Topic Actions

Topic Search

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 6 guests

Sustainability vs Survivalist

For anyone who might want to have a side conversation...you're welcome here!
Re: Sustainability vs Survivalist
Post by HB of CJ   » Sat Aug 30, 2014 9:48 pm

HB of CJ
Captain of the List

Posts: 707
Joined: Thu Jul 11, 2013 10:46 pm
Location: 43N, 123W Kinda

I hate getting old. Seems I may have had it DEAD backwards regarding Firefighter safety and roof top PV systems. Seems the NEW STUFF most definitely can hurt! Opps and Yikes!

Our old PV system 25 years ago with the 5 frugal acres was very small, 12vdc and had no electronical stuff at all. Produced about 40 KWH in the summer and about 10KWH in the winter.

Just 9, (later 12) smaller recycled M33 PVs on the roof and three strings of recycled 180 amp nickel cadmium storage batteries under the floor. High teck back then was quartz halogen.

The entire cabin and outbuildings were 12vdc. Inverters and stuff were known to exist 25 years ago, but were $spendy$ and only square wave 60 Htz. So, everything was low voltage.

The shallow water well had its own high value 12vdc pump along with another 6 cheap recycled M33 PV panels. In direct sun during the summer, it was enough to provide all of our needs.

During the long wet winters, an auxiliary hand pitcher pump provided the household water. We never got around to running a low voltage cable to the well pump. Only the pipe.

Never got around to installing the auxiliary 12vdc generator either. This was before the incredible boom in all the electroinical support structure. Everything has changed today.

Everything worked quite well. There was a dedicated 50 gallon solar hot water heater tank in the attic and a passive collector on the ground next to the cabin. No pumps.

The flat topped wood stove in the center of the house had an expensive water boiler loop pipe that fed the attic hot water tank. Thermo siphon. No electricity or moving parts at all.

We had plenty of hot water and could cook off of the wood stove. My dog kept us warm at night. Long ago and far away. I understand the cabin is still used as a garage. HB of CJ (old coot) Cm.
Top
Re: Sustainability vs Survivalist
Post by J6P   » Sun Aug 31, 2014 7:27 pm

J6P
Captain (Junior Grade)

Posts: 258
Joined: Mon Nov 11, 2013 11:46 am
Location: USA, WA, Issaquah

Daryl wrote:I'm interested to hear that California has 240V AC as I thought the US was on 110V AC.


All US residences have 220V AC. It is split at the panel into 2 phases of 110V for common wiring for safety reasons. All major appliances work on 220V(efficiency reasons). 110V you can actually work on hot without killing yourself. Yes, you still can, but the ability of doing so is much reduced compared to 220V. 220V will kill you as the voltage potential is easily great enough to penetrate and jump through your body to ground requiring a very small current. Leakage currents are quite common faults that go undetected.

Standard is 38V @0.48A can kill a person. Why most wiring for mechanical systems are all 12V, 24V/28V, or 36V systems. 48V has also become viable, but generally requires a complete current map of the system requiring much more detailed work. Then multiple disconnects have to be implemented as well, though this is usually done for Longer power runs decreasing copper expenditures. Lower Voltage allows maintenance while the machine is running without turning it off.

And sure, if you stand in a pail of water and then grab a steel pipe with 12V tied directly to it with a nice 100A energy sump, sure you can kill yourself. Though even this would be highly unlikely.

PS. When can we finally ditch the stupid 50/60Hz standard...? This moronic standard will be like the ass width of two horses from 3000 years ago defining carriages, defining roads, defining railroads, long after horses have not been used.
Top
USA Htz And Voltage Standards
Post by HB of CJ   » Mon Sep 01, 2014 6:16 pm

HB of CJ
Captain of the List

Posts: 707
Joined: Thu Jul 11, 2013 10:46 pm
Location: 43N, 123W Kinda

We here in the USA still cling to the older 60Htz and 110vac frequency and voltage standards. Nearly all smaller buildings (including homes) are wired for 220vac 60htz, which like already said before better, is just two legs of 110vac.

Flashing forward to the intermediate future, I wonder what the standards will be? Taking it to an extreme and exploiting non expensive and reliable electronical components, could we see a new standard of new high voltage and frequency?

Any teckie nerds out here? What would be the future sweet spot for voltage and frequency? Will we end up with, (for example) 480vac with 300htz? Or something even better? The fancier the plumbing, the easier to stop up the pipes?

HB of CJ (old coot) Cm. I'm now thinking EMP attacks. Yikes! I also remember when some cars were 6vdc and some forward thinking engineers wanted to go to 24vdc and not 12dc. They were overruled I think. It would have been better.
Top
Re: Sustainability vs Survivalist
Post by Thucydides   » Mon Sep 01, 2014 8:39 pm

Thucydides
Captain of the List

Posts: 689
Joined: Mon Feb 25, 2013 2:15 am

It is hard to say what might replace or supplement the current standard.

