New houses in the UK may be well-designed (in certain ways) but they are not always well-built. Personally I would never buy a house built after about 1975.MarcelvdG said:
Only a few months ago there was a story about whole estates of new houses having crumbling mortar between the bricks because far too much sand had been put in the mix. I guess sand is cheaper than cement?
High-grade cement is quite expensive. Also, if you buy a lot of sand, it's a lot cheaper than cement (pound for pound).
Makes sense to who and who determines what IS an inconvenience... Is it 22C, 24C, 26C....
I don’t want any AI, central planner or politician adjusting my thermostat, for any reason, especially when the need to load shed is predicated on the lack of generation output caused by the same central planners and politicians and their policies.
Our insolation is more like 650Wh/day. Another hit is taken on fixed installation. BTW I don't quite get the power rating of panels, I've taken a brand new Kyocera panel out under direct overhead sun (noon near mid-summer) on a perfectly clear day and did not get anywhere near 150 watts per square meter. I know they sort of cheat a little, 1000 watts per square meter is direct sun on the equator, but I was getting a little over 1/2 that.
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.
Lets stick with your comment though: Considering you are by either hard work, privilege, or both, actively consuming at a level higher than many (most) on the planet (you are on an electronic device, enjoying a friendly conversation with people from around the world, participating in an expensive and needless hobby)... Where does that put you? It kinda puts you in a glass house throwing stones, especially if you actually buy into the stereotype you posted above. That is ok Bill, we are all in glass houses throwing stones... it is pretty much unavoidable, as there are no
You may want to be the guy who draws that (sharp or fuzzy) line between give/take have/havenot - Not surprisingly that line always moves depending on where you look at it from.
You see, there will always be somebody to your left or right that has less, consumes less, or "offsets" more and feels that YOU are consuming without care. And THAT person always has another person that can say the same of them.
So I ask (rhetorically) again... WHO decides if YOUR thermostat is 22C, 26C... or if you can even have air conditioning? What central planner, person or AI shall we empower with enforcing the "better good"?
My point was that I am not comfortable with somebody making that decision for me. I did not say that I would not voluntarily self regulate.
You see that brings me back to your posted stereotype:
Does it take into consideration the billions of American aid dollars flowing throughout the world, the technology transfers, the uniformed and civilian volunteers aiding others globally...
More to the context - does that stereotype you posted consider, per capita volunteer giving from Americans? Use whatever tracking metric or index you wish... So "I do my part..." is that saving a tree, turning off the Amp 20 minutes early, or writing a check to help a disaster victim on the other side of the globe. Don't answer... it is again rhetorical.
Lastly - and back to the point: If people are not, by their own will, willing to donate their consumption to others, what makes you think that the politician, activist or central planner is wholly benevolent and not, by human nature, as flawed as the blind consumer he is trying to control?
You see Bill, "stereotypes" like you happily repeated are alive and well because folks like yourself are happy to repeat them even when doing so ignores the context and reality that prompted them.
I have enjoyed this conversation - but we are a long way from power distribution - I am not here to ruffle feathers, and certainly don't want to delve any further into saving the planet...
Chinese watts? Most panels are made in China, so even those made elsewhere have to compete with them.scott wurcer said:
True. Two snags with this:davidsrb said:
1.The sort of energy-intensive industry which can cope with controlled load shedding cannot cope with the cost of green electricity so has mainly moved elsewhere.
2. The recent incident in the UK was uncontrolled load shedding automatically triggered by low frequency alarms.
I think the questions we should ask in the UK are:
1. Why did two failures cause uncontrolled load shedding? Was it technical failure by the Grid, or was it political/social pressure to 'green' or cheapen our power supply?
2. Why did some users (e.g. railways) take so long to recover after the power was restored? There were stories of some trains where the driver was unable to reboot the train computers and get going again, so he had to wait for a technician to arrive.
This above reality (forced microshedding vs rolling blackouts) is predicated on...
The self imposed limitation of real-time generation capacity - predicated on being "green"....
Again - my rhetorical question is/was WHO sets that level of forced compliance/limited supply to WHAT standard? I am not saying there should not be one, I am just pointing out the slippery slope.
And the industry that CAN NOT cope - has also moved.
You can't allow a rolling blackout or load shed event to shut down an arc furnace, ladle or extrusion mill. Damages can easily be in the tens of millions and/or cause fatal catastrophic events.
You can't allow a rolling blackout or load shed event to shut down the ventilation fans, conveyors, long walls, etc, at a coal mine. Again the damages can easily be in the millions of dollars and/or cause fatal catastrophic events.
