Collarspace Discussion Forums


Home  Login  Search 

RE: Cost and simplicity of solar panels continues to fall.


View related threads: (in this forum | in all forums)

Logged in as: Guest
 
All Forums >> [Community Discussions] >> Dungeon of Political and Religious Discussion >> RE: Cost and simplicity of solar panels continues to fall. Page: <<   < prev  1 [2] 3   next >   >>
Login
Message << Older Topic   Newer Topic >>
RE: Cost and simplicity of solar panels continues to fall. - 9/27/2011 11:12:54 AM   
willbeurdaddy


Posts: 11894
Joined: 4/8/2006
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: DomKen


The panels I posted about include a built in inverter so they are meant solely for the sell to the grid option.



That makes no sense. An inverter is needed to run the household appliances, not just to sell.

_____________________________

Hear the lark
and harken
to the barking of the dogfox,
gone to ground.

(in reply to DomKen)
Profile   Post #: 21
RE: Cost and simplicity of solar panels continues to fall. - 9/27/2011 1:01:24 PM   
Hillwilliam


Posts: 19394
Joined: 8/27/2008
Status: offline
I have about 4500 SF of south facing metal roof on My office building.

As soon as I can raise the capital and/or grants, I'm installing. In this part of the country, the payback is about 5 years and then you're selling power to the TVA.

On cloudy days and at night, I would draw power and the meter runs forward. Sunny days, the meter runs backward.

_____________________________

Kinkier than a cheap garden hose.

Whoever said "Religion is the opiate of the masses" never heard Right Wing talk radio.

Don't blame me, I voted for Gary Johnson.

(in reply to willbeurdaddy)
Profile   Post #: 22
RE: Cost and simplicity of solar panels continues to fall. - 9/27/2011 1:08:54 PM   
DomKen


Posts: 19457
Joined: 7/4/2004
From: Chicago, IL
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: willbeurdaddy


quote:

ORIGINAL: DomKen


The panels I posted about include a built in inverter so they are meant solely for the sell to the grid option.



That makes no sense. An inverter is needed to run the household appliances, not just to sell.

What I meant was in regards to whether you could seel excess power to the grid or use it to charge a battery. With a built in inverter you would lose significant power to reconvert the electricity to DC for use in charging a battery. If you wanted to use a storage cell to power your home at night you would be better off getting different panels.

(in reply to willbeurdaddy)
Profile   Post #: 23
RE: Cost and simplicity of solar panels continues to fall. - 9/27/2011 1:11:47 PM   
DomKen


Posts: 19457
Joined: 7/4/2004
From: Chicago, IL
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Hillwilliam

I have about 4500 SF of south facing metal roof on My office building.

As soon as I can raise the capital and/or grants, I'm installing. In this part of the country, the payback is about 5 years and then you're selling power to the TVA.

On cloudy days and at night, I would draw power and the meter runs forward. Sunny days, the meter runs backward.

I'd contact a solar installation contractor or a good tax accountant, there are significant government incentives for installing solar panels, both federally and from some states.

(in reply to Hillwilliam)
Profile   Post #: 24
RE: Cost and simplicity of solar panels continues to fall. - 9/27/2011 1:15:14 PM   
Hillwilliam


Posts: 19394
Joined: 8/27/2008
Status: offline
I have Ken. Workin on both angles. I'm looking at refinancing the building within a year and as I have about 40% equity I can take out enough cash out to do the panels.

If enough people do that, certain people in the middle east can EAT their fuckin' oil.

_____________________________

Kinkier than a cheap garden hose.

Whoever said "Religion is the opiate of the masses" never heard Right Wing talk radio.

Don't blame me, I voted for Gary Johnson.

(in reply to DomKen)
Profile   Post #: 25
RE: Cost and simplicity of solar panels continues to fall. - 9/27/2011 1:23:43 PM   
DomKen


Posts: 19457
Joined: 7/4/2004
From: Chicago, IL
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Hillwilliam

I have Ken. Workin on both angles. I'm looking at refinancing the building within a year and as I have about 40% equity I can take out enough cash out to do the panels.

