote:
|
|| Cliff expostulated:
||
||| On Thu, 23 Jun 2005 17:39:39 -0500, "Morris Dovey"
||| <[email protected]> wrote:
|||
|||| Maytag
|||
||| My impression of themis one of overpriced stuff that's
||| no better than anyone else's.
||
|| Their top end (like their competitors' top end) products /are/
|| highly priced. In at least Maytag's case the top end products are,
|| in fact, as good as they can make 'em. The R&D guys actually talk
|| to the production assemblers, pay attention to what they say, and
|| make product changes on the basis of their suggestions. More
|| usually (elsewhere) an assembly person has to tell a foreman who
|| might or might not tell a supervisor - and so on up the ladder
|| until there's an information "bridge" back down the chain to the
|| R&D guys.
|
| None of that would give any hint of what actually failed in the
| field and flooded out the end customer or anything similar.
| For that you'd need to know what went wrong, not just
| how to make it cheaper.
Of course. Did the paragraphs following the one you quoted make it to
your server? If not:
<< The Maytag link to the customer call center is disconcertingly
direct.
When I first arrived I had a "recycled" R&D phone number and got calls
from CS call center operators demanding that problems be fixed *RIGHT
NOW!* That I wasn't the person they thought they were calling didn't
seem to make any difference - nor did the fact that I wasn't even a
Maytag employee. One gal told me that didn't matter and that I'd
better get up off my butt and FIND OUT who should be fixing this
problem and make 'em aware of it and have them get back to her
posthaste.
Maytag could never get away with showing a commercial of that scene
(can't admit right out loud in front of God and everybody that
someone's had a problem with our product!); but after I came out of
shock I decided it was actually pretty impressive. Again, it's
noteworthy that in all of these "hot" calls the communication was
between "indians". >>
--
Morris Dovey
DeSoto Solar
DeSoto, Iowa USA
http://www.iedu.com/DeSoto/solar.html
On Mon, 20 Jun 2005 18:20:28 GMT, "Vaughn Simon"
<[email protected]> wrote:
>
> Please people! Trim your posts. If you do so, you will not only save
>bandwidth
Bandwidth is a non issue. Not since the binary groups started putting
3 hour movies on the net...
Gunner
"Considering the events of recent years,
the world has a long way to go to regain
its credibility and reputation with the US."
unknown
On Thu, 16 Jun 2005 00:06:43 -0400, "Ed Huntress"
<[email protected]> wrote:
>"Richard the Dreaded Libertarian" <[email protected]> wrote in
>message news:[email protected]...
>>
>> Do you even have any idea what a "trade deficit" _is_? It means
>> we have two billion dollars more per day to spend on their crap
>> than they have to spend on our crap. That means WE ARE TWO BILLION
>> DOLLARS RICHER THAN THEY ARE!!!!! PER DAY!!!!!!!!!!
>
>Uh, no. It means that we have two billion dollars worth of their crap, and
>they have our two billion dollars.
>
>This is not necessarily a bad deal in itself. But that's the way it is.
Found a live one, eh?
One day they will demand their VALUE back ...... as promised
by that paper ....
Then those taxes will ......
--
Cliff
"Too_Many_Tools" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
>I am posting this subject in three different groups to hopefully get a
> good cross section of ideas. I apologize ahead of time if this offends
> anyone.
>
> When one considers a workshop with metal and wood working capabilities,
> what tradeoffs have you made to have a working shop in an alternate
> homepower environment where every amp is precious?
clip
> I would be interested in hearing how others have approached this
> situation and what implementations they have adopted.
>
> Thanks for any suggestions or comments that you can offer.
I worked in a shop with no electric and no "alternative power" tools... We
had a forge with bellows, anvil, hardies, tongs, etc., out back for metal
shaping and welding and a large selection of files, screw plates, hacksaws,
etc. For woodworking there were axes, adzes, spoke shaves, draw knives,
frame saws, panel saws, rasps, spring pole lathe, etc. Light came through
the windows... It's doable... At the time there was a 10 year waiting list
for our output.
John
On Thu, 16 Jun 2005 02:42:11 +0100, Andy Dingley
<[email protected]> wrote:
>On Wed, 15 Jun 2005 18:30:40 GMT, [email protected] (Dave Mundt) wrote:
>
>>
>> Hum...so you DON'T think it is a problem that America
>>is losing the knowledge, skills and tools to manufacture
>>even the basic tools we need to keep society going and the
>>infrastructure kept up?
>
>Our excuse for killing off manufacturing in the UK was Thatcher.
>What's America's excuse ?
==============================
Our buzzwords are "maximizing sharholder value" with "free
market" for the rondo.
People go out and drink too much even though they know they will
have a hang over the next day. The major difference in this case
is that the people who are enjoying the party are not the ones
who will suffer the hangover (and have to pay the bar tab).
On Thu, 16 Jun 2005 20:19:43 -0500, Scott Willing
<[email protected]> wrote:
>On Thu, 16 Jun 2005 16:00:07 -0400, WillR
><[email protected]> wrote:
>
>>Scott Willing wrote:
>>> On Wed, 15 Jun 2005 18:30:40 GMT, [email protected] (Dave Mundt) wrote:
>>>
>>>
>>>> Greetings and Salutations....
>>>>
>>>>On Wed, 15 Jun 2005 17:29:43 GMT, Richard the Dreaded Libertarian
>>>><[email protected]> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>>On Wed, 15 Jun 2005 07:36:34 -0700, F.George wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>><snip>
>>>>>>Given the current economic/social/political environment your
>>>>>>concerns are well founded, however I think the primary or basic
>>>>>>problem will not be limited or unavailable [electrical] power,
>>>>>>but rather the more pervasive and dangerous problem of a lack of
>>>>>>spare parts, raw materials and most critical HSS and carbide
>>>>>>tools and blanks.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>Whether by design or stupidity, the American
>>>>>>manufacturing/industrial infrastructure is rapidly being
>>>>>>destroyed, primarily by management "outsourcing" and plant
>>>>>>transfer.
>>>>>
>>>>>Thank you, Chicken Little.
>>>>
>>>> Hum...so you DON'T think it is a problem that America
>>>>is losing the knowledge, skills and tools to manufacture
>>>>even the basic tools we need to keep society going and the
>>>>infrastructure kept up?
>>>
>>>
>>> Consider the (tongue in cheek of course) upside: We're also exporting
>>> all the toxic aspects of manufacture and mind-numbing, RSI-prone jobs
>>> overseas, where the Chinese and others can gleefully destroy their
>>> corner of the environment and burn through workers without the pesky
>>> EPA or labour standards in the way. Although - if you remember ye
>>> olde "Asian brown cloud" - you might rightly regard this as farting
>>> down a tube, only to have the smell return eventually. It's a small
>>> planet.
>>>
>>> Last night on the news there was footage of armed government troops
>>> (police, whatever) forceably "relocating" Chinese farmers. Probably to
>>> make way for another widget factory to feed the Wal-Mart cash export
>>> conveyor.
>>>
>>> Ever tried to get through so much as a month -- a week -- without
>>> buying something made in China? Difficult and disturbing.
>>>
>>> I try to buy locally produced and supplied goods as much as possible.
>>> Being a Canuck, I look for Canadian-made goods first, then US-made
>>> goods. These days I consider myself lucky to find something made in
>>> the US much less in Canada. However I recently became aware that
>>> countries like the US (dunno about Canada) can set up special regions
>>> in overseas countries that are classified as sovereign extensions of
>>> the homeland.
>>
>>Mexico -- Maquialldora.
>>
>>> (Sorry the proper term escapes me.) In this way they can
>>> run sweatshops in wire-fenced compounds and legally print "Made in
>>> USA" on the goods produced there.
>>
>>Don't think so.
>
>From: http://www.thehoya.com/news/031700/news6.htm
>
>>>
>Students and faculty gathered Wednesday evening to hear Chie Abad, a
>former Saipan sweatshop worker, speak about the conditions of offshore
>garment factories as well as discuss the political ramifications of
>sweatshop labor.
>
>Abad, a Filipino accountant, found work in a factory on the small
>island of Saipan in the Mariana Islands, located in the South Pacific.
>Abad worked for a Korean contract company, producing clothing for Gap,
>Inc. and collegiate apparel. Since Saipan is a protectorate of the
>United States similar to Puerto Rico, manufacturers who purchase
>manufactured goods in Saipan may use a label claiming "Made in USA."
>However, U.S. labor laws are not enforced on the island, according to
>Abad.
><<
>
>This isn't even quite as extreme as the example I was thinking of.
>I'll see if I can dig up another cite, but I think it's probably in a
>magazine here so don't hold your breath.
Probably nobody cares but me, but for the sake of the archives I have
to back down somewhat.
Turns out an honest mistake (misreading) by my partner resulted in an
exaggeration that I failed to vet before repeating it when I said:
>>> (Sorry the proper term escapes me.) In this way they can
>>> run sweatshops in wire-fenced compounds and legally print "Made in
>>> USA" on the goods produced there.
We did track down the reference in question, and it was also about the
Marianas. Although this isn't what most people would think of as the
"USA" as in "Made in USA," it is not exactly the sort of "special
region" that I had claimed to exist within other countries. The
Marianas are technically a protectorate - not that this makes it OK,
IMHO - but there is a difference.
There *are* special trading zones set up within foreign sovereign
countries whose status may facilitate sweatshops (reference: No Logo),
but does not confer the right to claim that their products are made in
the US.
-=s
>BTW, a related article mentions Rep Tom Delay was working dilligently
>to ensure that US labour laws wouldn't be enforced there.
>
>-=s
>
>>
>>
>>>
>>> If that ain't double-speak, Mr. Orwell, I dunno what is.
>>>
>>> -=s
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>>>>With the trade deficit [current account trade balance]
>>>>>>approaching 2 billion dollars *PER DAY* it does not require a
>>>>>>degree in rocket science or a tarot deck to see that the time is
>>>>>>near when imports by the U.S. economy will be on a C.O.D. or even
>>>>>>a "pre-pay" basis [in gold, not dollars].
>>>>>
>>>>>Odd, that's not what my crystal ball tells me. ;-)
>>>>>
>>>>>And that "trade deficit" is the stupidest boogeyman ever perpetrated -
>>>>>well, at least up in the top five stupid boogeymen - since the
>>>>>nervous nellies found out that it's a scary buzzword.
>>>>>
>>>>>Do you even have any idea what a "trade deficit" _is_? It means
>>>>>we have two billion dollars more per day to spend on their crap
>>>>>than they have to spend on our crap. That means WE ARE TWO BILLION
>>>>>DOLLARS RICHER THAN THEY ARE!!!!! PER DAY!!!!!!!!!!
>>>>>
>>>>>You have a significant "trade deficit" with the grocery store.
>>>>>How much do you spend there? Maybe $100.00/week? That's a ONE
>>>>>HUNDRED DOLLARS PER WEEK TRADE DEFICIT with the grocery store.
>>>>>They don't buy anything from you, do they?
>>>>>
>>>>>And imagine your employer's trade deficit with _you_! He buys
>>>>>your labor for, what, $50K, $100K/year? How much stuff do you
>>>>>buy from him? Your EMPLOYER HAS A SERIOUS TRADE DEFICIT WITH
>>>>>YOU!!!!!
>>>>>
>>>>>"Trade Deficit". Pfaugh!
>>>>>
>>>>>Thanks!
>>>>>Rich
>>>>>UT o
>>>>
>>>> While your point may have some validity here, the
>>>>major difference is that the money in your examples is
>>>>circulating INSIDE the USA. The dollars spent in a
>>>>foreign market are dollars that are taken out of the
>>>>economy "forever".
>>>> As an analogy, if dollars are the life-blood
>>>>of the economy, foreign trade is like cutting an
>>>>artery.
>>>> Now...The fact of the matter is that SOME of
>>>>those dollars DO come back in, but, since it is a
>>>>DEFICIT, far more are going out than are coming in.
>>>>Those dollars have to be replaced in the economy
>>>>somehow. One "bad" way is to simply print more
>>>>money. While this gets more bucks in circulation,
>>>>it also cuts down on the value of each dollar.
>>>> We have to remember that the world economy
>>>>is more like a war than a cheerful family gathering.
>>>>All the countries in the world are jockeying to
>>>>gain advantage over the other countries, and, one
>>>>way to do that is to drain the cash of one country.
>>>> America, although economically large, is
>>>>not infinite, and, if we believed we were, we would
>>>>be fools. The fact that the dollar has dropped
>>>>in relative value on the world market is proof that
>>>>the deficits are having their desired effects. Also,
>>>>remember that the growing European Union can (and
>>>>perhaps already has) become a larger economic power
>>>>than America.
>>>> Finally, there is the basic problem that
>>>>the world, in general, is not a friendly place.
>>>>Countries that were our friends are now our
>>>>enemies; countries that were our enemies are
>>>>now our friends; The only lesson we can
>>>>learn from this is that this is likely to
>>>>happen again, so, to end up totally dependent
>>>>on another country for our major manufacturing
>>>>is a stupid thing to do.
>>>>
>>>> Regards
>>>> Dave Mundt
>>>
>>>
"Gunner" <[email protected]> wrote in message
> Bye fuckwit.
> Now my participation visa vis you in this thread is finished. If I
> wish to argue with a fuckwit, Ill do so with one I find more
> interesting.
Funny, you already said goodbye one and you've doing it again. Must be that
low memory retention you have. Either that or you just don't know how to end
an argument.
On Thu, 23 Jun 2005 15:50:25 GMT, Gunner <[email protected]>
wrote:
>Now my participation visa vis you in this thread is finished. If I
>wish to argue with a fuckwit, Ill do so with one I find more
>interesting.
It's always fun to watch him arguing with himself <G>.
--
Cliff
On Thu, 23 Jun 2005 15:50:25 GMT, Gunner <[email protected]>
wrote:
>So far, you have shown us:
>
>1. You have a bad attitude
>2. You are stupid
>3. You dont take critisism well and respond by being an ass.
>4.. You have the personal arrogance of a middle eastern Rhaj.
Found a long lost relative, eh?
Congratulations !!!
--
Cliff
On Thu, 23 Jun 2005 13:01:24 -0400, "Upscale" <[email protected]>
wrote:
>"Gunner" <[email protected]> wrote in message
>V
>> their mode of operation. It was you that made the blanket statement
>> that Agent was Junk, was it not?
>
>No was NOT. I use agent for downloading binaries. If you're going to play
>the asshole, at least try to respond with the knowledge that you have your
>facts straight.
>
>> Now my participation visa vis you in this thread is finished. If I
>> wish to argue with a fuckwit, Ill do so with one I find more
>> interesting.
>
>Been looking in the mirror again asshole? Hell, you're too stupid to even
>follow a thread properly. I damn well know for sure that you're incapable of
>searching out parts of previous threads or you'd have quoted what you're
>replying to like any normal person.
>
Bye fuckwit.
<plink>
Gunner
"Pax Americana is a philosophy. Hardly an empire.
Making sure other people play nice and dont kill each other (and us)
off in job lots is hardly empire building, particularly when you give
them self determination under "play nice" rules.
Think of it as having your older brother knock the shit out of you
for torturing the cat." Gunner
On Sat, 18 Jun 2005 07:32:19 +1000, LectroÑuis
<LectroÑ[email protected]> wrote:
>...try Larry Lixxx for a variation<G>..this Dude is weird
>as,, believe..and hey,
Yup, that looks like gymmy bob/bengi alright. http://tinyurl.com/df7mb
He's been complaining about top posters since 2001? Yikes! I sure wish
his social worker would give him a scroll-wheel mouse already. Anyway,
alt.support.tinnitus? Ringing in the ears, probably due to cranial
defect... that explains a lot.
Wayne
"Pete C." <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
> What we'll end up with is a bunch of lawyers feeding off of each other
> in the downward spiral as we end up with no capacity to produce anything
> for ourselves and consequently no money to import what we need. We'll
> end up rather like the undeveloped parts of the world are now.
Well, here's a guy who agrees with you...or he did <g>:
"We live in cheap and twisted times. Our leaders are low-rent Fascists and
our laws are a tangle of mockeries. Recent polls indicate that the only
people who feel optimistic about the future are first-year law students who
expect to get rich by haggling over the ruins.and they are probably
right." -- Hunter S. Thompson
"Too_Many_Tools" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
> I am posting this subject in three different groups to hopefully get a
> good cross section of ideas. I apologize ahead of time if this offends
> anyone.
>
> When one considers a workshop with metal and wood working capabilities,
> what tradeoffs have you made to have a working shop in an alternate
> homepower environment where every amp is precious?
>
> Obviously hand nonpowered tools take on a special importance.
>
> Cordless tools come to mind but which ones and what batteries?
>
> When considerng stationary tools like drills, lathes, mills, saws,
> grinders, etc., which ones fit best in an environment where one is off
> grid?
>
> Special operations like welding and using air compressors would seem to
> need consideration because of their unique requirements.
>
> I would be interested in hearing how others have approached this
> situation and what implementations they have adopted.
>
> Thanks for any suggestions or comments that you can offer.
>
> TMT
>
Have you ever been in an Amish woodshop? The last time I was in one it had
very many modern woodworking machines all driven by a jackshaft. There was
a Deutz diesel engine powering the jackshaft. The amish farmers in PA where
I grew up used the same diesel engine driving a jackshaft arrangement to
pump water, compress air, run the refridgeration units for their bulk tanks
and pump water. As a side note to this, they used an interesting pump down
the well that used compressed air as power to pump the water up to a holding
tank.
Shawn
There's still enough of us around that no how to make things to do it.
Unfortunaly, that won't be the case for too many more years. We're retiring.
A good example of the kind of thing that is wrecking the manufacturing base
is the place I presently work. Machine shop, run by an MBA. 50% of the
employees sit behind a desk. They wonder why they can't make any money. I've
been doing this since most of them were in grade school. When I have said
anything about getting more people producing and less people just collecting
a paycheck, I get put off as an old timer that just doesn't know how it's
done these days. Will be switching jobs here shortly. Let them go broke by
themselves.
"Prometheus" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
> On Fri, 17 Jun 2005 23:26:33 GMT, "CW" <[email protected]> wrote:
>
> >That's a little remembered fact. We could do it again.
> >
> >"Scott Lurndal" <[email protected]> wrote in message
> >news:[email protected]...
> >>
> >> I'll just point out that we didn't have that capacity in 1941, but
> >> we did by 1945.
>
> The US was a manfacturing based economy. Now, everyone seems
> hell-bent on pretending we can get by with consumption as our
> watchword. When you get an entire generation or two who think that
> they are entitled to consume and feel no need to produce, it doesn't
> create the kind of environment that allows a society to ratchet up
> production that quickly. It's a different world now.
>
>
That troll still lives here? Does he ever talk home power or still just a
troll?
I was wondering if I should take him out of my bozo bin yet? He could have
something interesting to say if he took Eunty Jeck's cock out of his mouth.
You need to trim better or top post , George (both would be even better for
most)
"George Ghio" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
>
>
>
> Pointless exercise with Wayne. He can talk the legs off a donkey but
> still can't explain his claim of two days autonomy for his system.
>
> And yes he does all his real work during daylight hours.
In article <[email protected]>,
"Arnold Walker" <[email protected]> wrote:
>Another fly in the oiment on your battery remark.....if batteries are so
>much effecient
>at storaging .Why are repair shop using air tools instead battery powered
>tools.
Air tools are generally more compact and lighter than their electric
counterparts. They can also move more energy in the same amount of time.
P.S. If you're going to reply to just one line in a post, please
trim the other 170 lines.
--
B.B. --I am not a goat! thegoat4 at airmail dot net
http://web2.airmail.net/thegoat4/
In article <[email protected]>,
wmbjk <[email protected]> wrote:
>>A source of mechanical energy can directly drive a compressor head,
>>saving the extremely inefficient conversions to electricity and back.
>>Compressed air is easy and economical to store in large volumes and is
>>free from the chemical hazards of batteries. Useable service life of
>>compressed air tanks is much higher than batteries as well.
>
>Wind driven compressor -> storage tank -> air motors? Could be OK if
>one had a really windy site, lots of surplus pressure vessels, and a
>plenty of rotor diameter. To get an idea of the diameter versus work
>produced, check out the size and pumping rates of Bowjon well pumps.
Ya know, you could probably make this work with a little creativity.
Find a compressor that's happy running at any speed between near-zero
and max, (good luck) then rig up a speed governor and a CVT (variable
pulleys would probably be the most practical). Arrange it so that the
governor keeps the windmill turning at optimal speed, and varies the
compressor speed depending on how much energy is available from the
wind. So, light wind, slow compressor, heavy wind, fast compressor.
Unload it through a small restriction when the system's full, so it can
keep the windmill moving, but control its speed. You wouldn't need an
oversized rotor to deal with the torque at high compressor outlet
pressures since the CVT would adjust for that on the fly.
For the tanks, get some pressure protection valves. These work sort
of like check valves, but only open at so many PSI, like 60 or so, and
with no pressure drop through the valve once open. Some are pre-set,
others are adjustable. Set to above your expected working pressure (by
that I mean whatever you set the outlet regulator to) and below your
maximum tank pressure. Just above working pressure is probably best.
Hook it up as compressor-> valve-> small tank-> valve-> large tank->
valve-> large tank->... Then, for the outlet of all the tanks, regular
check valves to a common manifold and then the regulator.
The result you'd have is a pressure buildup time proportional to the
small tank up to the pressure where the protection valve opens, after
that it'll be proportional to the total volume of first and second until
second is full, then second plus third, and so on. But when using air
your pressure fall would be proportional to the entire system's volume
(or at least the volume of the tanks currently charged up) as the
manifold would always pull from the highest-pressure tank first.
Kind of complex, but would ensure that you have lots and lots of air
available at highest pressure, and your system would be arbitrarily
expandable simply by adding additional tanks at the end of your chain
without hurting buildup time. And with a moderate wind and
appropriately sized first tank, you'd have a good buildup time for when
you actually need highest pressure.
You could even eliminate the unloader scheme if you just stick a
pressure pop off valve at the end of the chain. Or just keep adding
bigger tanks until you can never fill the final one. (:
ASCII Diagram:
Compressor---->T1-->ppValve-->T2-->ppValve-->T3---->pop-off valve
| | | or more tanks
Check Check Check
| | |
v v v
Regulator<-------------------------------------
|
v
Out
Probably couldn't run a sandblaster on it, but an impact, grinder,
nailer, or drill would be doable. Could probably even handle the fridge
idea someone mentioned earlier without trouble.
And if you outpace the system on occasion you would be able to
augment it with an engine or electric compressor that runs when you use
a whole lot of air and let the windmill keep the system topped off
otherwise.
--
B.B. --I am not a goat! thegoat4 at airmail dot net
http://web2.airmail.net/thegoat4/
On Mon, 20 Jun 2005 14:22:04 +0000 (UTC), [email protected]
wrote:
>Discussion has drifted to using compressed air as energy-storage medium.
>
>A company I used to work at processed wire, and powered the take-up
>reel with a rotary-vane air-motor, used as a constant-torque drive.
>Its air consumption was horrendous for the small amount of work it
>did.
>
>Another company used an old steam-powered fixed-crane to lift small
>barges in and out of the water. Its boiler was long gone, so a 1000
>CFM diesel air compressor powered it. Sometimes barely...
>
>Are there available air motors efficient enough to make this storage
>scheme practical?
Not that I know of. Like you I can think of examples that prove the
inefficiency - like a standard corded 3/8 drill that needs but a few
hundred Watts of electricity, while its air-powered cousin keeps a
1500 Watt compressor pretty busy. Just the same, I can imagine a
Bowjon type windmill/compressor generating compressed air for home
shop use. It wouldn't be efficient, but the losses wouldn't matter if
the shop's demands were low, and if the windmill, pump, tank and labor
were all cheap. It's not something I'd bother with though, and even
for somebody with lots of time on their hands, I'd expect wind-driven
shop air to come *after* solar-heated water and wind-powered battery
charging.
Wayne
[totally snipped]
Discussion has drifted to using compressed air as energy-storage medium.
A company I used to work at processed wire, and powered the take-up
reel with a rotary-vane air-motor, used as a constant-torque drive.
Its air consumption was horrendous for the small amount of work it
did.
Another company used an old steam-powered fixed-crane to lift small
barges in and out of the water. Its boiler was long gone, so a 1000
CFM diesel air compressor powered it. Sometimes barely...
Are there available air motors efficient enough to make this storage
scheme practical?
Tom Willmon
near Mountainair, (mid) New Mexico, USA
Net-Tamer V 1.12.0 - Registered
>
> Another fly in the oiment on your battery remark.....if batteries are so
> much effecient
> at storaging .Why are repair shop using air tools instead battery powered
> tools.
1] Habit; they were taught with air tools
2] They don't care a whit about efficiency
3] Seen a 300ft/lb cordless impact wrench lately?
4] electricity+gasoline=bad
The common voltage in Canada was always 120/240v. I believe the USA was the
same except that the USanians have their own measurement system for almost
everything else so who knows about what they nay have done.
Equipment was rated at 100v, 115v, 117v and 120 v over the years. This was
mostly just due to ignorance and foreign ignorance. The same thing happened
with 240v. It was labelled 220v, 230v and 240v. Some equipment is still
labelled at 250v which is only a class of equipment distinction. (max
capability).
This all applies to single phase descriptions. Some of the confusion can
attributed to 3 phase systems were 208v, 220v and 240v have been used and
bleeds over into single phase systems.
600v, 3 phase systems went through the same thing with 559v, 575v and 600v
being used. The US and western Canada use 480V systems and I am sure went
through the same crap of 440v etc..
The network style voltage or as some called it "3 phase 4 wire one leg out"
is used in apartment and multi dwelling complexes. They have 3 phase 4 wire
transformation and run two out of three phases (with shared neutral) to each
apartment floor or unit. This would give them 120/208v circuits. The 208v is
quite low for the 240v baseboard and appliances so they compromise both
voltages and came up with 125v/216v (root 3 factor). The 125 v is a little
high but within specs (+/-10%) and the 216v is a little but within the specs
also. Tougher lamps are in order to survive on this system. The end result
is much less copper to feed a huge complex.
The end result is there are many terms falsely used but mostly compatible.
I hope some of this helps.
"Ulysses" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
>
> "Me" <[email protected]> wrote in message
> news:[email protected]...
> > In article <[email protected]>,
> > "Ulysses" <[email protected]> wrote:
> >
> > > "wmbjk" <[email protected]> wrote in message
> > > news:[email protected]...
> > > > On Thu, 16 Jun 2005 15:43:10 GMT, "Pete C." <[email protected]>
> > > > wrote:
> > > >
> >
> > > >
> > > > Not necessarily. Home welding tends to be short duration. The
hardware
> > > > to supply that kind of power is actually affordable, and if one is
> > > > designing the power system from scratch for what most would consider
a
> > > > normal home, then the extra inverter capacity isn't a big deal. In
our
> > > > case, for the house loads alone we could have gotten away with a
> > > > single SW4024 plus a transformer for the 220V loads.
> > >
> > > How is this done, getting 220V from 110? How do you get the two "hot"
> > > wires? Are there 2 secondary windings on the transformer? Wouldn't
> they
> > > need to be out of phase with each other?
> > >
> > >
> >
> > Now here is a fellow that asks an inteligent question. If you take
> > a dual winding secondary with 120 Vac on each winding, feeding it
> > with a 120 Vac Primary, and connect the dual 120Vac windings in series
> > you get 240Vac. The phase is determined on how you connect the two
> > series windings. and they will either be inphase or 180 out of phase,
> > depending on the connection.
> >
> > Me
>
> Something else I've wondered about is why is it sometimes called 220,
other
> times 230, and also 240VAC? Do the different voltages imply single or
> double phase or is it just a matter of different voltages in different
> geographic locations? My little Honda generator is rated at 125 VAC which
> seems to be unusual and that would give us 250 VAC if it was ran through
the
> step-up transformer.
>
>
"Ed Huntress" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
> "J. R. Carroll" <[email protected]> wrote in message
> news:[email protected]...
> >
> > "Ed Huntress" <[email protected]> wrote in message
> > news:[email protected]...
> > > "J. R. Carroll" <[email protected]> wrote in message
> > > news:[email protected]...
> > > >
> > > > "F. George McDuffee" <[email protected]> wrote in message
> > > > news:[email protected]...
> > >
> > If Detroit or Windsor can't stay busy or if GM files it won't be because
> > they couldn't get the answer right. It will be because they kept asking
> the
> > wrong damned question.
>
> And are you talking about a solution for 10% of the market, or are you
> claiming you have a general question and a general solution for it?
It isn't a claim Ed, it is a proven philosophy and business model. It will
work wherever you choose to run it if the infrastructure is in place.
>
> Because we can always make a positive anecdote of the virtues of 10%, if
we
> neglect the fact that an economy is all 100%, and that the consequences of
> what happens to the other 90% eventually catches up with all of us.
>
> Sooner or later, you have to answer the question of how you compete with
80
> cents/hour wages, when technology and business expertise can be packaged
> into shipping containers and sent to Bangalore or Shanghai just as easily
as
> to Cleveland, and that clever ideas, hard work, and insight are
distributed
> quite evenly around the world.
Focusing on wages is exactly the wrong thing to do. I paid the tool room
guys a five dollar premium to the market, provided excellent medical
benefits, paid time off, and contributed the legal maximum to our 401K for
every employee at the time that was 4 to 1.
You are closer to the mark with the clever ideas part however and I agree
that no one group has a lock on that.
If you think that GM is tanking because of their labor contracts or pension
obligations you are just plain wrong. They suck hind tit because their
business model if for shit.
--
John R. Carroll
Machining Solution Software, Inc.
Los Angeles San Francisco
www.machiningsolution.com
That's a little remembered fact. We could do it again.
"Scott Lurndal" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
>
> I'll just point out that we didn't have that capacity in 1941, but
> we did by 1945.
>
> scott
>
> >
> >
> >
He stated the method in his last sentence. Transformer.
"Ulysses" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
> How is this done, getting 220V from 110? How do you get the two "hot"
> wires? Are there 2 secondary windings on the transformer? Wouldn't they
> need to be out of phase with each other?
