California without electricity again Solar/Wind no help

[DougSpindler]

Once again parts of California have been without electricity for days due to high winds, high temperatures and a power company which has not maintained the high voltage lines.  Solar and wind even though producing at record levels are useless as the electricity can not be sent to people's homes.

This is just one more data point indicating man caused climate change is occurring.

Anyone have a solution?

[free_electron]

Solar on your own roof combined with your own storage.  They can get stuffed.
In about 2 weeks i will have a 17KW solar installation combined with 4 Tesla powerwalls good for 52kw/h . It'll cut my monthly cost in half. I currently pay over 450$ a month for power ... My consumption from the grid will be zero. The only cost will be the monthly payment for the installation and that's about half of my power bill. The whole house is heated/cooled using an efficient heat-pump system. no need for gas.

i'll post pictures during the install works.

[EEVblog]

Once again parts of California have been without electricity for days due to high winds, high temperatures and a power company which has not maintained the high voltage lines.  Solar and wind even though producing at record levels are useless as the electricity can not be sent to people's homes.
This is just one more data point indicating man caused climate change is occurring.
Anyone have a solution?

That seems obvious 

[bdunham7]

This is just one more data point indicating man caused climate change is occurring.

Without implying an opinion one way or another on the matter of climate change, how is the fact that the wind blew over a bunch of poorly maintained equipment evidence of anything other than neglect of infrastructure?

[EEVblog]

Solar on your own roof combined with your own storage.  They can get stuffed.
In about 2 weeks i will have a 17KW solar installation combined with 4 Tesla powerwalls good for 52kw/h . It'll cut my monthly cost in half.

  you must use an insane amount of power, why?

[EEVblog]

Solar on your own roof combined with your own storage.  They can get stuffed.

Yep, if I lived in CA I would have done this many years ago, especially given that (I believe) there are government subsidies to do so.
Much less important there, longest blackout we've had is maybe a few hours in the 15+ years I've lived in my current place. But I still might install one before years end along with an upgraded solar system.
Unfortunately my old 3kW is maxed out, so it requires a whole new inverter system to even expand it a little bit (I have room for 4 more panels)

[free_electron]

Solar on your own roof combined with your own storage.  They can get stuffed.
In about 2 weeks i will have a 17KW solar installation combined with 4 Tesla powerwalls good for 52kw/h . It'll cut my monthly cost in half.

  you must use an insane amount of power, why?

electricity is the only powersource. no gas in the house
in summer : ac runs almost 10 hours a day. That thing is 25 ampere at 240v : almost 6 kilowatt . add 1.5 kilowatt (2hp pump) for the pool pump which runs 9 hours a day ( saltwater pool ) and a 1kw for the salt system. so i burn off 80kw/h a day ... without anything else.
The array will produce enough to run the house and fill the batteries on a daily basis. at nighttime i will only use 1 to 1 1/2 packs. the rest gets dumped into the car.

[trobbins]

The rapidly changing landscape of EV's, now that other manufacturers are gearing up for that future and battery price is continuing to slope down, along with hopefully a bi-directional charger acceptance for domestic use, and rules/regs for grid disconnect, could well be the 'great uncoupling' opportunity for many in years to come.

[DougSpindler]

This is an instance where people who have BEV are screwed even if they have solar panels.  With the grid off-line how do you charge your car if you have a BEV.  You are screwed in so many ways.  And even if you have solar panels which could some electricity you are screwed as well as most inverters will not provide any power when the grid is down. 

As someone posted you could buy PowerWalls.  I was given a price of $12,000 per PowerWall after rebates.  If one purchased four, that would mean you spent nearly $50,000 just on the PowerWalls.  To charge four PowerWalls and run your AC during the day, power the pool pump, and other items in your home AND chnarge your car?  I would guess you spent what, around $75,000 just for solar panels.  That means you spent around $125,000 to be grid independent.  Am I close?  I would argue most people do not have that much money to spend.  And isn't the life on the PowerWall batteries 10 years?  So 10 years from now won't you have to spend another $50,000 -60,000 on new PowerWalls?  I would how all that would compare with a natural gas powered generator?  Or do you have one of those as well?  Just wondering what you do in the winter if there's a week or more of cloudy days?  Sounds like it's a great solution for you, but then there is everyone else.

As for a bi-directional charger.  Please explain the benefit?  If you charge your car from the grid, and the grid goes down, like what's happening in California right now your bi-directional charger would have drained you EV batteries and you are screwed.  Even after the grid is on-line you would have to wait for you car to charge.  Just not understanding why after charging your EV you would want to discharge it to power devices in your house. 


 

[tszaboo]

Anyone have a solution?

Maintenance on the power lines.

[trobbins]

As an example, if a BEV was configured to work with a bi-directional inverter, and the house had solar, and was able to be islanded - then the PV and battery and inverter could keep the house energised as per a remote farm that only has PV, battery and inverter - the net result depends entirely on the loads you want to allow.  The point being that you don't need to buy batteries/powerwalls per se.  You can turn off the pool pump, and the electric ovens and air-conditioning - they aren't mandatory loads - you don't have to flatten the EV battery just because you can, or you didn't realise.

[EEVblog]

This is an instance where people who have BEV are screwed even if they have solar panels.  With the grid off-line how do you charge your car if you have a BEV. 

So is almost every ICE car owner in that same situation.
Sure, keep some petrol handy, but how many do that, you can round it down to zero percent.

[DougSpindler]

This is an instance where people who have BEV are screwed even if they have solar panels.  With the grid off-line how do you charge your car if you have a BEV. 

So is almost every ICE car owner in that same situation.
Sure, keep some petrol handy, but how many do that, you can round it down to zero percent.

Not exactly.  When the power company take the grid off-line that doesn't mean all of the city or the next city over is off-line as well.  When our house didn't have power for days, I could drive 10 minutes to the next city where the power was on and could have purchased gas.  California has 72 different power companies.  Some cities produce there own electricity.  So one person on one side of the street might have power, the person on the other side might not.

We are on the side of the street without power at the moment.

[free_electron]

We are on the side of the street without power at the moment.

That's cause you didn't rake the forest. But it could be worse, the side that has power probably has windmill cancer ...

That is the biggest issue : nothing is begin done in upgrading or even maintaining the grid. It's all corporate greed. Power , just like drinking water  should be public works. not for-profit corporations.

[NiHaoMike]

This is an instance where people who have BEV are screwed even if they have solar panels.  With the grid off-line how do you charge your car if you have a BEV.  You are screwed in so many ways.  And even if you have solar panels which could some electricity you are screwed as well as most inverters will not provide any power when the grid is down.

Better designs can provide some backup power during the day, without batteries.

[SilverSolder]

Anyone have a solution?

Maintenance on the power lines.

I kind of agree,  trying to fix the fact of a broken utility company by each family generating their own electricity seems....   the long way round.

[RoGeorge]

This is just one more data point indicating man caused climate change is occurring.

Anyone have a solution?

Yes, stop waining about climate change and maintain the power lines.

[DougSpindler]

This is just one more data point indicating man caused climate change is occurring.

Anyone have a solution?

Yes, stop waining about climate change and maintain the power lines.

It's a matter of priorities.  If the power company spend money on maintaining the power lines the execs won't receive their bonuses and stock shareholders won't receive their dividends.  The customers have a lower priority.  This has been the case for 25 years.  Any idea how many customers the power company has killed with gas line explosions or fires caused by powerlines sparking due to inadequate maintenance?  Need to research the exact number but it is close to 200 if not more.

[SilverSolder]

This is just one more data point indicating man caused climate change is occurring.

Anyone have a solution?

Yes, stop waining about climate change and maintain the power lines.

I think it goes against the American pioneering spirit to do something as boring as maintain things in good condition, unless it is your personal muscle car or Harley of course! 

There is definitely a cultural difference.  It definitely seems more difficult (but not impossible!) to find "people that care" in the US than in a Northern European country, for example.

[tom66]

Solar on your own roof combined with your own storage.  They can get stuffed.
In about 2 weeks i will have a 17KW solar installation combined with 4 Tesla powerwalls good for 52kw/h . It'll cut my monthly cost in half. I currently pay over 450$ a month for power ... My consumption from the grid will be zero. The only cost will be the monthly payment for the installation and that's about half of my power bill. The whole house is heated/cooled using an efficient heat-pump system. no need for gas.

i'll post pictures during the install works.

So instead of paying $450/mo for electricity you're paying $225/mo for electricity and $225/mo for lease/loan on an install?

It seems fair enough as electricity costs are only likely to increase but I think the economics are only there in places that have high energy cost.  I pay between $0.065 USD and $0.19 USD per kWh equivalent for electricity here.  My PHEV charges (pre-COVID) on the cheap night time rate.

[free_electron]

So instead of paying $450/mo for electricity you're paying $225/mo for electricity and $225/mo for lease/loan on an install?

no , i will be paying 250$ a month flat fee for the installation. There is no electric cost, unless i need to draw power from the grid. The system is designed that i will have to do that only very rarely. anytihng i overproduce i sell back so on a yearly basis my cost to the grid balances to zero.

[bdunham7]

To charge four PowerWalls and run your AC during the day, power the pool pump, and other items in your home AND chnarge your car?  I would guess you spent what, around $75,000 just for solar panels.  That means you spent around $125,000 to be grid independent.  Am I close?

If your goal is to be an off-grid energy hog, then it costs a few bucks.  But you make up these numbers and present it as a binary choice.  In most of California, losing power is not a huge deal and you don't need to replace it all.  You just need enough to keep your food cold, charge your laptop and power a few lights--unless you live in some communist s***hole progressive municipality that has banned natural gas in new construction.  The car, batteries, AC and pool pump can wait.  I did all that 8 years ago for $15K after rebates.  I'm not off-grid, but I'm at near-zero billing and I don't die if the power goes off.

As for a bi-directional charger.  Please explain the benefit?  If you charge your car from the grid, and the grid goes down, like what's happening in California right now your bi-directional charger would have drained you EV batteries and you are screwed.  Even after the grid is on-line you would have to wait for you car to charge.  Just not understanding why after charging your EV you would want to discharge it to power devices in your house.

Why do you imagine this question has a simple answer?  It all depends on the individual circumstances.  If you have plenty of charge in your car, no plans to go anywhere and just want to keep the lights on and your food cold, why not?  In my case, I have another car (ICE) so I would be perfectly OK letting my BEV keep the house going. 

[fourfathom]

Without implying an opinion one way or another on the matter of climate change, how is the fact that the wind blew over a bunch of poorly maintained equipment evidence of anything other than neglect of infrastructure?

I'm also not implying a climate change opinion, but the Northern California high temperatures and "wind events" of the past couple of days are what we used to call "Indian Summer" and "wind".  They really weren't out of the ordinary.  And AFAIK these outages were deliberate, where PG&E (Pacific Gas and Electric) shut down power in certain areas in anticipation of these "wind events".  For the past few days I've been getting emails and robo-phone calls from PG&E about anticipated shutdowns. 

Big factors in these shut-down decision have to be the recent trend in lawsuits against PG&E.  Fires due to downed power lines used to be "Acts of God", but now they are blamed on poor maintenance (perhaps justifiably so).  Also, tree trimming near power lines had until very recently been phased back because of property owner resistance, and I suppose also because it's expensive.

[tom66]

So instead of paying $450/mo for electricity you're paying $225/mo for electricity and $225/mo for lease/loan on an install?

no , i will be paying 250$ a month flat fee for the installation. There is no electric cost, unless i need to draw power from the grid. The system is designed that i will have to do that only very rarely. anytihng i overproduce i sell back so on a yearly basis my cost to the grid balances to zero.

So you say you consume 80kWh per day "base load" (AC/pool pump/etc) but you only have 17kW solar and 52kWh of batteries.  Do you really expect no grid load at all (on most days?) What about during winter with short sunlight hours?  Are you always going to keep the panels clean?

Do you pay a standing charge for a grid connection just in case?  Don't know about you but I would keep the grid just in case, even if it was (like here, for instance) $12/mo standing charge.

(Edited for clarity.)

[rsjsouza]

Solar on your own roof combined with your own storage.  They can get stuffed.
In about 2 weeks i will have a 17KW solar installation combined with 4 Tesla powerwalls good for 52kw/h . It'll cut my monthly cost in half. I currently pay over 450$ a month for power ... My consumption from the grid will be zero. The only cost will be the monthly payment for the installation and that's about half of my power bill. The whole house is heated/cooled using an efficient heat-pump system. no need for gas.

i'll post pictures during the install works.

Please do; I would love to see that. Really impressive installation.

Living in an equally sunny state (Texas) and having a somewhat high electricity bill (1MWh/mo at $250 $280 for 2.6MW/mo on the peak of the summer, with two AC beasts running at about 8h/day + 1/2hp pool pump running 8h/day and an auxiliary 1/4hp running 2h/day)), I can't make the financials meet to install solar. The turnaround would come after... a few decades, to which I would have spent even more money in maintenance and perhaps replacement of parts and panels.

[coppice]

Once again parts of California have been without electricity for days due to high winds, high temperatures and a power company which has not maintained the high voltage lines.  Solar and wind even though producing at record levels are useless as the electricity can not be sent to people's homes.

This is just one more data point indicating man caused climate change is occurring.

How is this a data point about climate change? You simply described an aspect of how badly California is managed.

Anyone have a solution?

Vote the self serving corrupt scum out, and see if a different direction might help?

[SilverSolder]

[...] a somewhat high electricity bill (1MWh/mo at $250 [...]

That seems very cheap for 1MWh? 

[free_electron]

Of course i will keep the grid. There will be days where i will draw some power from it. But most days i will be feeding back , so on yearly basis it is a wash ( net metering )

The array can produce 17kw. My base load is (on average and only calculated based on using the heat/pump+pool equipment ) 7 to 9kw. 3/4 of this load is during daytime(summer/cooling) or nighttime(winter/heating).
-in summertime (sun out and cooling needed) it is provided by the array. At nighttime it cools down so no ac needed. any 'extra' ( about 8 kw ) goes into storage and towards other consumption.
-In wintertime it is mainly heating during the night ( from storage in batteries ) as the sun is out during the day and little heating is required. So the daytime draw is small ( pool is off in winter ) and sufficient to fill the bank and feed the home.
The array produces enough power to cycle the batteries and the base load at all times. If i'm home i charge the car from the extra coming from the array during the day , or from the storage at night. I can program the distribution and set priorities.
In my case the goal is to use the grid as a 'backup' for when i am not self sufficient.

it'll take some time to figure out what to run when and adapt the programming , but it should work .

[tom66]

Will also be interested to see the install, and the results after 1 year of usage.