I would expect the change to be on the level of the grid, since it would be much simpler overall to change a few key pieces of infrastructure to convert sections of the grid a piece at a time. I have seen ideas floated for ultra high voltage DC as trunklines for a possible new "smart grid", but lots of other ideas exist.

I have the feeling that changing over the voltage and frequency at the consumer level will be a to harder, simply due to the vast sunk infrastructure that already exists. Can you imagine what will happen if a standard isn't set or universally adopted? Who would want to have the Betamax version of a stove or refrigerator, for example?

Even a top down push might not do the trick. Changing cable to digital from analogue turned out to be a drawn out process (my mother in law wondered why she no longer got reception since she did not understand the change and failed to get a digital converter until we took her to the store...

And unlike changing from Beta to VHS or DVD to Bluray, household appliances are a considerable expense (more so when you also consider things like power tools). As a fly in the ointment, computer equipment does NOT require high voltage systems, and things like your phone charger have step down converters to protect the system since it only runs on 5 VDC.

The one change that I have seen over the years is the considerable increase in amperage. When I was a kid, glass 15 amp fuses were the norm (screwed into the fusebox), now my current house is wired with a 60 amp service and a circuit breaker panel box.
Top
Future USA Htz And Voltage Standards
Post by HB of CJ   » Mon Sep 01, 2014 8:55 pm

HB of CJ
Captain of the List

Posts: 707
Joined: Thu Jul 11, 2013 10:46 pm
Location: 43N, 123W Kinda

I for one would not be the least bit surprised to see in a couple hundred years the good old USA still clinging to our present old 110vac and 60htz. There may be better ways, but the overall impact would be negative.

Paul Harvey once gave a great talk on why the now defunct Nasa Space Shuttle was directly related to the width of two asses or oxen. Great story. We might see some mandated "top to bottom" stuff. Digital TV comes to mind.

Yep....I am old enough to remember the standard 10 amp to 15 amp home FUSES that could be fooled by placing a penny inside the thing to keep current flowing. We had aluminum wire back then also. Yikes! HB of CJ (old coot) Cm.
Top
Re: Sustainability vs Survivalist
Post by Fireflair   » Tue Sep 02, 2014 4:52 pm

Fireflair
Captain of the List

Posts: 591
Joined: Wed Sep 05, 2012 6:23 pm

Not sure where the electrical system will end up. DC is unlikely, due to transmission difficulties at the local level. AC is easier to transmit. And cheaper. So without taking apart the major electric grid, which they're constantly upgrading, they won't switch to DC. Except the ultra-high voltage, possibly.

Most utility providers are steadily upgrading their distribution lines. 7KV, then 15KV, then 69KV used to be considered high voltage... The numbers get higher and higher. But about 1M volt lines are the upper limit (there are higher, but they are very rare).

My mother's first house had a 50A service. Her second a 100A. When my father built his house in '86, he put in a 400A service. The house he built in '06 has two service panels. A 200A and a 400A service.

Most homes built in the US, now, have a 400A service. People have far more electrical gadgets and gizmos. From multiple computers and TVs, to electric stoves and hot water heaters. One of those things to watch for, if you want to save money, is phantom loads which have helped to ratchet up the power usage in houses. Stand by power, indicator lights, charge systems, etc.
Top
Re: Sustainability vs Survivalist
Post by J6P   » Wed Sep 03, 2014 3:08 am

J6P
Captain (Junior Grade)

Posts: 258
Joined: Mon Nov 11, 2013 11:46 am
Location: USA, WA, Issaquah

Fireflair wrote:
My mother's first house had a 50A service. Her second a 100A. When my father built his house in '86, he put in a 400A service. The house he built in '06 has two service panels. A 200A and a 400A service.


Houses are not using more power today. Regulatory authorities, have changed the regs to such an extent requiring much larger panels to do the exact same job. Larger overall rating, same power used. The regs allowing a percentage of power on a single breaker has been drastically reduced along with the equations allowing additional breaker sub units. The regs requiring stand alone breakers has likewise been drastically increased for different appliances. Therefore the panel "amperage" has grown even though the load has not.

In fact, far less power is used in modern homes as most homes now have gas for main heat instead of electric. Likewise a huge number of homes have switched to gas. The only new addition for power drain of modern life is the addition of a computer. Computers which currently are using less and less power to operate. On average the common computer sold today, uses less than an old Edison light bulb.

The phantom power drain of all our gadgets and gizmos is equivalent to an old style Edison light bulb. Inconsequential.

All of our light today has been mandated out of the Edison light bulbs into LED, etc and now uses a fraction of the power that it used to. Of course residential lighting averaged less than 15% of power used, so not exactly any saved.