>
>
"Ed Huntress" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
> "J. R. Carroll" <[email protected]> wrote in message
> news:[email protected]...
> >
> > "F. George McDuffee" <[email protected]> wrote in message
> > news:[email protected]...
>
> > > This may have been true at the higher levels at one time but with
> > > telecommuting service sector jobs are also rapidly disappearing.
> > > For example many low to mid level accounting jobs such as tax
> > > returns are now done overseas. Where the jobs cannot be done
> > > externally H1B visas allow worker importation.
> >
> > Perhaps, but half of my customers are in Europe and Asia. My feeling is
> that
> > the value you add is what customers are interested in. It goes right to
> > their bottom line.
>
> That's fine in your business, John. It's not so fine if you're making
> injection moldings for consumer products or assembling car engines in
> Detroit or Windsor.
>
Ed,
When I owned half of an injection molder we never lost a job we wanted to
Asia, not once. In fact, the first big tooling/molding package we nailed
down was something running in Malaysia. One project that was bid around the
world was commercial binary syringe assemblies for tooth whitening gel. The
quantities were 20 million units per month to start. You probably know the
company we did this for. If you have a Hot Springs Spa, 90 percent of the
molded parts are from my tools running in the United States. Carlsbad to be
precise. I could go on here at some length as 100 million dollars per year
in molded product is a lot of product. That isn't my point.
In each and every case the costs of making product were lower when customers
did business with us than if they made there purchase overseas. We were
shipping parts on several jobs to China as a matter of fact.
This is the important part - in no year between 1991 and 2002 did the
company's net after tax margin fall below 18 percent of gross revenues -
never, not once, period. It was almost embarrassing and we did not have a
single product of our own.
If Detroit or Windsor can't stay busy or if GM files it won't be because
they couldn't get the answer right. It will be because they kept asking the
wrong damned question.
--
John R. Carroll
Machining Solution Software, Inc.
Los Angeles San Francisco
www.machiningsolution.com
"J. R. Carroll" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:%[email protected]...
> > > If you think that GM is tanking because of their labor contracts or
> > pension
> > > obligations you are just plain wrong. They suck hind tit because their
> > > business model if for shit.
> >
> > So you're saying they can absorb $1,500/car just by having a better
> business
> > model than Toyota or Hyundai?
>
> No, they can do that by properly understanding and then delivering to
their
> market. This is what they are utterly failing to do.
> The difference in price between a Hyundai built in Arkansas and a GM
product
> built anywhere is much more than 1,500 dollars.
> As a percentage it's about half.
Hyundai understands the market pretty well, too. In fact, I bought one last
September, after trying out all of the Japanese and American competition.
The Europeans offer no competition in that market. Any European car that's
technically competitive costs $10,000 more, at the minimum. My Hyundai
Sonata is a hell of a car for the money, and 'way ahead of anything
comparably priced -- in other words, anything in that market.
The next day I bought a Ford Focus ZX3. It's another good car for the buck,
although the bottom-end Civics probably are better overall. I just liked the
handling and performance; with its 2.3-liter engine, it will stomp any
Civic. <g> I consider it a good buy, though, and not bad for an American car
built in...Mexico.
>
> >And then, after gaining a $1,500/car advantage
> > over them simply through smarter organization, that they can maintain
that
> > advantage in a viciously competitive global market?
>
> They do not gain any advantage with a reduced price and shouldn't try.
Good
> value is critical in purchasing but you are talking about racing to the
> bottom and that is the stupidest thing I have seen in recent times. It
does
> not work.
What does work? Are you suggesting that GM can dope out the market better
than Toyota, Honda, Nissan, Audi, etc.? How would they do that? Are they
somehow smarter?
I don't think they're smarter. Since all of those foreign car makers have
good American marketing people to serve the US market, I don't think GM has
any greater knowledge of the market or greater insights into what people
want.
So, what's left?
>
> >
> > These are all fine assertions, John, but I'd like to see the specifics.
> > Frankly, I don't believe you can "business-model" your way to success
when
> > you have the kind of legacy overhead that GM has. That is, unless your
> > business model is based on moving all of your manufacturing offshore and
> > abandoning your legacy entitlements to the federal government.
>
> Just the opposite in most respects. You are smarter than this Ed.
I thought I was until I spent a year of research in preparation for the
5,000 word articles I wrote about China trade a couple of years ago. Now I
realize we're living on a heap of wishful thinking and baloney.
Any advantages we have are going away very quickly. In fact, our
multinationals are shipping the advantages offshore as fast as they can. I'm
waiting for the Milton Friedman dollar devaluation, but there will be hell
to pay if and when it happens. The recent devaluation ain't it.
> Ed,
> I am unable to continue this for the rest of today but I will.
> I read what you have written about global markets and manufacturing. The
> questions and their answer are largely contained in your own work and the
> underlying research behind it. The need to present fresh facts doesn't
> exist. There aren't really many fresh facts regardless. A fresh
perspective
> is the key, as I said. You answered, intelligently I might add, the wrong
> question. Your work revolves around looking like a top notch vendor. This
is
> certainly necessary but it is also the WRONG WRONG WRONG perspective.
> I get paid big bucks for this Ed and have yet to see anyone who will truly
> embrace what I provide as a service fail to flourish . I also have enough
> confidence in the results that I only take equity. I also, except once and
> not directly, don't do "turn arounds". My advice under the turn around
> scenario has consistently been "Get Out and do it Now".
When you get some time, John, it would be good to hear more about what
you're saying. It's one of the most important issues in metalworking today,
if not THE most important issue.
>
> The five dollar ratio to costs was 6 percent and we knew that percentage
> very precisely.
Well, 8% was reasonably close, then. d8-)
--
Ed Huntress
"Scott Willing" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
> On Thu, 16 Jun 2005 20:19:43 -0500, Scott Willing
Please people! Trim your posts. If you do so, you will not only save
bandwidth, but you will save readers lots of scrolling and they will be much
more likely to actually read your post. To trim, all you have to do is
highlight the area to be eliminated and hit your "Del" key.
For example; Scott's post could look more like below:
Thanks
Vaughn
>This isn't even quite as extreme as the example I was thinking of.
>I'll see if I can dig up another cite, but I think it's probably in a
>magazine here so don't hold your breath.
Probably nobody cares but me, but for the sake of the archives I have
to back down somewhat.
Turns out an honest mistake (misreading) by my partner resulted in an
exaggeration that I failed to vet before repeating it when I said:
>>> (Sorry the proper term escapes me.) In this way they can
>>> run sweatshops in wire-fenced compounds and legally print "Made in
>>> USA" on the goods produced there.
We did track down the reference in question, and it was also about the
Marianas. Although this isn't what most people would think of as the
"USA" as in "Made in USA," it is not exactly the sort of "special
region" that I had claimed to exist within other countries. The
Marianas are technically a protectorate - not that this makes it OK,
IMHO - but there is a difference.
There *are* special trading zones set up within foreign sovereign
countries whose status may facilitate sweatshops (reference: No Logo),
but does not confer the right to claim that their products are made in
the US.
In article <[email protected]>,
"Ulysses" <[email protected]> wrote:
> "wmbjk" <[email protected]> wrote in message
> news:[email protected]...
> > On Thu, 16 Jun 2005 15:43:10 GMT, "Pete C." <[email protected]>
> > wrote:
> >
> >
> > Not necessarily. Home welding tends to be short duration. The hardware
> > to supply that kind of power is actually affordable, and if one is
> > designing the power system from scratch for what most would consider a
> > normal home, then the extra inverter capacity isn't a big deal. In our
> > case, for the house loads alone we could have gotten away with a
> > single SW4024 plus a transformer for the 220V loads.
>
> How is this done, getting 220V from 110? How do you get the two "hot"
> wires? Are there 2 secondary windings on the transformer? Wouldn't they
> need to be out of phase with each other?
>
>
Now here is a fellow that asks an inteligent question. If you take
a dual winding secondary with 120 Vac on each winding, feeding it
with a 120 Vac Primary, and connect the dual 120Vac windings in series
you get 240Vac. The phase is determined on how you connect the two
series windings. and they will either be inphase or 180 out of phase,
depending on the connection.
Me
In article <[email protected]>,
"Too_Many_Tools" <[email protected]> wrote:
> Thanks for posting...actual daily experience carries alot of weight.
>
> What is the largest motor that your equipment has?
>
> Any of them three phase? I ask because many times industrial equipment
> has three phase motors.
>
> Any desire for changing any of the motors to DC?
>
> TMT
>
3 Phase motors really aren't a problem if you just use a FreqDrive that
is 1 Phase input and 3 Phase output.
Me
> What a surprise, not so much of a whiff of information about the topic
> at hand. I suggest that it's only fair when criticizing others, that
> you ought to be explaining how *you* handle supplying power to an
> off-grid workshop. Especially since you're cross-posting to a group
> that isn't familiar with your claims of being both an expert welder
> *and* a "solar power consultant". Here, let me help you...
>
> George believes that after professing to have a couple of decades
> experience as a professional in the solar biz, that it makes infinite
> sense that he's hauled some 15 *tons* of fuel to his own place
> (without even counting wood for space heating), and must start a
> generator for any load over a few hundred Watts. He's also of the
> opinion that many of society's ills can be traced to a dependence on
> powered devices (as in: anything *he* doesn't have), and says he wants
> for nothing on one (1) kWhr per day. That's $3 per month electricity
> for you grid-connected folks. While most off-grinders who live in an
> area as sunny as George's quickly learn the benefits of solar water
> heating, George intends to wait for the concept to be proven before
> spending a few hundred bucks on it. And most important of all, he
> absolutely can't stand to hear about people who've done it better,
> which is just about everyone else. Which explains why he's found
> bitter fault with most of the regulars in the energy groups. Does that
> about cover the high points George? You're welcome.
>
> Wayne
The fact that TMT has had an overload of help with the subject including
a warning about your own incompetence I am sure that he has already
worked out that he will have to decide what to do to suit his own needs.
Your fictions are only the mutterings of a sad case who still can not
post a sensable account of his energy use let alone anyone else's.
Sitll laughing
John P Bengi wrote:
> Take the hook out of your mouth George. The troll has struck paydirt with
> you.
>
> "George Ghio" <[email protected]> wrote in message
> news:[email protected]...
>
>>
>>>What a surprise, not so much of a whiff of information about the topic
>>>at hand. I suggest that it's only fair when criticizing others, that
>>>you ought to be explaining how *you* handle supplying power to an
>>>off-grid workshop. Especially since you're cross-posting to a group
>>>that isn't familiar with your claims of being both an expert welder
>>>*and* a "solar power consultant". Here, let me help you...
>>>
>>>George believes that after professing to have a couple of decades
>>>experience as a professional in the solar biz, that it makes infinite
>>>sense that he's hauled some 15 *tons* of fuel to his own place
>>>(without even counting wood for space heating), and must start a
>>>generator for any load over a few hundred Watts. He's also of the
>>>opinion that many of society's ills can be traced to a dependence on
>>>powered devices (as in: anything *he* doesn't have), and says he wants
>>>for nothing on one (1) kWhr per day. That's $3 per month electricity
>>>for you grid-connected folks. While most off-grinders who live in an
>>>area as sunny as George's quickly learn the benefits of solar water
>>>heating, George intends to wait for the concept to be proven before
>>>spending a few hundred bucks on it. And most important of all, he
>>>absolutely can't stand to hear about people who've done it better,
>>>which is just about everyone else. Which explains why he's found
>>>bitter fault with most of the regulars in the energy groups. Does that
>>>about cover the high points George? You're welcome.
>>>
>>>Wayne
>>
>>The fact that TMT has had an overload of help with the subject including
>>a warning about your own incompetence I am sure that he has already
>>worked out that he will have to decide what to do to suit his own needs.
>>
>>Your fictions are only the mutterings of a sad case who still can not
>>post a sensable account of his energy use let alone anyone else's.
>
>
>
Take the hook out of your mouth George. The troll has struck paydirt with
you.
"George Ghio" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
>
>
> > What a surprise, not so much of a whiff of information about the topic
> > at hand. I suggest that it's only fair when criticizing others, that
> > you ought to be explaining how *you* handle supplying power to an
> > off-grid workshop. Especially since you're cross-posting to a group
> > that isn't familiar with your claims of being both an expert welder
> > *and* a "solar power consultant". Here, let me help you...
> >
> > George believes that after professing to have a couple of decades
> > experience as a professional in the solar biz, that it makes infinite
> > sense that he's hauled some 15 *tons* of fuel to his own place
> > (without even counting wood for space heating), and must start a
> > generator for any load over a few hundred Watts. He's also of the
> > opinion that many of society's ills can be traced to a dependence on
> > powered devices (as in: anything *he* doesn't have), and says he wants
> > for nothing on one (1) kWhr per day. That's $3 per month electricity
> > for you grid-connected folks. While most off-grinders who live in an
> > area as sunny as George's quickly learn the benefits of solar water
> > heating, George intends to wait for the concept to be proven before
> > spending a few hundred bucks on it. And most important of all, he
> > absolutely can't stand to hear about people who've done it better,
> > which is just about everyone else. Which explains why he's found
> > bitter fault with most of the regulars in the energy groups. Does that
> > about cover the high points George? You're welcome.
> >
> > Wayne
>
> The fact that TMT has had an overload of help with the subject including
> a warning about your own incompetence I am sure that he has already
> worked out that he will have to decide what to do to suit his own needs.
>
> Your fictions are only the mutterings of a sad case who still can not
> post a sensable account of his energy use let alone anyone else's.
Yes, I know but this guy only trolls here and adds next to nothing. It's
very easy to sit back, say nothing and take potshots at people's spelling
and other idiosyncrasies. We all do it to a certain extent but most try to
discuss (the reason for being here) and this one doesn't seem to have
anything postive to say ever.
"George Ghio" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
> Sitll laughing
>
> John P Bengi wrote:
> > Take the hook out of your mouth George. The troll has struck paydirt
with
> > you.
> >
> > "George Ghio" <[email protected]> wrote in message
> > news:[email protected]...
> >
> >>
> >>>What a surprise, not so much of a whiff of information about the topic
> >>>at hand. I suggest that it's only fair when criticizing others, that
> >>>you ought to be explaining how *you* handle supplying power to an
> >>>off-grid workshop. Especially since you're cross-posting to a group
> >>>that isn't familiar with your claims of being both an expert welder
> >>>*and* a "solar power consultant". Here, let me help you...
> >>>
> >>>George believes that after professing to have a couple of decades
> >>>experience as a professional in the solar biz, that it makes infinite
> >>>sense that he's hauled some 15 *tons* of fuel to his own place
> >>>(without even counting wood for space heating), and must start a
> >>>generator for any load over a few hundred Watts. He's also of the
> >>>opinion that many of society's ills can be traced to a dependence on
> >>>powered devices (as in: anything *he* doesn't have), and says he wants
> >>>for nothing on one (1) kWhr per day. That's $3 per month electricity
> >>>for you grid-connected folks. While most off-grinders who live in an
> >>>area as sunny as George's quickly learn the benefits of solar water
> >>>heating, George intends to wait for the concept to be proven before
> >>>spending a few hundred bucks on it. And most important of all, he
> >>>absolutely can't stand to hear about people who've done it better,
> >>>which is just about everyone else. Which explains why he's found
> >>>bitter fault with most of the regulars in the energy groups. Does that
> >>>about cover the high points George? You're welcome.
> >>>
> >>>Wayne
> >>
> >>The fact that TMT has had an overload of help with the subject including
> >>a warning about your own incompetence I am sure that he has already
> >>worked out that he will have to decide what to do to suit his own needs.
> >>
> >>Your fictions are only the mutterings of a sad case who still can not
> >>post a sensable account of his energy use let alone anyone else's.
> >
> >
> >
On Mon, 20 Jun 2005 15:11:15 +1000, George Ghio <[email protected]>
wrote:
>wmbjk wrote:
>> On Sun, 19 Jun 2005 18:30:17 +1000, George Ghio <[email protected]>
>> wrote:
>> Good timing George, Pete has mentioned that he's going to build a
>> solar water-heating system in the near future. As you're a *solar*
>> power consultant, I expect you'll want to offer some tips for his
>> project. Oh darn, I just remembered, you've written that
>> propane-fueled water heating is more "appropriate". OK then, just tell
>> him how many pounds of fuel you've hauled during your time off-grid,
>> and how much cheaper and smarter you believe that is over his plan of
>> spending a few bucks and some time fabricating a system.
>> I assume you'll be explaining how that differs from what most people
>> do, why welding at night is better, and how when you're drawing 400
>> Amps, it makes a big difference whether or not your 60 Amps of PV is
>> lit....
>>
>> The thread is titled "workshop in a alternate home power environment",
>> and it has included some discussion about welding in an off-grid
>> workshop. Since you're a self-described expert welder who also claims
>> nearly two decades of success in the professional "designing" of solar
>> power setups, it would seem you're the perfect person to share with
>> everyone exactly how you handle welding at your own place. I'm sure
>> Pete and many others would be interested to hear how a
>> "professional's" system could handle his Miller Syncrowave 250, and
>> exactly how much of your daily energy production is available for
>> power tools in general.
>>
>> Wayne
>Ah, Wayne speaks again.
>
>Wayne, I would suggest that utill you can actually supply the numbers
>for the system you tout as a marvel of your design prowess that you
>forgo giving advice.
What a surprise, not so much of a whiff of information about the topic
at hand. I suggest that it's only fair when criticizing others, that
you ought to be explaining how *you* handle supplying power to an
off-grid workshop. Especially since you're cross-posting to a group
that isn't familiar with your claims of being both an expert welder
*and* a "solar power consultant". Here, let me help you...
George believes that after professing to have a couple of decades
experience as a professional in the solar biz, that it makes infinite
sense that he's hauled some 15 *tons* of fuel to his own place
(without even counting wood for space heating), and must start a
generator for any load over a few hundred Watts. He's also of the
opinion that many of society's ills can be traced to a dependence on
powered devices (as in: anything *he* doesn't have), and says he wants
for nothing on one (1) kWhr per day. That's $3 per month electricity
for you grid-connected folks. While most off-grinders who live in an
area as sunny as George's quickly learn the benefits of solar water
heating, George intends to wait for the concept to be proven before
spending a few hundred bucks on it. And most important of all, he
absolutely can't stand to hear about people who've done it better,
which is just about everyone else. Which explains why he's found
bitter fault with most of the regulars in the energy groups. Does that
about cover the high points George? You're welcome.
Wayne
In article <[email protected]>,
Cliff <[email protected]> wrote:
> Found a live one, eh?
> One day they will demand their VALUE back ...... as promised
> by that paper ....
>
> Then those taxes will ......
> --
> Cliff
Naw, we will just Nationalize their Dept, just like they did with
ours, years ago....Payback is a bitch...isn't it.....
Remeber the Red chineese never did pay us back for WWII........
Me
In article <[email protected]>,
"Arnold Walker" <[email protected]> wrote:
> Another fly in the oiment on your battery remark.....if batteries are so
> much effecient
> at storaging .Why are repair shop using air tools instead battery powered
> tools.
That question isn't real relative to the discussion as you don't specify
the type of battery your talking about. Some batteries are very
efficent at recharging and some are not. Some batteries have very large
capacities and some do not. Air tools have their place, but it takes a
very large airtank to keep one running for a few hours, without adding
more air. You can't run a soldering iorn off air, but you can off
batteries. Lets see you lug around a portable airtank to run your Impact
Tool, and have it still run after 30 minutes of use. Apple and oranges,
dude......
Me
This is a multi-part message in MIME format.
------=_NextPart_000_004F_01C576A7.9FB51D30
Content-Type: text/plain;
charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Try a normal browser like OE and get rid of that piece of junk Agent.
"Cliff" <[email protected]> wrote in message =
news:[email protected]...
> It's nice to know the CONTEXT or the question before
> the response, for one thing.
>=20
> More may be below .... go reread it all <G>.
>=20
>=20
> On Mon, 20 Jun 2005 15:14:16 -0500, Scott Willing
> <[email protected]> wrote:
>=20
> >On Mon, 20 Jun 2005 18:20:28 GMT, "Vaughn Simon"
> ><[email protected]> wrote:
> >
> >>
> >>"Scott Willing" <[email protected]> wrote in message
> >>news:[email protected]...
> >>> On Thu, 16 Jun 2005 20:19:43 -0500, Scott Willing
> >>
> >> Please people! Trim your posts. If you do so, you will not =
only save
> >>bandwidth, but you will save readers lots of scrolling and they will =
be much
> >>more likely to actually read your post. To trim, all you have to do =
is
> >>highlight the area to be eliminated and hit your "Del" key.
> >
> >I apologize, but first you must permit me to utter a good-natured
> >"Duh."
> >
> >For everyone who says "trim" there will be at least one who says =
"trim
> >under pain of death." Yes, trimming is considered by many to be a sin
> >on usenet, especially by those who were here before the great =
unwashed
> >masses gained access... and also have control issues.
> >
> >The argument is that posts get separated from their threads for a
> >multitude of reasons, and purists (which I'm decidedly not) insist
> >that the entire thread be kept intact, so when alien archeologists
> >studying the leftover bits of blown-out humanity don't have to work =
so
> >hard to figure out the context. As for me, well, I think a little
> >judicious trimming goes a long way towards readability.
> >
> >In this case I did feel it especially important to retain the thread
> >as the trail was a little cold on this one... or so I thought.
> >
> >BTW, the same purists (aka usenet nazis) will slap your willy for
> >top-posting too, and they really get their knickers in a knot about
> >it. We can only assume their mommies overdid the spanking a bit... =
and
> >that they really, *really* liked it.
> >
> >Anyway, wrt to trimming, it's "damned if you do, damned if you =
don't."
> >
> >BTW#2 - lest you think I'm unsympathetic to bandwidth issues, I'm on =
a
> >freaking "28.8k" dial that usually gives me 26.4k... a number I'd
> >never even heard of before moving here.
> >
> >Now, in deference to your preference, and also for the dirty pleasure
> >of sticking it in the face of my favorite usenet nazi, I'll trim the
> >rest of your post. <gasp! horrors!>
> >
> >-=3Ds
> --=20
> Cliff
------=_NextPart_000_004F_01C576A7.9FB51D30
Content-Type: text/html;
charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
<!DOCTYPE HTML PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.0 Transitional//EN">
<HTML><HEAD>
<META http-equiv=3DContent-Type content=3D"text/html; =
charset=3Diso-8859-1">
<META content=3D"MSHTML 6.00.2800.1498" name=3DGENERATOR>
<STYLE></STYLE>
</HEAD>
<BODY>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D5><STRONG>Try a normal browser like OE =
and get rid of=20
that piece of junk Agent.</STRONG></FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2></FONT> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2>"Cliff" <</FONT><A=20
href=3D"mailto:[email protected]"><FONT face=3DArial=20
size=3D2>[email protected]</FONT></A><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2>> =
wrote in message=20
</FONT><A href=3D"news:[email protected]"><FONT =
face=3DArial=20
size=3D2>news:[email protected]</FONT></A><FONT =
face=3DArial size=3D2>...</FONT></DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2>> =
It's nice=20
to know the CONTEXT or the question before<BR>> the response, for one =
thing.<BR>> <BR>> More may be below .... go reread it all=20
<G>.<BR>> <BR>> <BR>> On Mon, 20 Jun 2005 15:14:16 -0500, =
Scott=20
Willing<BR>> <</FONT><A =
href=3D"mailto:[email protected]"><FONT=20
face=3DArial size=3D2>[email protected]</FONT></A><FONT =
face=3DArial=20
size=3D2>> wrote:<BR>> <BR>> >On Mon, 20 Jun 2005 18:20:28 =
GMT,=20
"Vaughn Simon"<BR>> ><</FONT><A=20
href=3D"mailto:[email protected]"><FONT face=3DArial=20
size=3D2>[email protected]</FONT></A><FONT face=3DArial =
size=3D2>>=20
wrote:<BR>> ><BR>> >><BR>> >>"Scott Willing"=20
<</FONT><A href=3D"mailto:[email protected]"><FONT =
face=3DArial=20
size=3D2>[email protected]</FONT></A><FONT face=3DArial =
size=3D2>> wrote=20
in message<BR>>=20
>>news:[email protected]...<BR>> =
>>>=20
On Thu, 16 Jun 2005 20:19:43 -0500, Scott Willing<BR>> =
>><BR>>=20
>> Please people! Trim your posts. =
If you do=20
so, you will not only save<BR>> >>bandwidth, but you will save =
readers=20
lots of scrolling and they will be much<BR>> >>more likely to =
actually=20
read your post. To trim, all you have to do is<BR>> =
>>highlight=20
the area to be eliminated and hit your "Del" key.<BR>> ><BR>> =
>I=20
apologize, but first you must permit me to utter a good-natured<BR>>=20
>"Duh."<BR>> ><BR>> >For everyone who says "trim" there =
will be=20
at least one who says "trim<BR>> >under pain of death." Yes, =
trimming is=20
considered by many to be a sin<BR>> >on usenet, especially by =
those who=20
were here before the great unwashed<BR>> >masses gained access... =
and also=20
have control issues.<BR>> ><BR>> >The argument is that posts =
get=20
separated from their threads for a<BR>> >multitude of reasons, and =
purists=20
(which I'm decidedly not) insist<BR>> >that the entire thread be =
kept=20
intact, so when alien archeologists<BR>> >studying the leftover =
bits of=20
blown-out humanity don't have to work so<BR>> >hard to figure out =
the=20
context. As for me, well, I think a little<BR>> >judicious =
trimming goes a=20
long way towards readability.<BR>> ><BR>> >In this case I =
did feel=20
it especially important to retain the thread<BR>> >as the trail =
was a=20
little cold on this one... or so I thought.<BR>> ><BR>> =
>BTW, the=20
same purists (aka usenet nazis) will slap your willy for<BR>> =
>top-posting=20
too, and they really get their knickers in a knot about<BR>> >it. =
We can=20
only assume their mommies overdid the spanking a bit... and<BR>> =
>that=20
they really, *really* liked it.<BR>> ><BR>> >Anyway, wrt to=20
trimming, it's "damned if you do, damned if you don't."<BR>> =
><BR>>=20
>BTW#2 - lest you think I'm unsympathetic to bandwidth issues, I'm on =
a<BR>> >freaking "28.8k" dial that usually gives me 26.4k... a =
number=20
I'd<BR>> >never even heard of before moving here.<BR>> =
><BR>>=20
>Now, in deference to your preference, and also for the dirty=20
pleasure<BR>> >of sticking it in the face of my favorite usenet =
nazi, I'll=20
trim the<BR>> >rest of your post. <gasp! horrors!><BR>>=20
><BR>> >-=3Ds<BR>> -- <BR>> Cliff</FONT></BODY></HTML>
------=_NextPart_000_004F_01C576A7.9FB51D30--
"J. R. Carroll" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
>
> "Ed Huntress" <[email protected]> wrote in message
> news:[email protected]...
> > "J. R. Carroll" <[email protected]> wrote in message
> > news:[email protected]...
> > >
> > > "F. George McDuffee" <[email protected]> wrote in message
> > > news:[email protected]...
> >
> > > > This may have been true at the higher levels at one time but with
> > > > telecommuting service sector jobs are also rapidly disappearing.
> > > > For example many low to mid level accounting jobs such as tax
> > > > returns are now done overseas. Where the jobs cannot be done
> > > > externally H1B visas allow worker importation.
> > >
> > > Perhaps, but half of my customers are in Europe and Asia. My feeling
is
> > that
> > > the value you add is what customers are interested in. It goes right
to
> > > their bottom line.
> >
> > That's fine in your business, John. It's not so fine if you're making
> > injection moldings for consumer products or assembling car engines in
> > Detroit or Windsor.
> >
>
> Ed,
> When I owned half of an injection molder we never lost a job we wanted to
> Asia, not once. In fact, the first big tooling/molding package we nailed
> down was something running in Malaysia. One project that was bid around
the
> world was commercial binary syringe assemblies for tooth whitening gel.
The
> quantities were 20 million units per month to start. You probably know the
> company we did this for. If you have a Hot Springs Spa, 90 percent of the
> molded parts are from my tools running in the United States. Carlsbad to
be
> precise. I could go on here at some length as 100 million dollars per year
> in molded product is a lot of product. That isn't my point.
> In each and every case the costs of making product were lower when
customers
> did business with us than if they made there purchase overseas. We were
> shipping parts on several jobs to China as a matter of fact.
>
> This is the important part - in no year between 1991 and 2002 did the
> company's net after tax margin fall below 18 percent of gross revenues -
> never, not once, period. It was almost embarrassing and we did not have a
> single product of our own.
> If Detroit or Windsor can't stay busy or if GM files it won't be because
> they couldn't get the answer right. It will be because they kept asking
the
> wrong damned question.
And are you talking about a solution for 10% of the market, or are you
claiming you have a general question and a general solution for it?
Because we can always make a positive anecdote of the virtues of 10%, if we
neglect the fact that an economy is all 100%, and that the consequences of
what happens to the other 90% eventually catches up with all of us.
Sooner or later, you have to answer the question of how you compete with 80
cents/hour wages, when technology and business expertise can be packaged
into shipping containers and sent to Bangalore or Shanghai just as easily as
to Cleveland, and that clever ideas, hard work, and insight are distributed
quite evenly around the world.
--
Ed Huntress
"J. R. Carroll" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
>
>
>
> "Ed Huntress" <[email protected]> wrote in message
> news:[email protected]...
> > "J. R. Carroll" <[email protected]> wrote in message
> > news:[email protected]...
> > >
> > > "Ed Huntress" <[email protected]> wrote in message
> > > news:[email protected]...
> > > > "J. R. Carroll" <[email protected]> wrote in message
> > > > news:[email protected]...
> > > > >
> > > > > "F. George McDuffee" <[email protected]> wrote in message
> > > > > news:[email protected]...
> > > >
> > > If Detroit or Windsor can't stay busy or if GM files it won't be
because
> > > they couldn't get the answer right. It will be because they kept
asking
> > the
> > > wrong damned question.
> >
> > And are you talking about a solution for 10% of the market, or are you
> > claiming you have a general question and a general solution for it?