[DougSpindler]

Of course i will keep the grid. There will be days where i will draw some power from it. But most days i will be feeding back , so on yearly basis it is a wash ( net metering )

The array can produce 17kw. My base load is (on average and only calculated based on using the heat/pump+pool equipment ) 7 to 9kw. 3/4 of this load is during daytime(summer/cooling) or nighttime(winter/heating).
-in summertime (sun out and cooling needed) it is provided by the array. At nighttime it cools down so no ac needed. any 'extra' ( about 8 kw ) goes into storage and towards other consumption.
-In wintertime it is mainly heating during the night ( from storage in batteries ) as the sun is out during the day and little heating is required. So the daytime draw is small ( pool is off in winter ) and sufficient to fill the bank and feed the home.
The array produces enough power to cycle the batteries and the base load at all times. If i'm home i charge the car from the extra coming from the array during the day , or from the storage at night. I can program the distribution and set priorities.
In my case the goal is to use the grid as a 'backup' for when i am not self sufficient.

it'll take some time to figure out what to run when and adapt the programming , but it should work .

Are you a PG&E customer?  Are you aware of the rate change for solar customers that’s starting next year?   The price PG&E will be paying/crediting you for excess solar electricity is going dropping by $0.35 kWhr.  This is really going to screw with the finances of going solar.   

You are also leaving out some of the hidden fees such as your monthly connect charge. 

[rsjsouza]

[...] a somewhat high electricity bill (1MWh/mo at $250 [...]

That seems very cheap for 1MWh?

Actually, I was completely wrong (confused with winter season). It is, in fact, $280 for 2.6MWh. So, the financials are even further away from a break even.

[maginnovision]

That's pretty good. It costs me 1300 300$ for 1MWh.

[coppice]

That's pretty good. It costs me 1300$ for 1MWh.

$1.3 per kWh? Where are you? I've never seen a price that high.

[maginnovision]

That's pretty good. It costs me 1300$ for 1MWh.

$1.3 per kWh? Where are you? I've never seen a price that high.

My wife had a division error in the spreadsheet... $0.30/kWh. I'm on a break from my daughters school so didn't double check the numbers. It seemed high to me too.

[DougSpindler]

That's pretty good. It costs me 1300$ for 1MWh.

$1.3 per kWh? Where are you? I've never seen a price that high.

My wife had a division error in the spreadsheet... $0.30/kWh. I'm on a break from my daughters school so didn't double check the numbers. It seemed high to me too.

Are you in California?  Who is your power company?  Aren't you on Time of Use Billing?

[maginnovision]

That's pretty good. It costs me 1300$ for 1MWh.

$1.3 per kWh? Where are you? I've never seen a price that high.

My wife had a division error in the spreadsheet... $0.30/kWh. I'm on a break from my daughters school so didn't double check the numbers. It seemed high to me too.

Are you in California?  Who is your power company?  Aren't you on Time of Use Billing?

Yea, California. LADWP. No time of use billing just "tiers" and zones. I'm not sure if this include the 10% tax or not I'd have to find an actual bill. It's not so bad, in '18 we were using 5MWh a month because our AC was dying. Under 2 MWh now with new AC.

[DougSpindler]

I'm in PG&E territory.  PG&E has 13 different rates for customers with solar.  They have tiered, and they have Time of Use with no tiers.  And they have time of use with tiering.  And then they have non-tiered, time of use if you have an electric car.  We typically buy $2,200 of electricity from PG&E.  Just by switching rate plans our bill dropped 40% by switching to straight Time of Use, no tiering.

You might want to check with LADWP to see if there are other rate plans which are more favorable for you now that you have solar.  I found the solar sales "experts" when they design a system know about the different rates.  When they give you the proposal if don't know about the different rate plans, they will show you a before solar with you being on the highest rate plan.  And then after going solar they will make solar look really good by placing you on the lowest rate plan.  Such a scam.  Then they don't put you on that rate plan so when you get your bill it makes it appear like solar is a much better deal than it really is. 

[tom66]

In the UK with an EV I rarely use over 400kWh electricity in a month ... this is with a 3 bedroom detached house (gas heating, A/C in summer using portable units), just under 1000 sq ft.

All I can say is, wow, Americans use a lot of energy.

[free_electron]

Are you in California?  Who is your power company?  Aren't you on Time of Use Billing?

TIME OF USE BILLING IS THE PROBLEM !

The cost per kw is highest  exactly the hottest moment of the day when your AC is running full blast... In july/august we had 100 to 110 degrees F for 2 months straight... so that dings enormously into the powerbill.
Here in the central valley you blast through the baseline allowance in the first week alone.

Tier 1 allowance is 20.9 kWh per day. @ 0.24373 per kilowatt. . That gives you a baseline if 152 $ per month. anything over that is billed at 0.30672 per kilowatt. In September that cost me another 188 $ ... for a total of 340$
In July my 'overage' was 1070 kWh ... cost : 328 $ My total consumption was 1721 kWh ... bill : 490$. In august i got dinged another 482$ ...
They ran an analysis and the two tier system was the cheapest ... the others would have come out higher.

Note that during this time i have not once charged my cars at home. I went to the superchargers cause they are free.

My array can theoretically produce 17Kw.
Taking into account a severe efficiency drop and reducing that to 10kW production and on top limiting that to 8 hours a day (even though in peak summer there is more than 12 hours of sunlight) . that is 80kWh / day
80 kWh  x 30 days = 2400 kWH. More than what i use ! That extra 600 kWh is ending up in the storage.

The key in my system is the battery storage. In a traditional solar setup the array produces only during daylight. What you do not 'consume' is pure waste. So you still need the grid during the night. so if you base your efficiency on that it goes to snot !
That is why i opted for 4 powerwalls. What i do not 'consume' during solar production time is not lost : it ends up in storage. During the time my array is idle i run off the 'tanks'. The cars will be used as storage as well. Anything the array produces in excess of what i need goes into storage.

The biggest efficiency loss with solar is the nighttime... that's where the storage kicks in and washes that away.
On a winter day (shortest daylight , low sun ) the array should still be able to cover my consumption (my winterconsumption should be 60% of summer) and fill the storage array to 75%.. That is plenty to make it through the night and put plenty of mileage on the car every day.
If i do need powerdraw from the grid : fine. the net metering will reclaim that in summer.

[free_electron]

In the UK with an EV I rarely use over 400kWh electricity in a month ... this is with a 3 bedroom detached house (gas heating, A/C in summer using portable units), just under 1000 sq ft.

All I can say is, wow, Americans use a lot of energy.

1700 sq ft home. 5 months where it is over 100 degrees F ... no gas. electric only. my house is one of the smallest on the block.
And yes i have half a meter blown-in insulation in the attic and triple pane ir blocking glass ... and rockwool in all the exterior walls.
And switching off the AC while not home is impossible .. both my wife and i work from home with this covid situation ... so we are home 24/7 ...

[maginnovision]

About the same size house but it's a house in the San Fernando valley. Summer 6 months of the year(no, that's not global warming, it's the valley). The house was built in the 60's though. We'd basically have to tear it down and rebuild to get any sort of insulation. There is no attic just vaulted ceilings then the roof absorbing heat from the sun, stucco exterior. Gas oven And water heater but neither of those gets much use(about 120/yr natural gas for a family of 4). Double pane insulated windows we installed throughout. Quotes for solar have been incredibly high from every company and won't even cover our AC(apparently the roof shape and surrounding trees kill that dream).

[rsjsouza]

Yeah, houses here are quite expensive to run, especially due to the central A/C and the poor quality of construction. In Brasil we had fans everywhere and window AC units in the bedrooms for sleep.

I have a similar scenario here; the weather is hot from March 1^st through September 30^th and from July/Aug the temperatures average 38°C (42°C peaks for two or three weeks). 2300ft² two-story house with blown insulation and double-pane windows. Four people (two kids) all the time at home due to Covid.

[tom66]

Yes I suppose in the UK we are 'lucky' that our summer days are rarely above 25C though in Cambridgeshire we have had up to 37-38C on some days.   25C does not require much A/C power to keep cool.    I work from home a lot now so we now have two portable ACs,  before COVID we did not worry about this because by the time we got back from work the house had cooled enough, and on weekends we tend to go for walks or use the garden instead.   COVID really has changed a lot.

[Marco]

no , i will be paying 250$ a month flat fee for the installation.

Man the market is really driving down the margins on installers if they can do something as complex at that for that cost .... capitalism, it works.

[SilverSolder]

[...] a somewhat high electricity bill (1MWh/mo at $250 [...]

That seems very cheap for 1MWh?

Actually, I was completely wrong (confused with winter season). It is, in fact, $280 for 2.6MWh. So, the financials are even further away from a break even.

1 cent per KWh?  I could only dream...   -  The best I ever see in the North East is six or seven times that.

[SilverSolder]

In the UK with an EV I rarely use over 400kWh electricity in a month ... this is with a 3 bedroom detached house (gas heating, A/C in summer using portable units), just under 1000 sq ft.

All I can say is, wow, Americans use a lot of energy.

UK climate is milder for more of the year...  and houses are smaller, with better insulation. 

US houses were (apparently) designed in an era when it was envisioned that fusion would be invented shortly, so energy would be free!

[trobbins]

free_electron, how have you modified your daily loads to time align them to when solar power is available?  Apart from conscious decisions and scheduling to shift some practical loads to daytime hours, one aspect that is screaming out for some automation is for air-conditioning to have a temperature setting that is controlled by the grid-export, such that the house provides some thermal storage of that excess energy exported to grid.  Yes this has nothing to do with a sustained grid outage, but does have everything to do with ROI.

[free_electron]

free_electron, how have you modified your daily loads to time align them to when solar power is available?  Apart from conscious decisions and scheduling to shift some practical loads to daytime hours, one aspect that is screaming out for some automation is for air-conditioning to have a temperature setting that is controlled by the grid-export, such that the house provides some thermal storage of that excess energy exported to grid.  Yes this has nothing to do with a sustained grid outage, but does have everything to do with ROI.

i haven't. i don't have the system yet. 2 more weeks ...
but i don't really plan on doing such things. Just make the system large enough so you don't have to do those things
i win anyway. compared to my current bills of 480+ $ in summertime i will pay half of that. anything else is icing on the cake. i have the cake.

- creature comfort is not to be touched. i will not make concessions to the inside temperature at any given point.

i will tweak a few things though
- washer / dryer cycle : run that when there is lots of 'excess' power ( provided we are home of course. i do not like running machines while away. especially dryers and ovens... in summertime : laundry gets dryed outside)
- water boiler for shower : same : run when lots of excess energy. the tank is well insulated so it can hold warm water for 24 hours. if i have roof space over i may toss this out and go to a solar boiler. i have not found a water boiler with a 'control' system. in the sense : an input that says 'you can heat now'. such a thing would be great in combination with the energy controller. i could let the tesla app control the boiler. there may be a way to do this using ifttt. if the 'excess power' is higher than x for longer than y : start a heating cycle. the boiler would start and only stop when the water is hot . maybe a business idea : water boilers that have a start/stop input. The system would need an override though. if, at the end of the day the water is still not hot : kick in anyway.
-poolpump : run during peak production time. now it runs at night to use cheap power. the pump needs to run about 9 hours in a 24 hour period. the chlorination system is salt based so there needs to be circulation for the converter to create chlorine from the salt.
- car charging : excess daytime (provided home) or from storage.

The whole storage allocation i need to figure out. this will be a learning experience. the idea is that : come 2am , we will know what is required till sunset. ( all the heavy loads will be guaranteed off , except airco / heating ) so the packs can start dumping into the cars. that gives me 6 hours to 'transfer'. assuming half is available : that's 25kw/h i can move. easy to do in 6 hours.

[Marco]

It's a shame heat pump systems aren't designed for doing both AC+heating in a short timeframe (ie. with two buffer tanks). Could run the input for the boiler through a heat exchanger with the hot water from the heat pump.

[CatalinaWOW]

Maintaining the power lines is the easy answer, but it isn't.

Power is a public utility, so almost all places in the US there is a government body that sets utility rates.  They are beholden to voters and thus set the rates as low as they can get away with.  Sometimes with data to support the decision, sometimes not.  Throw in profit motive on the utility side and you have two powerful entities both working against maintenance.

And even when you have money for maintenance, you can't always do it.  A big part of maintenance is trimming foliage away from power lines.  Growing things are programmed genetically to search for sunlight, and in wooded areas the best source of sunlight is that clear strip along power lines.  So around here a tree trimming crew goes through about twice a decade cutting things back.  But as I found while they were doing that where it crosses my property, the utility easement doesn't give them the right to trim if the property owner doesn't agree.  There are several holdouts in my area that won't allow the trimming, for whatever reason.  Some are weird greenies not wanting to cut anything.  Some don't like the aesthetics.  Some just don't want anyone messing around on their property.  Guess who gets the blame though when a fire starts?

[maginnovision]

Not allowing cutting is so odd. I'm happy when they come down and cut my trees.

[David Hess]

This is just one more data point indicating man caused climate change is occurring.

It is a data point for the incompetence of a single party state government.

[james_s]

In the UK with an EV I rarely use over 400kWh electricity in a month ... this is with a 3 bedroom detached house (gas heating, A/C in summer using portable units), just under 1000 sq ft.

All I can say is, wow, Americans use a lot of energy.

Some do, but I don't know how they compare on average. PSE supplies both my electricity and natural gas and my bill is around $65/mo in the summer and $130/mo in the winter. That's also a 3 bedroom detached house of ~2200 sqft, gas heating and central AC in the summer. If I run the hot tub that doubles but I don't keep that filled year round and haven't used it in a couple years.

[SilverSolder]

In the UK with an EV I rarely use over 400kWh electricity in a month ... this is with a 3 bedroom detached house (gas heating, A/C in summer using portable units), just under 1000 sq ft.

All I can say is, wow, Americans use a lot of energy.

Some do, but I don't know how they compare on average. PSE supplies both my electricity and natural gas and my bill is around $65/mo in the summer and $130/mo in the winter. That's also a 3 bedroom detached house of ~2200 sqft, gas heating and central AC in the summer. If I run the hot tub that doubles but I don't keep that filled year round and haven't used it in a couple years.

That's pretty frugal.  I struggle to get below 1,500KWh per month here, any month.  -  A/C, dehumidifiers, electric heating in some rooms, etc., are probably the worst offenders.

[james_s]

Dehumidifiers and electric heat will kill you on the energy bill. A dehumidifier is just an air conditioner that doesn't vent the warm air outside, and electric resistance heat costs a fortune. It's much more efficient to burn the fuel in your house for heat than it is to burn it at a power plant, convert a fraction of that heat to electricity, burn up some of that in transmission and convert what's left over back into heat.

[maginnovision]

It certainly doesn't help to be locked down still, at least here. All work is being done from home, full classroom setup. Kids stuck indoors most of the day. We're using about double what we were this time last year(about 1.2MWh). My wife is so worried I'll die she barely even likes to take the kids to the beach when it's sunny and there is 100 feet or so between groups.

[Electrodynamic]

maginnovision
It certainly doesn't help to be locked down still, at least here. All work is being done from home, full classroom setup. Kids stuck indoors most of the day. We're using about double what we were this time last year(about 1.2MWh). My wife is so worried I'll die she barely even likes to take the kids to the beach when it's sunny and there is 100 feet or so between groups.