On the flip side - It is my understanding that historically, the demand of arc furnaces and their production schedules, are what have in-fact prompted rolling blackouts to ensure that the furnaces do not go down. This was when there were no codified "green energy" quotas or artificial limits on energy production.
With each passing day, as we remove the ability to scale to demand in real-time, we put more stress on the stability of the system and users of that system.
^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).
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).
Sadly the populace still bears the brunt, and industry make money regardless, while seeking to avoid all costs in maintaining the infrastructure it needs to exist.
I've been saying for years to my friends that there is already no need for regional warfare, the wars are already fought won and lost, by business. And we, countries, governments, society are just dragged along for the ride. We are all just assets to be used by industry, coerced/brainwashed to earn, spend, consume, die, leaving as little of our accumulated wealth to those we wish, as possible. The end has already begun.
Now time for some Vengaboys and to dance like a 5 year old, and forget everything I just wrote
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).
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).
Sadly the populace still bears the brunt, and industry make money regardless, while seeking to avoid all costs in maintaining the infrastructure it needs to exist.
I've been saying for years to my friends that there is already no need for regional warfare, the wars are already fought won and lost, by business. And we, countries, governments, society are just dragged along for the ride. We are all just assets to be used by industry, coerced/brainwashed to earn, spend, consume, die, leaving as little of our accumulated wealth to those we wish, as possible. The end has already begun.
Now time for some Vengaboys and to dance like a 5 year old, and forget everything I just wrote
Last edited:
Correct - those are the industries that could (at some cost) prepare for outage - by on-site prime power generators. The rub (mentioned above) is that the cost of the mandated "green" energy that they consume during peak times is too expensive for them to remain in business.
Ignoring labor cost itself - Why would a factory operate in a State or Country where the price of energy is artificially inflated both by the forced use of expensive sources, forced "carbon credit offset" purchase and the artificially imposed limited supply caused by the forced idling of cost effective sources? -- Especially if some other State or Country offered cheap, unlimited power without said artificial supply limits, carbon credits and inflated "green" prices.
As far as the mining and steel industry - you can't put enough backup or prime power on-site to supply their needs. A steel mill uses as much power as a small town - and as much as a small city (60 MVA) when the arc furnace is running. Ever see a 150 MWh generator? It is called a power plant
Somewhat related - It was not that long ago that power houses were built like roman monuments, for they were the heart that kept a modern city running. Their architecture was something to behold, though most of it was never meant for public consumption, but rather an ode to the significance of its very own existence.
This is one book with some examples from one city: I HIGHLY suggest buying it if you are at all into architecture, industrial revolution, engineering or any related subject. There are other books about and examples from cities all over the world.
"Palazzos of Power"
Palazzos of Power: Central Stations of the Philadelphia Electric Company, 1900-1930: Aaron V. Wunsch, Joseph E. B. Elliott, Joseph E. B. Elliott, David E. Nye: 9781616895006: Amazon.com: Books
Teething problems with new technology perhaps?
It was the new class 700 and class 717 trains which had to be restarted by technicians.
The class 717 was phased-in to regular service as recently as March 2019 (although the class 700 has been operating since 2016).
A 'safety feature' is said to be responsible for shutting down the trains.
Attachments
We have a Tesla - some really cool things about it - but I can't get over the fact that it has to be "rebooted" to solve oddball issues or partial system malfunctions that occur from time to time (some of them apparently unintended side effects of safety routines....) Maybe the train needs a CTRL+ALT+DEL keyset?
Ever see a 150 MWh generator? It is called a power plant
FWIW i work in, operate and maintain, a mini power plant.
I reckon Youd get 150MVA genset in perhaps a 150ft long shop, so perhaps not really an issue for some industries at all (steel/foundry), but mining is a different story perhaps?
We have about 40MVA of synchronisable 50Hz load, used as product testing supplies, driven by a max grid load of 3MW.
I dont pretend to understand the whole picture, far from it, but I really dont know why there arent more power stations just running spinning reserve in the form of synch motor driving alternator, or flywheel, as grid stabilizers.
Last edited:
40 MVA is nothing to sneeze at - you have your own sub station
For a while the natural gas co-gen plants were a big thing. Issue is now - Just a huge internal combustion engine and genset running of natural gas. I have seen a few at college campuses, hospitals, etc.
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.
For primary generation off fossil fuels, natural gas co-gen plants (combined cycle gas turbines) remain the best & most efficient - by no small measure.
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.
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 ('district heating' is a common term). Yes, such things suit primary healthcare and certain Uni (and other) campus uses well; in those contexts I've used them even right down to the 25-50Kw [electrical+heat] 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.
Last edited:
- Status
- Not open for further replies.