>
> It isn't a claim Ed, it is a proven philosophy and business model. It will
> work wherever you choose to run it if the infrastructure is in place.
Proven for what percentage of the economy? Are you suggesting this is a
general model that will sustain our economy as a whole? If so, how would you
apply it to, say, the manufacturing of shirts? What philosophy and business
model will let you make shirts at a price/quality tradeoff that competes
with rural China or Bangladesh? Child labor could help, I suppose...
>
> > Because we can always make a positive anecdote of the virtues of 10%, if
> we
> > neglect the fact that an economy is all 100%, and that the consequences
of
> > what happens to the other 90% eventually catches up with all of us.
> >
> > Sooner or later, you have to answer the question of how you compete with
> 80
> > cents/hour wages, when technology and business expertise can be packaged
> > into shipping containers and sent to Bangalore or Shanghai just as
easily
> as
> > to Cleveland, and that clever ideas, hard work, and insight are
> distributed
> > quite evenly around the world.
>
> Focusing on wages is exactly the wrong thing to do. I paid the tool room
> guys a five dollar premium to the market, provided excellent medical
> benefits, paid time off, and contributed the legal maximum to our 401K for
> every employee at the time that was 4 to 1.
> You are closer to the mark with the clever ideas part however and I agree
> that no one group has a lock on that.
Your $5 premium probably was around 20% of 40% of your costs: as a round
approximation, perhaps 8% of your cost of production, based on
tooling-industry rules of thumb.
When you're up against 80 cents/hour, how do you account for the 96%
disadvantage? Do you think that improved efficiencies in general (not just
yours, but those of the economy as a whole) can cover 96% differences? Any
model that I know of, that points in that possible direction, is based on
getting rid of all of those people you employ and adopting the values and
standards of the Third World.
And then business in general winds up hoist on its own petard.
>
> If you think that GM is tanking because of their labor contracts or
pension
> obligations you are just plain wrong. They suck hind tit because their
> business model if for shit.
So you're saying they can absorb $1,500/car just by having a better business
model than Toyota or Hyundai? And then, after gaining a $1,500/car advantage
over them simply through smarter organization, that they can maintain that
advantage in a viciously competitive global market?
These are all fine assertions, John, but I'd like to see the specifics.
Frankly, I don't believe you can "business-model" your way to success when
you have the kind of legacy overhead that GM has. That is, unless your
business model is based on moving all of your manufacturing offshore and
abandoning your legacy entitlements to the federal government.
--
Ed Huntress
"F. George McDuffee" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
> <snip>
> >If Detroit or Windsor can't stay busy or if GM files it won't be because
> >they couldn't get the answer right. It will be because they kept asking
the
> >wrong damned question.
> =============
> Right on!!!!! You also need to include Ford. A major
> contributing factor is that they can't decide if they are banks
> or car companies. They also seem to have forgotten than you
> can't milk a "cash cow" if it is dead.....
They're doing better as banks.
What's your SPECIFIC suggestion, George?
--
Ed Huntress
Then read the previous post. What were you doing reading the response to
nothing first?
You bottom posters are nuts and fanatics over something that went out in the
80s since threading browsers.
Keep your damn headers with the text.
When you get a browser that actually supports bottom posting I will join
you. Until then fuck off with your trolling.
"Cliff" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
> On Mon, 20 Jun 2005 15:14:16 -0500, Scott Willing
> <[email protected]> wrote:
>
> >BTW, the same purists (aka usenet nazis) will slap your willy for
> >top-posting too, and they really get their knickers in a knot about
> >it. We can only assume their mommies overdid the spanking a bit... and
> >that they really, *really* liked it.
>
> It's nice to know the CONTEXT or the question before
> the response, for one thing.
Actually the US worked with both the Nationalists and the Communists during
WWII. The Chinese Communists were very helpful during WWII. The
Nationalist government, army and police were largely corrupt while the
Communist were much better disciplined and effective at fighting the
Japanese. That is also why it was so easy for them to chase the
Nationalists off the mainland. We supplied them with quite a bit of arms
and equipment. The communists returned any escaped POWs to US units while
the nationalist were just as likely to give them back to the Japanese if the
money was right.
It was only after the war when the Communists started gaining ground and Mao
aligned himself closer to Stalin that we started getting nervous.
--
Glenn Ashmore
I'm building a 45' cutter in strip/composite. Watch my progress (or lack
there of) at: http://www.rutuonline.com
Shameless Commercial Division: http://www.spade-anchor-us.com
"Charlie Self" <[email protected]> wrote in message
> You think? It was the Nationalist Chinese we assisted in WWII, not the
> Reds. IIRC, Mao and buddies didn't take over until '49, at which time
> the Nationalists boogied to Formosa (aka Taiwan). The Reds have never
> owed us anything but a hard time, in their philosophy, which they have
> given us time after time.
>
"F. George McDuffee" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
> <snip>
> >> Our excuse for killing off manufacturing in the UK was Thatcher.
> >> What's America's excuse ?
> >
> >Free trade. There are highly regarded experts from both ends of the
> >political spectrum who say it's necessary.
> >
> >They all have jobs in the service sector and are relatively immune from
> >foreign competition themselves.
> ============================================
> This may have been true at the higher levels at one time but with
> telecommuting service sector jobs are also rapidly disappearing.
> For example many low to mid level accounting jobs such as tax
> returns are now done overseas. Where the jobs cannot be done
> externally H1B visas allow worker importation.
I didn't intend to lead that point to a discussion of how vulnerable service
sector jobs are, because, as you say, that situation in general is changing
fast.
With tongue in cheek, I was suggesting that US government economists, so
far, aren't showing much worry about having their *own* jobs outsourced to
India.
However, given that the ideological posture of our current administration
seems to have no throttle and a seemingly unlimited fuel tank, they may give
that one a try, as well.
--
Ed Huntress
"Andy Dingley" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
> On Wed, 15 Jun 2005 18:30:40 GMT, [email protected] (Dave Mundt) wrote:
>
> >
> > Hum...so you DON'T think it is a problem that America
> >is losing the knowledge, skills and tools to manufacture
> >even the basic tools we need to keep society going and the
> >infrastructure kept up?
>
> Our excuse for killing off manufacturing in the UK was Thatcher.
> What's America's excuse ?
Free trade. There are highly regarded experts from both ends of the
political spectrum who say it's necessary.
They all have jobs in the service sector and are relatively immune from
foreign competition themselves.
--
Ed Huntress
You must live in a tiny town if they sent out an Engineer for that...LOL
Did he have ditch digging caluses on his hands too?
Nice going. Never give up when you know you are right.
You would never get a rebate here for high voltage. power delivered is power
billed.
"Robert Bonomi" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
> In article <[email protected]>,
> lionslair at consolidated dot net <"lionslair at consolidated dot net">
wrote:
> >Robert Bonomi wrote:
> >
> [[.. munch ..]]
> >>
> >> It's a matter of history. The "standard" -- for what was expected at
the
> >> outlet in a residence -- changed over the years as power distribution
got
> >> better.
> >>
> [[.. munch ..]]
> >>
> >> Your Honda is probably at claimed 125V because of *lousy* voltage
regulation.
> >> 125V at 'no load', dropping to 120V (or lower) as the load increases.
> >>
> >Our house in the mountains of No. Ca. was a few miles from a swinging
> >transformer.
> >Under low load, the transformer was at one voltage, as the current
increased,
> >the transformer switched in another set of windings up until it hit an
end.
> >The swinging transformer had massive make-before-break contacts that
always rang
> >(voltage hits) as it moved. I called the power company when it started
hitting
> >my lines heavy (I was logging them on my APC's) and they found a burnt
contact.
> >
>
> At one point I lived "across the parking lot" from the local sub-station.
> the feed came out of the substation, down *one* pole, with the transformer
> and the drop to the 6 apartment building I was living in. the building
> was turn-of-the-century construction, with -- I think -- still original
> wiring. I could get an *nine* volt drop at the wall, by kicking on one
> of my pieces of electronic test gear -- one that drew about 8 amps.
*OUCH*.
>
> Anyway, I'm across the street from a school, 2 blocks from a *big*
hospital,
> And had several other sizable 'commercial' users within a few blocks.
> A line-voltage monitor showed as high as 133V in early AM, with it slowly
and
> somewhat erratically falling to about 127V by somewhere after 9AM on a
> week-day.
>
> *THAT* led to a call/complaint to the electric company, Demanding that
> they get the voltage down to the 'proper' level. (That degree of excess
> voltage _is_ hard on equipment, and other things. Reduces the effective
> life of incandescent bulbs by about _half_, in fact.)
>
> For some reason, customer service didn't want to believe me -- I guess
> complaints about "too much power" are *really* rare. :)
>
> They suggested that what I was reporting "couldn't be happening".
> That whatever I was using to read the voltage must be 'in error'.
>
> I pointed out that I had _five_ separate pieces of test equipment, by five
> different manufacturers, that were all telling the _same_ story, within
about
> 2V (analog readout uncertainty on some of the meters). That all were
> industrial- and/or lab-grade gear. That the precision-reading unit
(readable
> to 1/4v or finer) had been used for 'reference checks' at half-a-dozen
other
> locations around the city, and registered 118.5 - 121.5 at *every* other
> location. (About the only thing I didn't have was a _recording_ meter /
data-
> logger. :)
>
> They _grudgingly_ agreed to send an engineer out to see me. He took
> one look at my 'bench', and said "Hell, you've got better equipment there
> than _I_ do." Then, looked at my readings and said "that's not right!"
> (He didn't even bother to cross-check with his own gear.) Borrowed my
phone,
> called in to the office, and ordered an _immediate_ roll of a maintenance
> team to the substation, and goes outside to wait for the crew to show up.
> Which they did, in less than 15 minutes. Less than half an hour later,
> my instrumentation is showing a "respectable" 117V. rising all the way
> to 123V when the rest of the neighborhood shut down.
>
> I even got a credit on my bill -- where they went back an re-figured what
the
> kilowatt-hours _should_ have been if they had not been delivering 'too
high'
> voltage. I'd only lived there a few months, but they back-credited to the
> date I moved in. It was about 15% of everything I'd paid.
>
Gunner wrote:
> On Mon, 20 Jun 2005 18:20:28 GMT, "Vaughn Simon"
>
>> Please people! Trim your posts. If you do so, you will not only save
>>bandwidth
>
> Bandwidth is a non issue. Not since the binary groups started putting
> 3 hour movies on the net...
Perhaps but there are still a lot of people using slow dialup
modems and bandwidth remains an issue with them even on these
text newsgroups. Clipping the message appropriately also helps
improve legibility.
Anthony
Too_Many_Tools wrote:
>Thanks for the reply.
>
>I would agree that cordless tools have a spot in the AHP workshop since
>one can recharge them during off load hours.
>
>Where would one find 12v motors in the suitable HP and speeds to
>retrofit something like a table saw?
>
>In considering this subject, a lineshaft approach does come to mind but
>unfortunately you rarely see the needed equipment at HD or Lowes. I am
>not to crazy about chucking all the stationary power tools that have
>taken me decades to collect. Also, lineshafts take up room, linedriven
>tools are required to stay in one place and cannot be mounted on wheels
>to optimize shop space as needed. A workshop should be no larger than
>necessary for the heating/cooling aspect that also takes energy.
>
>TMT
>
>
>
There was a recent article in one of the wood working magazines about
cordless tools on the higher end beginning to use lithium ion batteries
instead of nicads. Apparently they can give one hell of a current draw
and run at a slightly higher voltage (28V?). Anyway, along with the
usual benefits for contractors on cordless drills and such there was
great promise for cordless table saws and larger equipment due to the
ability to run for extended periods at the higher current draw.
It doesn't help today but there is hope in the near future for the
off-gridders and job site work.
Koz
"F. George McDuffee" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
> <snip>
> >Perhaps, but half of my customers are in Europe and Asia. My feeling is
that
> >the value you add is what customers are interested in. It goes right to
> >their bottom line.
> ============================
> Big problem is that you can't tell what also comes off the bottom
> line as a result because is concealed as higher taxes, and/or
> quality of life issues such as higher crime rates with increased
> insurance and alarm costs. It is also displaced in time, in that
> you may see an immediate benefit now, but much higher costs
> later. Think about changing the oil in your car. Don't change
> it now, save a little money now, pay a lot more later or do
> without a car.
>
This isn't a problem at all. Calculating the value in manufacturing is a
reasonable precise and very doable exercise.
It is not much of an art but does require a thougough understanding of every
element involved.
--
John R. Carroll
Machining Solution Software, Inc.
Los Angeles San Francisco
www.machiningsolution.com
How many of these tools are going to operate at the same time? What do
those amps add up to? With some extra margin, that is the demand you need
to satisfy. It isn't the sum of all the tools, unless they will all be
running at the same time.
Steve
"Too_Many_Tools" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
>I am posting this subject in three different groups to hopefully get a
> good cross section of ideas. I apologize ahead of time if this offends
> anyone.
>
> When one considers a workshop with metal and wood working capabilities,
> what tradeoffs have you made to have a working shop in an alternate
> homepower environment where every amp is precious?
>
> Obviously hand nonpowered tools take on a special importance.
>
> Cordless tools come to mind but which ones and what batteries?
>
> When considerng stationary tools like drills, lathes, mills, saws,
> grinders, etc., which ones fit best in an environment where one is off
> grid?
>
> Special operations like welding and using air compressors would seem to
> need consideration because of their unique requirements.
>
> I would be interested in hearing how others have approached this
> situation and what implementations they have adopted.
>
> Thanks for any suggestions or comments that you can offer.
>
> TMT
>
On 14 Jun 2005 12:07:53 -0700, "Too_Many_Tools"
<[email protected]> wrote:
>When one considers a workshop with metal and wood working capabilities,
>what tradeoffs have you made to have a working shop in an alternate
>homepower environment where every amp is precious?
8kW (surges to 16) can handle most everything a home shop is likely to
have. We have a few limitations - Hypertherm 600 suffers nuisance
cut-outs above 45 Amps. It will also temporarily shut down if the
compressor starts mid-cut. So I let the compressor tank fill, then
shut the pump power off before starting the cut. For prolonged cutting
at max output, I run the backup generator for boost. Lincoln SW TIG
175 can't be run at full output off our inverters, amp draw is too
high. Could be solved by trading up to an inverter based unit if I
didn't already have an engine driven substitute for the bigger jobs.
Powermig 255 seems perfectly happy at full output.
>Obviously hand nonpowered tools take on a special importance.
Yuck! Perish the thought.
>Cordless tools come to mind but which ones and what batteries?
Cordless tools are great for jobs where the cord is a nuisance, but
there' isn't any special need for them with home power. Careful though
if you're using some of the modsquare (often called modsine)
inverters, they can cook the chargers included with some cordless
tools.
>When considerng stationary tools like drills, lathes, mills, saws,
>grinders, etc., which ones fit best in an environment where one is off
>grid?
There aren't really any special considerations unless you're trying to
get away with too-small inverter capacity. Keep in mind that if you're
maxing out system capacity in the shop, it won't be available in the
house at the same time. Having said that, I don't bother to tell my
wife what I'm up to in the shop. If together we managed to exceed
capacity, the inverters would trip off automatically. And that could
happen more easily if for instance batteries were low, and you have
surges due to large loads starting. The temporary voltage drop might
be sensed, and cause a shutdown.
>Special operations like welding and using air compressors would seem to
>need consideration because of their unique requirements.
One thing I've done with all equipment purchases is to make sure
they're easily returnable just in case they're not compatible with the
inverters. VFDs could be an issue for instance. Although the only
thing we've ever returned due to incompatibility was a bread maker
that ran at double speed.
Wayne
LOL....good one!
"Pete C." <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
>
> Why would the Japanese devalue their product by putting "Made in USA" on
> it?
>
> Pete C.
That is because the contract didn't spell their name correctly like you did.
"Me" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
> Remeber the Red chineese never did pay us back for WWII........
>
>
> Me
Motor based appliances are not fixed resistances. As the voltage goes down
the current goes up to achieve the same horsepower and the same RPM
"Robert Bonomi" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
> In article <[email protected]>,
> Tim Thomson <[email protected]> wrote:
> >
> >As a matter of fact would his metor not run less with some things like
his
> >fridge, vacuum, hair dryer, washing machine, dish washer, etc. What makes
a
> >power metor spin? If voltage goes up does the amp draw go down?
>
> Are you familiar with "Ohm's Law"?
>
> If the _resistance_ is a fixed value, guess what happens to the current
(amps)
> when the voltage goes up.
>
>
>
<snip>
>If Detroit or Windsor can't stay busy or if GM files it won't be because
>they couldn't get the answer right. It will be because they kept asking the
>wrong damned question.
=============
Right on!!!!! You also need to include Ford. A major
contributing factor is that they can't decide if they are banks
or car companies. They also seem to have forgotten than you
can't milk a "cash cow" if it is dead.....
On Fri, 17 Jun 2005 18:02:44 GMT, "Pete C." <[email protected]>
wrote:
>See my notes below re: saving four steps of energy conversion for
>applications where you are able to use air power directly such as nail
>guns and die grinders. Four fewer conversion steps *has* to be more
>efficient.
You only need to calculate the numbers for volume and consumption, as
I'm in agreement that with good wind, it's feasible that a resourceful
scrounger could put up sufficient rotor area.
> It is far cheaper and lower maintenance to use a
>large air or water reservoir than to use a huge string of batteries with
>limited life spans and hazardous lead and acid to dispose of properly at
>every battery replacement.
Excellent point, and I've committed it to memory in case I decide to
do a utility-scale installation. :-)
>The batteries in your string may last what, perhaps 8 years?
They're nearly ten years old now, and I won't be surprised if they
make 15 or 20. But home power systems pretty well always need *some*
batteries, so all we're talking about is whether the size could be
reduced somewhat by an additional system. And keep in mind that a
primary goal of home power (at least at my place), is to minimize the
energy that makes a trip through the batteries.
>Perhaps because I haven't seen the concept even proposed in any
>alternate energy books. As far as I know CAS and PH are both fairly new
>concepts that originated from electric utilities need for a way to store
>excess generating capacity during off peak times for use in peak shaving
>later.
Well, since my uh, somewhat unconventional neighbor ;-) thought of
doing compressed air, I think that if it were viable for home power,
it should have become popular by now. The subject of home power scale
pumped hydro comes up here regularly, and those impossible numbers can
be found in the archives.
>This would primarily apply to wind generation where peak gusts could
>produce power faster than the batteries could accept it, causing that
>power to be dissipated by the charge controller.
I've never heard of that being an issue, and it certainly hasn't come
up at my place, which has a high ratio of wind charging capacity to
battery size, and some pretty gusty winds.
>Any reason not to combine both and put up your tall tower with the
>electric gen up top and hang a compressor at a lower point on the same
>tower?
I think that once you run some numbers, you'll find that an air system
with the capacity you're thinking of will need several big rotors.
While I do have a small wind turbine scabbed onto my tower some
distance from the top, I couldn't add even one Bowjon type thing the
same way. Cheap rotors (multi-piece sheet metal) end up being pretty
heavy. IIRC, the Bowjon has a gearbox as well as the pump.
>Guess you just need to setup a heat exchanger from your inverter(s) to
>capture the waste heat for your DHW.
If you're serious, I'd like to see some numbers. How much can the
waste heat from 12kWhrs of inverter use raise the temperature of 80
gallons of water? And how practical is it to capture that by adding
yet another element to a solar water-heating system?
>Soft start inverter drive to a three phase well pump with an unloader
>valve? :)
Except for the unloader valve which isn't required, that's an approach
I've recommended previously here, partly because the drop in wire size
can save a few bucks on a deep hole. But you're still talking about a
good-sized inverter, plus a transformer, plus a VFD. Considering the
other benefits of dual inverters, our preference was to do that
instead, even though at 1/2hp a VFD wasn't required here, so the
savings on that didn't count.
>The only way to get reasonable efficiency out of a gen/bat/inv setup is
>to size the generator to just barely above the average load and run it
>24x7, and that requires a pretty specialized generator to handle that
>duty. Not something I'd consider unless I had my own nat gas well, or
>bio-gas generator.
Why do you say 24-7? An affordable startup concept I've recommended to
a few is an inverter/charger, batteries, and a Honda EU series. Run
the generator, say, every day for a couple of hours at max output
during peak load times, and for several hours every so often for
battery health. Add solar, wind, etc. as budget allows until generator
time is minimal. For example - DR1512, EU2000, and a string of
batteries from Sam's Club - perhaps $2k total.
>Looks like you had to go to some extremes to get your Internet
>connectivity.
We were fortunate to be the telco's guinea pig for a couple of radio
systems. The current one gives us multiple POTS lines (although we
only use one) plus DSL. Standard bill, same as if we were hard-wired.
Satellite intenet and next gen wi-fi brings similar connectivity to
just about anyone who needs it.
>Perhaps as I'm able to build up some AE projects I'll be able to cut
>operating expenses enough to start to get ahead.
You have a home shop and an idea for a cheaper alternative to
batteries, the cost of which home power users love to complain about.
Do I need to spell it out for you? ;-)
Wayne
wmbjk wrote:
> On 26 Jun 2005 19:48:32 -0700, "Too_Many_Tools"
> <[email protected]> wrote:
>
>
>
>>If you have more to contribute on subject, please feel free to offer
>>it.
>>
>>Thanks in advance,
>>
>>TMT
>
>
> Here's a sample day's work (yesterday's) in an off-grid workshop. The
> project was building the last 2 of 5 scissor trusses for a friend's
> aircraft hangar. All material was scrap - chords of 2" and 1.5"
> schedule 40 pipe. Long braces from T posts, shorter ones from 5/8"
> sucker rod. Most of the material was cut a few days ago. I wore out 3
> chop saw blades (medium quality ones) which should give you an idea of
> run time. The trusses are 40' wide, but built in halves. Each half
> took about 30 minutes to lay out and prep, including about 15 minutes
> use of a 4" side grinder. Then 26 welds per side, flip, another 26
> welds. Layout, prep, and welding - about one hour total per half, with
> a long break between each one to cool off. I built 4 halves, about 100
> minutes welding for the day. I didn't check the current draw, but the
> machine was set at 280 inches per second, 18 Volts, with .035" solid
> wire. Perhaps 5kW input. Charging rate was medium, there was good sun,
> but almost no wind, which was nice because I could leave the shop
> doors open. When I quit for the day, my wife commented that battery
> state of charge had dropped 6 Amp hours, and that she'd used the AC in
> the office for a couple of hours. On this project, like most others
> here, there wasn't any penalty for being off-grid, which is way cool
> IMO.
>
> Wayne
Ah Wayne, it looks like your saying 5kW for 1.6 hours and claiming that
it equates to 6 amp hours.
Would you like to refrase that amd perhaps look at the maths.
You use of units may be suspect. And your numbers would suggest that you
can only work when the sun is out.
5Kw input for 1.6 hours at 24V looks suspiciously like 333Ah.
On Sun, 26 Jun 2005 11:31:04 -0400, "John P Bengi" <JBengi
(spamm)@(spamm) yahoo,com> wrote:
>"daestrom" <daestrom@NO_SPAM_HEREtwcny.rr.com> wrote in message
>news:[email protected]...
>> The subject is 'workshop in an alternate homepower environment', but it
>has
>> degenerated to YAWVGM (yet-another-wayne-versus-george-match).
>I am onboard totally with you on this one. Must be the Great Lakes
>environment...LOL Hot huh?
What the heck are you talkin' about Gymmy Bob? I count 12 posts from
you so far in this thread. 10 are your usual worthless jackass
comments, and none contain so much as a hint of off-grid workshop
experience. Which is hardly surprising, given that somebody who posts
24-7 hasn't any need for a workshop on or off grid. George has dropped
14 steaming loads so far, with the only off-grid workshop connection
being his resentment of mine. No surprise there either. My posts total
31, half dead on topic (which is sometimes a bit like work), the
others being my reward - getting to skewer both the man of a thousand
IDs, and the Blunder From Down Under. Although frankly, the two of you
are making it so easy, you're taking most of the fun out of it.
Wayne
On 26 Jun 2005 19:48:32 -0700, "Too_Many_Tools"
<[email protected]> wrote:
>If you have more to contribute on subject, please feel free to offer
>it.
>
>Thanks in advance,
>
>TMT
Here's a sample day's work (yesterday's) in an off-grid workshop. The
project was building the last 2 of 5 scissor trusses for a friend's
aircraft hangar. All material was scrap - chords of 2" and 1.5"
schedule 40 pipe. Long braces from T posts, shorter ones from 5/8"
sucker rod. Most of the material was cut a few days ago. I wore out 3
chop saw blades (medium quality ones) which should give you an idea of
run time. The trusses are 40' wide, but built in halves. Each half
took about 30 minutes to lay out and prep, including about 15 minutes
use of a 4" side grinder. Then 26 welds per side, flip, another 26
welds. Layout, prep, and welding - about one hour total per half, with
a long break between each one to cool off. I built 4 halves, about 100
minutes welding for the day. I didn't check the current draw, but the
machine was set at 280 inches per second, 18 Volts, with .035" solid
wire. Perhaps 5kW input. Charging rate was medium, there was good sun,
but almost no wind, which was nice because I could leave the shop
doors open. When I quit for the day, my wife commented that battery
state of charge had dropped 6 Amp hours, and that she'd used the AC in
the office for a couple of hours. On this project, like most others
here, there wasn't any penalty for being off-grid, which is way cool
IMO.
Wayne
On 14 Jun 2005 12:36:13 -0700, MikeMandaville <[email protected]> wrote:
> I second what Robert Bonomi has said. What's wrong with good old
> fashioned human power? Such machinery was once very common. Take a
> look at some pictures of old machinery, and you will find an apprentice
> who is busy turning a flywheel all day long, and observing his master
> at work, thereby gaining a firsthand knoiwledge which no number of
> words can communicate. Nowadays, however, such flywheel turners tend
> to be very expensive. Therefore, I recommend that you build yourself a
> squirrelcage apparatus, and purchase a greyhound to run in it. Retired
> racing greyhounds are put to death if nobody wants them. I know a lady
> who has a retired racer, and he is a wonderful pet. A racer is happy
> when he is racing. This is of the very nature of a racer. So give a
> veteran a job, for god's sake, and build a squirrelcage power plant.
Along the same lines, I would suggest to build an internal combustion
engine powered by the the farting gas. You need to assure a steady
supply of beans and cabbage if you want this to work well. You will
need a flexible vinyl line for supplying gas to the engine, if you
want to move about the shope while the engine is running.
i
> Mike Mandaville
> providing meaningful solutions for the workaday world
>
--
"MikeMandaville" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
> And for those who might think that fart gas, otherwise known as bio
> gas, is unrealistic, here is the Mother Earth News "Plowboy Interview"
> of L. John Fry, who powered his farm with a generator turned by an
> engine which ran on this gas. This engine ran non-stop for six solid
> years:
>
> http://journeytoforever.org/biofuel_library/MENintvus/fryintvu.html
>
AIR, it's possible to get somewhere in the neighborhood of 2-6 CF of methane
from a dry pound of biomass. It's interesting to ponder how many pounds of
biomass one must produce to replace the total consumption of natural gas in
the US. The idea can make sense in some situations but is far from a
universal solution.
On 2005-06-14 [email protected] said:
>Newsgroups: alt.energy.homepower,rec.crafts.metalworking,rec.
>woodworking
>I am posting this subject in three different groups to hopefully
>get a good cross section of ideas. I apologize ahead of time if
>this offends anyone.
>When one considers a workshop with metal and wood working
>capabilities, what tradeoffs have you made to have a working shop
>in an alternate homepower environment where every amp is precious?
>Obviously hand nonpowered tools take on a special importance.
>Cordless tools come to mind but which ones and what batteries?
>When considerng stationary tools like drills, lathes, mills, saws,
>grinders, etc., which ones fit best in an environment where one is
>off grid?
>Special operations like welding and using air compressors would
>seem to need consideration because of their unique requirements.
>I would be interested in hearing how others have approached this
>situation and what implementations they have adopted.
>Thanks for any suggestions or comments that you can offer.
>TMT
My shop contains a 1HP air compressor (real, 1970's DeVilbiss), Miller
135amp 120volt MIG welder, metal lathe, drill press, radial-arm saw,
small table saw, assorted powered hand tools.
Because of all the motors, I chose a Trace sinewave inverter, 4KW to
cover starting surges (SW4024). Battery is 550 amp-hour, 24 volt,
T-105 golf cart, 3 parallel strings of 4 each. 1 KW of PV panels (16
Solarex 64 watt). System is in its 6th year of operation, supplying
household and work needs.
I work alone, so machines are run singly. Duty cycle is low; so is
energy consumption. I have yet to need to run a generator to cover
my working load, though I do use it to maintain the battery in our
rare cloudy weather, then avoiding power-intensive work.
When the shop was under construction, power initially was from the
generator. Most of the time is just sat, thrashing at no load, being
totally inefficient. Later construction was powered by the solar
system, blessedly silently recharging itself in between power draws.
When I have production welding, sand blasting, or intensive use of an
air-powered die grinder, I will probably have to use the generator,
passing power through the inverter and maintaining the battery
charge.
Tom Willmon
near Mountainair, (mid) New Mexico, USA
Net-Tamer V 1.12.0 - Registered
wmbjk wrote:
> On Sun, 19 Jun 2005 18:30:17 +1000, George Ghio <[email protected]>
> wrote:
>
>
>>Pointless exercise with Wayne. He can talk the legs off a donkey but
>>still can't explain his claim of two days autonomy for his system.
>
>
> Good timing George, Pete has mentioned that he's going to build a
> solar water-heating system in the near future. As you're a *solar*
> power consultant, I expect you'll want to offer some tips for his
> project. Oh darn, I just remembered, you've written that
> propane-fueled water heating is more "appropriate". OK then, just tell
> him how many pounds of fuel you've hauled during your time off-grid,
> and how much cheaper and smarter you believe that is over his plan of
> spending a few bucks and some time fabricating a system.
>
>
>>And yes he does all his real work during daylight hours.