Go to the beach!.
Here in Canada the average winter is near -20C with the odd week or two near - 25 to -30C. I have a backup generator and four 5 gallon gerry cans on standby to run the furnace, fridge/freezer and LED lighting. I was thinking about CHP as an alternative and I may as well use the heat the power stations are blowing out there stack.

Regards

[vk6zgo]

This is an instance where people who have BEV are screwed even if they have solar panels.  With the grid off-line how do you charge your car if you have a BEV. 

So is almost every ICE car owner in that same situation.
Sure, keep some petrol handy, but how many do that, you can round it down to zero percent.

Yeh, the hand cranked petrol pumps that were around when I was a kid are gone, in even the most remote places.

[tom66]

Dehumidifiers and electric heat will kill you on the energy bill. A dehumidifier is just an air conditioner that doesn't vent the warm air outside, and electric resistance heat costs a fortune. It's much more efficient to burn the fuel in your house for heat than it is to burn it at a power plant, convert a fraction of that heat to electricity, burn up some of that in transmission and convert what's left over back into heat.

Depends what you mean by efficiency - the source of your energy matters.   If that electricity is supplied by hydro, wind, even solar then it is still better than burning gas in your home.

For instance in the UK we have approx. 30% renewable, 30% nuclear, 40% fossil fuel power (5% coal, 90% nat. gas, 5% other).  So, using electric heating is, on average, better for the environment than burning natural gas in a boiler.  It is, however, considerably more expensive.

Heat pumps are almost always better though, provided the environmental conditions allow.

[free_electron]

It's a shame heat pump systems aren't designed for doing both AC+heating in a short timeframe (ie. with two buffer tanks). Could run the input for the boiler through a heat exchanger with the hot water from the heat pump.

please explain. i have a heatpump system. there are no buffer tanks. It's two coils ( heat exchangers ) . on in the ductwork inside the house , one outside. a crossover valve directs the flow of the thermal liquid. it's a simply scroll compressor, 2 coils and a valve ( and two fans to force air over the coils. ) works very well. even in 110 degree outside i can make it 72 inside

[coppice]

It's a shame heat pump systems aren't designed for doing both AC+heating in a short timeframe (ie. with two buffer tanks). Could run the input for the boiler through a heat exchanger with the hot water from the heat pump.

please explain. i have a heatpump system. there are no buffer tanks. It's two coils ( heat exchangers ) . on in the ductwork inside the house , one outside. a crossover valve directs the flow of the thermal liquid. it's a simply scroll compressor, 2 coils and a valve ( and two fans to force air over the coils. ) works very well. even in 110 degree outside i can make it 72 inside

I think he's referring to the lack of designs that will dynamically dump the heat extracted from your home in summer into a hot water storage tank.

[SilverSolder]

This is an instance where people who have BEV are screwed even if they have solar panels.  With the grid off-line how do you charge your car if you have a BEV. 

So is almost every ICE car owner in that same situation.
Sure, keep some petrol handy, but how many do that, you can round it down to zero percent.

Yeh, the hand cranked petrol pumps that were around when I was a kid are gone, in even the most remote places.

The conversation keeps coming back to petrol stations not working during power outages and needing hand pumps...    but the reality is that during the last power outage around here,  at least half of them remained open... selling petrol as usual, based on the idea of having a backup generator to run the business -  not as if these guys don't have enough fuel to run a generator, right?

The one thing that did not work, though, was accepting electronic payments.  It was cash only...   so that's something to think about during an extended outage:   Have some cash on hand.

[SilverSolder]

Dehumidifiers and electric heat will kill you on the energy bill. A dehumidifier is just an air conditioner that doesn't vent the warm air outside, and electric resistance heat costs a fortune. It's much more efficient to burn the fuel in your house for heat than it is to burn it at a power plant, convert a fraction of that heat to electricity, burn up some of that in transmission and convert what's left over back into heat.

Yes, I really need to measure the consumption of these various items and get to grips with which ones are the "low hanging fruit".

[tom66]

It's a shame heat pump systems aren't designed for doing both AC+heating in a short timeframe (ie. with two buffer tanks). Could run the input for the boiler through a heat exchanger with the hot water from the heat pump.

please explain. i have a heatpump system. there are no buffer tanks. It's two coils ( heat exchangers ) . on in the ductwork inside the house , one outside. a crossover valve directs the flow of the thermal liquid. it's a simply scroll compressor, 2 coils and a valve ( and two fans to force air over the coils. ) works very well. even in 110 degree outside i can make it 72 inside

I think he's referring to the lack of designs that will dynamically dump the heat extracted from your home in summer into a hot water storage tank.

The likely problem with that is you need a 70C+ heating element to get water up (within say 6-7 hours) to 55-60C which is the 'safe' storage/piping temperature (no bacteria growth).
Most heatpump systems don't have a hot side that is that hot even when cooling aggressively, so you would need a secondary heat pump to boost that heat.  Certainly would be worth it for some systems, but would add considerable cost.

[Marco]

please explain. i have a heatpump system. there are no buffer tanks.

Most reversible heat pumps here support buffer tanks, they don't absolutely require them but it increases efficiency. If you want to use them for cooling though, you lose the ability to do heating ... which is a shame.

Ideally you'd have a system which could always use the heatpump to reduce power requirements for making hot water (the heat pump makes it warm, then some resistive heating to make it hot). Then you can just go all PV and not waste space on evacuated tube collectors.

[free_electron]

Ideally you'd have a system which could always use the heatpump to reduce power requirements for making hot water (the heat pump makes it warm, then some resistive heating to make it hot).

That's what the machine i am looking at does. it is a hybrid. It uses the heatpump to get to a certain point, then a 5kw heater kicks in to do the rest.
https://www.aosmithatlowes.com/products/water-heaters/electric-water-heaters/hp10-50h45dv/

[Marco]

It's just inelegant to have two heat pumps, when one could do it all in theory.

[Someone]

In the UK with an EV I rarely use over 400kWh electricity in a month ... this is with a 3 bedroom detached house (gas heating, A/C in summer using portable units), just under 1000 sq ft.

All I can say is, wow, Americans use a lot of energy.

Some do, but I don't know how they compare on average. PSE supplies both my electricity and natural gas and my bill is around $65/mo in the summer and $130/mo in the winter. That's also a 3 bedroom detached house of ~2200 sqft, gas heating and central AC in the summer. If I run the hot tub that doubles but I don't keep that filled year round and haven't used it in a couple years.

On average, Americans just use much more energy than other comparable nations, and don't see it.

The below plot is from IEA 2018 "final consumption" data for household energy (all sources) and transport (all domestic transport including freight/aviation/etc, but excluding international). So this is the energy use of the entire country minus international links, industry, and commerce direct uses, averaged per capita. Noting these are significantly lower than the figures "Sustainable Energy — without the hot air" makes for daily consumption estimates (even after accounting for embodied energy accounting differences).

[NiHaoMike]

The likely problem with that is you need a 70C+ heating element to get water up (within say 6-7 hours) to 55-60C which is the 'safe' storage/piping temperature (no bacteria growth).

Generally not a problem in the city where the water is chlorinated (actually using chloramine, more effective than pure chlorine), but for well water, ozone or UVC would be more energy efficient.

[f4eru]

The below plot is from IEA 2018 "final consumption" data for household energy (all sources) and transport

Crazy... What a potential for improvement.
And we French and Germans are no angels.....

[tszaboo]

Maintaining the power lines is the easy answer, but it isn't.

Power is a public utility, so almost all places in the US there is a government body that sets utility rates.  They are beholden to voters and thus set the rates as low as they can get away with.  Sometimes with data to support the decision, sometimes not.  Throw in profit motive on the utility side and you have two powerful entities both working against maintenance.

And even when you have money for maintenance, you can't always do it.  A big part of maintenance is trimming foliage away from power lines.  Growing things are programmed genetically to search for sunlight, and in wooded areas the best source of sunlight is that clear strip along power lines.  So around here a tree trimming crew goes through about twice a decade cutting things back.  But as I found while they were doing that where it crosses my property, the utility easement doesn't give them the right to trim if the property owner doesn't agree.  There are several holdouts in my area that won't allow the trimming, for whatever reason.  Some are weird greenies not wanting to cut anything.  Some don't like the aesthetics.  Some just don't want anyone messing around on their property.  Guess who gets the blame though when a fire starts?

You have your power lines -going to the houses- above ground???
Where do you live, mid 20 century Italy?
Do you also have aqueducts?

[coppice]

Maintaining the power lines is the easy answer, but it isn't.

Power is a public utility, so almost all places in the US there is a government body that sets utility rates.  They are beholden to voters and thus set the rates as low as they can get away with.  Sometimes with data to support the decision, sometimes not.  Throw in profit motive on the utility side and you have two powerful entities both working against maintenance.

And even when you have money for maintenance, you can't always do it.  A big part of maintenance is trimming foliage away from power lines.  Growing things are programmed genetically to search for sunlight, and in wooded areas the best source of sunlight is that clear strip along power lines.  So around here a tree trimming crew goes through about twice a decade cutting things back.  But as I found while they were doing that where it crosses my property, the utility easement doesn't give them the right to trim if the property owner doesn't agree.  There are several holdouts in my area that won't allow the trimming, for whatever reason.  Some are weird greenies not wanting to cut anything.  Some don't like the aesthetics.  Some just don't want anyone messing around on their property.  Guess who gets the blame though when a fire starts?

You have your power lines -going to the houses- above ground???
Where do you live, mid 20 century Italy?
Do you also have aqueducts?

Outside dense urban areas, a lot of the power lines to subscribers in the US are above ground.

[bdunham7]

You have your power lines -going to the houses- above ground???

The single county that I live in, which is a subdivision of one of the 50 states, is geographically larger than your entire country.  Undergrounding would take a more digging per installation than would be practical.  My house is about 60 years old and the power service is more or less original from that time.

Do you also have aqueducts?

Yes.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/California_Aqueduct

[james_s]

You have your power lines -going to the houses- above ground???
Where do you live, mid 20 century Italy?
Do you also have aqueducts?

Vast swaths of the USA (and Canada) have overhead power. I think people who live in other parts of the world often don't grasp just how physically large this country is, and how many small towns and communities there are that are spread out. Then there is that much of the country was electrified earlier than some other parts of the world back when things were much more sparse than they are today even. It would cost astronomical sums of money to put all of the power lines underground and that is not a panacea, underground lines while less prone to storm damage are prone to other types of damage and far more expensive to diagnose and repair. The topography and climate has a significant effect on whether underground lines make sense. In this region the soil is glacial till that is full of rocks, many of them sharp. It's also very wet and landslides are not uncommon.

Google Earth is great for exploring and getting a feel for things. For example this street in Van Nuys CA on the outskirts of Los Angeles passes by All Electronics, a surplus dealer I've ordered from since I was a kid and visited several times when I was in the area.

https://www.google.com/maps/@34.1794474,-118.4584135,3a,75y,287.82h,100.44t/data=!3m7!1e1!3m5!1sjntaulC6nPAFPK9G6Diiaw!2e0!6s%2F%2Fgeo1.ggpht.com%2Fcbk%3Fpanoid%3DjntaulC6nPAFPK9G6Diiaw%26output%3Dthumbnail%26cb_client%3Dmaps_sv.tactile.gps%26thumb%3D2%26w%3D203%26h%3D100%26yaw%3D348.4539%26pitch%3D0%26thumbfov%3D100!7i16384!8i8192

That is fairly typical of a light commericial/industrial area in an older part of town. You'll see 3 phase power on one side of the street and below that telephone and cable TV lines. On the other side there is a pair of higher voltage 3 phase transmission lines passing through, most streets you'd see lines just on one side of the road.

This is near where I live:
https://www.google.com/maps/@47.7614305,-122.1063198,3a,75y,271.33h,101.32t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1s-d709bCa1gUCXt81S6G10A!2e0!7i16384!8i8192

There you'll see 3 phase power on one side of the street with what looks like cable TV below it and on the other side of the street I believe that's phone lines. If you follow that road into the towns it connects between you'll see that the lines go underground near the edge of the downtown area. This sort of thing is fairly typical all over the country, my neighborhood itself has underground power but most built prior to the mid-late 70s have overhead right to the houses. The biggest problem is trees and tree limbs falling on the lines, but the underground stuff is not impervious. Several years ago a tree fell across my street in a wind storm and while it didn't affect the power, the roots did break a water main when it came down. It could have just as easily torn up underground power lines.

[trobbins]

In oz a lot of bushfire mitigation changes have been rolled out.  One area of rural town main distribution focus (eg. 11kV type level) has been on 3ph feeders that get a short to ground (either above or below ground distribution) where the affected phase is pulled to ground, but the other 2 phases have to survive being forced to double their operating level (although they are rated for that).  There has been a lot of effort over decades to avoid nearby trees from impacting distribution lines.  There are a lot of redundant ring circuits, where sections can be de-energised, but the majority of customers still remain powered.  It's not something the distribution operators want to do, but liability and political costs have forced expensive changes for both maintenance and mitigation.

[CatalinaWOW]

Expense for underground here is enormous.  I don't know the actual costs.  When I interned for a power company in university it was ~$12/meter in loess soil for low voltage distribution lines (<<1000 V).  About 3 times that under trying conditions (under pavement, difficult soil etc.)  Given inflation since that time the number would be about ten times as much.

Now in my area I am in one of the densest local areas and it is about 100 meters to my next neighbor.  More typical along this distribution branch is about three times that.  Soil is basalt covered with rocky loam, with loam depth varying from 0 to about 1 meter.  Don't know how deep you put an intermediate voltage (13.6 kV) underground line like the one that goes through my property, but it is probably => 1 meter.  So that 100 meter segment would cost +/- 3 dB of $50000.  If my entire average electric bill of $140 were dedicated to that installation it would take over three centuries to recover that expense.

So while my numbers are largely speculative, they probably aren't too far off, based on the low rate of conversion to underground distribution in my area of the country.  The only places that I have seen power largely move underground are densely populated urban areas.  When you have 100+ customers every 25 meters the economics are far different than when it is one customer every 100 meters.

[Cerebus]

Vast swaths of the USA (and Canada) have overhead power. I think people who live in other parts of the world often don't grasp just how physically large this country is, and how many small towns and communities there are that are spread out.

I don't think it's that that surprises people. It's not a question of scale - certainly here in the UK overhead transmission is the norm between towns and in rural areas, but in urban areas underground transmission is the norm, even in the smallest towns. I've seen transformers and supplies on poles in the street in North America (both in the US and in Canada) in places that are geographically  and demographically equivalent to places in Europe where the local supply is all underground. I've friends in Vancouver that are much closer to being 'downtown' than I am here in London and they have a transformer on a pole, we have completely underground*.