If enough people do that, certain people in the middle east can EAT their fuckin' oil.

Precisely. If panels and small scale wind turbines went up on every flat or south facing roof in the US we could greatly reduce the coal and oil we burn for electricity.

Think about a few panels on a garage roof feeding a battery used to charge an electric commuter car overnight. How much gas would be saved if everyone who could do so did?

(in reply to Hillwilliam)
Profile   Post #: 26
RE: Cost and simplicity of solar panels continues to fall. - 9/28/2011 7:29:57 AM   
samboct


Posts: 1817
Joined: 1/17/2007
Status: offline
There's some misinfo here- let me see if I can correct some of it...

1) Solyndra went bellyup, along with Evergreen and Spectrawatt because the Chinese are heavily subsidizing their solar industry. There's a glut on the market now which is why prices are falling so rapidly. So don't plan on prices staying this low. Solyndra's business plan also bet on silicon remaining expensive- a bad bet in my opinion, and one which 2 years later proved disastrous. However, Evergreen and Spectrawatt had more efficient cells and better production technology than the Chinese cells.

2) Silicon PV is more efficient at colder temperatures- hence temperature plays a role. There are other types of PV which are more efficient at higher temperatures, but they're for utility scale only.

3) For residential installations, the best bet is probably amorphous silicon cells. These cells have lower peak efficiency, but have higher efficiency than crystalline silicon under low light and indirect light situations. Residential rooftops don't use trackers, so these cells make more sense.

4) ST is correct- you need an inverter. The cell produces DC power, the grid is AC. Be careful with them- they typically have warranties for 10 years, while the cells can last for 20. Note however, that cells will decline in performance over time.

5) One annoying thing that catches people out- if the grid goes down, you don't have power either. Someone may have already pointed this out- but a lineman working on local lines would get electrocuted- so you need the same circuits as a generator. Also- since PV panels vary in output with the amount of sunlight, you typically need a bank of batteries if you're going to have power when the grid goes down to even out demand. Inverter efficiency will matter here.

6) The residential market in the US is now smaller compared to industrial/utility. With uncertain feed in tariffs, its been very hard to establish an industry of dedicated installers. PV installations are heavy and can damage a roof if not done properly. However, with a sturdy roof, there can be an additional benefit if a solar hot water heater is integrated as well. Often the water can cool the cells- it's a win/win situation, but finding installers will be tough. Don't know if companies are still pushing this one- most installations seem to be PV only.

7) Geography matters a great deal. Without a south facing roof, you're basically done. Also can't have trees in the way. In the Northeast, most homes are geographically undesirable for solar.

8) The economics vary greatly on the utility companies. AFAIK- no utility will actually write you a check, but many are now crediting your account so your overall electric bill should diminish. Most utilities still have fixed pricing- which means that although you should pay more for peak demand power, you don't. If you do have peak power pricing, PV panels should be much easier to justify since they produce when AC demands are high.

9) Oil is not used much for power generation in this country- the combustibles we use are coal primarily, and natural gas which is coming on quickly.

Clearly, some of the desire for a PV panel may depend on your appetite for gambling. In many regions of the country- it makes overall sense to have PV feeding in to the grid. It'll reduce the need for peaker plants which are often old coal plants and an environmental nightmare, plus it comes on line pretty much when needed most. PV panels are probably at a minimum for at least several years now, although module pricing and inverter pricing may drop in the near future- I just have no idea on this. However if utilities want to charge you the same price all the time, well, it's much harder to justify a PV panel. One of the ideas behind the "smart meter" was that it would allow utilities to go to real time or at least more flexible pricing. But if the utility doesn't reward you, then the economics behind PV are going to be tough- or you have to have high cost electricity, i.e. north of 20 cents/kWhr I think.

Does this help?