>
>
> I assume you'll be explaining how that differs from what most people
> do, why welding at night is better, and how when you're drawing 400
> Amps, it makes a big difference whether or not your 60 Amps of PV is
> lit....
>
> The thread is titled "workshop in a alternate home power environment",
> and it has included some discussion about welding in an off-grid
> workshop. Since you're a self-described expert welder who also claims
> nearly two decades of success in the professional "designing" of solar
> power setups, it would seem you're the perfect person to share with
> everyone exactly how you handle welding at your own place. I'm sure
> Pete and many others would be interested to hear how a
> "professional's" system could handle his Miller Syncrowave 250, and
> exactly how much of your daily energy production is available for
> power tools in general.
>
> Wayne
Ah, Wayne speaks again.
Wayne, I would suggest that utill you can actually supply the numbers
for the system you tout as a marvel of your design prowess that you
forgo giving advice.
wmbjk wrote:
> On Tue, 28 Jun 2005 13:59:42 +1000, George Ghio <[email protected]>
> wrote:
>
>
>>wmbjk wrote:
>>
>>>On Tue, 28 Jun 2005 09:36:36 +1000, George Ghio <[email protected]>
>>>wrote:
>>>
>>>>wmbjk wrote:
>
>
>>>>>Here's a sample day's work (yesterday's) in an off-grid workshop. The
>>>>>project was building the last 2 of 5 scissor trusses for a friend's
>>>>>aircraft hangar. All material was scrap - chords of 2" and 1.5"
>>>>>schedule 40 pipe. Long braces from T posts, shorter ones from 5/8"
>>>>>sucker rod. Most of the material was cut a few days ago. I wore out 3
>>>>>chop saw blades (medium quality ones) which should give you an idea of
>>>>>run time. The trusses are 40' wide, but built in halves. Each half
>>>>>took about 30 minutes to lay out and prep, including about 15 minutes
>>>>>use of a 4" side grinder. Then 26 welds per side, flip, another 26
>>>>>welds. Layout, prep, and welding - about one hour total per half, with
>>>>>a long break between each one to cool off. I built 4 halves, about 100
>>>>>minutes welding for the day. I didn't check the current draw, but the
>>>>>machine was set at 280 inches per second, 18 Volts, with .035" solid
>>>>>wire. Perhaps 5kW input. Charging rate was medium, there was good sun,
>>>>>but almost no wind, which was nice because I could leave the shop
>>>>>doors open. When I quit for the day, my wife commented that battery
>>>>>state of charge had dropped 6 Amp hours, and that she'd used the AC in
>>>>>the office for a couple of hours. On this project, like most others
>>>>>here, there wasn't any penalty for being off-grid, which is way cool
>>>>>IMO.
>>>>>
>>>>>Wayne
>
>
>>><the Blunder From Down Under wrote>
>
>
>>>Ah Wayne, it looks like your saying 5kW for 1.6 hours and claiming that
>>>
>>>>it equates to 6 amp hours.
>>>>
>>>>Would you like to refrase that amd perhaps look at the maths.
>>>>
>>>>You use of units may be suspect. And your numbers would suggest that you
>>>>can only work when the sun is out.
>>>>
>>>>5Kw input for 1.6 hours at 24V looks suspiciously like 333Ah.
>
>
>>>I started at about 8AM, and I finished up at about 4PM. During that
>>>time, 2000 Watts of tracked PV was doing its job, along with a tiny
>>>bit of help from 1300 Watts of wind generator in the AM. Duh!
>
>
>>5kW input wonderful. Yes I made a mistake, I used 100 minutes when in
>>fact you meant 8 hours. Sorry. So this would be 5kW for 8 hours which is
>>of course 40kWh which is 1666.66 Amp hours. Is this your wonderful two
>>days autonomy at work.
>
>
> No you Baron of Blunders, the largest part of the shop consumption was
> (about) 5kW for 100 minutes.
Welding;
100min / 60 = 1.6 hours X 5kW = 8000kWh / 24 = 333Ah
You had the demand part nearly right the
> first time. You simply neglected to account for the balance of the
> demands (all the house loads, about 4 kWhrs),
House;
4000Wh / 24 = 166.6Ah
and the *entire* supply
> side (about 12 kWhrs).
Input;
12000Wh / 24 = 500Ah
Total;
333Ah + 166.6Ah = 499.6Ah
Hmmm no deficit here.
Well Wayne you have claimed a 150Wh deficit. I may be a bit of a skeptic
here, but, some how I just can't see that all the other things you would
do in a workshop for the task would only use 150Wh. It looks like you
you did 100 minutes of welding then watched TV for the rest of the day.
You also claim 12000Wh input. What is this based on. Being summer in
your part of the world + the fact that hot panels have a reduced output
can it be that you are simply multiplying the rated output of the
panels by six. What was the logged input for the day? Surely you monitor
your system? Or is all of this just a guess?
Why you're now trying to multiply the short
> term shop power demand by 8 hours is between you and your therapist.
In fact you said "I started at about 8AM, and I finished up at about
4PM." This is some what longer than 100 minutes. With an input of 5kW.
The question remains; Can you make a coherent accounting of your energy
use/input for the day?
You see, if Too_Many_Tools is to set up an off grid workshop he might
find the actual numbers useful in deciding what he will do. How much
grinder time is 150Wh. It's just that 100 minutes work and the house
seems like you think that 100 minutes a day is a good days work.
I will give you as many attempts as you need to make sense. OTOH I don't
think you can balance your numbers. Surprise me.
>
> Face it man, you're busted. If there's a responsible authority
> controlling solar installers in your area, reading such a fundamental
> lapse in critical thinking by someone in their charge, then the writer
> would at the very least be called onto the carpet for remedial
> training. Not that such would do much good if he hadn't gotten the
> basics down after 20 years.
>
>
>>The biggest blunder - YOURS.
>
>
> Sure George, a system that can supply a day's use of workshop and all
> the house loads as well, and come out with a 150 Whr deficit is
> obviously just one giant blunder.
>
> Get help man.
>
> Wayne
On Tue, 28 Jun 2005 13:59:42 +1000, George Ghio <[email protected]>
wrote:
>wmbjk wrote:
>> On Tue, 28 Jun 2005 09:36:36 +1000, George Ghio <[email protected]>
>> wrote:
>>>wmbjk wrote:
>>>>Here's a sample day's work (yesterday's) in an off-grid workshop. The
>>>>project was building the last 2 of 5 scissor trusses for a friend's
>>>>aircraft hangar. All material was scrap - chords of 2" and 1.5"
>>>>schedule 40 pipe. Long braces from T posts, shorter ones from 5/8"
>>>>sucker rod. Most of the material was cut a few days ago. I wore out 3
>>>>chop saw blades (medium quality ones) which should give you an idea of
>>>>run time. The trusses are 40' wide, but built in halves. Each half
>>>>took about 30 minutes to lay out and prep, including about 15 minutes
>>>>use of a 4" side grinder. Then 26 welds per side, flip, another 26
>>>>welds. Layout, prep, and welding - about one hour total per half, with
>>>>a long break between each one to cool off. I built 4 halves, about 100
>>>>minutes welding for the day. I didn't check the current draw, but the
>>>>machine was set at 280 inches per second, 18 Volts, with .035" solid
>>>>wire. Perhaps 5kW input. Charging rate was medium, there was good sun,
>>>>but almost no wind, which was nice because I could leave the shop
>>>>doors open. When I quit for the day, my wife commented that battery
>>>>state of charge had dropped 6 Amp hours, and that she'd used the AC in
>>>>the office for a couple of hours. On this project, like most others
>>>>here, there wasn't any penalty for being off-grid, which is way cool
>>>>IMO.
>>>>
>>>>Wayne
>> <the Blunder From Down Under wrote>
>>Ah Wayne, it looks like your saying 5kW for 1.6 hours and claiming that
>>>it equates to 6 amp hours.
>>>
>>>Would you like to refrase that amd perhaps look at the maths.
>>>
>>>You use of units may be suspect. And your numbers would suggest that you
>>>can only work when the sun is out.
>>>
>>>5Kw input for 1.6 hours at 24V looks suspiciously like 333Ah.
>> I started at about 8AM, and I finished up at about 4PM. During that
>> time, 2000 Watts of tracked PV was doing its job, along with a tiny
>> bit of help from 1300 Watts of wind generator in the AM. Duh!
>5kW input wonderful. Yes I made a mistake, I used 100 minutes when in
>fact you meant 8 hours. Sorry. So this would be 5kW for 8 hours which is
>of course 40kWh which is 1666.66 Amp hours. Is this your wonderful two
>days autonomy at work.
No you Baron of Blunders, the largest part of the shop consumption was
(about) 5kW for 100 minutes. You had the demand part nearly right the
first time. You simply neglected to account for the balance of the
demands (all the house loads, about 4 kWhrs), and the *entire* supply
side (about 12 kWhrs). Why you're now trying to multiply the short
term shop power demand by 8 hours is between you and your therapist.
Face it man, you're busted. If there's a responsible authority
controlling solar installers in your area, reading such a fundamental
lapse in critical thinking by someone in their charge, then the writer
would at the very least be called onto the carpet for remedial
training. Not that such would do much good if he hadn't gotten the
basics down after 20 years.
>The biggest blunder - YOURS.
Sure George, a system that can supply a day's use of workshop and all
the house loads as well, and come out with a 150 Whr deficit is
obviously just one giant blunder.
Get help man.
Wayne
"wmbjk" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
> On Wed, 22 Jun 2005 05:10:55 -0500, "Arnold Walker"
> <[email protected]> wrote:
>
> >
> >"wmbjk" <[email protected]> wrote in message
> >news:[email protected]...
>
> >> Now, if compressed air is so much more efficient than batteries, then
> >> why do *you* think that we're seeing ICE/battery hybrid cars driving
> >> around, but not ICE/air hybrids?
> >>
> >> Wayne
>
> >Because it is pure PC instead of science for starts.
> >There are and have been air powered cars...they are lighter for a hybrid
> >version
> >than a battery hybrid.Since all you do is add a burner in most cases.
> >Brayton cycle in a turbine ....Or rankine or sterling in a piston .
>
> Off hand, I can think of three ICE/battery hybrids currently selling
> in good numbers - Toyota Prius, and Honda Civic and Accord. Unless you
> can offer some similar examples of ICE/air hybrids, I'm going to stick
> with the notion that car manufacturers haven't found compressed air to
> be a competitive energy storage medium for automobiles.
>
> Wayne
A more accurate answer is that Toyota and Honda chose to capitalize on the
PC ,while
GM,Mercedes ,and the of the auto world chose to look for an engine. That
actually was more effecent at something other than
emptying your pockets.
Stanley had third market manufacturers converting thier steamcars to air in
the early 1900's.
Many steamtrains are now ran on air due to boiler code worrys by insurance
companies.
If you ever get back to science,instead politics ....you will notice, much
of what is new is an old idea rehashed.
I ,personally, am happy building the equipment instead of relying on a
another person's word on the information.
If you really must get fried on your information ......the patent office has
about 150years of air drive and electric drive vehicles
to flame with you.I don't see the point.
----== Posted via Newsfeeds.Com - Unlimited-Uncensored-Secure Usenet News==----
http://www.newsfeeds.com The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World! 120,000+ Newsgroups
----= East and West-Coast Server Farms - Total Privacy via Encryption =----
"Me" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
> In article <[email protected]>,
> "Arnold Walker" <[email protected]> wrote:
>
> > Many steamtrains are now ran on air due to boiler code worrys by
insurance
> > companies.
>
> CFR (Call for Reference) on the above. as I believe it to be
> Bullshit..... the only Steampowered Trains still in existance,
> and in commercial service are in third and fouth world countries,
> and mostly run on diesel fired boilers. Turning big air compressors
> with diesel engines is a very wastefull way to move Railroad Rolling
> Stock.
>
>
> Me
Then you are bullshit ....Time Warner Theme parks for starts have done that
on most of thier trains.
There are historic trains all over the US running at this time.
----== Posted via Newsfeeds.Com - Unlimited-Uncensored-Secure Usenet News==----
http://www.newsfeeds.com The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World! 120,000+ Newsgroups
----= East and West-Coast Server Farms - Total Privacy via Encryption =----
Your are correct on equal danger.....but that is not the way some insurance
companies see it.
When you first built up an engine it is air tested,so virtual all steam
piston engine's start life on air drive.
One problem with theme parks like Disney is that the employees were used to
IC engines.
And waste a lot of steam because they don't understand the point of a
throttle and a cutout(variable timing link in other words)
The reason ,about seven steam trains are missing from Disney World.
Both good air and good steam operation gets max. expansion for the unit of
work done.
Steam is a little tricker because of overexpansion in the right
conditions.Air usually is retarded 10 degrees behind the the setting used
for a steamengine on a given load.
Look around and we will find at least one historical steam train running in
virtually every state.....Texas has three,Colorado has two,and so on.
One irony about your steamtrain remark....is that in the Golden Era of steam
the major number of the locomotives in operation were industrial not
commerical service.
In my hometown in East Texas during that time period....there were seven
railroad lines running thru town. Missouri and Southern Pacific had two
lines with Southern Pacific furnishing all contract rail and locomotive
maintenance service.And the rest of the lines were sawmill trains hauling
timber out of the woods.
Many quarries,mines,and shipyards had trains for do-it-yourself short line
work in other parts of the country.
"Juergen Hannappel" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
> Me <[email protected]> writes:
>
> > In article <[email protected]>,
> > "Arnold Walker" <[email protected]> wrote:
> >
> >> Many steamtrains are now ran on air due to boiler code worrys by
insurance
> >> companies.
> >
> > CFR (Call for Reference) on the above. as I believe it to be
> > Bullshit....
>
> I think so too, especially because even without the water an old
> boiler pressurized with air is also no small danger.
>
> > the only Steampowered Trains still in existance,
> > and in commercial service are in third and fouth world countries,
>
> There *might* be some stored steam engines still running, typically in
> chemistry or power plants where steam is available anyway and can be
> filled into the engine easily.
>
> --
> Dr. Juergen Hannappel http://lisa2.physik.uni-bonn.de/~hannappe
> mailto:[email protected] Phone: +49 228 73 2447 FAX ... 7869
> Physikalisches Institut der Uni Bonn Nussallee 12, D-53115 Bonn, Germany
> CERN: Phone: +412276 76461 Fax: ..77930 Bat. 892-R-A13 CH-1211 Geneve 23
----== Posted via Newsfeeds.Com - Unlimited-Uncensored-Secure Usenet News==----
http://www.newsfeeds.com The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World! 120,000+ Newsgroups
----= East and West-Coast Server Farms - Total Privacy via Encryption =----
"Me" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
> In article <[email protected]>,
> "Arnold Walker" <[email protected]> wrote:
>
> > Many steamtrains are now ran on air due to boiler code worrys by
insurance
> > companies.
>
> CFR (Call for Reference) on the above. as I believe it to be
> Bullshit..... the only Steampowered Trains still in existance,
> and in commercial service are in third and fouth world countries,
> and mostly run on diesel fired boilers. Turning big air compressors
> with diesel engines is a very wastefull way to move Railroad Rolling
> Stock.
>
>
> Me
They don't always have a IC engine on board for the compressor...
Some recompress themselves with exhaust air,then heat the air recovered in
the boiler.
Many mine trains also run on air since sparks can be deadly in the right
environment.
They usually are either diesel air or stored air trains.
----== Posted via Newsfeeds.Com - Unlimited-Uncensored-Secure Usenet News==----
http://www.newsfeeds.com The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World! 120,000+ Newsgroups
----= East and West-Coast Server Farms - Total Privacy via Encryption =----
On Fri, 17 Jun 2005 23:04:07 GMT, "Pete C." <[email protected]>
wrote:
>wmbjk wrote:
>>
>> On Fri, 17 Jun 2005 18:02:44 GMT, "Pete C." <[email protected]>
>> wrote:
>You would need the right location and the right shop use to make it
>practical. Good wind and a custom cabinet shop perhaps.
Perhaps one foreman cracking the whip on a dozen guys toiling with
air-powered sanders, drills, nailers and sprayers? It should be
relatively easy to calculate the daily compressed-air demands of that,
and multiply it by the desired number of days autonomy. I'm guessing
that a surplus 747 pumped up to 1000 psi might cover it. Add one man
to the crew to take care of all the windmills. :-)
>> >The batteries in your string may last what, perhaps 8 years?
>>
>> They're nearly ten years old now, and I won't be surprised if they
>> make 15 or 20. But home power systems pretty well always need *some*
>> batteries, so all we're talking about is whether the size could be
>> reduced somewhat by an additional system. And keep in mind that a
>> primary goal of home power (at least at my place), is to minimize the
>> energy that makes a trip through the batteries.
>
>That's pretty good battery life, you must keep on top of the
>maintenance.
My wife reminds me when 4 months is up, but I've usually already
checked the water at about 3 months. It's a big help that we have wind
power and tracking for the PV. So we have a much lower proportion of
our energy making a trip through the batteries than we would with
fixed PV alone. Less charging and discharging equals less maintenance
and longer battery life.
>I don't have any cites for it, but it seems quite reasonable to me to
>think that there could be windy times when the gen is capable of
>supplying more power than the charger is drawing, much like the gas
>generator running with the potential to supply say 4kw and a load on it
>of only 2kw.
Our wind generator (a typical type) for example makes 3 phase AC, and
has a rectifier/controller indoors. There's no "charger", and no waste
unless the batteries are full. Even then, discretionary loads can make
use of the surplus.
>> If you're serious, I'd like to see some numbers. How much can the
>> waste heat from 12kWhrs of inverter use raise the temperature of 80
>> gallons of water? And how practical is it to capture that by adding
>> yet another element to a solar water-heating system?
>Well, they have systems for recapturing waste heat from showers
>available commercially. They also have the energy recovery ventilators
>to recover some of the heat from the stale air they are exhausting.
>Someone's done the math on those items and determined that it's
>worthwhile.
>
>Unless you're in a cold climate where you can always directly utilize
>the waste heat for space heating I'd think there would be some merit to
>using it for preheat of water to the DHW system. Probably also slightly
>increase the life and efficiency of the inverter.
I'll give you this, you sure are determined. ;-)
>What's the transformer for? Most applications for VFDs that I've seen
>don't use them. Many of the small to mid sized VFDs are specifically
>rated to take single phase input and they're also a lot more reasonably
>priced these days. At some point I'll replace the rotary phase converter
>(home built, $20 in materials) on my Bridgeport with a VFD.
On home power setups, a transformer is often used to double the
voltage of a single 110V inverter to run standard submersible well
pumps. One model here
http://www.xantrex.com/web/id/114/p/1/pt/5/product.asp
I haven't heard of a VFD being used with an inverter, but it should be
feasible barring weird compatibility issues. I once set up a VFD to
run a 2hp well pump from a really crummy single phase 4500W
engine-driven generator. The idea was to use a 230V three phase motor,
in order to reduce wire size, lessen startup load on the generator,
and eliminate potential thrashing of the pump against an uncased bore.
>> Why do you say 24-7? An affordable startup concept I've recommended to
>> a few is an inverter/charger, batteries, and a Honda EU series. Run
>> the generator, say, every day for a couple of hours at max output
>> during peak load times, and for several hours every so often for
>> battery health. Add solar, wind, etc. as budget allows until generator
>> time is minimal. For example - DR1512, EU2000, and a string of
>> batteries from Sam's Club - perhaps $2k total.
>That can work fine as long as the goal is to gradually add other
>sources. If the plan is to stick with the generator as you comment I was
>replying to implied, then the 24x7 operation is what should allow you to
>operate at peak efficiency.
I got into this thread to rebut the position that generators on their
own are a good way to do off-grid power. But lots of people do use
generators alone. Compared to that, a
generator/inverter-charger/battery combo is a huge improvement, and if
properly sized can be a practical solution used indefinitely, even if
no other sources are ever brought online. Some inverters can even add
their output to the generator output, which provides a way to power
loads too big for either unit on its own. For explanation and theory,
start at page 57 of the 2mb manual at this site
http://www.xantrex.com/web/id/939/docserve.asp. In case anyone reads
ahead and freaks at the blizzard of optional settings on that unit,
I'll point out that most users change very few of the defaults. The
manual is a good read for anyone who'd like to check out the
capabilities of whole-house inverters.
>Well, up first on my list is a solar water heater to take over for the
>electric one the place came with. Should be a really easy project that
>will have a short payback time.
Excellent idea, here's a link you might find useful
http://members.cox.net/sunraysolar/pricelist.html
Wayne
On Sun, 19 Jun 2005 11:47:58 -0500, "B.B."
<[email protected]> wrote:
>In article <[email protected]>,
> "Arnold Walker" <[email protected]> wrote:
>
>>Another fly in the oiment on your battery remark.....if batteries are so
>>much effecient
>>at storaging .Why are repair shop using air tools instead battery powered
>>tools.
>
> Air tools are generally more compact and lighter than their electric
>counterparts. They can also move more energy in the same amount of time.
Not to mention the fact that the tools themselves tend to cost a lot
less.
In article <[email protected]>,
"Arnold Walker" <[email protected]> wrote:
> "Me" <[email protected]> wrote in message
> news:[email protected]...
> > In article <[email protected]>,
> > "Arnold Walker" <[email protected]> wrote:
> >
> > > Many steamtrains are now ran on air due to boiler code worrys by
> insurance
> > > companies.
> >
> > CFR (Call for Reference) on the above. as I believe it to be
> > Bullshit..... the only Steampowered Trains still in existance,
> > and in commercial service are in third and fouth world countries,
> > and mostly run on diesel fired boilers. Turning big air compressors
> > with diesel engines is a very wastefull way to move Railroad Rolling
> > Stock.
> >
> >
> > Me
> They don't always have a IC engine on board for the compressor...
> Some recompress themselves with exhaust air,then heat the air recovered in
> the boiler.
>
> Many mine trains also run on air since sparks can be deadly in the right
> environment.
> They usually are either diesel air or stored air trains.
>
>
>
> ----== Posted via Newsfeeds.Com - Unlimited-Uncensored-Secure Usenet
> News==----
> http://www.newsfeeds.com The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World! 120,000+
> Newsgroups
> ----= East and West-Coast Server Farms - Total Privacy via Encryption =----
You really don't know a lot about mechanical engineering, do you.....
>then heat the air recovered in the boiler.> Would this be in the
boilers that "due to boiler code worrys by insurance companies" you
state they don't use anymore????
Actually here in the USA most of the Mine Trains are electric with
Induction motors, and Solidstate FreqDrives that have no brushes or
Sparkpoints that aren't covered by Flame Supperssion Barriers....
Flame Suppresion Technology has been in our mines since the 1920's
when they were mostly electrified. A few are diesel-electric, and a
few more Propane-electric, but being a retired Powderman, I has some
small experience in the Industry, and have NEVER seen an Air Powered
Mine Donkey. Basic Menchanical Engineering Thermaldynamics should be
enough to convince anyone, that Stored Air Trains would be a Collasally
Inefficent way to power a mine donkey, and if it were even in the same
Order of Magnitude, all that conversion loss, would be a deal killer,
anyway.
Me CFR really means not your opinion, but someone elses actall
Reseached Facts..............
In article <[email protected]>,
"Arnold Walker" <[email protected]> wrote:
> Many steamtrains are now ran on air due to boiler code worrys by insurance
> companies.
CFR (Call for Reference) on the above. as I believe it to be
Bullshit..... the only Steampowered Trains still in existance,
and in commercial service are in third and fouth world countries,
and mostly run on diesel fired boilers. Turning big air compressors
with diesel engines is a very wastefull way to move Railroad Rolling
Stock.
Me
Me wrote:
> In article <[email protected]>,
> "Arnold Walker" <[email protected]> wrote:
>
>> Many steamtrains are now ran on air due to boiler code worrys by
>> insurance companies.
>
> CFR (Call for Reference) on the above. as I believe it to be
> Bullshit..... the only Steampowered Trains still in existance,
> and in commercial service are in third and fouth world countries,
> and mostly run on diesel fired boilers. Turning big air compressors
> with diesel engines is a very wastefull way to move Railroad Rolling
> Stock.
>
>
> Me
I'm just jumping into this thread, so I haven't seen what set it off, but
here are a few facts...
There are still a lot of steam locomotives in service around the country in
excursion service. They all run in the traditional way - oil or coal or
wood burned to make steam to move a piston. Note the repeated changes in
the state of the energy. Each time you make such a change you lose a lot
of energy - simple thermodynamics.
Reconditioned/restored old steam locos are often run on compressed air for
safety testing. They don't actually go anywhere that way.
Let's look at an energy balance. Energy to heat water from 60 F to 212 F -
152 BTU/lb. Energy to convert water at 212 F to steam at 212 F and 0 psig
- 970 BTU/lb. Energy to take steam at 0 psig to 300 psig - 235 BTU/lb.
Adding these up, the total energy to take water at 60 F to steam at 300
psig is 1357 BTU/lb. The only portion of this that is usable is the energy
in the steam. If the steam enters the cylinder at 300 psig and leaves at 0
psig the actual energy used to do work is 235 BTU/lb, or 17.3% of the
energy added to the water in the tender.
Now add in all the losses involved in converting coal or oil to steam (less
than 50% efficient) and you can see that a steam locomotive is very
inefficient.
So what about compressed air? If you look at the volumes involved you will
see that it is just not practical. 1 cu.ft. of air at 3000 psig is about
200 cu.ft. of air at 0 psig. 1 cu.ft of water is about 1630 cu.ft. of
steam at 0 psig. A UP Big Boy locomotive used about 100 gallons (13.3
cu.ft) of water per mile on flat ground with a full 7000 ton cargo load.
That means that to run on compressed air it would need a storage tank
capable of holding 3000 psig pressures of over 800 gallons to run one mile!
Just how close would the compressed air refueling stations need to be, and
how much would it cost to compress the air?
Sure compressed air is great in the shop, but do you really care if it costs
you 6 cents/hour instead of 2 cents/hour to run your pad sander? By the
same token, why are there no table saws that run on compressed air?
Probably because most of us have neither the money nor the space for a
compressor large enough to do the job.
Note that this is a reply to the whole thread, not to the actual poster the
reply is posted to. In face, he is right. Going from the rotary output of
a deisel engine to compresed air to reciprocating motion of pistons is very
inefficient, and that doesn't even take into account all of the other
problems (non-energy related) of reciprocating piston locomotive drivers.
Peter
--
-- PeterZ --
On Sun, 19 Jun 2005 18:30:17 +1000, George Ghio <[email protected]>
wrote:
>Pointless exercise with Wayne. He can talk the legs off a donkey but
>still can't explain his claim of two days autonomy for his system.
Good timing George, Pete has mentioned that he's going to build a
solar water-heating system in the near future. As you're a *solar*
power consultant, I expect you'll want to offer some tips for his
project. Oh darn, I just remembered, you've written that
propane-fueled water heating is more "appropriate". OK then, just tell
him how many pounds of fuel you've hauled during your time off-grid,
and how much cheaper and smarter you believe that is over his plan of
spending a few bucks and some time fabricating a system.
>And yes he does all his real work during daylight hours.
I assume you'll be explaining how that differs from what most people
do, why welding at night is better, and how when you're drawing 400
Amps, it makes a big difference whether or not your 60 Amps of PV is
lit....
The thread is titled "workshop in a alternate home power environment",
and it has included some discussion about welding in an off-grid
workshop. Since you're a self-described expert welder who also claims
nearly two decades of success in the professional "designing" of solar
power setups, it would seem you're the perfect person to share with
everyone exactly how you handle welding at your own place. I'm sure
Pete and many others would be interested to hear how a
"professional's" system could handle his Miller Syncrowave 250, and
exactly how much of your daily energy production is available for
power tools in general.
Wayne
On Wed, 22 Jun 2005 05:10:55 -0500, "Arnold Walker"
<[email protected]> wrote:
>
>"wmbjk" <[email protected]> wrote in message
>news:[email protected]...
>> Now, if compressed air is so much more efficient than batteries, then
>> why do *you* think that we're seeing ICE/battery hybrid cars driving
>> around, but not ICE/air hybrids?
>>
>> Wayne
>Because it is pure PC instead of science for starts.
>There are and have been air powered cars...they are lighter for a hybrid
>version
>than a battery hybrid.Since all you do is add a burner in most cases.
>Brayton cycle in a turbine ....Or rankine or sterling in a piston .
Off hand, I can think of three ICE/battery hybrids currently selling
in good numbers - Toyota Prius, and Honda Civic and Accord. Unless you
can offer some similar examples of ICE/air hybrids, I'm going to stick
with the notion that car manufacturers haven't found compressed air to
be a competitive energy storage medium for automobiles.
Wayne
Me <[email protected]> writes:
> In article <[email protected]>,
> "Arnold Walker" <[email protected]> wrote:
>
>> Many steamtrains are now ran on air due to boiler code worrys by insurance
>> companies.
>
> CFR (Call for Reference) on the above. as I believe it to be
> Bullshit....
I think so too, especially because even without the water an old
boiler pressurized with air is also no small danger.
> the only Steampowered Trains still in existance,
> and in commercial service are in third and fouth world countries,
There *might* be some stored steam engines still running, typically in
chemistry or power plants where steam is available anyway and can be
filled into the engine easily.
--
Dr. Juergen Hannappel http://lisa2.physik.uni-bonn.de/~hannappe
mailto:[email protected] Phone: +49 228 73 2447 FAX ... 7869
Physikalisches Institut der Uni Bonn Nussallee 12, D-53115 Bonn, Germany
CERN: Phone: +412276 76461 Fax: ..77930 Bat. 892-R-A13 CH-1211 Geneve 23
On 2005-06-24 [email protected] said:
>Newsgroups: alt.energy.homepower,rec.crafts.metalworking,rec.
>woodworking
>Me <[email protected]> writes:
>> In article <[email protected]>,
>> "Arnold Walker" <[email protected]> wrote:
>>> Many steamtrains are now ran on air due to boiler code worrys by
>>>insurance companies.
>> CFR (Call for Reference) on the above. as I believe it to be
>> Bullshit....
>I think so too, especially because even without the water an old
>boiler pressurized with air is also no small danger.