Take Steyning, a sleepy village in Sussex, population under 6,000, surrounded by countryside. Not an overhead power line in sight in the village (overhead phone lines though). Gunnerside, Yorkshire, about 20 dwellings, population at a guess less than 200, surrounded by countryside, all electricity underground. In either place, drive around the local roads and you'll see medium voltage distribution on poles and probably aren't too far from high volatge distribution on pylons.

It seems that here (and much of Europe) the moment you cross the boundary between "country" side and "settlement" (no matter how small) the power goes underground. In the US and Canada you just don't think like that and keep it on poles in the vast majority of places.

Edit: *Just to make it clear, the area  of Vancouver I'm thinking of is easily as densely packed with dwellings as where I am here. There isn't any sense of that area being more 'spread out' than London.

[f4eru]

power lines above ground exist also quite a lot in older towns in France.
but we get insulated twisted 3 phase service in that case, and countrary to US, transformers are on the ground.
I am in an underground area.

[SilverSolder]

[...] In the US and Canada you just don't think like that and keep it on poles in the vast majority of places.

And it all blows down in storms, causes fires, etc. etc.

It seems to me that it is due to the traditional availability of cheaper labour in the US/CDN...  it was cheaper to fix the downed wires than making underground installations.  The opposite is true in Europe, where paying people to constantly run around and fix stuff that shouldn't need fixing would be too expensive.  I think US/Canada is getting closer to the European model as time moves on, though.

[Cerebus]

As someone who has occasionally had to pay, well sign the bills, for utility street works in my ISP days I can testify as to how horribly expensive it is to run cables or ducting in the streets. In my day it was circa £100 a metre to bury stuff in soft verges, if you had to dig up and resurface a metalled road it went up to about £300 a metre. Ouch! It's not just the digging, it's all the planning so you don't clobber all the other buried services.

[CatalinaWOW]

Vast swaths of the USA (and Canada) have overhead power. I think people who live in other parts of the world often don't grasp just how physically large this country is, and how many small towns and communities there are that are spread out.

I don't think it's that that surprises people. It's not a question of scale - certainly here in the UK overhead transmission is the norm between towns and in rural areas, but in urban areas underground transmission is the norm, even in the smallest towns. I've seen transformers and supplies on poles in the street in North America (both in the US and in Canada) in places that are geographically  and demographically equivalent to places in Europe where the local supply is all underground. I've friends in Vancouver that are much closer to being 'downtown' than I am here in London and they have a transformer on a pole, we have completely underground*.

Take Steyning, a sleepy village in Sussex, population under 6,000, surrounded by countryside. Not an overhead power line in sight in the village (overhead phone lines though). Gunnerside, Yorkshire, about 20 dwellings, population at a guess less than 200, surrounded by countryside, all electricity underground. In either place, drive around the local roads and you'll see medium voltage distribution on poles and probably aren't too far from high volatge distribution on pylons.

It seems that here (and much of Europe) the moment you cross the boundary between "country" side and "settlement" (no matter how small) the power goes underground. In the US and Canada you just don't think like that and keep it on poles in the vast majority of places.

Edit: *Just to make it clear, the area  of Vancouver I'm thinking of is easily as densely packed with dwellings as where I am here. There isn't any sense of that area being more 'spread out' than London.

A look at the satellite picture of Steyning provides the answer.  Houses are tightly spaced everywhere in town.  Although there are largish back lots, the house to house spacing is small. ~15 meters.   So customers/meter of line is relatively high.   Much like developments in the US in the last 20-30 years.  In these new developments power is most often underground.  Even though center to center spacing is a bit higher - perhaps ~20 meters.  While high density suburban housing exists in parts of the US and has overhead power it tends to be pretty old.

[coppice]

Take Steyning, a sleepy village in Sussex, population under 6,000, surrounded by countryside. Not an overhead power line in sight in the village (overhead phone lines though). Gunnerside, Yorkshire, about 20 dwellings, population at a guess less than 200, surrounded by countryside, all electricity underground. In either place, drive around the local roads and you'll see medium voltage distribution on poles and probably aren't too far from high volatge distribution on pylons.

Take our village. A sleepy little place a couple of km from York, with a population of about 500. Our power is underground but other power runs on poles down the main street. I have no idea how that hybrid arrangement came about. From the end of the village overhead lines run to the farmhouses beyond. A huge number of farmhouses in the UK still have overhead power. When I was a kid in suburban London there was still power above ground. There wasn't much left by the time I grew up. The real eyesore was the above ground telephone wiring. I don't mean just the wires spreading out from a pole to individual houses, which is still the norm for older houses. The feed along the street was all overground, as individual pairs, like: https://i.kinja-img.com/gawker-media/image/upload/c_fit,f_auto,g_center,pg_1,q_60,w_1465/stpwndthmby4lpsr77ge.jpg . Again, that was all gone by the time I was a teenager.

What is different in the US, and the thing that seems to explain why power cuts are a way of life outside really big urban areas, is they don't seem to care about the power being on poles. In the UK people tend to look at overhead power and think it will eventually go underground. There seems to be no such expectation in the US.

[Cerebus]

A look at the satellite picture of Steyning provides the answer.  Houses are tightly spaced everywhere in town.  Although there are largish back lots, the house to house spacing is small. ~15 meters.   So customers/meter of line is relatively high.   Much like developments in the US in the last 20-30 years.  In these new developments power is most often underground.  Even though center to center spacing is a bit higher - perhaps ~20 meters.  While high density suburban housing exists in parts of the US and has overhead power it tends to be pretty old.

I was just randomly picking places I know that are in rural islands and therefore aren't obvious candidates for underground power, older rural housing does tend to be quite small but that isn't the driving thing. We just don't seem to like using overhead power if it's at all avoidable. The only places in the UK I have regularly seen overhead lines coming onto the property are isolated rural dwellings, typically farms, perhaps a garage on an otherwise empty stretch of road. There are probably 'townies' in the UK who have never seen an overhead power cable going into a property. Even places where the dwellings are widely spaced the norm is underground. I suspect it's just a difference in style, a preference for not "making the place look untidy", or possibly at the instance of local planners/planning laws. It doesn't seem to matter whether the area is old or new. Here the cables stay buried until there are hundreds of metres between isolated dwellings/buildings, thus to the British eye (and I suspect many Europeans) to those who notice it it just looks odd, perhaps even a little 'hicksville' as the only place you really see it here is in rural areas.

[Cerebus]

What is different in the US, and the thing that seems to explain why power cuts are a way of life outside really big urban areas, is they don't seem to care about the power being on poles. In the UK people tend to look at overhead power and think it will eventually go underground. There seems to be no such expectation in the US.

Exactly this. If I see overhead transmission I do indeed "think it will eventually go underground" unless there's a farmhouse involved.

[themadhippy]

One of the triggers for change was the replacement of street lighting,it was common to hang the street lamp   off the  pole that also carried the power,when these were replaced to  stand alone street  lighting,  the trench works needed made it cost effective to drop the overhead cabling into the same hole
Something  thing that may confuse many is they see a wooden pole with a single cable from pole to pole with lines going off to individual houses and assume its telephone as they remember the electric poles with  4 wires,not any more the old 4 wire system is slowly being replaced with aerial bundled cable

[james_s]

Exactly this. If I see overhead transmission I do indeed "think it will eventually go underground" unless there's a farmhouse involved.

That thought would never even occur to me. Putting the lines underground is tremendously expensive, both to install it and if later maintenance is required, and there's the geographic thing, the US has states that are larger than the entire UK with far lower population density. The cost of re-doing all of that existing infrastructure to move it underground would be astronomical, it's a complete non-starter in most areas. Overhead lines have always been a thing here, I don't think most people even notice them or care, certainly they've never bothered me. Power outages in most suburban areas are pretty rare, in the 15 years I've lived in this house I can probably count the number of power outages longer than 30 minutes on one hand, it's one of those things where every couple of years the power might go out for a few hours during a big storm. I've got a portable generator so I don't really care, it's only a minor inconvenience. I pay around 8 cents per kWh which is as I recall around 1/3 or less what my friend in the UK pays. I'd rather put up with a power outage now and then than pay 3 times as much for electricity and I think it would have to go up a lot more than that in many areas. Additionally in the forested regions where overhead lines are most vulnerable to tree damage, underground lines are also vulnerable to tree damage from the root balls. I've only visited a small part of the UK but I don't recall seeing the sort of 100+ foot tall evergreen trees that are prolific here, and UK houses are very small and very densely packed by American standards.

[DougSpindler]

Power is now back on.  We were without power for just over three days.  One thing I found is how poorly insulated refrigerators are.  We have an energy saving gas water heater which doesn’t work when the power is out either.  There’s an exhaust gas value which is closed when the gas is not heating the water.  It requires power to open the value.  No power, value can’t open, no hot water.

Sucks having 20 solar panels - No power from the grid, no power from the solar panels.  The inverter has the option to add one AC 120v outlet max output of I think 5 amps.  Cost for the module was something like $2,000.  Grossly over priced.

All of this because the power company is more interested in paying the execs yearly bonuses in the millions of dollars and man caused climate change.  In California where I live we can see a change in our yearly weather patterns which is the definition of climate change.

[tszaboo]

Exactly this. If I see overhead transmission I do indeed "think it will eventually go underground" unless there's a farmhouse involved.

That thought would never even occur to me. Putting the lines underground is tremendously expensive, both to install it and if later maintenance is required, and there's the geographic thing, the US has states that are larger than the entire UK with far lower population density. The cost of re-doing all of that existing infrastructure to move it underground would be astronomical, it's a complete non-starter in most areas. Overhead lines have always been a thing here, I don't think most people even notice them or care, certainly they've never bothered me. Power outages in most suburban areas are pretty rare, in the 15 years I've lived in this house I can probably count the number of power outages longer than 30 minutes on one hand, it's one of those things where every couple of years the power might go out for a few hours during a big storm. I've got a portable generator so I don't really care, it's only a minor inconvenience. I pay around 8 cents per kWh which is as I recall around 1/3 or less what my friend in the UK pays. I'd rather put up with a power outage now and then than pay 3 times as much for electricity and I think it would have to go up a lot more than that in many areas. Additionally in the forested regions where overhead lines are most vulnerable to tree damage, underground lines are also vulnerable to tree damage from the root balls. I've only visited a small part of the UK but I don't recall seeing the sort of 100+ foot tall evergreen trees that are prolific here, and UK houses are very small and very densely packed by American standards.

Power lines are underground in urban and suburban areas. Of course you shouldn't put all the wires underground, that would be very expensive. On the other hand it is an eyesore, and more likely to get damaged.
The connection costs of a house, be it above ground or below ground is a one time cost. It doesnt really require any maintenance if it is below ground. And the one time cost goes into your mortgage, and becomes value of the house. Although the way I see it (large parts) americans dont seem to invest too much into their houses, it seems to me as it is much more important to have a lot of square feet, rather than using quality meterials (brick) or walls that are not made of paper.
Not that I'm happy with the way houses built here. Isolation is an afterthought, and garages are rarely built, or cannot fit a car AND open the door of the car. And super tiny rooms.

[coppice]

Exactly this. If I see overhead transmission I do indeed "think it will eventually go underground" unless there's a farmhouse involved.

That thought would never even occur to me. Putting the lines underground is tremendously expensive, both to install it and if later maintenance is required, and there's the geographic thing, the US has states that are larger than the entire UK with far lower population density. The cost of re-doing all of that existing infrastructure to move it underground would be astronomical, it's a complete non-starter in most areas. Overhead lines have always been a thing here, I don't think most people even notice them or care, certainly they've never bothered me. Power outages in most suburban areas are pretty rare, in the 15 years I've lived in this house I can probably count the number of power outages longer than 30 minutes on one hand, it's one of those things where every couple of years the power might go out for a few hours during a big storm. I've got a portable generator so I don't really care, it's only a minor inconvenience. I pay around 8 cents per kWh which is as I recall around 1/3 or less what my friend in the UK pays. I'd rather put up with a power outage now and then than pay 3 times as much for electricity and I think it would have to go up a lot more than that in many areas. Additionally in the forested regions where overhead lines are most vulnerable to tree damage, underground lines are also vulnerable to tree damage from the root balls. I've only visited a small part of the UK but I don't recall seeing the sort of 100+ foot tall evergreen trees that are prolific here, and UK houses are very small and very densely packed by American standards.

In the UK they like to put all services underground, but do it in the most destructive way. Take a road with a grass verge, and the need for a new underground power cable, or telecoms cable, or water pipe, or gas pipe, or sewer pipe. They rarely dig up the verge to lay that new facility. The did up the concrete or tarmac. Then a few weeks later another one of those services might need to go in, and they'll dig up the tarmac again. They don't coordinate to minimise disruption (and cost) by laying multiple services in one go, and they maximise the damage to the roads. There are specific roads which are a meme in traffic reports because they are almost permanently being dug up for one service or another. The poor state of many UK roads is due to the endless digging up and refilling, which never leaves the road in the best condition.

[Alti]

Power is now back on.

It looks like you have monopoly there in California.
The cost of blackouts is transfered to the end customers and not to the distribution company stock owners.
This effectively raises the cost of gridkWh in the direction of PVkWh (which is still expensive). Ultimately in perfect world an equilibrium is set with gridkWh = PVkWh, market becomes divided and monopoly is lost. In a perfect world.

PVkWh is dropping, distrubution company revenues shrink, they start cutting expenses on maintenance introducing "optimization of costs"..
If I were a monopolyst, I'd consider raising the equlibrium as high as possible, by raising PVkWh.
I'd start from legislation. PV has a weak point that it is intermittent.
So I'd focus on either the batteries or feed-in tariff.
And I'd start lobbying against possibility of sharing this PV energy among neighbors locally..
Then I'd impose restrictions targeting back-up generators.
I'd also start some PV discouraging campaigns.
But that is just greedy me.

[tom66]

It seems that here (and much of Europe) the moment you cross the boundary between "country" side and "settlement" (no matter how small) the power goes underground. In the US and Canada you just don't think like that and keep it on poles in the vast majority of places.

I lived in a sleepy village for most of my childhood in Hampshire, and the power there is all overground;  houses supplied from a transmission cable running down the street on wooden poles, with every "block" of homes switching phases.  (One given group of houses, e.g. a semi-detached block, usually shares a phase and circuit, although each home is fused and metered independently.)  Most of that village was built after the WWII boom.  There's definitely a mix across the country, though underground is certainly more common.

What we tend to see more commonly is 11kV distribution under pavements/roads and anything 33kV or above goes on poles.  Small substations about the size of a single car garage provide 415V 3ph to the local area from the 11kV network.

A former colleague of mine worked for the electricity board in the 1960s as his first job and part of his job was reconductoring overhead lines.  Certain old copper lines were removed and replaced with aluminum - the cost of recovering the copper was enough to make the labour worthwhile.

[tom66]

Power is now back on.  We were without power for just over three days.  One thing I found is how poorly insulated refrigerators are.  We have an energy saving gas water heater which doesn’t work when the power is out either.  There’s an exhaust gas value which is closed when the gas is not heating the water.  It requires power to open the value.  No power, value can’t open, no hot water.