Sam

(in reply to StrangerThan)
Profile   Post #: 27
RE: Cost and simplicity of solar panels continues to fall. - 9/28/2011 7:35:05 AM   
Lucylastic


Posts: 40310
Status: offline
Google announced yesterday that they are investing 75 million in solar
This morning, at the Renewable Energy Finance Forum (REFF-West) in San Francisco, I announced a new $75 million investment to create an initial fund with Clean Power Finance that will help up to 3,000 homeowners go solar. This is our second investment in residential solar, and we’ve now invested more than $850 million overall to develop and deploy clean energy.

http://googlegreenblog.blogspot.com/
it sure as hell aint going away

_____________________________

(•_•)
<) )╯SUCH
/ \

\(•_•)
( (> A NASTY
/ \

(•_•)
<) )> WOMAN
/ \

Duchess Of Dissent
Dont Hate Love

(in reply to samboct)
Profile   Post #: 28
RE: Cost and simplicity of solar panels continues to fall. - 9/28/2011 7:40:27 AM   
Aneirin


Posts: 6121
Joined: 3/18/2006
From: Tamaris
Status: offline
Could it at all be that seeing as solar panels are dropping in price, it is hoped that more in the west will use them and become dependant, so that there is less demand for oil, so it can then be sold on to countries that will pay more for the oil ?

A thought could be, let the past industrial west have the low torque power sources, as the new industrial east needs the high torque energy to power what is now the industrial centre of the world, therefore the industrial centre has more need of the energy burning oil produces than the west.

< Message edited by Aneirin -- 9/28/2011 7:44:24 AM >


_____________________________

Everything we are is the result of what we have thought, the mind is everything, what we think, we become - Guatama Buddha

Conservatism is distrust of people tempered by fear - William Gladstone

(in reply to Lucylastic)
Profile   Post #: 29
RE: Cost and simplicity of solar panels continues to fall. - 9/28/2011 12:53:43 PM   
Edwynn


Posts: 4105
Joined: 10/26/2008
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: samboct

There's some misinfo here- let me see if I can correct some of it...

Most utilities still have fixed pricing- which means that although you should pay more for peak demand power, you don't. If you do have peak power pricing, PV panels should be much easier to justify since they produce when AC demands are high.


Sam




That's a new one on me.

Perhaps you might be confusing this with power averaging, where energy use of the prior year is averaged across this year's 12 months to obtain the "fixed" pricing spoken of. You are in fact paying for the peak demand power consumption incurred through the peak months during the months of below average power usage, when you are paying for more than was actually consumed in that month.

$2,000 per year is still $2,000 per year, whether billed as averaged use or actual per-month use. The power companies don't give anything away, be sure of that.


To the issue of AC vs. DC:

Any heating element (cook top electric range, water heater, etc.) runs just as easily off of DC as AC, many electric motors are DC, which require the extra expense of rectification (converting AC to DC) which would be eliminated with DC power generation. All audio amplifiers and computer circuits require DC for operation, the power supplies being much more costly due to being fed AC. Large rectifiers are not cheap, but even for the relatively cheap smaller ones, the further filtering (involving capacitors, inductors and resistors) to reduce ripple after the rectification needed for "close as possible" DC in critical circuits adds further to the cost. Some few high-end audio preamplifiers run off batteries for this reason. DC lamps (requiring the 'wall wart' plug because of AC power) are common, and DC lighting systems are easily installed in any home or work place.

All the above (and many more examples) indicate that inverters are not needed for many applications and that the need for costly rectification and filtering/ripple suppression can be eliminated for DC circuits and power requirements when power generation is DC to begin with.











(in reply to samboct)
Profile   Post #: 30
RE: Cost and simplicity of solar panels continues to fall. - 9/28/2011 12:56:53 PM   
Real0ne


Posts: 21189
Joined: 10/25/2004
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: DomKen

http://www.marketwatch.com/story/westinghouse-solar-releases-affordable-rooftop-solar-kits-2011-09-26
http://www.westinghousesolar.com/index.php/ac-kits

A 235W panel with all mounting hardware which can be mostly installed by a competent DIYer available at Lowes. The previous generation was 185W for $650. They seem to think you can fit 20 on a residential roof but I can't find the dimensions anywhere.



surprise surprise

solar panels are the least efficient way to convert sunlight.  LOL

a waste




< Message edited by Real0ne -- 9/28/2011 12:57:19 PM >


_____________________________

"We the Borg" of the us imperialists....resistance is futile

Democracy; The 'People' voted on 'which' amendment?