>> the only Steampowered Trains still in existance,
>> and in commercial service are in third and fouth world countries,
>There *might* be some stored steam engines still running, typically
>in chemistry or power plants where steam is available anyway and
>can be filled into the engine easily.
>--
>Dr. Juergen Hannappel http://lisa2.physik.uni-bonn.
>de/~hannappe
>Physikalisches Institut der Uni Bonn Nussallee 12, D-53115 Bonn,
>Germany CERN: Phone: +412276 76461 Fax: ..77930 Bat. 892-R-A13
>CH-1211 Geneve 23
Smith Brothers in Galesville, MD (a marine construction and equipment
rental firm I used to work for) has an old steam crane operated from
a 1000CFM air compressor, used for plucking barge sections from the
water. Makes a merry chug.
You are aware of coal-fired steam excursion trains? We have one in
northern New Mexico (Cumbres & Toltec) and there are many in
Colorado.
Tom Willmon
near Mountainair, (mid) New Mexico, USA
Net-Tamer V 1.12.0 - Registered
Prometheus <[email protected]> writes:
>On Fri, 17 Jun 2005 02:01:17 GMT, Me <[email protected]> wrote:
>
>>In article <[email protected]>,
>> Cliff <[email protected]> wrote:
>>
>>> Found a live one, eh?
>>> One day they will demand their VALUE back ...... as promised
>>> by that paper ....
>>>
>>> Then those taxes will ......
>>> --
>>> Cliff
>>
>>Naw, we will just Nationalize their Dept, just like they did with
>>ours, years ago....Payback is a bitch...isn't it.....
>>Remeber the Red chineese never did pay us back for WWII........
>
>
>Sure. Why not. Oh wait, perhaps it's because they have 2 billion
>people to fight for them, and a good hunk of our industry. Remember
>we won WWII because we could build a couple of war machines for every
>one that the axis powers destroyed.
I'll just point out that we didn't have that capacity in 1941, but
we did by 1945.
scott
>
>
>
Because it wouldn't.
"Pete C." <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
>
> Why would the Japanese devalue their product by putting "Made in USA" on
> it?
>
> Pete C.
Cliff (in [email protected]) said:
| On Sun, 26 Jun 2005 14:19:28 -0500, "Morris Dovey"
| <[email protected]> wrote:
|
||| None of that would give any hint of what actually failed in the
||| field and flooded out the end customer or anything similar.
||| For that you'd need to know what went wrong, not just
||| how to make it cheaper.
||
|| Of course. Did the paragraphs following the one you quoted make it
|| to your server? If not:
|
| They made it but did not seem to be on that issue.
| Perhaps you had to be there?
Oops. Sorry, I may have assumed too much. Customer service call center
operators take calls from customers (and sometimes from dealers) when
there's either a problem or a how-to issue. Maytag's call center had
several hundred people and these operators seemed to have been more
knowledgable than I'd expected, given the number of products and
models supported.
Cost seemed to be a secondary consideration to these people. Their
mission (/their/ mission if not the corporation's) was to resolve any
issues to the satisfaction of the customer. If/when they thought the
issue was a consequence of design, even if the use was unusual, they
weren't bashful about letting the R&D group know about it. I think
part of their motivation was "Golden Rule" and part of it was workload
reduction (fewer future service calls for the same problem). Although
I didn't have a lot of contact with CS, I'm aware that even when the
problem was something the customer had done wrong (there actually
/are/ people who'll put a half box of detergent in with a single load
of clothes!) they tried to make a follow-up call sometime /after/
problem resolution to verify satisfaction.
CS isn't a cost reducing function. More usually it adds cost - since
they provide the information leading to engineering changes for
released products. I'm not aware of any instance where their input
ever led to making the product cheaper. I suppose it could happen, but
I didn't see it.
--
Morris Dovey
DeSoto Solar
DeSoto, Iowa USA
http://www.iedu.com/DeSoto/solar.html
On Sun, 26 Jun 2005 14:19:28 -0500, "Morris Dovey" <[email protected]>
wrote:
>| None of that would give any hint of what actually failed in the
>| field and flooded out the end customer or anything similar.
>| For that you'd need to know what went wrong, not just
>| how to make it cheaper.
>
>Of course. Did the paragraphs following the one you quoted make it to
>your server? If not:
They made it but did not seem to be on that issue.
Perhaps you had to be there?
--
Cliff
On Sun, 19 Jun 2005 06:55:57 -0500, the opaque Prometheus
<[email protected]> spake:
>On Fri, 17 Jun 2005 23:26:33 GMT, "CW" <[email protected]> wrote:
>
>>That's a little remembered fact. We could do it again.
>>
>>"Scott Lurndal" <[email protected]> wrote in message
>>news:[email protected]...
>>>
>>> I'll just point out that we didn't have that capacity in 1941, but
>>> we did by 1945.
>
>The US was a manfacturing based economy. Now, everyone seems
>hell-bent on pretending we can get by with consumption as our
>watchword. When you get an entire generation or two who think that
>they are entitled to consume and feel no need to produce, it doesn't
>create the kind of environment that allows a society to ratchet up
>production that quickly. It's a different world now.
I'm looking forward with trepidation to the History Channel show
"Boneyard" this week, starting tonight:
8-10pm EST-- Boneyard: Where Machines End Their Lives -
Where do machines go when they die? From B-52 Bombers
to massive aircraft carriers, from passenger cars to
Cold War cruise missiles and remnants of the Twin
Towers, all that we manufacture has a lifespan. But
reaching the end of their original purposes can be
just the beginning. Join us on a fascinating visual
journey as we follow some of our greatest achievements
in manufacturing, design engineering, and construction
to their after-lives and final resting places.
I'm keeping a box of Kleenex on the couch when I watch it.
Sadly, it marks the end of an era.
--------------------------------------------
-- I'm in touch with my Inner Curmudgeon. --
http://diversify.com Comprehensive Website Development
============================================================
Some people, unlike you, have a real life though.
"wmbjk" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
> On 14 Jun 2005 12:55:15 -0700, "FriscoSoxFan" <[email protected]>
> wrote:
>
> >1. Go to a big power tool store.
> >2. Buy a generator.
> >3. Buy a whole bunch of gas.
> >4. Start said generator
> >5. Plug in tools
> >6. Build.
>
> Booo! Hissss! Generators as a sole source are often the worst choice
> for home power. Their only advantage is low up-front cost. But in the
> long run they'll cost more, and are no fun to live with compared to
> solar/wind/inverter/battery. Home use tends to be relatively high
> energy but low power, while shop use tends to be high power but low
> energy. So adding shop power usually means increasing charging sources
> and batteries a little, but making the inverters substantially larger.
> And if one were to choose a generator well suited for shop use, it's
> likely to be way too big for backup on a properly sized home power
> setup.
>
> Wayne
"George Ghio" <[email protected]> wrote in message
>
> Pointless exercise with Wayne. He can talk the legs off a donkey but
> still can't explain his claim of two days autonomy for his system.
Pointless or not, by quoting almost 200 lines of text you've demonstrated
very aptly that you don't have any comprehension of how to carry on an
online conversation. Try trimming the rhetoric next time.
"Richard the Dreaded Libertarian" <[email protected]> wrote in
message news:[email protected]...
>
> Do you even have any idea what a "trade deficit" _is_? It means
> we have two billion dollars more per day to spend on their crap
> than they have to spend on our crap. That means WE ARE TWO BILLION
> DOLLARS RICHER THAN THEY ARE!!!!! PER DAY!!!!!!!!!!
Uh, no. It means that we have two billion dollars worth of their crap, and
they have our two billion dollars.
This is not necessarily a bad deal in itself. But that's the way it is.
--
Ed Huntress
On 14 Jun 2005 13:42:00 -0700, "arw01" <[email protected]>
wrote:
>Only real solution for running tools at home is a generator.
Nonsense.
Wayne
On 15 Jun 2005 11:36:20 -0700, "Too_Many_Tools"
<[email protected]> wrote:
>Thanks for the reply.
>
>I would agree that cordless tools have a spot in the AHP workshop since
>one can recharge them during off load hours.
>
>Where would one find 12v motors in the suitable HP and speeds to
>retrofit something like a table saw?
>
>In considering this subject, a lineshaft approach does come to mind but
>unfortunately you rarely see the needed equipment at HD or Lowes. I am
>not to crazy about chucking all the stationary power tools that have
>taken me decades to collect. Also, lineshafts take up room, linedriven
>tools are required to stay in one place and cannot be mounted on wheels
>to optimize shop space as needed. A workshop should be no larger than
>necessary for the heating/cooling aspect that also takes energy.
>
>TMT
I really hesitate to jump in on this topic, but I advise you to make
sure to do your research carefully before pursuing the replacement of
AC motors with DC motors.
In the early days of homepower which was nearly universally 12V on the
primary side, this was a pretty common practice, but in the overall
picture of things today I'm not sure it's warranted in the general
case.
At one time I was given to understand that DC motors are just innately
more efficient than AC. It appears that this is not necessarily so,
and has much to do with the crappy design and build quality of
"shovelware" AC motors than any basic electromechanical principles. To
know whether you would actually be further ahead after a DC
conversion, you would have to consider each case individually.
Ignoring power factor, a 12V load of power "x" draws 10 times the
current that an 120VAC load will draw. Will the losses you avoid by
bypassing the inverter get chewed up in the wire? How close to the
battery room will the workshop be?
I started out at 12V primary by virtue of buying a house with an
existing PV system. Like many frontier homebrew systems, it had
started as a purely DC system to which an inverter was added later.
Having no plumbing in the house, I've acquired a number of small 12V
pumps for various specific purposes, such as our bucket shower.
Fortunately this hasn't represented a significant investment. With
each system upgrade I left myself options for going to a higher
primary voltage, and recently made the move to 24V when we replaced
our chargerless mod square wave inverter with a sine wave
inverter/charger. At some distant point in the future we might even
make the jump to 48V, but for the moment, 24V was "just right."
The punchline is that our little pumps (and other 12V DC loads) are
now running off a 24V/12V DC-DC converter. In the overall picture of
things this crazy scenario actually still makes sense here, but again
these are *small* loads.
The moral is that when you choose to run DC loads, you're creating
specialized equipment and there are serious implications that might
not be immediately obvious. If you stick with AC loads, your wire runs
can be far longer for a given power throughput / wire guage, you can
reconfigure the primary side of your system without affecting anything
on the load side, use a common AC generator when it's more convenient
or more sensible to do so, or take your gear with you and use it
elsewhere.
Having "inherited" a mixed DC/AC system and lived with it, off-grid,
for five years, there is no question in my mind that the new house we
build here will be wired almost entirely for conventional AC and will
likely have only some emergency lighting (power room!), and perhaps a
few very special-purpose devices and outlets wired for DC.
YMMV.
-=s
<snip>
>> Our excuse for killing off manufacturing in the UK was Thatcher.
>> What's America's excuse ?
>
>Free trade. There are highly regarded experts from both ends of the
>political spectrum who say it's necessary.
>
>They all have jobs in the service sector and are relatively immune from
>foreign competition themselves.
============================================
This may have been true at the higher levels at one time but with
telecommuting service sector jobs are also rapidly disappearing.
For example many low to mid level accounting jobs such as tax
returns are now done overseas. Where the jobs cannot be done
externally H1B visas allow worker importation.
On Fri, 17 Jun 2005 15:14:41 -0500, "Arnold Walker"
<[email protected]> wrote:
>"wmbjk" <[email protected]> wrote in message
>news:[email protected]...
>> How big a tank? I think you're going to find a fly in the ointment
>> once you run some numbers on air consumption. And if air power could
>> be so efficient and practical, why do you believe it is that
>> off-gridders, often known to be innovative and unafraid of breaking
>> with convention, haven't flocked to the concept?
>Another fly in the oiment on your battery remark.....if batteries are so
>much effecient
>at storaging .Why are repair shop using air tools instead battery powered
>tools.
For the same reason that I use many air tools in my own shop - because
they're often lighter, cheaper, and more compact than electric
versions. Sometimes efficiency isn't very important.
Now, if compressed air is so much more efficient than batteries, then
why do *you* think that we're seeing ICE/battery hybrid cars driving
around, but not ICE/air hybrids?
Wayne
Several people have indicated the Current Accounts Ballance of
Payments [trade] deficit was meaningless.
Among other problems, accumulation of U.S. dollars allows the
purchase of U.S. companies, and the transfer of U.S. jobs. See
Reuters article below for details of how the jobs at Maytag were
traded for cheap imports. Another example is the sale by IBM of
their line of personal computers.
The problem is not with the Chinese, they are just good business
men and take an opportunity when it is available. The problem
is with the people who made the opportunity available.
How much tax revenues will be lost to the U.S. and how much of a
hit will the taxpayer take through the PBGC on the pensions?
========== Reuters article follows =======
Haier, equity firms bid for Maytag
By Doug Young 36 minutes ago
SHANGHAI (Reuters) - Top Chinese appliance maker Haier and
private equity giants Bain and Blackstone have bid $1.28 billion
for Maytag Corp., trumping Ripplewood's offer for the ailing U.S.
corporation.
Haier's global ambitions would be boosted with the addition of
Maytag, the maker of washing machines and Hoover vacuums that has
fallen on tough times amid rising costs and competition from
low-cost makers.
Maytag said in a statement released late on Monday in New York
that it had received a preliminary bid of $16 a share from a
consortium comprising Haier Group, Bain Capital and The
Blackstone Group.
That would be about 14 percent higher than a $14 per share offer
by U.S. buyout firm Ripplewood Holdings LLC., part of a
consortium whose members include Goldman Sach's GS Capital
Partners and the J. Rothschild Group.
Under the Haier proposal, due diligence is expected to take six
to eight weeks to complete, Maytag said in its statement. The
group would look to Merrill Lynch to provide debt financing, it
added.
"We continue to support the Ripplewood transaction," Howard
Clark, Maytag's lead director, said in a statement.
"However, we also believe that it is incumbent on us to pursue
this possibility of achieving a higher price for our
stockholders."
No official counter offer had been submitted yet, a source
familiar with the matter told Reuters. Bain and Blackstone
declined comment. Haier has said it was interested in Maytag, but
a spokeswoman would not comment further on Tuesday.
"Chinese companies don't have brand equity outside of China," a
Tokyo-based analyst said.
"To build that themselves, in the same way the Toyotas of the
world do it, is pretty hard. It's the intangible assets they're
buying."
THE LONG HAUL
Their competing bid would also mark the first major attempt at an
international acquisition by Haier Group, a state conglomerate
that controls Shanghai-listed Qingdao Haier Refrigerator Co. Ltd.
and Hong Kong-listed Haier Electronics Group Co. Ltd.
Haier Electronics had climbed 2.6 percent to HK$0.198 by 0611
GMT, vastly outperforming the market's 0.21 percent dip.
Haier is probably willing to pay a premium for Maytag because it
could keep the company over the longer term for its brand, while
Ripplewood would be more likely to sell in the long run, the
Tokyo-based analyst said.
The consortium, whose Haier component came from Haier America
Trading LLC, had expressed its interest in the run-up to a
deadline last Friday for competing offers.
Maytag shares closed up 7 cents at $15.23 in Monday trading in
New York. Its shares are up about 5 percent since word first
emerged last week that Haier and others were considering rival
bids for the company.
Haier is a well-known name in China, commanding 26 percent of the
domestic refrigerator market and 17 percent of the air
conditioning market at the end of 2003.
It is also one of the nation's few brands to make headway in
foreign markets, cornering nearly half the U.S. compact
refrigerator market and more than half that for wine coolers.
OVERSEAS M&A
Haier's foray would follow similar moves by some of China's
biggest firms as they look beyond their domestic strongholds.
Generally, Chinese companies have picked up struggling businesses
in mature industries, hoping to use their growing prowess as
low-cost manufacturers to turn those assets around.
Earlier this year, Lenovo Group Ltd. purchased the PC-making unit
of IBM for $1.25 billion. It later brought in private equity
firms Texas Pacific Group, General Atlantic LLC and Newbridge
Capital LLC, which contributed $350 million as part of the deal.
TCL Corp. has also been active, buying the cellphone-making
assets of France's Alcatel S.A. and the TV-making assets of
France's Thomson
But the Chinese move abroad has also included some stumbles, such
as an aborted takeover of struggling British carmaker MG Rover by
top car maker Shanghai Automotive Industry Corp.
Oil company CNOOC Ltd. has expressed possible interest in U.S.
oil company Unocal Corp., and China's Minmetals Corp. has
expressed interest in Canadian mining firm Noranda Inc.
(Additional reporting by Godwin Chellam in Shanghai, Chawadee
Nualkhair in Tokyo and Michael Flaherty in New York)
On Mon, 20 Jun 2005 22:19:06 GMT, Matt Stawicki
<[email protected]> wrote:
> I know enough about politics to make myself look stupid,
>and in the grand scheme of things, it really doesn't matter. Besides,
>these malcontents, no matter which side of the fence they're on, are
>talking out both sides of their mouths anyway. They each think their
>Opinions and Theories are FACTS, they're constantly beating each other
>up with their "facts", and reality doing nothing more than trying to
>cram their "facts" down our throats.
Found those "WMDs" yet?
--
Cliff
On Wed, 15 Jun 2005 18:30:40 GMT, [email protected] (Dave Mundt) wrote:
> Greetings and Salutations....
>
>On Wed, 15 Jun 2005 17:29:43 GMT, Richard the Dreaded Libertarian
><[email protected]> wrote:
>
>>On Wed, 15 Jun 2005 07:36:34 -0700, F.George wrote:
>>> <snip>
>>> Given the current economic/social/political environment your
>>> concerns are well founded, however I think the primary or basic
>>> problem will not be limited or unavailable [electrical] power,
>>> but rather the more pervasive and dangerous problem of a lack of
>>> spare parts, raw materials and most critical HSS and carbide
>>> tools and blanks.
>>>
>>> Whether by design or stupidity, the American
>>> manufacturing/industrial infrastructure is rapidly being
>>> destroyed, primarily by management "outsourcing" and plant
>>> transfer.
>>
>>Thank you, Chicken Little.
>
> Hum...so you DON'T think it is a problem that America
>is losing the knowledge, skills and tools to manufacture
>even the basic tools we need to keep society going and the
>infrastructure kept up?
Consider the (tongue in cheek of course) upside: We're also exporting
all the toxic aspects of manufacture and mind-numbing, RSI-prone jobs
overseas, where the Chinese and others can gleefully destroy their
corner of the environment and burn through workers without the pesky
EPA or labour standards in the way. Although - if you remember ye
olde "Asian brown cloud" - you might rightly regard this as farting
down a tube, only to have the smell return eventually. It's a small
planet.
Last night on the news there was footage of armed government troops
(police, whatever) forceably "relocating" Chinese farmers. Probably to
make way for another widget factory to feed the Wal-Mart cash export
conveyor.
Ever tried to get through so much as a month -- a week -- without
buying something made in China? Difficult and disturbing.
I try to buy locally produced and supplied goods as much as possible.
Being a Canuck, I look for Canadian-made goods first, then US-made
goods. These days I consider myself lucky to find something made in
the US much less in Canada. However I recently became aware that
countries like the US (dunno about Canada) can set up special regions
in overseas countries that are classified as sovereign extensions of
the homeland. (Sorry the proper term escapes me.) In this way they can
run sweatshops in wire-fenced compounds and legally print "Made in
USA" on the goods produced there.
If that ain't double-speak, Mr. Orwell, I dunno what is.
-=s
>
>>
>>> With the trade deficit [current account trade balance]
>>> approaching 2 billion dollars *PER DAY* it does not require a
>>> degree in rocket science or a tarot deck to see that the time is
>>> near when imports by the U.S. economy will be on a C.O.D. or even
>>> a "pre-pay" basis [in gold, not dollars].
>>
>>Odd, that's not what my crystal ball tells me. ;-)
>>
>>And that "trade deficit" is the stupidest boogeyman ever perpetrated -
>>well, at least up in the top five stupid boogeymen - since the
>>nervous nellies found out that it's a scary buzzword.
>>
>>Do you even have any idea what a "trade deficit" _is_? It means
>>we have two billion dollars more per day to spend on their crap
>>than they have to spend on our crap. That means WE ARE TWO BILLION
>>DOLLARS RICHER THAN THEY ARE!!!!! PER DAY!!!!!!!!!!
>>
>>You have a significant "trade deficit" with the grocery store.
>>How much do you spend there? Maybe $100.00/week? That's a ONE
>>HUNDRED DOLLARS PER WEEK TRADE DEFICIT with the grocery store.
>>They don't buy anything from you, do they?
>>
>>And imagine your employer's trade deficit with _you_! He buys
>>your labor for, what, $50K, $100K/year? How much stuff do you
>>buy from him? Your EMPLOYER HAS A SERIOUS TRADE DEFICIT WITH
>>YOU!!!!!
>>
>>"Trade Deficit". Pfaugh!
>>
>>Thanks!
>>Rich
>>UT o
>
> While your point may have some validity here, the
>major difference is that the money in your examples is
>circulating INSIDE the USA. The dollars spent in a
>foreign market are dollars that are taken out of the
>economy "forever".
> As an analogy, if dollars are the life-blood
>of the economy, foreign trade is like cutting an
>artery.
> Now...The fact of the matter is that SOME of
>those dollars DO come back in, but, since it is a
>DEFICIT, far more are going out than are coming in.
>Those dollars have to be replaced in the economy
>somehow. One "bad" way is to simply print more
>money. While this gets more bucks in circulation,
>it also cuts down on the value of each dollar.
> We have to remember that the world economy
>is more like a war than a cheerful family gathering.
>All the countries in the world are jockeying to
>gain advantage over the other countries, and, one
>way to do that is to drain the cash of one country.
> America, although economically large, is
>not infinite, and, if we believed we were, we would
>be fools. The fact that the dollar has dropped
>in relative value on the world market is proof that
>the deficits are having their desired effects. Also,
>remember that the growing European Union can (and
>perhaps already has) become a larger economic power
>than America.
> Finally, there is the basic problem that
>the world, in general, is not a friendly place.
>Countries that were our friends are now our
>enemies; countries that were our enemies are
>now our friends; The only lesson we can
>learn from this is that this is likely to
>happen again, so, to end up totally dependent
>on another country for our major manufacturing
>is a stupid thing to do.
>
> Regards
> Dave Mundt
F. George McDuffee expostulated:
| It would be interesting to know how much in deductions the
| corporation took on their tax returns over the last 5 or 10 years
| for market research and product R&D. Article in Wed. June 22 WSJ
| discusses shift in consumer priorities for major appliances from
| stolid dependability to flash and glitz, which may help explain
| why the "dependability people" are now in deep do-do.
It's probably worthwhile to take note of the fact that I'm not a
"Maytag Expert" and that I can't provide very much more than firsthand
observations (that may or may not be safe to use as the basis for
generalizations) and inexpert opinion - garnered while working as a
software consultant with their R&D group. Since all of the products
under development of which I had knowledge have been announced and/or
shipped, I'm free to speak openly.
On the R&D side, Maytag has extraordinarily competent engineers and
researchers who're as enthusiastic and eager as any I've ever seen
elsewhere. There aren't many of them - and they seemed much
under-appreciated by their management. My thought was (and remains)
that any of Maytag's competitors could ruin the firm simply by
offering this one engineering group an industry competive wage and
management guaranteed to provide genuine appreciation of past and
future accomplishments. With careful research, a competitor could
simultaneously put Maytag's future in grave jeopardy and greatly
enhance their own prospects for as little as $500K/year. In my mind,
for a Fortune 300 company this is tantamount to gross negligence on
the part of management.
| On the other hand, flash and glitz are only skin deep, and how
| much can it cost and how long can it take to have a design studio
| "re-skin" a washer or drier, and how much can it cost to shoot
| metal flake paint in place of white? As an aside, the American
| people deserve what they get on this one..
Flash and glitz /are/ cheap and easy. Solid dependability and quality
of function are more difficult and generally expensive to achieve - no
surprises here. My task as a consultant was to provide a technical
solution that was expected to drasticly reduce that expense. I
provided the requested solution (which incorporated solutions to the
usual variety of unanticipated side issues) and to the best of my
knowlege, that package was shelved because it required a degree of
interdepartmental cooperation/communication that too many of the
first-line development managers weren't prepared to exercise.
(Bummer!)
A related issue had to do with more than healthy managerial resistance
to technology more advanced than a motor-driven cycle controller -
even after their horizontal-axis (front loading) Neptune washer had
provided proof positive that micros are here to stay! I was by
definition a "short timer" and that attitude was grindingly
frustrating to me. I don't want to think about how frustrating it has
to be for the R&D folks who're intending to stay with Maytag for the
long haul...
| In response to another reply, the questions about the likely
| outcomes for senior management were rhetorical, although your
| detailed answers were insightful. This helps explain the
| "shortage" of engineers and the rapidly declining number of
| engineering students. Even the "nerdest" engineer can look
| up/around and see that while they (and the rest of the "product"
| people) are taking it in the shorts big time, management and
| finance are riding off with full boodle bags. While both groups
| will have some time off, for the product people it will be a mad
| scramble for another job so they can keep the house and the car,
| while the management and finance people are resting in Cancun.
|
| Do you happen to know if the Maytag pension plans are fully
| funded, or is this another "debt bomb" that will be lobbed into
| the PBGC? How about medical care for current retirees? Off
| Maytag and onto the taxpayers through Medicare?
I don't know. Actually, I didn't pay much attention to anything
unrelated to R&D and/or some specific product development. I sat
through (too many) meetings and took notice of what was being said
about the technology and politics involved with getting the
vertical-axis (top loading) Neptune product working and out the door -
and the implementation of a methodology to streamline development of
all future cycle-based "whiteware".
| We need something more than biased B-school case studies. What do
| you think of an economic/financial equivalent to the NTSB that
| would investigate major corporate "crash and burn" cases? These
| could well be a job for Dr. Kavorikan and not a "crash-cart" and
| life-support situation.
|
| In the aggregate the major loss/damage caused by not only Maytag,
| but also Enron, Tyco, Ford, EMC, Delta, American, etc., etc., is
| a total loss of confidence in the competence and motives of
| management by not only their employees, but the majority of
| stockholders and the American people.
I'd encourage you to make an at least internal distinction between
failures resulting from fundamental dishonesty with intent to
defraud - and failures resulting from stupidity, lack of due
diligence, etc. on the part of fundamentally well-intentioned people.
If I were to choose a single cause for Maytag's failure to thrive
(which would be a huge over-simplification), that cause would be the
selection of a succession of CEO's who lacked the wisdom to define
success and to lead their people in that direction.
Your summary is basically true; but would you really expect that a
government agency /could/ do more than throw good money after bad in
these cases? If so, you're far more optimistic than I'd dare to be.
One final comment. One of my first questions after starting work at
Maytag (and I did ask every single person I worked with) was: "What
does it take to make dirty clothes clean?". What I was after were
things like how much water per pound of clothes during wash and rinse,
how much agitation, how much cleaning agent, etc. with some kind of
mathematical relationships and some numbers. No one knew! I was (and
still am) dumbfounded that no one at Maytag had ever made a serious
effort to define in engineering terms what it takes to make clothes
clean. Think about the implications of that tidbit as you ponder
business failure causes...
--
Morris Dovey
DeSoto Solar
DeSoto, Iowa USA
http://www.iedu.com/DeSoto/
I rest my case. You lose.
"Mark & Juanita" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
> On Tue, 21 Jun 2005 23:15:41 -0400, "John P Bengi" <JBengi
> (spamm)@(spamm) yahoo,com> wrote:
>
> Posting returned to usenet bottom-posting convention.
>
> >"Mark & Juanita" <[email protected]> wrote in message
> >news:[email protected]...
> >On Tue, 21 Jun 2005 21:24:36 -0400, "John P Bengi" <JBengi
> >(spamm)@(spamm) yahoo,com> wrote:
> >
> >Try a normal browser like OE and get rid of that piece of junk Agent.
> >
> > Ah, a msoft zealot -- that explains it. In your previous posting you
> >whined about no browser supporting bottom posting, yet as shown above,
you
> >recognize that Agent, as well as many other Usenet readers that were
around
> >before Saint Bill discovered the Internet conform to the bottom posting
> >convention.
> >
> > ... snip
> >
> >
> >
>
>+--------------------------------------------------------------------------
-
> >-----+
> >
> > If you're gonna be dumb, you better be tough
> >
> >
>
>+--------------------------------------------------------------------------
-
> >-----+
> >
>
> BTW, most "real" usenet reading software is smart enough to trim sig
> lines from the reply lines.
>
> >Really? Now let's see you answer this post without separating the headers
> >and the text and yet still bottom post. Show me how Agent supports this
> >bottom posting garbage idea.
> >
>
> ??? "separating the headers and the text?, what are you talking about?
> The headers of a posting are the routing and history information of the
> posting and associated book-keeping. The text is the body of the message.
>
> >It will only take one more response to demo what a dumb idea bottom
posting
> >was. Try to attach your previous posts at the bottom while you are at it
> >like you do in your emails you send.
> >
>
> Why do I want to do that? There is no reason to attach previous posts
if
> the context of a message has been properly preserved in the thread.
>
> Also note another pre-Saint Bill usenet convention -- interspersed
> comments within the posting. This helps preserve the dialog and keep
> comments with relevant context.
>
> I'm done with this, I've got better things to do with my time. Feel free
> to post whatever ridicule you choose; have a nice life.
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
+---------------------------------------------------------------------------
-----+
>
> If you're gonna be dumb, you better be tough
>
>
+---------------------------------------------------------------------------
-----+
On Thu, 23 Jun 2005 03:38:32 -0400, "Upscale" <[email protected]>
wrote:
>X-Priority: 3
>X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
>X-Newsreader: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2800.1506
>X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2800.1506
Speaking of neanderthal, boy..if it was so important to you..how come
you are not using Linux? Thats the bleeding edge today.
You are using old paleolithic tech when using Outleak Exploder.
Gunner
"Pax Americana is a philosophy. Hardly an empire.
Making sure other people play nice and dont kill each other (and us)
off in job lots is hardly empire building, particularly when you give
them self determination under "play nice" rules.