Sucks having 20 solar panels - No power from the grid, no power from the solar panels.  The inverter has the option to add one AC 120v outlet max output of I think 5 amps.  Cost for the module was something like $2,000.  Grossly over priced.

Can you not "trick" your grid tied inverter...

Service disconnect isolated: no grid connection (this is of course essential so linemen don't get electrocuted).  Ideally get a proper LOTO isolator installed.  Then connect a small generator to the now isolated grid connection (loads in house must be ~0).  Alternatively a true sine wave UPS might be usable here.   The solar inverter will 'grid tie' onto the generator and the solar system will provide most of the power and you will not need to burn much fuel to have most of your luxuries operating.

You will at least have power through the day when the sun is out and low power loads at night as long as you have petrol.

[Gyro]

It seems that here (and much of Europe) the moment you cross the boundary between "country" side and "settlement" (no matter how small) the power goes underground. In the US and Canada you just don't think like that and keep it on poles in the vast majority of places.

I lived in a sleepy village for most of my childhood in Hampshire, and the power there is all overground;  houses supplied from a transmission cable running down the street on wooden poles, with every "block" of homes switching phases.  (One given group of houses, e.g. a semi-detached block, usually shares a phase and circuit, although each home is fused and metered independently.)  Most of that village was built after the WWII boom.  There's definitely a mix across the country, though underground is certainly more common.

A good video than Big Clive did on UK overhead house supplies where they are still in service...

[NiHaoMike]

Sucks having 20 solar panels - No power from the grid, no power from the solar panels.  The inverter has the option to add one AC 120v outlet max output of I think 5 amps.  Cost for the module was something like $2,000.  Grossly over priced.

Check the DC voltage from the solar array. Probably is in the range of 150-400V which will run a switching power supply as is.

[SilverSolder]

Power is now back on.

It looks like you have monopoly there in California.
The cost of blackouts is transfered to the end customers and not to the distribution company stock owners.
This effectively raises the cost of gridkWh in the direction of PVkWh (which is still expensive). Ultimately in perfect world an equilibrium is set with gridkWh = PVkWh, market becomes divided and monopoly is lost. In a perfect world.

PVkWh is dropping, distrubution company revenues shrink, they start cutting expenses on maintenance introducing "optimization of costs"..
If I were a monopolyst, I'd consider raising the equlibrium as high as possible, by raising PVkWh.
I'd start from legislation. PV has a weak point that it is intermittent.
So I'd focus on either the batteries or feed-in tariff.
And I'd start lobbying against possibility of sharing this PV energy among neighbors locally..
Then I'd impose restrictions targeting back-up generators.
I'd also start some PV discouraging campaigns.
But that is just greedy me.

They could always hire some tobacco industry executives with long experience in presenting something bad as something good! 

[james_s]

Power lines are underground in urban and suburban areas. Of course you shouldn't put all the wires underground, that would be very expensive. On the other hand it is an eyesore, and more likely to get damaged.
The connection costs of a house, be it above ground or below ground is a one time cost. It doesnt really require any maintenance if it is below ground. And the one time cost goes into your mortgage, and becomes value of the house. Although the way I see it (large parts) americans dont seem to invest too much into their houses, it seems to me as it is much more important to have a lot of square feet, rather than using quality meterials (brick) or walls that are not made of paper.
Not that I'm happy with the way houses built here. Isolation is an afterthought, and garages are rarely built, or cannot fit a car AND open the door of the car. And super tiny rooms.

When new housing developments are built, the power typically is underground. It is rare to go back and retrofit houses built 45+ years ago to replace the overhead power with underground. As is typical here, my street has underground utilities, but the lines along the main arterial between towns are overhead, and I can see where the 7200V phase is tapped off and goes down a conduit to feed my neighborhood. As I said, I don't think most people notice overhead power or find it particularly bothersome. It's not likely to add anywhere near enough to the value of a house to recover the substantial one time cost to do so. When I was house hunting, whether the power was overhead or underground was not even on my list of deciding factors, I just don't really care one way or another. Most people, if they have the tens of thousands of dollars or whatever it costs are going to renovate the interior, add a room, get new flooring, new furniture, buy a new car or any number of other things instead. They would balk at spending all that money to relocate something they probably don't even notice unless someone points it out to them.

As for building materials, it's not really a cost issue. Brick is not used here for seismic reasons, only a fool would build a house out of brick in a quake zone, wood structures flex without cracking or crumbling. There are parts of the country where brick houses are common but if you see one on the West coast it's a facade over a timber structure. Interior walls are made of sheetrock covered wood, done properly they're very sturdy and it's relatively easy to run new wires and such in existing structures. There is of course a trend of newer houses being more cheaply built than older houses but that applies to virtually everything. Recently for example I was going to replace the handle on the sliding glass door to my back deck, I bought a new one that looked identical but when I had removed the old one and held them side by side the new one was made of much thinner material and was much lighter and just felt cheap. Ultimately I polished up the original one and refurbished it and returned the crappy new one. Houses here do tend to be bigger than necessary, chalk that up to culture I guess, I think anywhere you go you'll find people spending lots of money on status symbols of one sort or another.

[free_electron]

It's just inelegant to have two heat pumps, when one could do it all in theory.

true , but it is also much more troublesome if something goes wrong. i had a system that used the warm water in the waterheater to create heat for the house. if the waterheater goes down : no warm air in the house. such a heater has an additional heat exchanger and that silly extra coil pushed the price of the heater an additional 1000$ up !
i prefer compartimentalized systems. if one goes out the others keep running. it may not be elegant but redundancy is good

[free_electron]

Expense for underground here is enormous.  I don't know the actual costs.  When I interned for a power company in university it was ~$12/meter in loess soil for low voltage distribution lines (<<1000 V).  About 3 times that under trying conditions (under pavement, difficult soil etc.)  Given inflation since that time the number would be about ten times as much.

i have a 67 yard overhead cable coming from the transformer up the poly into the weatherhead. i asked the utility company if they could bury it ( it's unsightly and tree-trimming is an issue ) they quoted me about 15000$ and about 2 years to do the planning and permitting. fuck that ! the problem is they need trenching , a steel pipe from the transformer down. they need to replace the wood pole as well . there are other cables ( phone , tv ) on that pole. burial grade cable itself ( 200 ampere feed split-phase ) would cost me an arm and a leg. They need about 100 yards.

[free_electron]

Sucks having 20 solar panels - No power from the grid, no power from the solar panels.  The inverter has the option to add one AC 120v outlet max output of I think 5 amps.  Cost for the module was something like $2,000.  Grossly over priced.

How is that possible ? if the grid goes down your isolation contactor should open. You then run standalone.

from Tesla website :

How Powerwall Provides Backup Power
When a utility power outage does occur, your Powerwall instantly disconnects from the grid and restores backup power to your home in a fraction of a second, over one hundred times faster than typical standby generators. This means your appliances keep running without interruption, and there’s no need to reset your clocks. You may not even notice when an outage occurs.
If you have solar, your Powerwall can recharge from your solar system to run your home from solar and Powerwall even when the grid is down.

A traditional solar system without a Powerwall does not function during a grid outage.

aha. that last sentence is apparently the key. if you have no storage then it does go down. kinda stupid. simply open the isolation contactor and run. only when the grid comes back for longer than 10 seconds : re-engage.
if the  grid draws more power than you can produce : disconnect and check incoming voltage. The inverters can see what is coming in. they simply interrupt for one period of the 50hz and sample the incoming voltage. if that goes to 0 : grid is down.
it can't be that hard to make such a system.

[CatalinaWOW]

It isn't super hard, but net metering drives systems that push power back up line.  If you hook up a generator the solar system forces voltage up until the load (house + generator) accepts all the array output.  The generator usually can't handle it.  Powerwall has incorporated appropriate logic and controls.

[Electrodynamic]

I believe the newest inverters can act as a conventional grid tie inverter and operate off a battery bank or solar panels off line. They can also prioritize power management and charge the battery bank for use after sun down only exporting power to the grid as a last resort.

I think a conventional grid tie inverter could be tricked to do the same thing and power a house off grid. However I don't think a generator could be tied in because the the frequency varies from 60Hz. So in order to trick the inverter it would need to see a clean 60Hz sine wave to lock onto then whenever it senses a voltage drop it would start pushing power into the system. So in theory we could start the system with a small AC inverter with a fixed voltage and the grid tie inverter would synch with it like the grid. Then as added loads produced more voltage drops the grid tie inverter should ramp up it's output to hold the voltage in theory.

The main issue would probably be synching the system voltage because each inverter wants to hold a given voltage. If they are not exactly the same then the inverter with the higher voltage setting would have priority. They may start hunting or surging producing hysteresis in the system causing an over voltage shutdown. 

Regards

[DougSpindler]

The problem with faking out the solar system to provide power during a power outage is how do you prevent powering the entire neighborhood?  And what happens when grid  power resumes and your inverter is out of sync?  I think it would make for a nice fireworks display and would probably start another California wild fire.

No question about it, in theory this could be done.  But then there  is the “real world”.  I’m sure there must be a reason why the internet’s manufactures do not provide a power outlet to provide power when the grid is down.

I think I know the answer.  You can’t really power anything in your home directly form the solar panels.  They just don’t output enough power on their own except maybe around mid-day for an hour or so. 

One could spend $12,000 on a Tesla PowerWall.  But I really wonder what that’s going to be able to power and for how long during a power outage.  For most homes, I’m thinking it might power a home for a quarter of a day if even that.

[NiHaoMike]

I think I know the answer.  You can’t really power anything in your home directly form the solar panels.  They just don’t output enough power on their own except maybe around mid-day for an hour or so.

Why not? If you're saying they can't supply the peak current, that's something that can be done with capacitors. A few commercial products already do just that, and I see those becoming popular for those who want some backup power during the day but don't want the cost of batteries.

One could spend $12,000 on a Tesla PowerWall.  But I really wonder what that’s going to be able to power and for how long during a power outage.  For most homes, I’m thinking it might power a home for a quarter of a day if even that.

27kWh is a lot! Even without solar to help, it will easily power essentials for days. Do you really need to keep your dozen Bitcoin miners running when the grid goes down?

[maginnovision]

12k usd will get you one powerwall installed. 20k might get you two. For that kind of money you could get a real generator installed that can power your house for days and it works day and night. The economics aren't great. However, if you avoid tesla you could do it cheaper but it might not look as nice or fit as well. Still costs don't really make sense if you're looking for emergency power.

[free_electron]

The problem with faking out the solar system to provide power during a power outage is how do you prevent powering the entire neighborhood?  And what happens when grid  power resumes and your inverter is out of sync?  I think it would make for a nice fireworks display and would probably start another California wild fire.

No question about it, in theory this could be done.  But then there  is the “real world”.  I’m sure there must be a reason why the internet’s manufactures do not provide a power outlet to provide power when the grid is down.

I think I know the answer.  You can’t really power anything in your home directly form the solar panels.  They just don’t output enough power on their own except maybe around mid-day for an hour or so. 

One could spend $12,000 on a Tesla PowerWall.  But I really wonder what that’s going to be able to power and for how long during a power outage.  For most homes, I’m thinking it might power a home for a quarter of a day if even that.

It should be perfectly possible to do that. The inverters use a PWM system to create a pure sinewave. To feed energy into the net they pump up their output voltage slightly above the incoming voltage. They all work that way ... that is the only way to do it. the grid is an impedance. to get current into it you need a higher voltage. ohms law.
so to do that the inverters open the connection to the grid for a fraction of a millisecond at the peak. they have a peak detector to phase lock. The sample the current and the direction. Sampling the incoming voltage is easy : the bridge mosfets are stopped for a few pwm cycles and the voltage is sampled. if that voltage is below 105 volts ( assuming 110 is nominal ) : stop feeding the grid. then go in a sample only mode. only if 120 volt is seen for more than 5 minutes : resume normal operation.

This is how harddisks measure velocity of the head or torque of the motor . they stop the commutation on one phase for 1 period and look for the peak. The algorithms can predict when the peak should occur and open only in a tight window around this. take a voltage sample , scan for the peak and resume. All these inverters are H-bridges under PWM control. it is a simple addition to do this. They already do it anyway.

My guess it is more regulation and archaic rules than anything. 'but what about the old inverters'? . fine. they stay as they are. but it does not block new generation inverters from becoming smart.

[bdunham7]

Do you imagine you are the first person to think of these things and therefore nobody has thought of a solution yet? 
Here are your answers:

The problem with faking out the solar system to provide power during a power outage is how do you prevent powering the entire neighborhood?  And what happens when grid  power resumes and your inverter is out of sync?  I think it would make for a nice fireworks display and would probably start another California wild fire.

Its called an isolation transfer switch.  Used and required with backup power systems for a very long time, whether powered by solar, battery or generator.  Not 'theoretical', but well established tech if not old hat.  Available from electrical contractors everywhere, Amazon and probably your local Lowes.

No question about it, in theory this could be done.  But then there  is the “real world”.  I’m sure there must be a reason why the internet’s manufactures do not provide a power outlet to provide power when the grid is down. I think I know the answer.  You can’t really power anything in your home directly form the solar panels.  They just don’t output enough power on their own except maybe around mid-day for an hour or so. 

Do you do math at all?  Whether your solar panels can power 'anything' depends on how much power 'anything' draws and how much power your solar system is putting out.  With my rather modest system, the output generally exceeds my 'anything' for 5-6 hours a day.  As for not having off-grid capability, I don't have it for the same reason I can't tow a trailer with my SUV--that option is not installed!  It is available and could be installed, but I didn't spend the money.  Now it is true that using only solar with no battery is going to be uneven and require different usage patterns and maybe devices as the sun is a bit unreliable even here in SoCal, but that is just a matter of getting used to a different system--and maybe having at least a small battery.

One could spend $12,000 on a Tesla PowerWall.  But I really wonder what that’s going to be able to power and for how long during a power outage.  For most homes, I’m thinking it might power a home for a quarter of a day if even that.

Again, math at all?  If  you insist on running your central air and baking a cake at the same time, then yes the Powerwall won't last as long.  But you can use the isolation transfer switch mentioned above to restrict the backup power to those circuits that you want to retain--lights, refrigerator, etc while not powering AC, oven, water heater, etc.  Then, in conjunction with working solar, one Powerwall can keep you partially powered indefinitely.  Want to have more backup power?  Buy more solar panels and more Powerwalls.  That math thing will help you figure out how much you need for what you want to do.
[/quote]

[Cerebus]

The problem with faking out the solar system to provide power during a power outage is how do you prevent powering the entire neighborhood?  And what happens when grid  power resumes and your inverter is out of sync?  I think it would make for a nice fireworks display and would probably start another California wild fire.

No question about it, in theory this could be done.  But then there  is the “real world”.  I’m sure there must be a reason why the internet’s manufactures do not provide a power outlet to provide power when the grid is down.

