Domestic mains voltage and frequency

Status
Not open for further replies.
For primary generation off fossil fuels, natural gas co-gen plants (combined cycle gas turbines) remain the best & most efficient - by no small measure.
When all governance, lawsuits, regulation, mineral to watt, etc. is considered, I would agree. Coal is/was extremely viable until it was regulated to death....

FWIW - the current favorable energy pricing is due to the very fracking, lease expansion and other measures that are under wholesale assault... forcing yet another viable energy production means into extinction in favor of MUCH higher prices for alternatives and the simple fact that the petroleum products will be imported at a higher cost than produced domestically. Not willing to wade into the politics of either or the environmental perspective. This is just a simple statement of where power did/does/will come from and its associated btu cost.

I would argue that nuclear fision could and should be the most viable by far - but there are too many financial obstacles purposfully preventing that form happening.

The internal-combustion prime-mover type are usually used as combined heat & power to serve a campus or similar, and offer cost efficiencies - when the hot water thermal output plus electrical output, is cheaper (and also rather more carbon-efficient) than delivering that total demand off grid supply electricity (and gas), in essence.
Exactly - pretty nifty setups. Fairly low maintenance, low tech with respect to staffing and facilities labor too. You clearly know a lot more about the technology than I do as a curious bystander. I spent maybe 12-15 years in the underground coal industry and currently do work with an oil and gas drilling company.


Such CHP units are also usu. two orders of magnitude at least smaller than typical CCGT sites, and then only make sense if the end-user can make use of all of the waste heat, almost all of the time - such to provide domestic hot water or equiv space heat demand via a campus primary hot water main. Yes, such things suit primary healthcare and certain Uni (and other) campus uses well; in those contexts I've used them down to the 25-50Kw output range. But it's not a grid-replacement solution: just an efficient answer when the scale and scope and load demand can be very-well-defined, and modelled; and relatively small-scale in demand - up to a MW or two or so.
That is my understanding of the units as well - not a grid replacement but an efficient means of supplemental power.

This is one of the units I am familiar with - https://www.bizjournals.com/pittsbu...ctrical-plant-produces-power-and-savings.html

If I remember, it may have replaced coal boilers that were used to heat the entire campus.
 
Member
Joined 2014
Paid Member
For primary generation off fossil fuels, natural gas co-gen plants (combined cycle gas turbines) remain the best & most efficient - by no small measure.


Just over the lake from where I work is a 45MW CCGT that provides peak load to the town. From talking to people who know the tech it should have been deployed everywhere but other interests and politics has limited its rollout nationwide. And of course no trough of subsidies.
 
Member
Joined 2014
Paid Member
^This is true of course.

In days past, not all that long ago (I'm 40) large hubs of industry had provision for on site generation, certainly in the rotating machine industry (and perhaps others, as I speak of only my experience).


Everywhere I have worked has had a diesel generator. In my first job in aerospace they had 6 or 7 on side. This was late 80s and a hangover from the 70s blackouts. When we did have a power cut by the time they filled the tanks and started the generators the power was back on!
 
Member
Joined 2014
Paid Member
Billshurv: You do [sic] realise how poorly Brits are often viewed by the rest of the world for being so arrogant? You are playing wonderfully into that stereotype.

You see how silly cheap shots like that sound? Neither statement above is true - they are in fact pointless stereotypes.


Sorry I really thought you were joking. Can be so hard to tell. But now I know I will be more careful.
 
As far as I know, our pre-industrial ancestors used biomass, particularly wood, rather than slaves to heat their homes.

By the way, the reports of the IPCC can all be downloaded from ipcc.ch. They claim that there are still pathways that either limit the global warming averaged over the Earth's surface to below 1.5 K, or manage to get it below 1.5 K after a small overshoot, although it is getting more and more difficult with each passing year. The reports are so long and written in such a tedious style that I never managed to read one, though.

Not to mention that they arguably have little credibility anyway...
 
There is a house(cabin)around here that has stream powered electricity, the batteries are under the floorboards.
that is pretty cool... not sure if I like the batteries under the floorboard part. Still cool though.

the pessimist in me bets that if the JHA finds out, the property owner has no right to harvest energy from the stream, even if it runs through their property. Imagine that can of worms!

Read about the rainwater collection lawsuits that are popping up all,over the country.
 
Like it or not, there will be less fossil fuel power in the future, so you have the choice of massive storage or microshedding.

Not running out of coal, gas or oil anytime in the foreseeable future. Lack of supply is a self imposed hardship. A hardship “for the better good” that is causing the price of everything to rise while, actually just transferring much of the environmental impact, not eliminating it. But hey, it makes people, feel good!
 
mondogenerator said:
Those provisions kept the factories running, and in times of slack, and increased grid demand these were spun up to supply instead. OK so it isnt rapid response to demands, but a small leveller. But industry has seemed to abandon such assets, preferring instead to blame it on weakness in state infrastructure, during times where the state has retreated into hiding and also seems to shun responsibility (privatisation).
Industry used to be run by industrialists. They were interested in keeping the factory working. Nowadays industry is run by accountants and lawyers; accountants want to avoid spending money, while lawyers are always looking for someone else to blame and sue. There is also the modern tendency to place responsibility for everything on someone else: if I fail my exams it is the school's fault; if I trip up I can blame the landowner; if I have an alcohol/gambling problem it is the fault of the pub/betting shop; if I scald myself it is the coffee shop's fault etc.

Maybe the trains were running Windows 10 so had to do an upgrade before rebooting?
 
Maybe the trains were running Windows 10 so had to do an upgrade before rebooting?

Used Windows since the 1.0 preview
Own an IT consulting company
Manage windows server and desktop daily

I am now a full time Mac OS user because windows 10, and Microsoft are so absolutely bad. Not just "Windows 10" but everything they touch is becoming less stable, less ergonomic, less productive and more convoluted (in an attempt to force people into their cloud solutions).

Not even really a fan of the Apple stuff or Mac OS - it is just far more usable, stable and organic than Windows.

In Windows "server" situations - it has become more of a liability than ever, regardless of the power and technology that it exposes. Server updates/reboots are like the desktop now - you can't ignore them and they CAN and DO happen regardless of production schedule.

Anyway -
 
"worse" is a matter of perspective...

We had a president in the 70's that made some very poor decisions regarding energy. An artificial limit on supply created an unmeetable demand and insane pricing... (hint: some of the same crowd is back in the mix, attempting to drive policy now).

During the same time, the steel industry was in full swing, helping drive the rest of manufacturing. Energy demand was tremendous, most of it to keep the manufacturing rolling... Those well paying jobs allowed people to buy the products they produced.

The policy effects were devastating to Steel and manufacturing as a whole, both directly and indirectly as the economy was bludgeoned into a standstill. No money in pockets, no need for manufacturing... fewer jobs, less money on pockets...Higher taxes (19% home loans?)

Another guy was elected that did a lot to reverse course...

--

Here we are again 40 years later, ready to rinse and repeat.

So is it worse now? I would argue that we are well on the way, in more sectors than just energy ;)
 
we had miners who tried to destroy the country and leaders of industry who couldn't lead. I'll have to have a few beers with DF96 some time and remind him about British Leyland in the 70s :)

I worked in the underground coal industry for a long time - I know a bit about UK mining operations and a good bit of mining history...For the most part, European coal mining methods were assbackward. Not up to speed if they have changed in the last 10-15 years, but they were not good through the 90's. Not sure about destroying the country... and don't know much about the politics of it over there.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.