Think of it as having your older brother knock the shit out of you
for torturing the cat." Gunner
"Gunner" <[email protected]> wrote in message >
> Speaking of neanderthal, boy..if it was so important to you..how come
> you are not using Linux? Thats the bleeding edge today.
Windows at home (my preference), Mandrake Linux where I work. (their
preference).
I'm sure I own a half dozen products that are what I'd consider to be
superior to what you or someone else owns. That doesn't mean I'm going to
spend my time criticising you for what you use by choice. It pisses me off
when idiots like you attempt to validate your existence for criticising me
for using what I want. And that's EXACTLY what you're doing right now with
your response above.
Fine, there's a growing population that loathes Microsoft and they have
every right to voice their disapproval. But when people who hate Microsoft
start letting their criticism drift towards users who use MS products by
choice, then I'm going to respond. Got it?
F. George McDuffee wrote:
>> What will the individual managers of Maytag lose by
>> this move after they have run the company into the ground? How
>> many collected bonuses over the last few years? How much will the
>> US taxpayers have to pony up for the pensions?
Lose? Nothing at all. Their resumes will reflect that they brokered a
desirable transfer of ownership on behalf of their shareholders.
Lotsa bonus dollars paid out. Not sure what'll happen to the value of
Ralph Hakes' million dollar home in Newton (probably don't need to
tell you that a million dollar home in a small town in Iowa bears
astonishingly little resemblance to a million dollar home in say, San
Francisco or Fairfax), but doubt that he's too concerned about real
estate values at the moment.
--
Morris Dovey
DeSoto Solar
DeSoto, Iowa USA
http://www.iedu.com/DeSoto
Gee . Maybe that bottom posting stuff isn't so bad after all....LOL
"Cliff" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
> On Thu, 23 Jun 2005 18:30:15 -0400, "John P Bengi" <JBengi
> (spamm)@(spamm) yahoo,com> wrote:
>
> >BTW Cliff:
> >Most of that other thread was not my postings. It was a super troll we
have
> >been trying to demolish for the last 6 months on a few groups. He doesn't
> >like the vcomplaints to his ISP and News providers so he forges my
nickname
> >and treis to libel me in any group I visit.
> >
> >His last known commonly used name is Bunty Jeck. Previously known as
Aunty
> >Jack, Eunty JEck, Gymmy Bob, nunja, M II, Taz, Tez, Tbz, T@z, Troll
killer
> >and over 300 incarnations of those basic ones over the last year. Very
> >mentally ill (OCD) individual in bed with Wayne and M II here or the same
> >person.
> >
> >Sorry for the confusion but I gave up on that thread. I only post from
> >golden.net. Check the headers
>
> Hope you liked the way I trimmed his/her top-posted stuff <G>.
> --
> Cliff
On Thu, 23 Jun 2005 19:52:44 -0400, JohnM <[email protected]> wrote:
>Cliff wrote:
>> On Thu, 23 Jun 2005 06:59:33 -0400, JohnM <[email protected]> wrote:
>>
>>
>>>Cliff wrote:
>>>
>>>>On Mon, 20 Jun 2005 15:14:16 -0500, Scott Willing
>>>><[email protected]> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>>The argument is that posts get separated from their threads for a
>>>>>multitude of reasons
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Only quote the specific bits that you are responding directly to.
>>>> You need the context but not the rest.
>>>
>>>I seem to remember you snipping my posts in order to alter the context..
>>>
>>>John
>>
>>
>> John,
>> I don't think so (but it's possible). Sometimes, with a few
>> others, I only reply to a slight snippet (see jb & Gunner & crew)
>> with a sharp poke <G>.
>
>You go back and look at the thread where we disagreed over the atomic
>bombing of the Japanese cities and you'll see where I accused you of
>cutting what I said, resulting in an altered context.
Not going to go search but I'm certain that I altered nothing
in what I quoted.
It could well be that what I quoted showed your general attitude
rather well though <G>.
>> For most the subject (or a specific subset of it), not the
>> author, is the subject (whoops .. a tautology?)
>>
>> Usually I quote the specific bit I'm responding to (for the
>> proper context). I like SHORT, easy-on-the-reader posts,
>> little forced scrolling to find the context, and brevity, usually.
>>
>> Some of the others like huge essays .... but I find that a
>> few well placed words usually do most of the time.
>
>I find your few, well placed words to often sound like you haven't
>thought of anything constructive. "Winger!, WMD's!", etc. Maybe the
>readers you prefer need it kept simple?
Like many of the wingers? Perhaps so. Even than, many
still don't get it, or so it seems. Look at poor Gunner ..
Much, if not all, of such has been coverd so many times
before and they well know it (or should).
I see no need to endlessly repeat the same longish
replies laden with facts & reasoning or redo any prior
research.
>> One may also usually assume that the reader recently read the
>> prior full post that the reply is in response to.
>
>I don't believe that to be a safe assumption.
Better than always quoting the entire thing IMHO.
>You go through a thread on
>a day and you see the posts between then and the last time you looked.
>There may be responses to something you read three days ago, twenty
>lines up the thread. There's usually a middle ground between giving
>enough information about what you're responding to that you're showing
>consideration for your readers and cutting enough to not waste people's
>time. Myself, I prefer to err on the side of too much information.
I'll stick with brevity, usually <G>>
--
Cliff
On Tue, 21 Jun 2005 23:15:41 -0400, "John P Bengi" <JBengi
(spamm)@(spamm) yahoo,com> wrote:
>Really? Now let's see you answer this post without separating the headers
>and the text and yet still bottom post. Show me how Agent supports this
>bottom posting garbage idea.
What are you going on about NOW?
--
Cliff
On Tue, 21 Jun 2005 23:15:41 -0400, "John P Bengi" <JBengi
(spamm)@(spamm) yahoo,com> wrote:
>Try to attach your previous posts at the bottom while you are at it
>like you do in your emails you send.
HUH?
Is the techincal term for that "forwarding"?
You must have a LOT of problems with that pile of
junk indeed.
BTW, Why add "OT" Twice? Did Outbreak distress
MAKE you do it?
--
Cliff
<snip>
>>> If this were an event that affected only a few players, I would
>>> be selling tickets. Unfortunately, this almost entirely affects
>>> only the average person with roots in their community and many
>>> years invested in learning a trade.
==========
>Hmm. I'm not sure how you've reached your conclusion; but my own
>opinion (formed by direct observation) is that it's unlikely that the
>Chinese will value the current Maytag employees less than the old
>management. The major differences, I suspect, will be that outsourced
>operations will be relocated from Germany and Mexico to the Pacific
>Rim.
===================
To put it another way -- If you are going Vegas or Atlantic City,
it is expected that you will use your own money to gamble. If
you use the company's money and are discovered you go to jail.
Even if you win, the winnings belong to the company and not to
you [common law master/servant rule] .
The way it is now, individuals are making high stakes bets, and
keeping the winnings if they win and making other people eat the
losses if the lose.
If I sell you a machine that I don't own and keep the money for
myself and get caught, I will be put in jail and the legal owner
can recover the machine. Why is it any different with a
corporation? What will the individual managers of Maytag lose by
this move after they have run the company into the ground? How
many collected bonuses over the last few years? How much will the
US taxpayers have to pony up for the pensions?
<snip>
>A visit to Newton might provide some insights. Spending a bit of time
>inside Maytag's headquarters, R&D facility, and manufacturing areas
>might leave you wondering why it's taken so long for this to happen.
<snip>
An insightful comment and one I missed the first time I read your
response.
It would be interesting to know how much in deductions the
corporation took on their tax returns over the last 5 or 10 years
for market research and product R&D. Article in Wed. June 22 WSJ
discusses shift in consumer priorities for major appliances from
stolid dependability to flash and glitz, which may help explain
why the "dependability people" are now in deep do-do.
On the other hand, flash and glitz are only skin deep, and how
much can it cost and how long can it take to have a design studio
"re-skin" a washer or drier, and how much can it cost to shoot
metal flake paint in place of white? As an aside, the American
people deserve what they get on this one
.
In response to another reply, the questions about the likely
outcomes for senior management were rhetorical, although your
detailed answers were insightful. This helps explain the
"shortage" of engineers and the rapidly declining number of
engineering students. Even the "nerdest" engineer can look
up/around and see that while they (and the rest of the "product"
people) are taking it in the shorts big time, management and
finance are riding off with full boodle bags. While both groups
will have some time off, for the product people it will be a mad
scramble for another job so they can keep the house and the car,
while the management and finance people are resting in Cancun.
Do you happen to know if the Maytag pension plans are fully
funded, or is this another "debt bomb" that will be lobbed into
the PBGC? How about medical care for current retirees? Off
Maytag and onto the taxpayers through Medicare?
We need something more than biased B-school case studies. What do
you think of an economic/financial equivalent to the NTSB that
would investigate major corporate "crash and burn" cases? These
could well be a job for Dr. Kavorikan and not a "crash-cart" and
life-support situation.
In the aggregate the major loss/damage caused by not only Maytag,
but also Enron, Tyco, Ford, EMC, Delta, American, etc., etc., is
a total loss of confidence in the competence and motives of
management by not only their employees, but the majority of
stockholders and the American people.
F. George McDuffee expostulated:
| As a followon to another post I just made, see WSJ article Wed
| June 22 on this.
|
| I ask the same question about Whirlpool that I asked about
| Maytag. How much did they claim on their tax returns for market
| research and product R&D over the last 5 to 10 years? It is
| clear they did not do any.
I think you're mistaken. Whilrpool has introduced some well-developed
new products (this according to engineering folks at one of their main
competitors) and I've purchased a number (more than a half dozen) of
top rate new Kitchen-Aid (a Whirlpool brand) appliances for my own
home. The folks at Maytag weren't exactly thrilled to hear me praise
Whirlpool/Kitchen-Aid, but did pay close attention when I listed the
features I liked best.
I have to believe thay spent some reasonable amount of R&D money to
produce just the products I happened to buy - and that new products
don't just appear gratis on some design engineer's CAD screen. FWIW, I
suspect that they spent really serious money developing their "Duet"
laundry appliances.
--
Morris Dovey
DeSoto Solar
DeSoto, Iowa USA
http://www.iedu.com/DeSoto/solar.html
As a followon to another post I just made, see WSJ article Wed
June 22 on this.
I ask the same question about Whirlpool that I asked about
Maytag. How much did they claim on their tax returns for market
research and product R&D over the last 5 to 10 years? It is
clear they did not do any. The apparent choices are "management
malpractice," or "management malpractace" and tax fraud.
Any chance to "claw back" some of the management bonuses and/or
"differed compensation"?
On Thu, 23 Jun 2005 03:15:59 -0400, Cliff <[email protected]>
wrote:
<snip>
>>Second problem is that this gives the Chinese an opening wedge
>>into the U.S. major appliance market with an existing brand and
>>dealer network, directly threatening #1 Whirlpool with all the
>>jobs and local taxes revenue they represent.
>
> IIRC Whirlpool is already in big trouble.
On Wed, 22 Jun 2005 23:11:05 -0400, "John P Bengi" <JBengi
(spamm)@(spamm) yahoo,com> wrote:
>I have noticed a few things about this.
>1) I tried Agent for a month or so and it feels like running a MSDos
>programme, primitive and non-intuitive. I am not willing to pay for this
>functionality. OE is free without hacking.
>
>2) The people that seem to always have problems with threading or posting
>readability are almost always Agent users. For posting binaries it is a much
>better machine, I am sure.
>
>3) I have never had a virus scanner installed on my system in the 20 odd
>years I have been using MS op-systems. I have used a virus scanner the odd
>time but never required a full time scanner and the targetabilty is only
>because the results could be seen with such a popular browser. Once Agent
>becames more popular it will become a target also.
>
>4) no browser I have ever heard of or seen support bottom posting. They all
>separate the p[osted text from the posted header. Threading browsers have
>made the top down posting style obsolete in the 80s. Who ever puts their
>attachments of previous posts before their text. Do you do this in an email?
>The previous posts are all in the thread and available to anybody wanted to
>review the previous posts. The arguments for bottom posting are all moot.
Not too bright, eh?
What NG are you from that you never got educated?
--
Cliff
On Tue, 21 Jun 2005 23:15:41 -0400, "John P Bengi" <JBengi
(spamm)@(spamm) yahoo,com> wrote:
Posting returned to usenet bottom-posting convention.
>"Mark & Juanita" <[email protected]> wrote in message
>news:[email protected]...
>On Tue, 21 Jun 2005 21:24:36 -0400, "John P Bengi" <JBengi
>(spamm)@(spamm) yahoo,com> wrote:
>
>Try a normal browser like OE and get rid of that piece of junk Agent.
>
> Ah, a msoft zealot -- that explains it. In your previous posting you
>whined about no browser supporting bottom posting, yet as shown above, you
>recognize that Agent, as well as many other Usenet readers that were around
>before Saint Bill discovered the Internet conform to the bottom posting
>convention.
>
> ... snip
>
>
>
>+---------------------------------------------------------------------------
>-----+
>
> If you're gonna be dumb, you better be tough
>
>
>+---------------------------------------------------------------------------
>-----+
>
BTW, most "real" usenet reading software is smart enough to trim sig
lines from the reply lines.
>Really? Now let's see you answer this post without separating the headers
>and the text and yet still bottom post. Show me how Agent supports this
>bottom posting garbage idea.
>
??? "separating the headers and the text?, what are you talking about?
The headers of a posting are the routing and history information of the
posting and associated book-keeping. The text is the body of the message.
>It will only take one more response to demo what a dumb idea bottom posting
>was. Try to attach your previous posts at the bottom while you are at it
>like you do in your emails you send.
>
Why do I want to do that? There is no reason to attach previous posts if
the context of a message has been properly preserved in the thread.
Also note another pre-Saint Bill usenet convention -- interspersed
comments within the posting. This helps preserve the dialog and keep
comments with relevant context.
I'm done with this, I've got better things to do with my time. Feel free
to post whatever ridicule you choose; have a nice life.
+--------------------------------------------------------------------------------+
If you're gonna be dumb, you better be tough
+--------------------------------------------------------------------------------+
On Thu, 23 Jun 2005 18:30:15 -0400, "John P Bengi" <JBengi
(spamm)@(spamm) yahoo,com> wrote:
>BTW Cliff:
>Most of that other thread was not my postings. It was a super troll we have
>been trying to demolish for the last 6 months on a few groups. He doesn't
>like the vcomplaints to his ISP and News providers so he forges my nickname
>and treis to libel me in any group I visit.
>
>His last known commonly used name is Bunty Jeck. Previously known as Aunty
>Jack, Eunty JEck, Gymmy Bob, nunja, M II, Taz, Tez, Tbz, T@z, Troll killer
>and over 300 incarnations of those basic ones over the last year. Very
>mentally ill (OCD) individual in bed with Wayne and M II here or the same
>person.
>
>Sorry for the confusion but I gave up on that thread. I only post from
>golden.net. Check the headers
Hope you liked the way I trimmed his/her top-posted stuff <G>.
--
Cliff
On 14 Jun 2005 12:55:15 -0700, "FriscoSoxFan" <[email protected]>
wrote:
>1. Go to a big power tool store.
>2. Buy a generator.
>3. Buy a whole bunch of gas.
>4. Start said generator
>5. Plug in tools
>6. Build.
Booo! Hissss! Generators as a sole source are often the worst choice
for home power. Their only advantage is low up-front cost. But in the
long run they'll cost more, and are no fun to live with compared to
solar/wind/inverter/battery. Home use tends to be relatively high
energy but low power, while shop use tends to be high power but low
energy. So adding shop power usually means increasing charging sources
and batteries a little, but making the inverters substantially larger.
And if one were to choose a generator well suited for shop use, it's
likely to be way too big for backup on a properly sized home power
setup.
Wayne
On Tue, 14 Jun 2005 16:41:55 -0500, "Mike Henry" <[email protected]>
wrote:
>The idea can make sense in some situations but is far from a
>universal solution.
I've actually built one of these things. The justification was as much
waste disposal (dairy farm) as it was for power generation.
On Thu, 16 Jun 2005 21:55:15 GMT, "Pete C." <[email protected]>
wrote:
><compressed air storage> Should be comparable or better efficiency than a wind driven generator
>charging batteries.
Perhaps in some niches... but in any event a practical home power
setup needs some batteries, and charging them with wind, assuming
there's wind to harvest, is highly recommended. So you're talking
about *adding* systems because you believe it's worth the trouble, but
you haven't supplied any numbers or examples to back up your position.
> They also do this
>with pumped hydro, but CAS is far more practical than pumped hydro in a
>homepower environment.
But both are less practical than batteries.
>No, not mechanically driven. The refrigeration compressor would be belt
>driven from an air motor. The thermostat simply opens the air valve when
>it needs to spin up the compressor. Again the ultimate source of power
>does not have to be wind, and in fact with CAS it's even easier to
>combine energy captured from multiple sources. No need to worry about
>charge controllers when you're simply pumping air into a big tank.
How big a tank? I think you're going to find a fly in the ointment
once you run some numbers on air consumption. And if air power could
be so efficient and practical, why do you believe it is that
off-gridders, often known to be innovative and unafraid of breaking
with convention, haven't flocked to the concept?
>The point is that batteries can only accept a charge at a certain rate,
>potentially wasting captured energy during peaks.
There's isn't any peak power wasting problem that I'm aware of with
home power systems, since the cost of generating prevents people from
buying excess capacity. Can you give an example of the problem you're
citing?
>The efficiency of directly utilizing the energy of the compressed air
>for mechanical applications is also higher. Instead of capturing wind
>energy, converting to electricity, storing in a battery, converting to
>AC, converting to mechanical energy with a motor, converting to
>compressed air with a compressor coupled to the motor and then utilizing
>the compresses air to fire your nail gun, you eliminate four conversion
>steps.
You left out the AC to DC conversion of the turbine, and assumed that
energy used must be stored in a battery first. It's true that
compressed air for tools is a very inefficient process, on-grid or
off. Yet I've managed quite well with the just the same sort of
compressor that grid-connected folks use. I could do wind-powered shop
air more easily than most, but I wouldn't dream of adding another
system to cure an inefficiency that's such a small part of the big
picture.
Coincidentally, I have a neighbor who plans a Bowjon type installation
(low tower, bulky rotor, single-stage compressor) for shop air using
multiple surplus storage tanks. I've suggested that since he hasn't
any wind power at present and could really use some, that the time and
money he's going to put into the new setup would be better spent on a
conventional wind genny and a tall tower.
>This is where you really need the hybrid system. You run the inverter to
>power your conventional appliances. When you are not running the
>appliances you turn the inverter off.
That's one of those convenience/practicalities tradeoffs. Many
appliances don't like being de-powered, and it's a nuisance to fight
it. IMO, biting the bullet for full time capacity is one of those
things that goes a long way to making off-grid living palatable for
the average person. After a hard day of pining over the dearth of
rural ballet, the last thing you want is to have to reprogram the
clock on the microwave. :-)
> You run your lighting and TV and
>whatnot that are your much higher duty cycle items from DC and avoid the
>conversion.
The conversion losses are lamentable, but not generally worth working
around. As Scott mentioned, after you've fought that battle for a
while, you're ready for straight AC in order to eliminate the
diddling.
>Perhaps your home welding is less than mine. I've got a Miller
>Syncrowave 250 that I love and it can see quite a bit of use on project
>weekends. I'm thinking your inverters would gag at the 240v 100a gulps
>the Syncrowave takes, even if the typical gulp is only about 10 seconds
>duration. On a big project those 10 second gulps add up to quite a few
>minutes.
The fuses definitely couldn't handle it - 400A limit (24V system).
What kind of *home* welding are you doing that takes 24k Watts input?
People can size for whatever they can afford, but if I had the need
for more indoor stick/TIG, I'd be after one of these
http://cgi.ebay.com/ws/eBayISAPI.dll?ViewItem&category=57039&item=7524207277,
which should be a comfortable fit with our setup. But I find I rarely
stick weld indoors above about 120A, although I use the Powemig 255 up
to its max more often. The only really heavy stuff I have to work on
are the tractors, and that's only occasionally. Since they don't fit
inside, and neither does the smoke and dust of heavy work, I roll an
engine-driven unit outdoors.
>I didn't really intend the welder / generator to be used for backup to
>the regular power system. I really meant it more as an option for
>powering larger shop tools.
The auto-idle feature of a good unit will make that bearable, if the
tools' idle use is compatible. Still, the generator is going to be
either idling or roaring in between power tool use, at an average of
about $2 per hour in fuel. When we first moved onto our site, but
before we had the power system set up temporarily, I was stuck with
the welder generator. The running hours add up quickly, and I wouldn't
recommend it to anyone else except for occasional or temporary use, or
because there was no alternative, or if it's for a job that pays
enough to cover the expenses and aggravation.
>Modifying a DC inverter welder which are pretty inexpensive these days
>is likely the most efficient way to get quality welding capacity from a
>home power system. No line shaft required, and no need for oversized
>inverters or load shedding.
Everyone has different needs, wants, and budget, but I think you'll
find that more and more people have a potential combination of house
loads that need such capacity that shop use isn't a leap. Around here
for instance are many who need to power the surge of a 2 hp well pump,
along with other use concurrent. It can be done with a smaller
inverter and a generator, but it's sure nice to get that generator
time down if you can. We used to have a couple nearby who had a
generator/battery/inverter setup, over 10 hours generator time per
day. That's about 4000 hours and 2000 gallons of fuel per year. I
think the fuel cost, repair costs, and eventual generator replacement
cost were big factors in their pulling out after a few years. Even a
modest amount of PV could have cut that generator time in half, and
would have been far cheaper in the long run. Better still, the cost of
that (very nice) generator and fuel could have bought a combination of
hardware including a much smaller generator needing only a few hours
per week run time.
>Somehow it seems to cost
>more to live self sufficient off-grid than it does to just pay the
>utilities...
Not necessarily. Cashing out of a grid-connected place allowed us to
retire, start with a clean slate, and as the yuppies say, "leverage"
the advantages of home power to help keep the big picture cost down.
Cheap land, lower taxes, fewer utilities (still need the phone
company) are some of the benefits. In talking to off-gridders, I find
that the main factor affecting success isn't so much the power issues,
but whether the folks can afford and are comfortable with truly rural
living. For most, that usually means retirement or telecommuting, and
precludes having children at home. For those who need to commute or be
close to school busses etc., they're usually stuck with paying the
premium for grid access. Then again, when they want to generate their
own power, they can have cheaper and more efficient systems, and use
the grid for storage.
Wayne
On Mon, 20 Jun 2005 15:14:16 -0500, Scott Willing
<[email protected]> wrote:
>On Mon, 20 Jun 2005 18:20:28 GMT, "Vaughn Simon"
><[email protected]> wrote:
>
>>
>>"Scott Willing" <[email protected]> wrote in message
>>news:[email protected]...
>>> On Thu, 16 Jun 2005 20:19:43 -0500, Scott Willing
>>
>> Please people! Trim your posts. If you do so, you will not only save
>>bandwidth, but you will save readers lots of scrolling and they will be much
>>more likely to actually read your post. To trim, all you have to do is
>>highlight the area to be eliminated and hit your "Del" key.
>
>I apologize, but first you must permit me to utter a good-natured
>"Duh."
>
>For everyone who says "trim" there will be at least one who says "trim
>under pain of death." Yes, trimming is considered by many to be a sin
>on usenet, especially by those who were here before the great unwashed
>masses gained access... and also have control issues.
>
Trimming has long been an honorable and noble Usenet tradition and has
always been strongly encouraged, particularly when bandwidth issues, even
with text postings, was an issue. Trimming has been severely chastised in
times past, present, and future, when the trimmer deliberately trims
context out of posts to either strengthen the poster's position in a debate
or to weaken or ignore the points of another poster.
>The argument is that posts get separated from their threads for a
>multitude of reasons, and purists (which I'm decidedly not) insist
>that the entire thread be kept intact, so when alien archeologists
>studying the leftover bits of blown-out humanity don't have to work so
>hard to figure out the context. As for me, well, I think a little
>judicious trimming goes a long way towards readability.
>
... as it should be.
... snip
>BTW, the same purists (aka usenet nazis) will slap your willy for
>top-posting too, and they really get their knickers in a knot about
>it. We can only assume their mommies overdid the spanking a bit... and
>that they really, *really* liked it.
>
Frankly, even as *not* a usenet nazi, top-posting drives me up a wall.
As one poster's sig says:
A: Because it destroys the logic of a thread
Q: Why is top-posting bad?
... snip
+--------------------------------------------------------------------------------+
If you're gonna be dumb, you better be tough
+--------------------------------------------------------------------------------+
<snip>
>>People go out and drink too much even though they know they will
>>have a hang over the next day. The major difference in this case
>>is that the people who are enjoying the party are not the ones
>>who will suffer the hangover (and have to pay the bar tab).
>>
> This is true, too...folks have a long history of
>making bad decisions. The best we can do is try to make
>better ones...and hopefully, learn from our mistakes before
>the crisis gets so bad that we cannot survive.
<snip>
Major problem about learning from your mistakes [other than you
may not live to learn] is that from the perspective of the
decision makers these were excellent decisions resulting in
wealth for themselves beyond the dreams of avarice.
From the perspective of everybody else: the first major mistake
was letting these people get into and stay in their position of
power; the second one is letting them keep any of the money they
looted. [RICO anyone?] There is however there is a deeper
problem. In a line originally used about politicians, "they are
like cockroaches - its not what they carry off, its what they
fall into and spoil."
Conventional national defense considerations by themselves should
be enough to justify the retention of our basic manufacturing
capability, cadre and infrastructure.
On Fri, 17 Jun 2005 17:31:42 -0700, "Ulysses"
<[email protected]> wrote:
>
>"Scott Willing" <[email protected]> wrote in message
>news:[email protected]...
>> On Thu, 16 Jun 2005 09:30:54 -0700, "Ulysses"
>> <[email protected]> wrote:
>>
>> >
>> >"Scott Willing" <[email protected]> wrote in message
>> >news:[email protected]...
>> >> On 15 Jun 2005 11:36:20 -0700, "Too_Many_Tools"
>> >> <[email protected]> wrote:
>> >>
>> >> >Thanks for the reply.
>> >> >
>> >>
>> >> I started out at 12V primary by virtue of buying a house with an
>> >> existing PV system. Like many frontier homebrew systems, it had
>> >> started as a purely DC system to which an inverter was added later.
>> >>
>> >> Having no plumbing in the house, I've acquired a number of small 12V
>> >> pumps for various specific purposes, such as our bucket shower.
>> >
>> >Just curious, but how do you go to the bathroom? Composting toilet?
>>
>> Yes and no. :-) We have a simple sawdust bucket toilet that sits
>> beside a commercial composting toilet, now retired. I'm going to tear
>> out the latter and build a nicer bucket toilet when the time is
>> available.
>>
>> Long story, but the commercial toilet is, IMHO, a waste of money.
>> (Fortunately, wasn't my decision; came with the house.) A bucket
>> toilet is superior to it in every way.
>>
>> Most so-called composting toilets, including this one, are actually
>> evaporating toilets and don't compost per se.
>
>I don't see how ANY of them could actually compost anything when you are
>always adding new material.
I don't see a problem with that. I add fresh material to the top of
our working pile once a week until the bin is full and we let 'er
rest. The most active thermophilic zone *is* right near the top where
the new material is added. Our working bin is toasting along at 120
degrees F right at the moment.
We learned a lot from Joe Jenkin's "Humanure Handbook" e.g. that we
don't need to do a lot of work turning the pile, and that doing so can
actually kill the thermophilic action. That's exactly what we've found
in practice. Haven't flipped a pile since.
> My composting takes place in the compost heap.
>That actually works.
Yep.
>>
>> >Outhouse?
>>
>> There are two of those here, also retired.
>>
>> We have shallow groundwater, and an outhouse is an potentially nasty
>> polluter. Actually septic systems can be just as bad - so many people
>> manage to pollute their wells with those too. Above-ground aerobic
>> composting is the way to go IMHO.
>>
>> -=s
>Yea. I built a composting toilet and replaced it with a bigger version (30
>gallon) of the bucket toilet. I overcame the weight problem by putting a
>drain at the bottom that goes into a hole (covered, of course) and I used
>weeds chopped with a lawnmower or peat moss when there are no weeds instead
>of sawdust.
I'm fortunate enough to have two small smallmills run by neighbors
within a few miles. We tried leaves and stuff but kept bringing in too
many bugs with 'em.
> My well is about 300 feet away and down 126 feet.
Excellent.
> I've given
>some thought to having it go into a solar still and then only clean water
>would reach the ground. Haven't figured out yet how to clean the solar
>still though. Might be ugly and stinky.
One reason I like the bucket thing is 'cos the pee just goes into the
pile where it contributes nitrogen and helps to keep it at the right
moisture level.
One of our problems with the commercial unit was that no matter what
we did we would eventually end up with flies, e.g. fungus gnats,
living in there. The buckets don't sit around long enough for anything
to breed in 'em.
I thought when we build the new house I might like to try a vault, but
the fly thing really worries me. Plus, we're trying to keep to a
single-story design with no stairs which kinda precludes that anyway.
Best site we have is on a hill though, so there's still the
possibility for ground-level access to a lower-level vault. Dunno.
I'll keep the commercial toilet around just to install it
(temporarily) for getting approvals... something prior residents here
haven't had to concern themselves with.
-=s
Ulysses wrote:
> "Scott Willing" <[email protected]> wrote in message
...
>>Most so-called composting toilets, including this one, are actually
>>evaporating toilets and don't compost per se.
>
> I don't see how ANY of them could actually compost anything when you are
> always adding new material. My composting takes place in the compost heap.
> That actually works.
As I understand it, composting toilets always have a second compartment
where the final composting takes place before the stuff is removed.
>>We have shallow groundwater, and an outhouse is an potentially nasty
>>polluter. Actually septic systems can be just as bad - so many people
>>manage to pollute their wells with those too. Above-ground aerobic
>>composting is the way to go IMHO.