Given that this a a forum full of electronics engineers and enthusiasts there are dozens of people shaking their heads at you right now.

Detecting whether there's a live grid out there or just a huge load isn't exactly a massive unsolved problem in electrical metrology (hint it's got something to do with the direction and magnitude the current is trying to adopt at any given moment). If the load from the grid side climbs too high, indicating the grid has gone away, you just open an isolator between you and the grid.

Similarly when the grid eventually comes back, phase locking to the grid before you reconnect to it isn't exactly rocket science, given that you're in charge of an inverter and can make it put out any signal you want (within reason, using your solar installation as an AM radio transmitter is probably not going to work out for you and will possibly make your fridge freezer take up smoking  ).

The reason that people make systems that don't is that it is slightly cheaper, and there are people who will buy systems without first asking the (one would think blindingly obvious) question: "Can I get power from this when the grid's down".

[tom66]

Even a reasonable 3-4kW solar system would provide enough to run fans,  fridges/freezers, even a microwave oven, without storage, when the sun is up.
Enough to make a power cut more bearable.

[DougSpindler]

Even a reasonable 3-4kW solar system would provide enough to run fans,  fridges/freezers, even a microwave oven, without storage, when the sun is up.
Enough to make a power cut more bearable.

Here we are at the end of October when the sun is lower in the sky.  At what time do you think the panels would be producing enough power to power a refrigerator?  And for how many hours? Not sure why one would want to power fans in fall.  Around this time is when we turn on the heater.  Think those solar panels could heat the house?

[coppice]

Even a reasonable 3-4kW solar system would provide enough to run fans,  fridges/freezers, even a microwave oven, without storage, when the sun is up.
Enough to make a power cut more bearable.

Inrush currents can be a big problem with a lot of appliances. Inrush can last a bit long for the capacitors in the inverter to ride over them. A modest sized battery can help here.

[Cerebus]

Even a reasonable 3-4kW solar system would provide enough to run fans,  fridges/freezers, even a microwave oven, without storage, when the sun is up.
Enough to make a power cut more bearable.

Here we are at the end of October when the sun is lower in the sky.  At what time do you think the panels would be producing enough power to power a refrigerator?  And for how many hours? Not sure why one would want to power fans in fall.  Around this time is when we turn on the heater.  Think those solar panels could heat the house?

Aw c'mon, the red herrings are at their best in the Australian late spring in October. And it looks like they're not out of season in the North either.

[DougSpindler]

So bdunham7 is this something you have actually done?  Or are you one of those theoretical Dunning and Kruger engineers who is all talk.   https://www.eevblog.com/forum/Smileys/default/blah.gif

https://www.eevblog.com/forum/Smileys/default/smiley_laughing.gif

As I stated, "No question about it, in theory this could be done.  But then there  is the “real world”.  I’m sure there must be a reason why the internet’s manufactures do not provide a power outlet to provide power when the grid is down."

I'd like to see your calculations on what you think could be powered with a 6.5 kW solar system could power in late October at latitude 38? 
https://www.eevblog.com/forum/Smileys/default/scared.gif

[tom66]

Even a reasonable 3-4kW solar system would provide enough to run fans,  fridges/freezers, even a microwave oven, without storage, when the sun is up.
Enough to make a power cut more bearable.

Here we are at the end of October when the sun is lower in the sky.  At what time do you think the panels would be producing enough power to power a refrigerator?  And for how many hours? Not sure why one would want to power fans in fall.  Around this time is when we turn on the heater.  Think those solar panels could heat the house?

Well a fridge requires about 150W to operate the compressor so even if a 3kW system is operating at 10% capacity then you could at least keep some items cool.  Ideally the fridge would run at close to a 100% duty cycle when sun was available, 'charging' it with cool air so it can retain a modest temperature through the night.  Some fridges have a 'super chill' function that cools a fridge to near zero and turns on a circulation fan to cool items quickly.  That may be beneficial (though of course the fan reduces the overall efficiency of the machine.)

When we moved our chest freezer I was worried that items would go off, it was switched off for about 12 hours in total, we checked the temperature with a thermometer and it started at -19C and was at -10C when I plugged it in. Provided they are not opened they retain the cold temperature for a rather long time.

[tom66]

Even a reasonable 3-4kW solar system would provide enough to run fans,  fridges/freezers, even a microwave oven, without storage, when the sun is up.
Enough to make a power cut more bearable.

Inrush currents can be a big problem with a lot of appliances. Inrush can last a bit long for the capacitors in the inverter to ride over them. A modest sized battery can help here.

That is true.  One of the benefits of an 'inverter' fridge where the compressor runs 24/7 at varying speeds would be lack of inrush, beneficial if you want to run your devices off inverters or generators.

[bdunham7]

The reason that people make systems that don't is that it is slightly cheaper, and there are people who will buy systems without first asking the (one would think blindingly obvious) question: "Can I get power from this when the grid's down".

I must protest.  Even today a grid-tied system with backup is typically much, much more expensive than a simple grid-tied system when you price out the entire job.  Back when I installed mine, I most certainly did ask all those questions along with the even-more obvious ones, which are "how often does the grid go down?" and "what happens if it does".  I quite deliberately installed a system that has the sole function of reducing my electric bill.  Since then I've had exactly one grid outage of more than a few minutes and that was preannounced because it was for maintenance.  My ad-hoc system using my electric car kept my food cold and laptop charged during that one event.

[SilverSolder]

[...] and maybe having at least a small battery.

You don't need much, if you cut back to pure basics.

I have an old school lead acid RV battery - a single 12V one -  which can keep my fridge alive via an inverter for about 12 hours.  Total investment about $200 including the (pre-owned) inverter!

With 10 of those batteries and some solar panels, one could do a lot - with a little.

[Cerebus]

So bdunham7 is this something you have actually done?  Or are you one of those theoretical Dunning and Kruger engineers who is all talk.   https://www.eevblog.com/forum/Smileys/default/blah.gif

https://www.eevblog.com/forum/Smileys/default/smiley_laughing.gif

As I stated, "No question about it, in theory this could be done.  But then there  is the “real world”.  I’m sure there must be a reason why the internet’s manufactures do not provide a power outlet to provide power when the grid is down."

I'd like to see your calculations on what you think could be powered with a 6.5 kW solar system could power in late October at latitude 38? 
https://www.eevblog.com/forum/Smileys/default/scared.gif

Why do you think the discussion has to be about what is happening in your back yard at this precise time of year?

Oh, because that somehow devalues perfectly valid answers that you don't like because they make you look a little less knowledgable than you like to believe you are. And you have the cheek to invoke the Dunning-Kruger effect? C'mon, that's below the belt and you know it.

[Cerebus]

The reason that people make systems that don't is that it is slightly cheaper, and there are people who will buy systems without first asking the (one would think blindingly obvious) question: "Can I get power from this when the grid's down".

I must protest.  Even today a grid-tied system with backup is typically much, much more expensive than a simple grid-tied system when you price out the entire job.  Back when I installed mine, I most certainly did ask all those questions along with the even-more obvious ones, which are "how often does the grid go down?" and "what happens if it does".  I quite deliberately installed a system that has the sole function of reducing my electric bill.  Since then I've had exactly one grid outage of more than a few minutes and that was preannounced because it was for maintenance.  My ad-hoc system using my electric car kept my food cold and laptop charged during that one event.

I'm not talking about "with backup", I'm just talking about a grid-tied solar system that can still supply domestic power when there isn't a grid to supply power (obviously during daylight, adequate capacity, adequate load etc. etc. etc.). Extra cost: one contactor, maybe two, a drive circuit for it/them, perhaps a secondary voltage sensor for the grid when isolated and some NRE for the control algorithms. Doug seems to under the impression that designing a grid-tied solar system that can still provide local power when there's no grid is some kind of hard problem, it's not, it's trivially solvable.

[DougSpindler]

Why do you think the discussion has to be about what is happening in your back yard at this precise time of year?

This is about my back yard, read the post.  I'm the one who has been without power for over 3 days.  Then these yahoos replay saying I could be getting power from my solar system if I install a transfer switch from Lowes, buy an inverter with batteries to "fake-out" the inverter into thinking I have grid power.  As I said posted in theory this could be done.  Then one of the yahoos said I could power a couple of fans.  Not sure why I would want to power a couple of fans.  What needs to be powered is the refrigerator, water heater and the house heater.  I'll have to look at my solar production software, but I think with my 6.6 kW system I think I might be able to power the refrigerator for 3 maybe 4 hours.

What do you think? 

[DougSpindler]

The reason that people make systems that don't is that it is slightly cheaper, and there are people who will buy systems without first asking the (one would think blindingly obvious) question: "Can I get power from this when the grid's down".

I must protest.  Even today a grid-tied system with backup is typically much, much more expensive than a simple grid-tied system when you price out the entire job.  Back when I installed mine, I most certainly did ask all those questions along with the even-more obvious ones, which are "how often does the grid go down?" and "what happens if it does".  I quite deliberately installed a system that has the sole function of reducing my electric bill.  Since then I've had exactly one grid outage of more than a few minutes and that was preannounced because it was for maintenance.  My ad-hoc system using my electric car kept my food cold and laptop charged during that one event.

I'm not talking about "with backup", I'm just talking about a grid-tied solar system that can still supply domestic power when there isn't a grid to supply power (obviously during daylight, adequate capacity, adequate load etc. etc. etc.). Extra cost: one contactor, maybe two, a drive circuit for it/them, perhaps a secondary voltage sensor for the grid when isolated and some NRE for the control algorithms. Doug seems to under the impression that designing a grid-tied solar system that can still provide local power when there's no grid is some kind of hard problem, it's not, it's trivially solvable.

@Cerebus  Did you read my post?  I said in theory it could be done.  So why haven't any of the inverter manufactures doing this?  (I think there might be one not so popular brand sold in the US which might.) 

If this is something that's so easy to do, why is it not being done?

[SilverSolder]

[...] with my 6.6 kW system I think I might be able to power the refrigerator for 3 maybe 4 hours. [...]

King sized fridge?

6.6kW is awesome.  That would take quite a big area of panels around here.  (North East)

[Cerebus]

What do you think?

That you're being excessively parochial. If you really expect a discussion of the capabilities of solar generation systems to be limited to strictly that which is applicable to you and you alone then your expectations are unrealistically self-centred. Heck, you've even opened the discussion out to the "the internet’s manufactures (sic)" [of every grid tied solar generation system] yourself.

[Cerebus]

The reason that people make systems that don't is that it is slightly cheaper, and there are people who will buy systems without first asking the (one would think blindingly obvious) question: "Can I get power from this when the grid's down".

I must protest.  Even today a grid-tied system with backup is typically much, much more expensive than a simple grid-tied system when you price out the entire job.  Back when I installed mine, I most certainly did ask all those questions along with the even-more obvious ones, which are "how often does the grid go down?" and "what happens if it does".  I quite deliberately installed a system that has the sole function of reducing my electric bill.  Since then I've had exactly one grid outage of more than a few minutes and that was preannounced because it was for maintenance.  My ad-hoc system using my electric car kept my food cold and laptop charged during that one event.

I'm not talking about "with backup", I'm just talking about a grid-tied solar system that can still supply domestic power when there isn't a grid to supply power (obviously during daylight, adequate capacity, adequate load etc. etc. etc.). Extra cost: one contactor, maybe two, a drive circuit for it/them, perhaps a secondary voltage sensor for the grid when isolated and some NRE for the control algorithms. Doug seems to under the impression that designing a grid-tied solar system that can still provide local power when there's no grid is some kind of hard problem, it's not, it's trivially solvable.

@Cerebus  Did you read my post?  I said in theory it could be done.  So why haven't any of the inverter manufactures doing this?  (I think there might be one not so popular brand sold in the US which might.) 

If this is something that's so easy to do, why is it not being done?

Justify your assumption that it's not being done.

[DougSpindler]

What do you think?

That you're being excessively parochial. If you really expect a discussion of the capabilities of solar generation systems to be limited to strictly that which is applicable to you and you alone then your expectations are unrealistically self-centred. Heck, you've even opened the discussion out to the "the internet’s manufactures (sic)" [of every grid tied solar generation system] yourself.

Why are you avoiding answering the question?  If it is so trivial to add an outlet to provide power from solar panels when the grid is off-line why is it the inverter manufactures aren't doing it?  Could it be it's as easy as you say?

[DougSpindler]

The reason that people make systems that don't is that it is slightly cheaper, and there are people who will buy systems without first asking the (one would think blindingly obvious) question: "Can I get power from this when the grid's down".

I must protest.  Even today a grid-tied system with backup is typically much, much more expensive than a simple grid-tied system when you price out the entire job.  Back when I installed mine, I most certainly did ask all those questions along with the even-more obvious ones, which are "how often does the grid go down?" and "what happens if it does".  I quite deliberately installed a system that has the sole function of reducing my electric bill.  Since then I've had exactly one grid outage of more than a few minutes and that was preannounced because it was for maintenance.  My ad-hoc system using my electric car kept my food cold and laptop charged during that one event.

I'm not talking about "with backup", I'm just talking about a grid-tied solar system that can still supply domestic power when there isn't a grid to supply power (obviously during daylight, adequate capacity, adequate load etc. etc. etc.). Extra cost: one contactor, maybe two, a drive circuit for it/them, perhaps a secondary voltage sensor for the grid when isolated and some NRE for the control algorithms. Doug seems to under the impression that designing a grid-tied solar system that can still provide local power when there's no grid is some kind of hard problem, it's not, it's trivially solvable.

@Cerebus  Did you read my post?  I said in theory it could be done.  So why haven't any of the inverter manufactures doing this?  (I think there might be one not so popular brand sold in the US which might.) 

If this is something that's so easy to do, why is it not being done?

Justify your assumption that it's not being done.

Please provide the brand names of inverters being sold in the US who offer the feature?  I looked, have you?

[bdunham7]

So bdunham7 is this something you have actually done?  Or are you one of those theoretical Dunning and Kruger engineers who is all talk. 

Done what?  When did I say I had done anything?  And I think the Dunning-Kruger trope is overused, but perhaps it still fits for an academic purportedly educating people about these things but seems to be unaware of basic technology that is older then either of us.

As I stated, "No question about it, in theory this could be done.  But then there  is the “real world”.  I’m sure there must be a reason why the internet’s manufactures do not provide a power outlet to provide power when the grid is down."

They do provide that feature.  Not in theory, in real life.  If you don't buy it, then you won't have it.  The two 'real world' reasons to not have a backup-capable system with absolutely no battery are that they work much better with at least a small battery and that the backup functionality is actually not that cheap or easy to implement in totality.  Unless you do it as part of new construction, the electrician's bill alone will be quite substantial to put in the required transfer circuitry.  I'm not sure what issue you aren't clear on or what you are debating.

I'd like to see your calculations on what you think could be powered with a 6.5 kW solar system could power in late October at latitude 38? 