Yesterdays tinfoil is today's reality!

"No man's life, liberty, or property is safe while the legislature is in session

(in reply to DomKen)
Profile   Post #: 31
RE: Cost and simplicity of solar panels continues to fall. - 9/28/2011 1:37:20 PM   
samboct


Posts: 1817
Joined: 1/17/2007
Status: offline
Edwynn

I'm not confusing the two. There've been some consumer testing done where utilities vary pricing according to demand. There are also some devices that can communicate with the utility, such as a dishwasher, that doesn't turn on until pricing drops to a certain level. This has been done for years with industrial users- aluminum smelting for example is one of the largest users of electricity in the economy, and utilities have long had arrangements that during peak demand, smelters shut down or run at reduced rates. Some utilities are paying customers to curb demand when requested, which creates virtual generating capacity- and needless to say, there are companies that are bundling this virtual capacity and selling it. Recently, one of these resellers, Exelon, was bought by Constellation Energy for close to $40B.

However, utilities have discovered that in general, customers don't like real time pricing, preferring fixed pricing. There's some disagreement here- the way its introduced matters. But I think the consensus is that most residential customers think it's too much of a PITA long term- they don't want to really modify their behavior to save a few pennies at a time on their electric bill.

No disagreement on most of your comments- but things like air conditioning or fans often use A/C motors, not permanent magnet motors. Most household appliances could use DC if designed, but there's an added layer of circuitry. Blame Westinghouse (think he was the one who pushed AC over DC) but then again, it's a heck of a lot easier to wire a city with AC....

Oh yeah- LED lighting doesn't do AC either- and there you probably want about 3 volts or so...

Sam

< Message edited by samboct -- 9/28/2011 1:39:34 PM >

(in reply to Real0ne)
Profile   Post #: 32
RE: Cost and simplicity of solar panels continues to fall. - 9/28/2011 2:27:04 PM   
DomKen


Posts: 19457
Joined: 7/4/2004
From: Chicago, IL
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: samboct
No disagreement on most of your comments- but things like air conditioning or fans often use A/C motors, not permanent magnet motors. Most household appliances could use DC if designed, but there's an added layer of circuitry. Blame Westinghouse (think he was the one who pushed AC over DC) but then again, it's a heck of a lot easier to wire a city with AC....

Edison was pushing DC and Tesla and Westinghouse pushed AC for the distribution network. AC really does work much better for distribution and DC does work better in many small appliances.

AC is also safer than equivalent DC. AC will tend to throw your hand off if you make contact while DC may cause your muscles to contract and make you hold on to the live wire.

(in reply to samboct)
Profile   Post #: 33
RE: Cost and simplicity of solar panels continues to fall. - 9/28/2011 3:01:07 PM   
Edwynn


Posts: 4105
Joined: 10/26/2008
Status: offline


Thanks for the clarification. And yes, I am aware of the various incentive plans for off-peak power usage.

"Most utilities still have fixed pricing- which means that although you should pay more for peak demand power, you don't."

That is what confused me.


In any case, a DC motor works as well or better than an AC motor in most applications. So the compressors used in refrigerators, air conditioning, etc., can run on DC power. They are using AC now because that is what's available, no rectification needed, not because of any other inherent advantage. The fact that many industrial process motors use DC even with the added cost of the needed rectifiers might tell us that there are circumstances where the DC motor has an advantage, otherwise we would not see them at all in an AC environment.

I'm not sure what you mean by the "added layer of circuitry" concerning a DC configured house (or workplace). I'm sure there is something that absolutely requires AC for operation, but at the moment I can't think of anything. As it stands, there is much extra expense  in supplying DC power to the vast majority of electronic circuits that require it when power is derived from our current (no pun intended) AC power generation regime. More appliances and devices using DC actually reduces the cost of 'the added layer of circuitry' of the inverters as would be needed for whatever remaining AC equipment.