Want to save power? Mandate geothermal or less efficient air heat pumps. That right there would save 65-80% of everyone's' heating bill in fall/winter/spring months.

PS. Frequency that should be used is about 1Khz instead of 50-60Hz. Higher than this and then you start losing power due to turning all of your wires into gigantic antennas. This change alone would save approx 1-5% of the the power used world wide depending on how you calculate it. While we are dreaming, may as well dream of superconductors saving ourselves the energy transmission loss of at least 15%-25% of our power.

PPS. Nearly all modern electronics work on 50/60hz without adapters. Still all those devices working on motors would not enjoy a 20% power overload.
Top
Re: Sustainability vs Survivalist
Post by Fireflair   » Wed Sep 03, 2014 4:34 pm

Fireflair
Captain of the List

Posts: 591
Joined: Wed Sep 05, 2012 6:23 pm

Didn't know that about home power panels. I can't say I'm surprised by the information though.

It is estimated that phantom loads in the median household cost a few hundred dollars a year. I'll take the savings any way I can. And most homes don't use LED bulbs, heck, most don't even have florescent bulbs yet. But both are excellent upgrades that will save a bunch of money in the long term.

I work as an industrial electrical engineer, and one of my on going projects is replacing all the florescent bulbs. I've got some phenomenal high-bay light fixtures that used a tenth of the power that florescent bulbs do. And in the environment I am in, reducing lighting costs is a real money saver. Between reduced maintenance, better lighting, and less operating costs, it's a real win.

As for PCs, I happen to have metered mine. And as the other PCs in the house are my hand me downs, I imagine that they're in line with my current unit. My PC is a gaming machine, with multiple video cards, high end CPU, and a 1200 watt power supply. I shut mine down at night to reduce power usage. But I still see a power draw that is far more significant then any incandescent light bulb.

It runs at about 500 watts, routinely. Peaks at around 700 watts. And costs me about ten dollars a month to run. The other PCs are similar. All the computers in the house (6 of them), have LED monitors now. Getting rid of the CRT monitors was a great move.
Top
Re: Sustainability vs Survivalist
Post by Daryl   » Wed Sep 03, 2014 9:30 pm

Daryl
Fleet Admiral

Posts: 3605
Joined: Sat Apr 24, 2010 1:57 am
Location: Queensland Australia

The cost of leaving appliances on stand by is dependent on the brand. When buying equipment I check the stand by power draw. Much of my gear like TVs, stereos and PVRs only use half to one watt on stand by. Thus if all such only add up to 5 watts, the annual charge is between $5 and $10. Different if you have some cheaper brands. Generally I've found Panasonic to be excellent in this area plus having relatively low drain when running.
Between solar panels, solar hot water, LED lights, gas cooking, and wood heating we have been paid about $300 a year by our electricity company for seven years now.

Mind you I chuckle about people feeling virtuous having replaced a 60 watt incandescent bulb with a 10 watt fluoro or 5 watt LED, who then drive a V8 Landcruiser with 300kw. That's 300,000 watts people, so much for carbon reduction.
Top
Re: Sustainability vs Survivalist
Post by Imaginos1892   » Wed Sep 03, 2014 10:47 pm

Imaginos1892
Rear Admiral

Posts: 1332
Joined: Sat Mar 24, 2012 3:24 pm
Location: San Diego, California, USA

J6P wrote:PS. Frequency that should be used is about 1Khz instead of 50-60Hz. Higher than this and then you start losing power due to turning all of your wires into gigantic antennas. This change alone would save approx 1-5% of the the power used world wide depending on how you calculate it. While we are dreaming, may as well dream of superconductors saving ourselves the energy transmission loss of at least 15%-25% of our power.

PPS. Nearly all modern electronics work on 50/60hz without adapters. Still all those devices working on motors would not enjoy a 20% power overload.

NOT!!! At 1KC, a transmission line less than a hundred miles long forms a half-wave antenna - a very efficient way to broadcast electromagnetic energy. If you're running a radio station, that's just what you want. but if your purpose is to get the 'trons from one end of a wire to the other with as little loss as possible, that kind of efficiency is a Very Bad Thing Indeed.

Nikola Tesla knew what he was doing when he set the Westinghouse electric standard at 60 cycles; at that frequency the half-wave distance is over 1,500 miles and I don't know any transmission lines that go even a quarter that far. There are still losses, but not too bad. Usually. I heard of a case of a farmer who suddenly stopped using electricity. The electric company sent an engineer to investigate, and he found an electric fence that wasn't hooked up to a fence charger. It turned out the farmer had put in a loooooong fence parallel to the transmission lines forming an air-core transformer several miles long, and "tuned" the length to get 120V out of it. The electric company was not amused.

Most electronic equipment today has a switching power supply that will run on anything from 95 to 275 VAC at 45 to 70 cycles.
Top

Return to Free-Range Topics...