I'm not really willing to do any work.  How about a 7.2kW system at latitude 34 for the past 5 days instead?  You can see that the power output exceeds 1kW from 8AM to 4:30PM on all 5 days and power production exceeds 24kWh per day.   So you can have 1kW to run your fridge, lights, TV, charge your laptop and so forth for 8+ hours a day.  Add 2 of these batteries and you can have a good 500W for the other 15.5 hours of the day to keep your fridge and freezer going, run a few lights, etc.  If you want more than that, spend more money.

https://www.solar-electric.com/enphase-energy-encharge-3-1p-na.html?gclid=Cj0KCQjwlvT8BRDeARIsAACRFiVGeHoRur8ASYJXuG1qaCo9-bGFGrLFXWR6VhkqoRr-S87TbDHizAYaAnHuEALw_wcB

[bdunham7]

I'm not talking about "with backup"

But you are.  A grid-tied system like mine works with the grid, period.  No grid, no power, no exceptions.  Anything that supplies power when the grid is off is considered backup and subject to some pretty stringent regulations.  The inverters have to function differently, you are required to have certified, inspected and placarded transfer equipment installed by licensed contractors with approvals from the power company--and they don't like these systems because of the potential danger to line workers.  It is not a trivial or low cost add-on in reality and that is why Doug has no power.

[SilverSolder]

I don't have a solar energy system so I'm following the heated debate on the basis of interest in this technology.

It seems to me that a grid-tied system loses costs, not only initially, but also maintenance?  Batteries have a finite life, for example.

I guess the choice is down to whether you live in an area with frequent outages?

[Cerebus]

What do you think?

That you're being excessively parochial. If you really expect a discussion of the capabilities of solar generation systems to be limited to strictly that which is applicable to you and you alone then your expectations are unrealistically self-centred. Heck, you've even opened the discussion out to the "the internet’s manufactures (sic)" [of every grid tied solar generation system] yourself.

Why are you avoiding answering the question?  If it is so trivial to add an outlet to provide power from solar panels when the grid is off-line why is it the inverter manufactures aren't doing it?

There are millions of electrical installations in this world that have local generation facilities, be those generation facilities solar, diesel and petrol generators, or whatever. They have these standard components in their systems called 'automatic transfer switches' designed to transfer the local load from grid to local power source and back again. This is a standard electrical component known to every sparkie that ever walked the earth in the late 20th century or later.

Look:



Over 800 million results.

If an electrician is sufficiently qualified to install a grid-tied solar system, then they are sufficiently qualified to do so with an automatic transfer switch. That's it, that's the beginning and end of it. There's no magic required, no special extra socket on the solar system - you just connect the whole solar system appropriately into the existing system. The only requirement is that one's solar system is smart enough to know that it is 'off grid' and instead of following the grids 50/60 Hz to has to provide its own 50/60Hz sine wave feed to the phase locked loop that controls the inverter. The manufacturers of grid-tied solar generators don't have to supply an automatic transfer switch (but I bet it's an option for many) as it is an off the shelf component. Its availability is taken as read.

  Could it be it's as easy as you say?

Yes it is, yes it is.

[coppice]

There are millions of electrical installations in this world that have local generation facilities, be those generation facilities solar, diesel and petrol generators, or whatever. They have these standard components in their systems called 'automatic transfer switches' designed to transfer the local load from grid to local power source and back again. This is a standard electrical component known to every sparkie that ever walked the earth in the late 20th century or later.

Specifically, any installation that has uninterruptable power has an automated cutover mechanism. Its usually to a battery powered UPS, and perhaps a diesel set for longer backup. However, the process is just the same if you have solar generation.

[bdunham7]

It seems to me that a grid-tied system loses costs, not only initially, but also maintenance?  Batteries have a finite life, for example.

I guess the choice is down to whether you live in an area with frequent outages?

Yes and yes.  My system cost $15K USD after rebates and credits and has paid for itself twice over in 8 years by nearly eliminating what would have been an eyewatering electric bill.  It also has required zero maintenance, although I did upgrade the interface at a cost of a few hundred dollars.

With respect to outages, it depends a lot on both how often they happen and what happens when they  occur.  Where I live, power is almost optional.  We don't freeze and on the very hot days the house stays warm but livable if you close it up, then it generally cools off enough at night to be tolerable.  Most houses have AC, but there are examples that don't.  We have gas cooking and hot water, so we're actually good for weeks on end if need be.  I've considered modifying a few of the panels to supply low voltage power to charge a battery to run the fridge and freezer, but the need hasn't come up in 8 years.  If I were in Doug's place, I'd be OK without power for 3 days.

[Cerebus]

I'm not talking about "with backup"

But you are.  A grid-tied system like mine works with the grid, period.  No grid, no power, no exceptions.  Anything that supplies power when the grid is off is considered backup and subject to some pretty stringent regulations.  The inverters have to function differently, you are required to have certified, inspected and placarded transfer equipment installed by licensed contractors with approvals from the power company--and they don't like these systems because of the potential danger to line workers.  It is not a trivial or low cost add-on in reality and that is why Doug has no power.

I'm not taking about "backup" as in "battery backup", but I can see there's a confusion in that one could say I'm talking about "backup" as in "backup generator". Why would you think that there's a more stringent requirement for "can operate standalone as well as grid-tied" than for "can operate grid-tied"?

All the difficult bit there is the "grid-tied" bit. Adding transfer switching is meat and drink to any competent electrical contractor, indeed I've contracted out that job myself for a mid-sized datacentre that had a three phase grid feed, a generator and room full of UPS and batteries bigger than many people's houses. I suspect some local regulatory shenanigans to make it harder then it needs to be (possibly just for solar) where you are. There's no difference in principle between a dirty great UPS, generators and a solar generation system - they are all capable of back-feeding the grid inappropriately if not properly installed.

[sandalcandal]

I havn't read this thread in detail but I don't think anyone has pointed out Tesla already does an automatic anti-islanding + backup solution addon for Powerwall solar systems: the "Tesla Backup Gateway"

Explanation of automatic transfer and Tesla Backup Gateway at 8:00
Demonstration at 10:18

As far as cost: "Tesla lowered the price of the Powerwall 2 a few hundred bucks to $6,500 per Powerwall in mid-2019 though it’s worth planning for the additional $1,100 for the requisite Powerwall Backup Gateway 2 for any installation." https://cleantechnica.com/2020/02/09/everything-you-need-to-know-about-the-powerwall-2-2019-edition/
That's from Clean Technica so USD. Thanks maginnovision. Updated cost Oct. 2020 is $US7000 for Powerwall 2 and $4500 for Backup Gateway plus installation

Edit: Also note the Tesla Backup Gateway does more than automatic switchover. It does some automatic capacity management and optimised grid feed-in. See above video for details.

In OZ Jaycar apparently did an automatic transfer switch for $AU199. https://www.jaycar.com.au/mains-auto-transfer-switch/p/MS5300 edit: Apparently unapproved
Integration with a generic grid tie solar system might be more tricky though.

Edit3: Additional update on cost. Just checked on the Tesla Australia website. Cost is $AU10,800 for a single Powerwall and $AU1,700 for installation and Gateway.

[bdunham7]

Adding transfer switching is meat and drink to any competent electrical contractor, indeed I've contracted out that job myself for a mid-sized datacentre that had a three phase grid feed, a generator and room full of UPS and batteries bigger than many people's houses. I suspect some local regulatory shenanigans to make it harder then it needs to be (possibly just for solar) where you are. There's no difference in principle between a dirty great UPS, generators and a solar generation system - they are all capable of back-feeding the grid inappropriately if not properly installed.

I'm not saying that it is technically advanced, I'm saying that it costs money.  You need to install a separate panel for the circuits to be transferred, the transfer switch and then rerun some of the wires.  That can be a substantial task as a retrofit to an older house, as you may also be required to update certain parts of the system, like the main service entrance and panel.  In my case, it would have involved tearing out a stucco wall. You also need to use an variable-output inverter that can do the job, and by the time you are done with all that, a battery is looking cheap.

And yes, permitting can be an issue.  When I did mine, there was a simple, streamlined system for getting approvals for a grid-tied non-backup system with approved microinverters, no HVDC and less than 10kW.  That only cost me $2K for permits, drawing my own plans.  Imagine what the non-streamlined process would be.  Fortunately, the state government has passed laws regulating local governments regarding permit fees on solar.

[sandalcandal]

I don't have a solar energy system so I'm following the heated debate on the basis of interest in this technology.

It seems to me that a grid-tied system loses costs, not only initially, but also maintenance?  Batteries have a finite life, for example.

I guess the choice is down to whether you live in an area with frequent outages?

I did some research very recently on lifetime costs for Powerwall systems when Dave posted about Nissan Leafs being used for battery backup in Australia here. I've snipped out the relevant bit out below.

A 9.8kWh residential energy storage system (ESS) from LG chem is rated for a 24.3 MWh lifetime throughput down to 60% rated capacity degradation (https://solarjuice.com.au/wp-content/uploads/2018/01/lg-chem-lv-resu-limited-warranty.pdf) with a retail cost of AU$7,862.80 (https://www.ecoelectric.com.au/shop/lg-resu-10-lv-battery-system.html.html). So thats 0.326 AU$/kWh then you need to add a seperate inverter-charger which would serve the same function at the $10k wall wart vehicle to grid (V2G) interface.

As an additional datapoint for residential ESS, Tesla Powerwall 2 is warrantied for 37 MWh down to 70% rated capacity degradation (https://www.tesla.com/sites/default/files/pdfs/powerwall/Powerwall_2_AC_Warranty_AUS-NZ_1-0.pdf) at a retail cost of AU$10,000 (https://www.ecoelectric.com.au/shop/tesla-powerwall-tesla-14kwh-battery.html  https://www.tesla.com/en_AU/powerwall). So thats 0.270 AU$/kWh and you've got extra capacity at the end of warranty compared to the LG Chem and the inverter-charger is built-in too.

[maginnovision]

I havn't read this thread in detail but I don't think anyone has pointed out Tesla already does an automatic anti-islanding + backup solution addon for Powerwall solar systems: the "Tesla Backup Gateway"

Explanation of automatic transfer and Tesla Backup Gateway at 8:00
Demonstration at 10:18

As far as cost: "Tesla lowered the price of the Powerwall 2 a few hundred bucks to $6,500 per Powerwall in mid-2019 though it’s worth planning for the additional $1,100 for the requisite Powerwall Backup Gateway 2 for any installation." https://cleantechnica.com/2020/02/09/everything-you-need-to-know-about-the-powerwall-2-2019-edition/
That's from Clean Technica so USD.

Edit: Also note the Tesla Backup Gateway does more than automatic switchover. It does some automatic capacity management and optimised grid feed-in. See above video for details.

In OZ Jaycar apparently did an automatic transfer switch for $AU199. https://www.jaycar.com.au/mains-auto-transfer-switch/p/MS5300
Integration with a generic grid tie solar system might be more tricky though.

https://electrek.co/2020/10/01/tesla-tsla-increases-powerwall-price-demand/

Another pro tesla source disagrees on cost as of oct 1. EDIT: Also roughly what I was quoted and passed on.

[sandalcandal]

Thanks maginnovision. I've corrected the post and also done my own double check on the Australian Tesla website.
Edit: Why is the installation + gateway cost so much less in Oz??? Are there iffy regulation fees in the USA?

[Cerebus]

Adding transfer switching is meat and drink to any competent electrical contractor, indeed I've contracted out that job myself for a mid-sized datacentre that had a three phase grid feed, a generator and room full of UPS and batteries bigger than many people's houses. I suspect some local regulatory shenanigans to make it harder then it needs to be (possibly just for solar) where you are. There's no difference in principle between a dirty great UPS, generators and a solar generation system - they are all capable of back-feeding the grid inappropriately if not properly installed.

I'm not saying that it is technically advanced, I'm saying that it costs money.  You need to install a separate panel for the circuits to be transferred, the transfer switch and then rerun some of the wires.  That can be a substantial task as a retrofit to an older house, as you may also be required to update certain parts of the system, like the main service entrance and panel.  In my case, it would have involved tearing out a stucco wall. You also need to use an variable-output inverter that can do the job, and by the time you are done with all that, a battery is looking cheap.

And yes, permitting can be an issue.  When I did mine, there was a simple, streamlined system for getting approvals for a grid-tied non-backup system with approved microinverters, no HVDC and less than 10kW.  That only cost me $2K for permits, drawing my own plans.  Imagine what the non-streamlined process would be.  Fortunately, the state government has passed laws regulating local governments regarding permit fees on solar.

You seen to be talking about all of the ancillary costs where you are and in your particular situation. We were talking about whether it costs significantly more to build a solar system that is capable of doing islanding. Chalk and cheese.

And, coming from a country that often gets stick for over-regulation, particularity from residents of the USA, "only" $2k for permits? Can somebody from the UK who has actually installed a solar system please tell us what you had to shell out in regulatory fees (building control and the like) to do so?

[NiHaoMike]

Inrush currents can be a big problem with a lot of appliances. Inrush can last a bit long for the capacitors in the inverter to ride over them. A modest sized battery can help here.

The inverters that have daytime backup without batteries have much larger capacitors than usual. Also, V/Hz scaling can massively reduce the inrush of motor loads.

Please provide the brand names of inverters being sold in the US who offer the feature?  I looked, have you?

SMA is the big one, also MPP offers that on some of their inverters. I think the newest Enphase systems also have that capability.

[bdunham7]

You seen to be talking about all of the ancillary costs where you are and in your particular situation. We were talking about whether it costs significantly more to build a solar system that is capable of doing islanding. Chalk and cheese.

I'm not sure what we were talking about, but what do you mean by 'build'?  If you mean the electrical engineering and parts involved in making the inverters capable of this, then it probably isn't a deal breaker cost-wise.  If we were talking about a complete installed system, it might be more than you think--and not very helpful without at least some battery storage.

[Cerebus]

You seen to be talking about all of the ancillary costs where you are and in your particular situation. We were talking about whether it costs significantly more to build a solar system that is capable of doing islanding. Chalk and cheese.

I'm not sure what we were talking about, but what do you mean by 'build'?  If you mean the electrical engineering and parts involved in making the inverters capable of this, then it probably isn't a deal breaker cost-wise.  If we were talking about a complete installed system, it might be more than you think--and not very helpful without at least some battery storage.

I'm going to build this circuit board, then I'm going to install it.

[nctnico]

It seems to me that a grid-tied system loses costs, not only initially, but also maintenance?  Batteries have a finite life, for example.

I guess the choice is down to whether you live in an area with frequent outages?

Yes and yes.  My system cost $15K USD after rebates and credits and has paid for itself twice over in 8 years by nearly eliminating what would have been an eyewatering electric bill.  It also has required zero maintenance, although I did upgrade the interface at a cost of a few hundred dollars.