As to power transmission, AC suffers lower loss than DC over short-medium distances, which was the condition that existed in the early days of power plant being close to power users. But over longer distances DC is actually the better way to go. I remember reading ~ 20 years ago in Scientific American that some were calling for a return to DC power transmission over long distances, that obtaining supposed feasibility even after accounting for the banks of inverters on the receiving end.

But if we are talking about on site power, then the transmission issue is a moot point anyway.

Here is an interesting blurb that looks into both power transmission and variability of wind or solar as sources:

http://www.economist.com/node/9539765

(edited to correct the inadvertent wrong link in the initial post; sorry)

In any event, there are obviously many people still stuck in the all-or-nothing/one-size-fits-all paradigm. The current status of 'alternative' energy is not meant to replace the entire power generation regime overnight. Efficiency and overall reduction of power usage by way of improved technology should actually be of as much or greater concern and direction of focus as that of "more power!," by whatever means.

As an indication of where the focus is currently; starting pay for oil rig and refinery engineers and oil geologists is anywhere from 50% to 80% higher than for the next closest starting pay for any other engineering or geologist jobs.






< Message edited by Edwynn -- 9/28/2011 3:54:45 PM >

(in reply to samboct)
Profile   Post #: 34
RE: Cost and simplicity of solar panels continues to fall. - 9/28/2011 4:46:41 PM   
samboct


Posts: 1817
Joined: 1/17/2007
Status: offline
Edwynn

I think we're pretty much in agreement. In terms of motors, I think the more critical distinction is between permanent magnet motors and motors which rely on a generated field. However, in terms of efficiency, modern brushless motors which use permanent magnets and AC fields may be the most efficient things going- I think that some have cracked 95% efficiency. Conversely, some of the big all AC motors may have also hit similar efficiency. DC motors all need permanent magnets, but are somewhat less efficient.

The economics of motors is getting really muddy with increasing costs of good magnets with the rare earth supply controlled by China. In cars, you need permanent magnet motors due to weight, but in stationary applications, I'm not sure there's much difference in efficiency.

On the other hand, I'm not sure that starting with AC voltage actually helps with an AC brushless motor- all the ones I've used have had batteries.

In terms of AC versus DC in transmission- the losses with AC increase with distance, the losses with DC happen when you put the voltage in and when you take it out, losses over distance are much lower. So yeah, there are long haul DC lines now- think there's a line between Germany and Sweden.

Sam

(in reply to Edwynn)
Profile   Post #: 35
RE: Cost and simplicity of solar panels continues to fall. - 9/28/2011 5:35:09 PM   
Edwynn


Posts: 4105
Joined: 10/26/2008
Status: offline


Thanks for the education on motors, Sam.

I did not realize that all DC motors relied upon permanent magnets. I'm not sure why this is the case, but no need for you to explain if "that's just the way it is."

That certainly puts things in a different light. BTW, the Chinese are restricting not only export, but actual output of rare earth metals. It's not only to jack up prices and piss everybody off, though. As I learned in geology courses, whatever resources are most valued in the world are best held in check by the host country of those resources; let other countries deplete their supply first, save ours for last. In that aspect, China had been inadvertently a bit generous so regarding, and just recently woke up to the fact. Various rare earth mining operations are reawakening in other countries as we speak, which was the intention there.






< Message edited by Edwynn -- 9/28/2011 5:40:45 PM >

(in reply to samboct)
Profile   Post #: 36
RE: Cost and simplicity of solar panels continues to fall. - 9/28/2011 5:54:48 PM   
Termyn8or


Posts: 18681
Joined: 11/12/2005
Status: offline
FR

A couple of posters have touched on this conversion issue. The statement that AC is better for distribution is absolutley true, or was up until certain technologies got better, more on that later.