>
> Yea. I built a composting toilet and replaced it with a bigger version (30
> gallon) of the bucket toilet. I overcame the weight problem by putting a
> drain at the bottom that goes into a hole (covered, of course) and I used
> weeds chopped with a lawnmower or peat moss when there are no weeds instead
> of sawdust. My well is about 300 feet away and down 126 feet. I've given
> some thought to having it go into a solar still and then only clean water
> would reach the ground. Haven't figured out yet how to clean the solar
> still though. Might be ugly and stinky.
You might instead use a solar evaporator so that only vapor escapes.
The fellows doing those earthships (tire houses) did a bit of work on
these things. I found a page of theirs...
http://www.earthship.org/systems/sewage.php
Apparently they prefer to use a solar heated septic tank that drains
into a large outdoor lined planter. Plants do seem to do a good job
at both removing pollutants and evaporating water.
Anthony
Pete C. wrote:
> What we'll end up with is a bunch of lawyers feeding off of each other
> in the downward spiral as we end up with no capacity to produce anything
> for ourselves and consequently no money to import what we need. We'll
> end up rather like the undeveloped parts of the world are now.
>
The only poetic justice to this is that legal research is now being
outsourced to India as well.
--
jeff
On Tue, 14 Jun 2005 19:21:32 -0000, [email protected] (Robert
Bonomi) wrote:
>Charging batteries is *extremely* ineffcient.
That depends. For a typical windpower setup, you have an excess of power
you can't store when you don't need it, then a shortage when you do.
Even inefficient batteries can improve _overall_ efficiency
--
Cats have nine lives, which is why they rarely post to Usenet.
In article <[email protected]>,
[email protected] (Dave Mundt) wrote:
> Finally, there is the basic problem that
> the world, in general, is not a friendly place.
> Countries that were our friends are now our
> enemies; countries that were our enemies are
> now our friends; The only lesson we can
> learn from this is that this is likely to
> happen again, so, to end up totally dependent
> on another country for our major manufacturing
> is a stupid thing to do.
Especially one with which we have such a long standing distrust. Pssst,
by the way, everyone, they're still run by communists. Wasn't that the
reason we fought a "war" against the Soviet Union as well as boycotting
all trade with Cuba for half a century? Not to mention, OK I'll mention
them anyway - Korea and Vietnam? To stop the scourge of Communism?
--
Owen Lowe
The Fly-by-Night Copper Company
__________
"I pledge allegiance to the flag of the
Corporate States of America and to the
Republicans for which it stands, one nation,
under debt, easily divisible, with liberty
and justice for oil."
- Wiley Miller, Non Sequitur, 1/24/05
<snip>
>Perhaps, but half of my customers are in Europe and Asia. My feeling is that
>the value you add is what customers are interested in. It goes right to
>their bottom line.
============================
Big problem is that you can't tell what also comes off the bottom
line as a result because is concealed as higher taxes, and/or
quality of life issues such as higher crime rates with increased
insurance and alarm costs. It is also displaced in time, in that
you may see an immediate benefit now, but much higher costs
later. Think about changing the oil in your car. Don't change
it now, save a little money now, pay a lot more later or do
without a car.
On Wed, 15 Jun 2005 07:36:34 -0700, F.George wrote:
> <snip>
> Given the current economic/social/political environment your
> concerns are well founded, however I think the primary or basic
> problem will not be limited or unavailable [electrical] power,
> but rather the more pervasive and dangerous problem of a lack of
> spare parts, raw materials and most critical HSS and carbide
> tools and blanks.
>
> Whether by design or stupidity, the American
> manufacturing/industrial infrastructure is rapidly being
> destroyed, primarily by management "outsourcing" and plant
> transfer.
Thank you, Chicken Little.
> With the trade deficit [current account trade balance]
> approaching 2 billion dollars *PER DAY* it does not require a
> degree in rocket science or a tarot deck to see that the time is
> near when imports by the U.S. economy will be on a C.O.D. or even
> a "pre-pay" basis [in gold, not dollars].
Odd, that's not what my crystal ball tells me. ;-)
And that "trade deficit" is the stupidest boogeyman ever perpetrated -
well, at least up in the top five stupid boogeymen - since the
nervous nellies found out that it's a scary buzzword.
Do you even have any idea what a "trade deficit" _is_? It means
we have two billion dollars more per day to spend on their crap
than they have to spend on our crap. That means WE ARE TWO BILLION
DOLLARS RICHER THAN THEY ARE!!!!! PER DAY!!!!!!!!!!
You have a significant "trade deficit" with the grocery store.
How much do you spend there? Maybe $100.00/week? That's a ONE
HUNDRED DOLLARS PER WEEK TRADE DEFICIT with the grocery store.
They don't buy anything from you, do they?
And imagine your employer's trade deficit with _you_! He buys
your labor for, what, $50K, $100K/year? How much stuff do you
buy from him? Your EMPLOYER HAS A SERIOUS TRADE DEFICIT WITH
YOU!!!!!
"Trade Deficit". Pfaugh!
Thanks!
Rich
>>On Tue, 21 Jun 2005 21:24:36 -0400, "John P Bengi" <JBengi
(spamm)@(spamm) yahoo,com> wrote:
>>Try a normal browser like OE and get rid of that piece of junk Agent.
> What was this about?
oh , just the Gymmy Bob / Bengi / pizza Girl / Larry Lixxx troll getting his jollies again !
Thank phuck the Globe does not rely on the types that follow this jerks posts to
generate any interest in RE - bunch of dim witted morons, at best!!
mutter mutter ......wankers!
On Thu, 23 Jun 2005 06:59:33 -0400, JohnM <[email protected]> wrote:
>Cliff wrote:
>> On Mon, 20 Jun 2005 15:14:16 -0500, Scott Willing
>> <[email protected]> wrote:
>>
>>
>>>The argument is that posts get separated from their threads for a
>>>multitude of reasons
>>
>>
>> Only quote the specific bits that you are responding directly to.
>> You need the context but not the rest.
>
>I seem to remember you snipping my posts in order to alter the context..
>
>John
John,
I don't think so (but it's possible). Sometimes, with a few
others, I only reply to a slight snippet (see jb & Gunner & crew)
with a sharp poke <G>.
For most the subject (or a specific subset of it), not the
author, is the subject (whoops .. a tautology?)
Usually I quote the specific bit I'm responding to (for the
proper context). I like SHORT, easy-on-the-reader posts,
little forced scrolling to find the context, and brevity, usually.
Some of the others like huge essays .... but I find that a
few well placed words usually do most of the time.
One may also usually assume that the reader recently read the
prior full post that the reply is in response to.
--
Cliff
John P Bengi wrote:
> I have noticed a few things about this.
> 1) I tried Agent for a month or so and it feels like running a MSDos
> programme, primitive and non-intuitive. I am not willing to pay for this
> functionality. OE is free without hacking.
>
> 2) The people that seem to always have problems with threading or posting
> readability are almost always Agent users. For posting binaries it is a much
> better machine, I am sure.
>
> 3) I have never had a virus scanner installed on my system in the 20 odd
> years I have been using MS op-systems. I have used a virus scanner the odd
> time but never required a full time scanner and the targetabilty is only
> because the results could be seen with such a popular browser. Once Agent
> becames more popular it will become a target also.
>
> 4) no browser I have ever heard of or seen support bottom posting. They all
> separate the p[osted text from the posted header. Threading browsers have
> made the top down posting style obsolete in the 80s. Who ever puts their
> attachments of previous posts before their text. Do you do this in an email?
> The previous posts are all in the thread and available to anybody wanted to
> review the previous posts. The arguments for bottom posting are all moot.
>
> Other than that, thanx for your polite information.
Microsoft stuff is pretty functional, and it's basically alright once
you get it configured, but the fact remains that it's the stuff that's
most often assaulted, it's often buggy and MS is darn slow at dealing
with problems. Consider XP and the 'service packs', strange way to do
things..
Try Mozilla's Thunderbird, it's what I use. I really don't know of
anything bad to say about it, it works and it works well. The Mozilla
folks seem determined to resolve issues quickly, I feel that they're
doing a much better job of it than MS.
Don't get me wrong, MS did a great service for the people by putting
Windows out, they helped to make the internet what it is just by
offering a fairly simple and working OS that we non computer-geeks can
use. MS set the standard that others are now exceeding and I can see
little reason for not using that which exceeds. Give it a try, you might
like it. Mozilla Firefox is a very good browser too, try 'em both.
John
Cliff wrote:
> On Thu, 23 Jun 2005 06:59:33 -0400, JohnM <[email protected]> wrote:
>
>
>>Cliff wrote:
>>
>>>On Mon, 20 Jun 2005 15:14:16 -0500, Scott Willing
>>><[email protected]> wrote:
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>>The argument is that posts get separated from their threads for a
>>>>multitude of reasons
>>>
>>>
>>> Only quote the specific bits that you are responding directly to.
>>> You need the context but not the rest.
>>
>>I seem to remember you snipping my posts in order to alter the context..
>>
>>John
>
>
> John,
> I don't think so (but it's possible). Sometimes, with a few
> others, I only reply to a slight snippet (see jb & Gunner & crew)
> with a sharp poke <G>.
You go back and look at the thread where we disagreed over the atomic
bombing of the Japanese cities and you'll see where I accused you of
cutting what I said, resulting in an altered context.
>
> For most the subject (or a specific subset of it), not the
> author, is the subject (whoops .. a tautology?)
>
> Usually I quote the specific bit I'm responding to (for the
> proper context). I like SHORT, easy-on-the-reader posts,
> little forced scrolling to find the context, and brevity, usually.
>
> Some of the others like huge essays .... but I find that a
> few well placed words usually do most of the time.
I find your few, well placed words to often sound like you haven't
thought of anything constructive. "Winger!, WMD's!", etc. Maybe the
readers you prefer need it kept simple?
> One may also usually assume that the reader recently read the
> prior full post that the reply is in response to.
I don't believe that to be a safe assumption. You go through a thread on
a day and you see the posts between then and the last time you looked.
There may be responses to something you read three days ago, twenty
lines up the thread. There's usually a middle ground between giving
enough information about what you're responding to that you're showing
consideration for your readers and cutting enough to not waste people's
time. Myself, I prefer to err on the side of too much information.
John
On Tue, 21 Jun 2005 16:02:08 GMT, [email protected] (Scott Lurndal)
wrote:
>F. George McDuffee <[email protected]> writes:
>>Several people have indicated the Current Accounts Ballance of
>>Payments [trade] deficit was meaningless.
>>
>>Among other problems, accumulation of U.S. dollars allows the
>>purchase of U.S. companies, and the transfer of U.S. jobs. See
>>Reuters article below for details of how the jobs at Maytag were
>>traded for cheap imports. Another example is the sale by IBM of
>>their line of personal computers.
>
>And the doomsayers were saying this about Japan when a Japanese
>businessman bought pebble beach in the 80's. He
>subsequently sold it back to an American consoritium for a
>significant loss.
It's probably still there, in one form or another.
Plants get closed & the name brand is now another imported
product. Often of an unknown quality.
--
Cliff
On Tue, 21 Jun 2005 21:24:36 -0400, "John P Bengi" <JBengi
(spamm)@(spamm) yahoo,com> wrote:
>Try a normal browser like OE and get rid of that piece of junk Agent.
ROFLMAO!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
Outleak Exploder?
ROFLMAO!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
Gunner
>
>"Cliff" <[email protected]> wrote in message news:[email protected]...
>> It's nice to know the CONTEXT or the question before
>> the response, for one thing.
>>
>> More may be below .... go reread it all <G>.
>>
>>
>> On Mon, 20 Jun 2005 15:14:16 -0500, Scott Willing
>> <[email protected]> wrote:
>>
>> >On Mon, 20 Jun 2005 18:20:28 GMT, "Vaughn Simon"
>> ><[email protected]> wrote:
>> >
>> >>
>> >>"Scott Willing" <[email protected]> wrote in message
>> >>news:[email protected]...
>> >>> On Thu, 16 Jun 2005 20:19:43 -0500, Scott Willing
>> >>
>> >> Please people! Trim your posts. If you do so, you will not only save
>> >>bandwidth, but you will save readers lots of scrolling and they will be much
>> >>more likely to actually read your post. To trim, all you have to do is
>> >>highlight the area to be eliminated and hit your "Del" key.
>> >
>> >I apologize, but first you must permit me to utter a good-natured
>> >"Duh."
>> >
>> >For everyone who says "trim" there will be at least one who says "trim
>> >under pain of death." Yes, trimming is considered by many to be a sin
>> >on usenet, especially by those who were here before the great unwashed
>> >masses gained access... and also have control issues.
>> >
>> >The argument is that posts get separated from their threads for a
>> >multitude of reasons, and purists (which I'm decidedly not) insist
>> >that the entire thread be kept intact, so when alien archeologists
>> >studying the leftover bits of blown-out humanity don't have to work so
>> >hard to figure out the context. As for me, well, I think a little
>> >judicious trimming goes a long way towards readability.
>> >
>> >In this case I did feel it especially important to retain the thread
>> >as the trail was a little cold on this one... or so I thought.
>> >
>> >BTW, the same purists (aka usenet nazis) will slap your willy for
>> >top-posting too, and they really get their knickers in a knot about
>> >it. We can only assume their mommies overdid the spanking a bit... and
>> >that they really, *really* liked it.
>> >
>> >Anyway, wrt to trimming, it's "damned if you do, damned if you don't."
>> >
>> >BTW#2 - lest you think I'm unsympathetic to bandwidth issues, I'm on a
>> >freaking "28.8k" dial that usually gives me 26.4k... a number I'd
>> >never even heard of before moving here.
>> >
>> >Now, in deference to your preference, and also for the dirty pleasure
>> >of sticking it in the face of my favorite usenet nazi, I'll trim the
>> >rest of your post. <gasp! horrors!>
>> >
>> >-=s
>> --
>> Cliff
"Considering the events of recent years,
the world has a long way to go to regain
its credibility and reputation with the US."
unknown
F. George McDuffee wrote:
>> One problem with this approach/attitude is that it ignores the
>> human costs. This is actually 1,600 well paying manufacturing
>> jobs affecting 1,500 or more families, and 14.8 million dollars
>> in local tax revenues.
A visit to Newton might provide some insights. Spending a bit of time
inside Maytag's headquarters, R&D facility, and manufacturing areas
might leave you wondering why it's taken so long for this to happen.
>> Second problem is that this gives the Chinese an opening wedge
>> into the U.S. major appliance market with an existing brand and
>> dealer network, directly threatening #1 Whirlpool with all the
>> jobs and local taxes revenue they represent.
The threat to Whirlpool is certainly /possible/; but not a given. It
will take a fair amount of time and a huge expenditure of resources to
bring Maytag to the point where it's again sufficiently robust to
threaten Whirlpool. It could happen, but only if Whirlpool management
allows it to happen.
>> Third problem will not be come apparent for a few years when
>> anguished messages are posted to these news groups lamenting that
>> blanking and forming die tool makers and press set-up men are
>> unavailable.
This seems like a logical conclusion - but it might be worth
investigating to find out how many of these people Maytag directly
employs and what their average age is...
>> If this were an event that affected only a few players, I would
>> be selling tickets. Unfortunately, this almost entirely affects
>> only the average person with roots in their community and many
>> years invested in learning a trade.
Hmm. I'm not sure how you've reached your conclusion; but my own
opinion (formed by direct observation) is that it's unlikely that the
Chinese will value the current Maytag employees less than the old
management. The major differences, I suspect, will be that outsourced
operations will be relocated from Germany and Mexico to the Pacific
Rim.
--
Morris Dovey
DeSoto Solar
DeSoto, Iowa USA
http://www.iedu.com/DeSoto
BTW Cliff:
Most of that other thread was not my postings. It was a super troll we have
been trying to demolish for the last 6 months on a few groups. He doesn't
like the vcomplaints to his ISP and News providers so he forges my nickname
and treis to libel me in any group I visit.
His last known commonly used name is Bunty Jeck. Previously known as Aunty
Jack, Eunty JEck, Gymmy Bob, nunja, M II, Taz, Tez, Tbz, T@z, Troll killer
and over 300 incarnations of those basic ones over the last year. Very
mentally ill (OCD) individual in bed with Wayne and M II here or the same
person.
Sorry for the confusion but I gave up on that thread. I only post from
golden.net. Check the headers
"Cliff" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
> On Tue, 21 Jun 2005 16:02:08 GMT, [email protected] (Scott Lurndal)
> wrote:
>
> >F. George McDuffee <[email protected]> writes:
> >>Several people have indicated the Current Accounts Ballance of
> >>Payments [trade] deficit was meaningless.
> >>
> >>Among other problems, accumulation of U.S. dollars allows the
> >>purchase of U.S. companies, and the transfer of U.S. jobs. See
> >>Reuters article below for details of how the jobs at Maytag were
> >>traded for cheap imports. Another example is the sale by IBM of
> >>their line of personal computers.
> >
> >And the doomsayers were saying this about Japan when a Japanese
> >businessman bought pebble beach in the 80's. He
> >subsequently sold it back to an American consoritium for a
> >significant loss.
>
> It's probably still there, in one form or another.
> Plants get closed & the name brand is now another imported
> product. Often of an unknown quality.
> --
> Cliff
I have noticed a few things about this.
1) I tried Agent for a month or so and it feels like running a MSDos
programme, primitive and non-intuitive. I am not willing to pay for this
functionality. OE is free without hacking.
2) The people that seem to always have problems with threading or posting
readability are almost always Agent users. For posting binaries it is a much
better machine, I am sure.
3) I have never had a virus scanner installed on my system in the 20 odd
years I have been using MS op-systems. I have used a virus scanner the odd
time but never required a full time scanner and the targetabilty is only
because the results could be seen with such a popular browser. Once Agent
becames more popular it will become a target also.
4) no browser I have ever heard of or seen support bottom posting. They all
separate the p[osted text from the posted header. Threading browsers have
made the top down posting style obsolete in the 80s. Who ever puts their
attachments of previous posts before their text. Do you do this in an email?
The previous posts are all in the thread and available to anybody wanted to
review the previous posts. The arguments for bottom posting are all moot.
Other than that, thanx for your polite information.
"Bruce L. Bergman" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
> On Tue, 21 Jun 2005 21:24:36 -0400, "John P Bengi" <JBengi
> (spamm)@(spamm) yahoo,com> wrote:
>
> >Try a normal browser like OE and get rid of that piece of junk Agent.
>
> Okay, I can see that you've made up your mind based on faulty
> premises, and don't want to be confused with the real facts...
>
> I have several copies of Microsloth Outleak Exploder, and two
> legally licensed copies of full Outlook that came with Microsoft
> Office. I've tried using them. They are both the biggest pieces of
> non-intuitive crap software to ever be shipped out of Redmond WA, and
> they've never really fixed it.
>
> Agent may be "a piece of junk" in your misguided opinion, but at
> least it is designed to do it's job and it does it well. And when
> updates are needed, the programmers make them rapidly. And all the
> default settings for Agent are correct out of the box, it won't do
> anything stupid unless you change the options and tell it to.
>
> As the "defacto" software that comes pre-installed on the computer
> for the sheeple who can't be bothered to find anything better, MSOE is
> a virus and trojan exploit magnet for all the skript kiddies out there
> trying to hack into other peoples' systems. As an example, I offer
> the "Preview Pane" that would cheerfully run any binary that appeared
> there, including executable programs... You have to go manually make
> sure that option is turned off before allowing the program anywhere
> near the Net.
>
> And MSOE helpfully self-destructs on a regular basis - if your news
> server ever has problems where it loses it's spool hard drive and even
> once reports "this newsgroup does not exist", Outlook Express
> cheerfully deletes all your newsgroups and all the saved messages from
> the local computer hard drive. If the news server says the group
> does not exist anymore it /must/ be true, it can't be a momentarily
> hosed server.
>
> Go try a few other programs before you keep praising MSOE. You
> might be surprised that there are other good coders out there.
>
> And if you have nothing else constructive to offer on the subject in
> response, I'll stop poking the troll here and gladly let you have the
> last word. And you can wander off and check the stock ticker to see
> how your Microsoft stock is doing.
>
> --<< Bruce >>--
> --
> Bruce L. Bergman, Woodland Hills (Los Angeles) CA - Desktop
> Electrician for Westend Electric - CA726700
> 5737 Kanan Rd. #359, Agoura CA 91301 (818) 889-9545
> Spamtrapped address: Remove the python and the invalid, and use a net.
John P Bengi expostulated:
| Really? Now let's see you answer this post without separating the
| headers and the text and yet still bottom post. Show me how Agent
| supports this bottom posting garbage idea.
With a little help from a package called "quote-fix", this is how OE
can deal with that challenge. It's available free at
<http://home.in.tum.de/~jain/software/oe-quotefix/>.
One of the things that I've liked about it is that it displays each
person's quoted text in a different color, to make it easier to follow
interspersed comments.
--
Morris Dovey
DeSoto Solar
DeSoto, Iowa USA
http://www.iedu.com/DeSoto/
<snip>
>And the doomsayers were saying this about Japan when a Japanese
>businessman bought pebble beach in the 80's. He
>subsequently sold it back to an American consoritium for a
>significant loss.
<snip>
One problem with this approach/attitude is that it ignores the
human costs. This is actually 1,600 well paying manufacturing
jobs affecting 1,500 or more families, and 14.8 million dollars
in local tax revenues.
Second problem is that this gives the Chinese an opening wedge
into the U.S. major appliance market with an existing brand and
dealer network, directly threatening #1 Whirlpool with all the
jobs and local taxes revenue they represent.
Third problem will not be come apparent for a few years when
anguished messages are posted to these news groups lamenting that
blanking and forming die tool makers and press set-up men are
unavailable.
If this were an event that affected only a few players, I would
be selling tickets. Unfortunately, this almost entirely affects
only the average person with roots in their community and many
years invested in learning a trade.
See these URLs for additional/background info
http://www.jobsillinois.us/news/contentview.asp?c=123669
http://www.iasb.com/files/nb0604.htm
http://www.cfoss.com/maytag.html
On Tue, 21 Jun 2005 21:24:36 -0400, "John P Bengi" <JBengi
(spamm)@(spamm) yahoo,com> wrote:
>Try a normal browser like OE and get rid of that piece of junk Agent.
Ah, a msoft zealot -- that explains it. In your previous posting you
whined about no browser supporting bottom posting, yet as shown above, you
recognize that Agent, as well as many other Usenet readers that were around
before Saint Bill discovered the Internet conform to the bottom posting
convention.
... snip
+--------------------------------------------------------------------------------+
If you're gonna be dumb, you better be tough
+--------------------------------------------------------------------------------+
On Tue, 21 Jun 2005 21:23:36 -0400, "John P Bengi" <JBengi
(spamm)@(spamm) yahoo,com> wrote:
>Then read the previous post. What were you doing reading the response to
>nothing first?
>
>You bottom posters are nuts and fanatics over something that went out in the
>80s since threading browsers.
>
>Keep your damn headers with the text.
>
>When you get a browser that actually supports bottom posting I will join
>you. Until then fuck off with your trolling.
What was this about?
--
Cliff
On Tue, 21 Jun 2005 21:24:36 -0400, "John P Bengi" <JBengi
(spamm)@(spamm) yahoo,com> wrote:
>Try a normal browser like OE and get rid of that piece of junk Agent.
Okay, I can see that you've made up your mind based on faulty
premises, and don't want to be confused with the real facts...
I have several copies of Microsloth Outleak Exploder, and two
legally licensed copies of full Outlook that came with Microsoft
Office. I've tried using them. They are both the biggest pieces of
non-intuitive crap software to ever be shipped out of Redmond WA, and
they've never really fixed it.
Agent may be "a piece of junk" in your misguided opinion, but at
least it is designed to do it's job and it does it well. And when
updates are needed, the programmers make them rapidly. And all the
default settings for Agent are correct out of the box, it won't do
anything stupid unless you change the options and tell it to.
As the "defacto" software that comes pre-installed on the computer
for the sheeple who can't be bothered to find anything better, MSOE is
a virus and trojan exploit magnet for all the skript kiddies out there
trying to hack into other peoples' systems. As an example, I offer
the "Preview Pane" that would cheerfully run any binary that appeared
there, including executable programs... You have to go manually make
sure that option is turned off before allowing the program anywhere
near the Net.
And MSOE helpfully self-destructs on a regular basis - if your news
server ever has problems where it loses it's spool hard drive and even
once reports "this newsgroup does not exist", Outlook Express
cheerfully deletes all your newsgroups and all the saved messages from
the local computer hard drive. If the news server says the group
does not exist anymore it /must/ be true, it can't be a momentarily
hosed server.
Go try a few other programs before you keep praising MSOE. You
might be surprised that there are other good coders out there.
And if you have nothing else constructive to offer on the subject in
response, I'll stop poking the troll here and gladly let you have the
last word. And you can wander off and check the stock ticker to see
how your Microsoft stock is doing.
--<< Bruce >>--
--
Bruce L. Bergman, Woodland Hills (Los Angeles) CA - Desktop
Electrician for Westend Electric - CA726700
5737 Kanan Rd. #359, Agoura CA 91301 (818) 889-9545
Spamtrapped address: Remove the python and the invalid, and use a net.
M II strikes again!
"Wall" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:1119542417.802a936af79f12dbd55a5a3c01453788@teranews...
> >>On Tue, 21 Jun 2005 21:24:36 -0400, "John P Bengi" <JBengi
> (spamm)@(spamm) yahoo,com> wrote:
>
> >>Try a normal browser like OE and get rid of that piece of junk Agent.
>
> > What was this about?
>
> oh , just the Gymmy Bob / Bengi / pizza Girl / Larry Lixxx troll getting
his jollies again !
> Thank phuck the Globe does not rely on the types that follow this jerks
posts to
> generate any interest in RE - bunch of dim witted morons, at best!!
>
> mutter mutter ......wankers!
>
>
>
"Bruce L. Bergman" <[email protected]> wrote in message
>
> Okay, I can see that you've made up your mind based on faulty
> premises, and don't want to be confused with the real facts...
You know, you're right. A Windows computer can suffer from all the problems
you've listed. But, it appears you're just another Neanderthal that doesn't
have the wherewithal to properly configure a Windows computer against all
the problems you've listed.
My Windows computer doesn't suffer from *any* of the problems you've listed.
For the most part, I use and like many Windows programs as well as a number
of others. And no, I don't own any Microsoft stock or have any great
appreciation for Bill Gates. And yes, on frequent occasion I'm exposed to
and use other Operating Systems such as Linux. (Mandrake version)
So screw off and climb back into your hole. I'm not the least interested in
hearing you WHINE about your incapability's when it comes to Windows.
Really? Now let's see you answer this post without separating the headers
and the text and yet still bottom post. Show me how Agent supports this
bottom posting garbage idea.
It will only take one more response to demo what a dumb idea bottom posting
was. Try to attach your previous posts at the bottom while you are at it
like you do in your emails you send.
"Mark & Juanita" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
On Tue, 21 Jun 2005 21:24:36 -0400, "John P Bengi" <JBengi
(spamm)@(spamm) yahoo,com> wrote:
Try a normal browser like OE and get rid of that piece of junk Agent.
Ah, a msoft zealot -- that explains it. In your previous posting you
whined about no browser supporting bottom posting, yet as shown above, you
recognize that Agent, as well as many other Usenet readers that were around
before Saint Bill discovered the Internet conform to the bottom posting
convention.
... snip
+---------------------------------------------------------------------------
-----+
If you're gonna be dumb, you better be tough
+---------------------------------------------------------------------------
-----+
On 14 Jun 2005 12:07:53 -0700, "Too_Many_Tools"
<[email protected]> wrote:
>I would be interested in hearing how others have approached this
>situation and what implementations they have adopted.
>
>Thanks for any suggestions or comments that you can offer.
Any chance of hooking up to the grid for the special cases like the
welder? It's not total independance, but you can really limit the
amount of purchased electricity you use, and still get most of the
benefits from generating your own power.
On Mon, 20 Jun 2005 12:37:18 -0500, Scott Willing
<[email protected]> wrote:
>There *are* special trading zones set up within foreign sovereign
>countries
They exist INSIDE the US as well.
Examples in Michigan (I once worked inside one):
http://www.crcmich.org/EDSurvey/fedzones/ftz.html
--
Cliff
Hey John!
On Wed, 15 Jun 2005 13:11:30 -0700, "John" <[email protected]> wrote:
>
><Snipped>
>
>Hi Matt, Where've you been? Crankin' out too many parts to get into =
any of=20
>the ongoing arguments? <g>
Not really. I know enough about politics to make myself look stupid,
and in the grand scheme of things, it really doesn't matter. Besides,
these malcontents, no matter which side of the fence they're on, are
talking out both sides of their mouths anyway. They each think their
Opinions and Theories are FACTS, they're constantly beating each other
up with their "facts", and reality doing nothing more than trying to
cram their "facts" down our throats. Then, when someone does refute
their arguments with actual facts that they can't deny, they start
slinging personal insults. So, trying to engage them with any form of
reasoning is a nothing but a serious waste of time.
>
>Hey, remember that little 3-48 x .054" set screw? We finally got it =
running=20
>pretty good on the Tsugami. We're making it out of 416HT stainless and =
are=20
>using a Habegger adjustable thread rolling die. Almost full thread =
profile=20
>right to the ends. So far, so good. (crossed fingers).
Cool! Glad you got it going. It ran great on my ENC-74. The only
problem is that on that machine, it ran so slow that it was costing me
money to make your parts. I originally quoted it to run on a cam
operated Tornos R-10. The basic part ran great. Had I been able to
stop the .050" hex broach from sticking (spring loaded drill spindle
couldn't retract it every time), it would been a good job to have. As
it was, I had trouble making your deliveries because I couldn't tie my
CNC up for very long on a part for which I wasn't making any money :-(
Too bad really, it was a fun part to make. I still get a kick out of
showing it to people. "Wow! How'd you make that little bugger? & No
shit! There's a hex in there?"
BTW, how are you de-burring the broached hex ID on the cut-off end?=20
I tried acid de-burr, but it cost more than the parts were worth. I
finally wound up having to pay an operator to sit and poke each part,
after looking at them to see which end was the end with the burr, from
the cut-off end and push the burr through the hex hole (shear the burr
off in the hex). Did a few thousand of them myself, as well. Major
PITA, and really rough on the eyes.