Now these inverters are not your run of the mill buzzboxes you hook up in an RV or camper, not at all. This type of inverter must operate in a phase locked loop with the 60 Hz already on the grid. This requires a pretty nifty current detection system and very accurate frequency and phase control. Any error costs money in terms of efficiency. A 90 degree phase shift nullifies EVERYTHING. Though the scale is logarythmic and one degree is not very significant, the efficiency decreases to zero in only one quarter cycle. There does have to be a loss across some ballast resistors as this type of current detection simply cannot be done totally inductively. (or it's more trouble than it's worth)

There are however some things in the house that absolutely need AC power, but their dominance is diminshing. Most things with big motors need AC. Your furnace/AC blowers and AC compressors are usually AC only. Anything that uses a conventional power transformer as well. Many many other things do not need AC, in fact the first thing that happens to the AC inside is that it is converted to DC. Stereo equipment usually needs AC for a specific engineering reason, also some things that have a time clock use the AC pulse for synch. The former is something that makes the music - maybe - sound a bit better, the latter can easily be replaced with a quartz crystal oscillator, such as in a battery operated clock. The only reason the AC pulse is used in alot of internal clocks is that even if the grid's 60 Hz leads or lags, it is corrected to NIS standards whenever possible, almost conintually in fact. And don't think you can pick it up on the radio or something like WWV, it doesn't work that way. For example in Cleveland in certain areas you have a choice between CPP and CEI for an electric company. Years ago CPP used to be significantly cheaper and many people used it when they could, but even moreso industry did. But I owned a business where there was a factory in the back of the building that used CPP, while my shop used CEI and I know for absolute certainty that they were not in sync. It apparently depends on load. As well regulated as they are, they can fall behind.

The two grids are different geographically, CPP is synched with the PASNE grid and CEI is synched with the TVA grid. Now back to distribution. In days past AC was the only logical choice for distribution because transformers would step the voltage up, which of course lowers resistive (as well as inductive) losses in long runs. (included just for those unfamiliar with electricity)

However now that there are extremely efficient semiconductor (transistor) devices things have changed. That is why there is no conventional transformer in your TV set for example, nor in your monitor or computer. They immediately rectify it to DC and use said transistor(s) [type device, there are many clases], to convert to high frequency AC.

It's called switched mode. Now with a single coil, not a trnsformer, using a transistor you can step DC up and down quite efficiently. A single ended stage can be, and frequently is more efficient than a conventional 60 Hz transformer. Imagine now a circuit that literally, without a transformer, puts out more current than it draws. And it is technically a series cuircuit so the old laws of electronics say it is impossible, but it is possible now.

The one advantage to DC distribution would be the elimination of inductive losses. Right now it's not worth the trouble, but the trend is there. Even though our electronic devices do have the tendency to be of more efficient designs as the years pass, we seem to get more and more of them. Plus no matter what people say about birth rates it is only logical to assume that population will increase. The final thing is that the cost of these semiconductor based convertors is bound to come down. With these three factors we may one day see a DC transmission system.

One serious ramification of that would be that it would be a hell of alot easier to use batteries for storage and sell power to the grid, as there would be no need to sycnchronize. The amp - hour meter just reads the other way and that is that. Convert your DC to higher voltage and it's a done deal. This makes batteries very attractive, and that technology is also coming along. We could concievably live to see a world with no power outages.

But the fact is DC conversion has a bit of a way to go. Conventional transformers are used in microwave ovens by necessity, devices to do it the other way would just be too expensive. Motors that are AC only are another problem. You would need an invertor for your refrigerator, AC/furnace and a few other things. But it could be done.

In fact it is. In a large building's HVAC system, if it's modern it might use VF motors for blowers and pumps. In these the AC is converted to DC, and then back to AC, but at the frequency they want. They efficiently control the speed of the motor with the frequency. A synchronous motor is pretty effecient and easy to build without brushes. On 60 Hz you got your choice of submultiples of 60 RPS, which is 3,600 RPM. It's usually 1,800 but with some inefficiency comes out 1,750. More poles, less RPM, but always a submultiple of the input power's frequency.