>
>I better get out of here before I get flamed for not being on-topic =
enough.
Why? I rarely see anyone else in the group stay on topic these days:-)
(well...except those of us that were around pre-Cliff)
Take care John,
Matt
<snip>
>When one considers a workshop with metal and wood working capabilities,
>what tradeoffs have you made to have a working shop in an alternate
>homepower environment where every amp is precious?
<snip>
Given the current economic/social/political environment your
concerns are well founded, however I think the primary or basic
problem will not be limited or unavailable [electrical] power,
but rather the more pervasive and dangerous problem of a lack of
spare parts, raw materials and most critical HSS and carbide
tools and blanks.
Whether by design or stupidity, the American
manufacturing/industrial infrastructure is rapidly being
destroyed, primarily by management "outsourcing" and plant
transfer.
With the trade deficit [current account trade balance]
approaching 2 billion dollars *PER DAY* it does not require a
degree in rocket science or a tarot deck to see that the time is
near when imports by the U.S. economy will be on a C.O.D. or even
a "pre-pay" basis [in gold, not dollars].
Given the U.S. has a very limited (and rapidly diminishing)
domestic production capacity for machine tools [lathes, mills,
gear shapers, etc.], C.N.C. controllers, and perhaps most
critical M2 HSS and carbide inserts, this means the entire house
of cards will collapse as the existing machinery wears out,
replacements are unobtainable, and repair cannot be attempted.
Re-industrialization will be very expensive, time consuming and
dangerous, as even the most basic industries such as iron
foundries will have to be reestablished. Indeed, a generation or
more will be required, as the evolution, techniques and lessons
of the period 1890-1930 will have to be retraced, with no
assurance that the time required will be available before America
must again meet a serious international challenge to its
existence / hegemony.
"F. George McDuffee" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
>
> "Desperate situations demand desperate remedies" is a time-proven
> adage. Given the disastrous impact that the cascading failures of
> these major players will have on the U.S. economy/society, I
> propose a "super bankruptcy court" be created to establish the
> likely economic viability of these organizations, with immediate
> liquidation (Chapt. 7) [not reorganization (Chapt. 11)] of those
> unlikely to survive, with a 10 year suspension from any
> management position of the current and previous corporate
> executives and directors. (The stockholders have already lost
> all their equity, although they might not yet realize this.)
>
> The PBGC should have priority claim on any assets for full
> pension funding, and any trust-fund/lockboxes established for
> management retirement benefits and/or "differed compensation"
> should be recaptured on the basis that this was an attempt to
> conceal corporate assets.
>
> The choice is not between a "good" and better" solution, but
> between a "bad" and a "worse" solution.
Jeez, you're brutal. <g> I'm going to wait to hear if John has a solution
that's less drastic.
--
Ed Huntress
"F. George McDuffee" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
> <snip>
> >What's your SPECIFIC suggestion, George?
> <snip>
>
> "Desperate situations demand desperate remedies" is a time-proven
> adage. Given the disastrous impact that the cascading failures of
> these major players will have on the U.S. economy/society, I
> propose a "super bankruptcy court" be created to establish the
> likely economic viability of these organizations, with immediate
> liquidation (Chapt. 7) [not reorganization (Chapt. 11)] of those
> unlikely to survive, with a 10 year suspension from any
> management position of the current and previous corporate
> executives and directors. (The stockholders have already lost
> all their equity, although they might not yet realize this.)
How about making the share holders liable for the debt. They are after all
"owners" of the companies :-)
>
> The PBGC should have priority claim on any assets for full
> pension funding, and any trust-fund/lockboxes established for
> management retirement benefits and/or "differed compensation"
> should be recaptured on the basis that this was an attempt to
> conceal corporate assets.
>
> The choice is not between a "good" and better" solution, but
> between a "bad" and a "worse" solution.
>
>
>
"J. R. Carroll" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
> Let me offer you a little encouragement in the interim Ed. 65 million
> dollars per year worth of manufacturing will be back in the US from Korea
> beginning in October of this year and the customer involved will be able
to
> reduce their price, improve their margin and put a little sugar on it for
me
> and my guys.
That's great news, John! When you get to it, let us know how general you
think this approach can be for the rest of us. <g>
--
Ed Huntress
On Mon, 20 Jun 2005 17:56:46 -0700, Anthony Matonak
<[email protected]> wrote:
>Anthony
Sometimes.
Gunner
"Considering the events of recent years,
the world has a long way to go to regain
its credibility and reputation with the US."
unknown
On Sun, 19 Jun 2005 16:14:25 GMT, "CW" <[email protected]> wrote:
>There's still enough of us around that no how to make things to do it.
>Unfortunaly, that won't be the case for too many more years. We're retiring.
>A good example of the kind of thing that is wrecking the manufacturing base
>is the place I presently work. Machine shop, run by an MBA. 50% of the
>employees sit behind a desk. They wonder why they can't make any money. I've
>been doing this since most of them were in grade school. When I have said
>anything about getting more people producing and less people just collecting
>a paycheck, I get put off as an old timer that just doesn't know how it's
>done these days. Will be switching jobs here shortly. Let them go broke by
>themselves.
I've seen that a fair amount as well. At least at the place I work
now, the guys in the office still come out and run a machine from time
to time (the company only promotes from within, and only from those
who can perform every operation from the plasma-cutters to the mills
to the powder-coating line). I'm still young, so I bemoan the state
of manufacturing quite a bit- our average new employee is in and out
in less than a week, because nobody wants to get dirty, or get a
scratch on their soft, pretty skin anymore. Being a steel fabricator
used to be a respectable job because people understood that it is
skilled work- now it seems to be regarded as inferior to being a
night-time stocker at Walmart, if some of our ex-employees are
anything to go by.
Well, time will tell. I just keep hoarding tools and knowledge for
the day when I'm going to really, truly, need them. Of course, if
that day never comes- at least I've got an excellent hobby!
On Mon, 20 Jun 2005 20:58:22 -0700, Mark & Juanita
<[email protected]> wrote:
>A: Because it destroys the logic of a thread
>Q: Why is top-posting bad?
A. Top Posting.
Q. What's the most annoying thing on Usenet?
--
Cliff
On Mon, 20 Jun 2005 17:56:46 -0700, Anthony Matonak
<[email protected]> wrote:
>Gunner wrote:
>> On Mon, 20 Jun 2005 18:20:28 GMT, "Vaughn Simon"
>>
>>> Please people! Trim your posts. If you do so, you will not only save
>>>bandwidth
>>
>> Bandwidth is a non issue. Not since the binary groups started putting
>> 3 hour movies on the net...
>
>Perhaps but there are still a lot of people using slow dialup
>modems and bandwidth remains an issue with them even on these
>text newsgroups.
Do you download every body of every post, or just the headers to see
if you are interested, then download them?
>Clipping the message appropriately also helps
>improve legibility.
>
It may. It may not.
>Anthony
Gunner
"Considering the events of recent years,
the world has a long way to go to regain
its credibility and reputation with the US."
unknown
<snip>
>What's your SPECIFIC suggestion, George?
<snip>
Unfortunately there may be no solution in the sense of "saving"
GMC, Ford, American, Delta, Northwestern, Boeing, Lockheed, etc.
etc. etc. All appear to be in the same situation as were the
steel companies, i.e. terminal H.I.V. patients. Like the typical
HIV patent, these companies sought immediate gratification at the
expense of their long-term survivability, using credit to support
their "lifestyle," using derivatives as their "crack cocaine."
Congress is currently nibbling around the edges of this critical
problem by holding hearings into the possible impact on the PBGC
if one or more of these companies/sectors should collapse. The
problem is that it is a question of "when," and "in what
sequence," *NOT* if.
Most of the underlying real assets such as physical plant, tools
and dies, knowledge base, customer base, and production/operation
expertise appear to be largely intact although obsolescent.
However, these have been "submerged" under mountains of debt and
neglect while "management" chased the latest fad, dissipating any
real income while not paying stock holder dividends nor
reinvesting in new products, equipment, etc. in their
core/foundational business. Additionally, these "assets" have
significant value only for an on-going business.
While automobile/truck manufacturing, and the design, production
and operation of jumbo civilian aircraft appears to be
economically viable in the United States, it does not appear the
existing cadre management (and corporate culture) of these
organizations is capable.
"Desperate situations demand desperate remedies" is a time-proven
adage. Given the disastrous impact that the cascading failures of
these major players will have on the U.S. economy/society, I
propose a "super bankruptcy court" be created to establish the
likely economic viability of these organizations, with immediate
liquidation (Chapt. 7) [not reorganization (Chapt. 11)] of those
unlikely to survive, with a 10 year suspension from any
management position of the current and previous corporate
executives and directors. (The stockholders have already lost
all their equity, although they might not yet realize this.)
The PBGC should have priority claim on any assets for full
pension funding, and any trust-fund/lockboxes established for
management retirement benefits and/or "differed compensation"
should be recaptured on the basis that this was an attempt to
conceal corporate assets.
The choice is not between a "good" and better" solution, but
between a "bad" and a "worse" solution.
"Ed Huntress" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
> "F. George McDuffee" <[email protected]> wrote in message
> news:[email protected]...
> >
> > "Desperate situations demand desperate remedies" is a time-proven
> > adage. Given the disastrous impact that the cascading failures of
> > these major players will have on the U.S. economy/society, I
> > propose a "super bankruptcy court" be created to establish the
> > likely economic viability of these organizations, with immediate
> > liquidation (Chapt. 7) [not reorganization (Chapt. 11)] of those
> > unlikely to survive, with a 10 year suspension from any
> > management position of the current and previous corporate
> > executives and directors. (The stockholders have already lost
> > all their equity, although they might not yet realize this.)
> >
> > The PBGC should have priority claim on any assets for full
> > pension funding, and any trust-fund/lockboxes established for
> > management retirement benefits and/or "differed compensation"
> > should be recaptured on the basis that this was an attempt to
> > conceal corporate assets.
> >
> > The choice is not between a "good" and better" solution, but
> > between a "bad" and a "worse" solution.
>
> Jeez, you're brutal. <g> I'm going to wait to hear if John has a solution
> that's less drastic.
>
Let me offer you a little encouragement in the interim Ed. 65 million
dollars per year worth of manufacturing will be back in the US from Korea
beginning in October of this year and the customer involved will be able to
reduce their price, improve their margin and put a little sugar on it for me
and my guys. The meeting ended an hour ago and before you ask me where we
found the capacity let me just tell you that we did, and we did it without
pushing any capacity envelopes.
I realize this is a small sum in the grand scheme of things but you know
what they say -it does add up. I also have to say that pulling something
like this off is better than sex -it lasts longer as well. I will probably
be bouncin' off the ceiling for a day or two at least.
--
John R. Carroll
Machining Solution Software, Inc.
Los Angeles San Francisco
www.machiningsolution.com
"Prometheus" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
> On Sun, 19 Jun 2005 16:14:25 GMT, "CW" <[email protected]> wrote:
>
> I've seen that a fair amount as well. At least at the place I work
> now, the guys in the office still come out and run a machine from time
> to time (the company only promotes from within, and only from those
> who can perform every operation from the plasma-cutters to the mills
> to the powder-coating line).
The place I'm at is a third generation family buiseness. If you are related,
they give you a desk, a computer and a paycheck. The olnly way I have seen
an outsider get in on this is to marry into the family.
>I'm still young, so I bemoan the state
> of manufacturing quite a bit-
I'm 45, considered an oldtimer as relativly few last in this buisiness
(small job shops) as long as I have.
>our average new employee is in and out
> in less than a week,
Same with us.
> because nobody wants to get dirty, or get a
> scratch on their soft, pretty skin anymore.
I see that that is not just a local thing.
>Being a steel fabricator
> used to be a respectable job because people understood that it is
> skilled work- now it seems to be regarded as inferior to being a
> night-time stocker at Walmart, if some of our ex-employees are
> anything to go by.
>
> Well, time will tell. I just keep hoarding tools and knowledge for
> the day when I'm going to really, truly, need them. Of course, if
> that day never comes- at least I've got an excellent hobby!
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
On 14 Jun 2005 12:07:53 -0700, "Too_Many_Tools"
<[email protected]> wrote:
>When one considers a workshop with metal and wood working capabilities,
>what tradeoffs have you made to have a working shop in an alternate
>homepower environment where every amp is precious?
Don't use the amps. I can't see any scenario where powering these tools
(bigger than trivial) from an existing setup where "every amp is
precious" can be viable. For lighting it's a different matter - simply
upping the battery capacity might be enough.
And what's the shortage here ? Amps or coulombs ? Is the limit on power
(ability to deliver it) or energy (stored capacity) ?
For convenience, go for a generator. You can use standard tools, the
cost of doing this is low, the convenience is high. For an occasional
use setup, or particularly for construction work, then this is almost
always the best way.
For improved efficiency, then go to lineshafts and a separate internal
combustion prime mover. This is likely to mean pre-WW2 vintage tools
though, and slow-speed metalworking rather than our modern high-speed
cutting. One of my neighbours has a 1900 house with its original
(commercial light engineering) workshop - power comes from a 12hp gas
engine (town gas, not gasoline) and it powers several lathes, mill and
drill by lineshaft. All still operational too! This seems more viable
for wood than for metal though.
With centralised lineshaft power, you're also geared up to use a water
turbine. I can't see this working for wind power, but water is certainly
viable. I've seen old UK cereal watermills which have had modern lathes
or potter's wheels attached to them, and smithing has regularly done
this to drive power hammers. The well-known Taunton press "Workshops"
book has photos and drawings in it of "Ben's Mill" in Vermont, a
water-powered mill with a 1900s iron water turbine, now supplemented by
a tractor.
A timber yard I use is on an old farm. It has a number of electric
machines, but the main rip saw is powered by a tractor and flat belt.
There's now a dedicated stripped-down tractor, on a permanent brick
footing.
A more modern approach than lineshafting is hydraulics. There are a
number of US religious groups (Amish, AFAIR) where there are
prohibitions on electric machinery. However a centralised diesel
hydraulic power pack and individual hydraulic motors are acceptable. Not
cheap though!
One of the simplest options is to not use powered tools at all. Why do
you need a workshop? What are you trying to make ? If you're a green
woodworker than you can use a shave horse and drawknife for much shaping
work, a pole, treadle or great-wheel lathe for turning (powered either
by the operator, or an assistant). Many such workers may also use these
in conjunction with a Wood-mizer or similar large bandsaw, with its own
petrol engine.
--
Cats have nine lives, which is why they rarely post to Usenet.
On Mon, 20 Jun 2005 18:20:28 GMT, "Vaughn Simon"
<[email protected]> wrote:
>
>"Scott Willing" <[email protected]> wrote in message
>news:[email protected]...
>> On Thu, 16 Jun 2005 20:19:43 -0500, Scott Willing
>
> Please people! Trim your posts. If you do so, you will not only save
>bandwidth, but you will save readers lots of scrolling and they will be much
>more likely to actually read your post. To trim, all you have to do is
>highlight the area to be eliminated and hit your "Del" key.
I apologize, but first you must permit me to utter a good-natured
"Duh."
For everyone who says "trim" there will be at least one who says "trim
under pain of death." Yes, trimming is considered by many to be a sin
on usenet, especially by those who were here before the great unwashed
masses gained access... and also have control issues.
The argument is that posts get separated from their threads for a
multitude of reasons, and purists (which I'm decidedly not) insist
that the entire thread be kept intact, so when alien archeologists
studying the leftover bits of blown-out humanity don't have to work so
hard to figure out the context. As for me, well, I think a little
judicious trimming goes a long way towards readability.
In this case I did feel it especially important to retain the thread
as the trail was a little cold on this one... or so I thought.
BTW, the same purists (aka usenet nazis) will slap your willy for
top-posting too, and they really get their knickers in a knot about
it. We can only assume their mommies overdid the spanking a bit... and
that they really, *really* liked it.
Anyway, wrt to trimming, it's "damned if you do, damned if you don't."
BTW#2 - lest you think I'm unsympathetic to bandwidth issues, I'm on a
freaking "28.8k" dial that usually gives me 26.4k... a number I'd
never even heard of before moving here.
Now, in deference to your preference, and also for the dirty pleasure
of sticking it in the face of my favorite usenet nazi, I'll trim the
rest of your post. <gasp! horrors!>
-=s
On Fri, 24 Jun 2005 03:25:39 -0400, "Upscale" <[email protected]>
wrote:
>"Gunner" <[email protected]> wrote in message
>> Bye fuckwit.
>
>> Now my participation visa vis you in this thread is finished. If I
>> wish to argue with a fuckwit, Ill do so with one I find more
>> interesting.
>
>Funny, you already said goodbye one and you've doing it again. Must be that
>low memory retention you have. Either that or you just don't know how to end
>an argument.
He'd have to be able to have one first.
--
Cliff
On Thu, 16 Jun 2005 16:00:07 -0400, WillR
<[email protected]> wrote:
>Scott Willing wrote:
>> On Wed, 15 Jun 2005 18:30:40 GMT, [email protected] (Dave Mundt) wrote:
>>
>>
>>> Greetings and Salutations....
>>>
>>>On Wed, 15 Jun 2005 17:29:43 GMT, Richard the Dreaded Libertarian
>>><[email protected]> wrote:
>>>
>>>
>>>>On Wed, 15 Jun 2005 07:36:34 -0700, F.George wrote:
>>>>
>>>>><snip>
>>>>>Given the current economic/social/political environment your
>>>>>concerns are well founded, however I think the primary or basic
>>>>>problem will not be limited or unavailable [electrical] power,
>>>>>but rather the more pervasive and dangerous problem of a lack of
>>>>>spare parts, raw materials and most critical HSS and carbide
>>>>>tools and blanks.
>>>>>
>>>>>Whether by design or stupidity, the American
>>>>>manufacturing/industrial infrastructure is rapidly being
>>>>>destroyed, primarily by management "outsourcing" and plant
>>>>>transfer.
>>>>
>>>>Thank you, Chicken Little.
>>>
>>> Hum...so you DON'T think it is a problem that America
>>>is losing the knowledge, skills and tools to manufacture
>>>even the basic tools we need to keep society going and the
>>>infrastructure kept up?
>>
>>
>> Consider the (tongue in cheek of course) upside: We're also exporting
>> all the toxic aspects of manufacture and mind-numbing, RSI-prone jobs
>> overseas, where the Chinese and others can gleefully destroy their
>> corner of the environment and burn through workers without the pesky
>> EPA or labour standards in the way. Although - if you remember ye
>> olde "Asian brown cloud" - you might rightly regard this as farting
>> down a tube, only to have the smell return eventually. It's a small
>> planet.
>>
>> Last night on the news there was footage of armed government troops
>> (police, whatever) forceably "relocating" Chinese farmers. Probably to
>> make way for another widget factory to feed the Wal-Mart cash export
>> conveyor.
>>
>> Ever tried to get through so much as a month -- a week -- without
>> buying something made in China? Difficult and disturbing.
>>
>> I try to buy locally produced and supplied goods as much as possible.
>> Being a Canuck, I look for Canadian-made goods first, then US-made
>> goods. These days I consider myself lucky to find something made in
>> the US much less in Canada. However I recently became aware that
>> countries like the US (dunno about Canada) can set up special regions
>> in overseas countries that are classified as sovereign extensions of
>> the homeland.
>
>Mexico -- Maquialldora.
>
>> (Sorry the proper term escapes me.) In this way they can
>> run sweatshops in wire-fenced compounds and legally print "Made in
>> USA" on the goods produced there.
>
>Don't think so.
From: http://www.thehoya.com/news/031700/news6.htm
>>
Students and faculty gathered Wednesday evening to hear Chie Abad, a
former Saipan sweatshop worker, speak about the conditions of offshore
garment factories as well as discuss the political ramifications of
sweatshop labor.
Abad, a Filipino accountant, found work in a factory on the small
island of Saipan in the Mariana Islands, located in the South Pacific.
Abad worked for a Korean contract company, producing clothing for Gap,
Inc. and collegiate apparel. Since Saipan is a protectorate of the
United States similar to Puerto Rico, manufacturers who purchase
manufactured goods in Saipan may use a label claiming "Made in USA."
However, U.S. labor laws are not enforced on the island, according to
Abad.
<<
This isn't even quite as extreme as the example I was thinking of.
I'll see if I can dig up another cite, but I think it's probably in a
magazine here so don't hold your breath.
BTW, a related article mentions Rep Tom Delay was working dilligently
to ensure that US labour laws wouldn't be enforced there.
-=s
>
>
>>
>> If that ain't double-speak, Mr. Orwell, I dunno what is.
>>
>> -=s
>>
>>
>>
>>>>>With the trade deficit [current account trade balance]
>>>>>approaching 2 billion dollars *PER DAY* it does not require a
>>>>>degree in rocket science or a tarot deck to see that the time is
>>>>>near when imports by the U.S. economy will be on a C.O.D. or even
>>>>>a "pre-pay" basis [in gold, not dollars].
>>>>
>>>>Odd, that's not what my crystal ball tells me. ;-)
>>>>
>>>>And that "trade deficit" is the stupidest boogeyman ever perpetrated -
>>>>well, at least up in the top five stupid boogeymen - since the
>>>>nervous nellies found out that it's a scary buzzword.
>>>>
>>>>Do you even have any idea what a "trade deficit" _is_? It means
>>>>we have two billion dollars more per day to spend on their crap
>>>>than they have to spend on our crap. That means WE ARE TWO BILLION
>>>>DOLLARS RICHER THAN THEY ARE!!!!! PER DAY!!!!!!!!!!
>>>>
>>>>You have a significant "trade deficit" with the grocery store.
>>>>How much do you spend there? Maybe $100.00/week? That's a ONE
>>>>HUNDRED DOLLARS PER WEEK TRADE DEFICIT with the grocery store.
>>>>They don't buy anything from you, do they?
>>>>
>>>>And imagine your employer's trade deficit with _you_! He buys
>>>>your labor for, what, $50K, $100K/year? How much stuff do you
>>>>buy from him? Your EMPLOYER HAS A SERIOUS TRADE DEFICIT WITH
>>>>YOU!!!!!
>>>>
>>>>"Trade Deficit". Pfaugh!
>>>>
>>>>Thanks!
>>>>Rich
>>>>UT o
>>>
>>> While your point may have some validity here, the
>>>major difference is that the money in your examples is
>>>circulating INSIDE the USA. The dollars spent in a
>>>foreign market are dollars that are taken out of the
>>>economy "forever".
>>> As an analogy, if dollars are the life-blood
>>>of the economy, foreign trade is like cutting an
>>>artery.
>>> Now...The fact of the matter is that SOME of
>>>those dollars DO come back in, but, since it is a
>>>DEFICIT, far more are going out than are coming in.
>>>Those dollars have to be replaced in the economy
>>>somehow. One "bad" way is to simply print more
>>>money. While this gets more bucks in circulation,
>>>it also cuts down on the value of each dollar.
>>> We have to remember that the world economy
>>>is more like a war than a cheerful family gathering.
>>>All the countries in the world are jockeying to
>>>gain advantage over the other countries, and, one
>>>way to do that is to drain the cash of one country.
>>> America, although economically large, is
>>>not infinite, and, if we believed we were, we would
>>>be fools. The fact that the dollar has dropped
>>>in relative value on the world market is proof that
>>>the deficits are having their desired effects. Also,
>>>remember that the growing European Union can (and
>>>perhaps already has) become a larger economic power
>>>than America.
>>> Finally, there is the basic problem that
>>>the world, in general, is not a friendly place.
>>>Countries that were our friends are now our
>>>enemies; countries that were our enemies are
>>>now our friends; The only lesson we can
>>>learn from this is that this is likely to
>>>happen again, so, to end up totally dependent
>>>on another country for our major manufacturing
>>>is a stupid thing to do.
>>>
>>> Regards
>>> Dave Mundt
>>
>>
"Gunner" <[email protected]> wrote in message
V
> their mode of operation. It was you that made the blanket statement
> that Agent was Junk, was it not?
No was NOT. I use agent for downloading binaries. If you're going to play
the asshole, at least try to respond with the knowledge that you have your
facts straight.
> Now my participation visa vis you in this thread is finished. If I
> wish to argue with a fuckwit, Ill do so with one I find more
> interesting.
Been looking in the mirror again asshole? Hell, you're too stupid to even
follow a thread properly. I damn well know for sure that you're incapable of
searching out parts of previous threads or you'd have quoted what you're
replying to like any normal person.
"Gunner" <[email protected]> wrote in message
> So far, you have shown us:
>
> 1. You have a bad attitude
> 2. You are stupid
> 3. You dont take critisism well and respond by being an ass.
> 4.. You have the personal arrogance of a middle eastern Rhaj.
>
> Now my participation visa vis you in this thread is finished. If I
> wish to argue with a fuckwit, Ill do so with one I find more
> interesting.
Now I know you're looking in mirror and the person there is talking about
you.
On Thu, 23 Jun 2005 10:47:50 -0400, "Upscale" <[email protected]>
wrote:
>"Gunner" <[email protected]> wrote in message >
>> Speaking of neanderthal, boy..if it was so important to you..how come
>> you are not using Linux? Thats the bleeding edge today.
>
>Windows at home (my preference), Mandrake Linux where I work. (their
>preference).
>
>I'm sure I own a half dozen products that are what I'd consider to be
>superior to what you or someone else owns. That doesn't mean I'm going to
>spend my time criticising you for what you use by choice. It pisses me off
>when idiots like you attempt to validate your existence for criticising me
>for using what I want. And that's EXACTLY what you're doing right now with
>your response above.
>
>Fine, there's a growing population that loathes Microsoft and they have
>every right to voice their disapproval. But when people who hate Microsoft
>start letting their criticism drift towards users who use MS products by
>choice, then I'm going to respond. Got it?
>
So far, you have shown us:
1. You have a bad attitude
2. You are stupid
3. You dont take critisism well and respond by being an ass.
4.. You have the personal arrogance of a middle eastern Rhaj.
The various posters quite nicely covered the Historical and current
weaknesses in Outleak Exploder. Weaknesses still being found and
exploited by the script kiddies. One should note that the vast
majority of internet viruses are targeted AT OE.
One should also note that those who spend significant time on Usenet,
typically use Agent if they use a MS OS, both because of its ease of
use, its relative security and its versitility. Its generally the AOL
type, or the occasional poster who hasnt invested the meager amount of
time to investigate the various newsreaders to see which best fits
their mode of operation. It was you that made the blanket statement
that Agent was Junk, was it not? With no citations why, other than you
found it unfriendly. Which addresses #2 above btw. Oddly enough..I
and most Agent users find it particularly friendly. We also tend to
use a seperate email program. Few combination programs do both email
and usenet well, without becoming particularly bulky and cumbersome,
and prone to secuity issues. I use Eudora for email. Shrug. Ive used
most of the others.
Btw..this is my 10 yr anniversary of being on the internet. And
no..Ive never been an AOL member. For the obvious reasons.
Now my participation visa vis you in this thread is finished. If I
wish to argue with a fuckwit, Ill do so with one I find more
interesting.
Gunner
"Pax Americana is a philosophy. Hardly an empire.
Making sure other people play nice and dont kill each other (and us)
off in job lots is hardly empire building, particularly when you give
them self determination under "play nice" rules.
Think of it as having your older brother knock the shit out of you
for torturing the cat." Gunner
On Fri, 24 Jun 2005 20:47:34 -0500, "Morris Dovey" <[email protected]>
wrote:
>Whirlpool
I once met their engineer that suggested replacing
all those custom hoses, fittings, pumps, etc. on their
washing machine models with a single set of standard
ones. I gather that they did it.
To this day I wonder how they got the contract for
the toilet(s) on the International Space Station.
BTW, They used to use ComputerVision IIRC.
--
Cliff
Cliff (in [email protected]) said:
| On Fri, 24 Jun 2005 20:47:34 -0500, "Morris Dovey"
| <[email protected]> wrote:
|
|| Whirlpool
|
| I once met their engineer that suggested replacing
| all those custom hoses, fittings, pumps, etc. on their
| washing machine models with a single set of standard
| ones. I gather that they did it.
Seems like a "no-brainer to me" - though the no-brainer solutions are
sometimes the most difficult to get approved.
One of the other no-brainers (for CPU-controlled washers) should be to
allow either hose to connect to hot and the other to the cold water
supply. The controllers monitor both temperatures and control the flow
valves independently anyway...
| To this day I wonder how they got the contract for
| the toilet(s) on the International Space Station.
Interesting - I wasn't aware they'd done that.
| BTW, They used to use ComputerVision IIRC.
Ok. My primary software tools were gcc, Visual C, and Excel (in order
of high to low quality) - No CAD/CAM needed for what I was doing. I
did notice that the mechanical engineering types had some pretty nifty
packages for designing gears 'n' stuff, though. One of the guys took
time to teach me a bit about making gear trains quiet - and that was
so fascinating I skipped lunch. (I suppose that makes both he and I
hopeless geeks :-)
--
Morris Dovey
DeSoto Solar
DeSoto, Iowa USA
http://www.iedu.com/DeSoto/solar.html
"Cliff" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
> On Thu, 16 Jun 2005 00:06:43 -0400, "Ed Huntress"
> <[email protected]> wrote:
>
> >"Richard the Dreaded Libertarian" <[email protected]> wrote in
> >message news:[email protected]...
> >>
> >> Do you even have any idea what a "trade deficit" _is_? It means
> >> we have two billion dollars more per day to spend on their crap
> >> than they have to spend on our crap. That means WE ARE TWO BILLION
> >> DOLLARS RICHER THAN THEY ARE!!!!! PER DAY!!!!!!!!!!
> >
> >Uh, no. It means that we have two billion dollars worth of their crap,
and
> >they have our two billion dollars.
> >
> >This is not necessarily a bad deal in itself. But that's the way it is.
>
> Found a live one, eh?
> One day they will demand their VALUE back ...... as promised
> by that paper ....
I'm not looking forward to it. I have a feeling we're about to try, once
again, to follow the pea under the shells, with Milton Friedman moderating.
--
Ed Huntress