If they find this more efficient in large buildings, how long will it take until this technology trickles down into the home of the average Joe sixpack ? I give it about a decade.

T^T

(in reply to samboct)
Profile   Post #: 37
RE: Cost and simplicity of solar panels continues to fall. - 9/28/2011 5:59:15 PM   
Real0ne


Posts: 21189
Joined: 10/25/2004
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: DomKen


quote:

ORIGINAL: samboct
No disagreement on most of your comments- but things like air conditioning or fans often use A/C motors, not permanent magnet motors. Most household appliances could use DC if designed, but there's an added layer of circuitry. Blame Westinghouse (think he was the one who pushed AC over DC) but then again, it's a heck of a lot easier to wire a city with AC....

Edison was pushing DC and Tesla and Westinghouse pushed AC for the distribution network. AC really does work much better for distribution and DC does work better in many small appliances.

AC is also safer than equivalent DC. AC will tend to throw your hand off if you make contact while DC may cause your muscles to contract and make you hold on to the live wire.


sorta

the reason ac won over dc is because you can install line transformers to keep the voltage up to make up for transmission line losses

sorta tough to do that with dc.

as far as safety goes, ole niky kola would take a hunk of number 12 copper wire and hold it in his hands and wave it through the field of what today is termed "cold electricity", and the wire would instantly vaporize and no burns on his hands.

Later in his life while he stated that it was basically safe he said he did not think he would do those stunts again.

Now one time he pissed a crowd off I believe it was in rochester showing them how he could vaporize metal and he would be unharmed.   He did it with lead and splattered the crowd and I understand there were lots of bery unhappy people over that.

However lets remember it was nicky kola who invented the ac system we use today when everyone sneered at him, well this was his improvement over it.

No wires no losses, just the opposite you get more out then in, very simple to do if you have your physics down.






< Message edited by Real0ne -- 9/28/2011 6:12:40 PM >


_____________________________

"We the Borg" of the us imperialists....resistance is futile

Democracy; The 'People' voted on 'which' amendment?

Yesterdays tinfoil is today's reality!

"No man's life, liberty, or property is safe while the legislature is in session

(in reply to DomKen)
Profile   Post #: 38
RE: Cost and simplicity of solar panels continues to fall. - 9/28/2011 6:00:07 PM   
Termyn8or


Posts: 18681
Joined: 11/12/2005
Status: offline
"DC motors all need permanent magnets, but are somewhat less efficient. "

Oops, you're busted. Look up series wound versus shunt wound motors for detail. These have brushes, but can run on AC or DC and have no permenent magnets. Think Electrolux vacuum cleaners.

Of course for a given motor the required voltage to run it properly is higher for AC versus DC, but it will run just the same.

T^T

(in reply to samboct)
Profile   Post #: 39
RE: Cost and simplicity of solar panels continues to fall. - 9/28/2011 6:19:10 PM   
Real0ne


Posts: 21189
Joined: 10/25/2004
Status: offline
yeh I will take a dc motor any day over ac.

especially if you want a ass kicking electric car.

Electric car vs Ferrari




_____________________________

"We the Borg" of the us imperialists....resistance is futile

Democracy; The 'People' voted on 'which' amendment?

Yesterdays tinfoil is today's reality!

"No man's life, liberty, or property is safe while the legislature is in session

(in reply to Termyn8or)
Profile   Post #: 40
Page:   <<   < prev  1 [2] 3   next >   >>
All Forums >> [Community Discussions] >> Dungeon of Political and Religious Discussion >> RE: Cost and simplicity of solar panels continues to fall. Page: <<   < prev  1 [2] 3   next >   >>
Jump to:





New Messages No New Messages
Hot Topic w/ New Messages Hot Topic w/o New Messages
Locked w/ New Messages Locked w/o New Messages
 Post New Thread
 Reply to Message
 Post New Poll
 Submit Vote
 Delete My Own Post
 Delete My Own Thread
 Rate Posts




Collarchat.com © 2025
Terms of Service Privacy Policy Spam Policy

0.219