Still I'm wondering why electricity is so insanely expensive in California (for example). Over here the the break even point for solar is around 8 to 9 years including subsidies (which will dissapear in a few years) on the electricity you feed back into the grid. Without the subsidies it makes no sense to install solar (using new panels). If I source used panels and an inverter for a good price and mount them on the roof myself it is possible to reduce break even to 4 years but that also relies on subsidies.

[Cerebus]

Please provide the brand names of inverters being sold in the US who offer the feature?  I looked, have you?

Doug, you do this every time someone disagrees with some point you have made. You made the assertion, it's up to you to prove it, not down to me to disprove it.

You invoked Dunning-Kruger earlier, well now I am. You are arguing here, on a board stuffed with people who understand that adding the ability to run a solar inverter standalone, when it has the 'inverter' bit, and it has the 'phased locked loop bit' for grid tie-in, is trivial because they understand how it works, and understand that all that is needed is a tiny oscillator to supply a 50 or 60Hz sine wave (it probably not even a 'real' oscillator but one created in software) and the means to temporarily isolate the inverter and the load from the grid while it is running standalone and a few changes in its control software to support this. You do not believe it is trivial because you do not know how it works.

[themadhippy]

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=babtv00R-Nchttps://www.youtube.com/watch?v=babtv00R-Nc

[Monkeh]

The problem with islanding is it simply isn't practical without storage. Oh, you need 50W more than the panels put out? Sorry, power's off again, good luck getting the inverter to restart into the now greater load..

Let's pluck a random day:


Orange is actual power consumption, yellow is solar generation. Clearly, that can't island without storage or rewiring for load shedding.

[Cerebus]

The problem with islanding is it simply isn't practical without storage. Oh, you need 50W more than the panels put out? Sorry, power's off again, good luck getting the inverter to restart into the now greater load..

Agreed. But it's equally stupid to be sitting on \$x\$ kW of working solar generation and finding yourself having to say "The grid's out, the sun is shining and I've still got no power". If storage is too expensive, or impracticable for some other reason, one ought to be able to at least power a reduced set of 'essential' services while the sun is shining - at least keep the fridge/freezer, your internet connection, and the lights in the dark corners of the house going.

[Monkeh]

The problem with islanding is it simply isn't practical without storage. Oh, you need 50W more than the panels put out? Sorry, power's off again, good luck getting the inverter to restart into the now greater load..

Agreed. But it's equally stupid to be sitting on \$x\$ kW of working solar generation and finding yourself having to say "The grid's out, the sun is shining and I've still got no power". If storage is too expensive, or impracticable for some other reason, one ought to be able to at least power a reduced set of 'essential' services while the sun is shining - at least keep the fridge/freezer, your internet connection, and the lights in the dark corners of the house going.

I would absolutely prefer to have storage and be capable of islanding (not to mention using all that excess generation), but the costs of a non-islanding system are significantly lower. Either you need storage, or a substantially different wiring system to support an un-backed islanding configuration, and neither comes for free. Not to mention people are absolutely guaranteed to start mucking with any limited islanding function because they absolutely must have their coffee or something stupid, and eventually someone gets killed.

[Cerebus]

because they absolutely must have their coffee or something stupid, and eventually someone gets killed.

Worth it if it's good coffee, or bad coffee and you send Piers Morgan to make it! 

[SilverSolder]

Adding transfer switching is meat and drink to any competent electrical contractor, indeed I've contracted out that job myself for a mid-sized datacentre that had a three phase grid feed, a generator and room full of UPS and batteries bigger than many people's houses. I suspect some local regulatory shenanigans to make it harder then it needs to be (possibly just for solar) where you are. There's no difference in principle between a dirty great UPS, generators and a solar generation system - they are all capable of back-feeding the grid inappropriately if not properly installed.

I'm not saying that it is technically advanced, I'm saying that it costs money.  You need to install a separate panel for the circuits to be transferred, the transfer switch and then rerun some of the wires.  That can be a substantial task as a retrofit to an older house, as you may also be required to update certain parts of the system, like the main service entrance and panel.  In my case, it would have involved tearing out a stucco wall. You also need to use an variable-output inverter that can do the job, and by the time you are done with all that, a battery is looking cheap.

And yes, permitting can be an issue.  When I did mine, there was a simple, streamlined system for getting approvals for a grid-tied non-backup system with approved microinverters, no HVDC and less than 10kW.  That only cost me $2K for permits, drawing my own plans.  Imagine what the non-streamlined process would be.  Fortunately, the state government has passed laws regulating local governments regarding permit fees on solar.

You seen to be talking about all of the ancillary costs where you are and in your particular situation. We were talking about whether it costs significantly more to build a solar system that is capable of doing islanding. Chalk and cheese.

And, coming from a country that often gets stick for over-regulation, particularity from residents of the USA, "only" $2k for permits? Can somebody from the UK who has actually installed a solar system please tell us what you had to shell out in regulatory fees (building control and the like) to do so?

The USA is not a homogeneous area when it comes to these kinds of regulations - it tends to be down to each state, even to each city.

[Electrodynamic]

Cerebrus

Agreed. But it's equally stupid to be sitting on x kW of working solar generation and finding yourself having to say "The grid's out, the sun is shining and I've still got no power". If storage is too expensive, or impracticable for some other reason, one ought to be able to at least power a reduced set of 'essential' services while the sun is shining - at least keep the fridge/freezer, your internet connection, and the lights in the dark corners of the house going.

Agreed and the problem was never technology but people knowing how to solve problems with technology.

For example, if the inverter cannot handle all the loads then don't let it take on all the loads at once. We could use a $20 microcontroller to monitor the important circuits current flow then add a 15A circuit isolating DPDT relay to switch in any alternate power source. So we turn on the fridge, wait until it cuts out, then turn the circuit off and switch in another circuit load. Since our computer can monitor the on/off time of any circuit or appliance it can cycle them as demand requires within the switching program.

As such one 3kW off the shelf inverter could handle almost all the priority loads so long as the loads switched at on any given time do not exceed the inverters power rating. So the programming logic might look like this...
-LED lighting on
-fridge on, wait for current drop, fridge off
-freezer on, wait for current drop, freezer off
-If the total current draw is near the maximum then turn off circuit X, wait Y time, check program cycle, give X priority, return.

This easily solves the biggest problem which is a complete lack of intelligence in the system wanting to turn multiple inductive loads on at the same time. So minimal storage would be required acting mainly as a buffer for the often variable alternative energy source.

I see no reason why it can't be done because the only new element is intelligent design.

Regards

[Monkeh]

I see no reason why it can't be done because the only new element is intelligent design.

And completely rewiring the building. Unless you propose every single load item in the house has a networked switch on it?

[Cerebus]

I see no reason why it can't be done because the only new element is intelligent design.

And completely rewiring the building. Unless you propose every single load item in the house has a networked switch on it?

Once upon a time that would have been a ridiculous suggestion; with cheap zigbee controlled switched outlets it isn't any more.

[Electrodynamic]

Monkeh

I would absolutely prefer to have storage and be capable of islanding (not to mention using all that excess generation), but the costs of a non-islanding system are significantly lower. Either you need storage, or a substantially different wiring system to support an un-backed islanding configuration, and neither comes for free. Not to mention people are absolutely guaranteed to start mucking with any limited islanding function because they absolutely must have their coffee or something stupid, and eventually someone gets killed.

I have built many islanding systems and in practice it's just a transfer switch isolating from the grid.

We disconnect from the grid and then connect a suitable alternative energy source. Basically what were talking about with a solar priority load system is solar panels, a charge controller, a couple batteries, and an inverter connected to any priority loads. If the solar and grid transfer switches are linked then it's a simple matter of flipping a switch.

If power outages are a problem and it could defrost all the food in our fridge/freezer as well as having no light and being thrown back into the dark ages then it's a valid option.

Regards

[Monkeh]

I see no reason why it can't be done because the only new element is intelligent design.

And completely rewiring the building. Unless you propose every single load item in the house has a networked switch on it?

Once upon a time that would have been a ridiculous suggestion; with cheap zigbee controlled switched outlets it isn't any more.

And you'll have more inconvenience from those things dying or being molested by annoying teenagers than power outages. You can have good or you can have cheap, and most will be neither.

It's entirely doable, it's just that you need to put a non-trival amount of additional money somewhere to island practically. Either the wiring, a storage system, or a complete and actually reliable smart home bolted (annoyingly, intrusively) onto an existing installation.

[Electrodynamic]

Monkeh

And completely rewiring the building. Unless you propose every single load item in the house has a networked switch on it?

I'm not sure you understand what were talking about.

For each circuit we simply install a relay after the circuit breaker, ouside the panel before the load to disconnect that circuit. The relays are controlled by a microcomputer monitoring a clamp on current sensor so minimal rewiring is needed.

I'm pretty sure it can be done because I see hundreds of them operating every day at work. So what you may think is complex and dangerous I could probably install in a few hours and the programming is so simple it's not even worth mentioning.

Regards

[Monkeh]

Monkeh

And completely rewiring the building. Unless you propose every single load item in the house has a networked switch on it?

I'm not sure you understand what were talking about.

For each circuit we simply install a relay after the circuit breaker, ouside the panel before the load to disconnect that circuit. The relays are controlled by a microcomputer monitoring a clamp on current sensor so minimal rewiring is needed.

I'm pretty sure it can be done because I see hundreds of them operating every day at work. So what you may think is complex and dangerous I could probably install in a few hours and the programming is so simple it's not even worth mentioning.

Regards

I think I do.

On one circuit, we have: Boiler, fridge, fridge-freezer, washing machine, dishwasher, and an entire bedroom. On another, we have the entire living room, two bedrooms, and some of my office. On a third, we have another freezer, tumble dryer, and the garage door (we'd really like that to keep working). On a fourth, we have all the sockets really in use in my office, of which a certain portion of equipment would prefer to stay alive. Oh, also, three of those are 32A circuits.

You cannot break my installation down by circuit in this way. Not to mention by the time you've seen what's happening the inverter has probably already shut off.

[bdunham7]

Monkeh

And completely rewiring the building. Unless you propose every single load item in the house has a networked switch on it?

I'm not sure you understand what were talking about.

For each circuit we simply install a relay after the circuit breaker, ouside the panel before the load to disconnect that circuit. The relays are controlled by a microcomputer monitoring a clamp on current sensor so minimal rewiring is needed.

I'm pretty sure it can be done because I see hundreds of them operating every day at work. So what you may think is complex and dangerous I could probably install in a few hours and the programming is so simple it's not even worth mentioning.

Regards

And this system is a commercial product that has passed certifications and I can buy it and install it in my house?  Do you have a link or info?

[Electrodynamic]

Monkeh

On one circuit, we have: Boiler, fridge, fridge-freezer, washing machine, dishwasher, and an entire bedroom. On another, we have the entire living room, two bedrooms, and some of my office. On a third, we have another freezer, tumble dryer, and the garage door (we'd really like that to keep working). On a fourth, we have all the sockets really in use in my office, of which a certain portion of equipment would prefer to stay alive. Oh, also, three of those are 32A circuits.

You cannot break my installation down by circuit in this way. Not to mention by the time you've seen what's happening the inverter has probably already shut off.

I see the problem, we were talking about a priority system based on lighting, fridge, freezer and possibly a high efficiency natural gas furnace. Only the essentials to get by and prevent damage which could have been prevented.

bdunham7

And this system is a commercial product that has passed certifications and I can buy it and install it in my house?  Do you have a link or info?

My experience is based on the fact part of my work is operating/troubleshooting a 9000 point/control land area network (Johnson and Siemens). So this is nothing new, it's a PLC operating some current sensors and relays switching power so of course it can pass an inspection. It's not common knowledge but basically all new commercial/industrial applications have fully automated HVAC/power systems using PLC's.

Regards

[bdunham7]

Agreed and the problem was never technology but people knowing how to solve problems with technology.

I would say neither.  Both the design and general implementation of the technology are fairly obvious and not at all new, although the specific design (say Zigbee) may be relatively recent.  X10, for example, has been around for 45 years.  The important factors are need and actual, implemented, fully installed cost--which means if I hire a contractor to install the whatever, how much is the check that I'm going to write for the whole job.  This gives us the means to address the cost/benefit analysis, which in the end is the most important issue.

[Monkeh]

Monkeh

On one circuit, we have: Boiler, fridge, fridge-freezer, washing machine, dishwasher, and an entire bedroom. On another, we have the entire living room, two bedrooms, and some of my office. On a third, we have another freezer, tumble dryer, and the garage door (we'd really like that to keep working). On a fourth, we have all the sockets really in use in my office, of which a certain portion of equipment would prefer to stay alive. Oh, also, three of those are 32A circuits.

You cannot break my installation down by circuit in this way. Not to mention by the time you've seen what's happening the inverter has probably already shut off.

I see the problem, we were talking about a priority system based on lighting, fridge, freezer and possibly a high efficiency natural gas furnace. Only the essentials to get by and prevent damage which could have been prevented.

Indeed we were. The problem is you can't separate this equipment by circuit when it shares the circuit with other loads. It's all very easy when you have a building wired to support this, but that just isn't the norm.

By the time you add up the cost of rewiring to suit (which, over here, is about to skyrocket because manufacturers control the regulations), a storage system starts to look cost effective. And is still thousands of pounds over a simple grid-tie with no islanding.

[trobbins]

In Oz any connection to the grid of a power system that has alternative generation (generator or battery bi-directional inverter) has to be via an approved interconnection switch (ie. not the Jaycar ATS example).  One local inverter manufacturer incorporates that transfer switch such that the grid can be synced and connected/disconnected in a seamless manner.  If the grid goes down, the inverter side of that interconnection switch can have grid-tie PV that syncs to the inverter, and a genset can be started and connected by the inverter syncing to the gen.  As described earlier, the local loads have to be within the the power capabilities of the generation at any point in time (eg. battery + PV + gen) when no grid is connected, which can impose extra interlocked or controlled AC circuits.  For domestic use, even a small Generac gas unit can be connected in, but local sound level restrictions, some spare space in the garden, and a costly approved gas regulator assembly are required.  However, as all the domestic load is connected through a single inverter 'box', there is a practical need for a separate manual transfer switch with an 'all off' mid-point such that all domestic loads can be powered from the grid, and all the inverter and other gen equipment can be isolated for maintenance/repair.  All that extra equipment can be retrofitted to a typical domestic house, but does require switchboard work.

[DougSpindler]

Monkeh

On one circuit, we have: Boiler, fridge, fridge-freezer, washing machine, dishwasher, and an entire bedroom. On another, we have the entire living room, two bedrooms, and some of my office. On a third, we have another freezer, tumble dryer, and the garage door (we'd really like that to keep working). On a fourth, we have all the sockets really in use in my office, of which a certain portion of equipment would prefer to stay alive. Oh, also, three of those are 32A circuits.

You cannot break my installation down by circuit in this way. Not to mention by the time you've seen what's happening the inverter has probably already shut off.

I see the problem, we were talking about a priority system based on lighting, fridge, freezer and possibly a high efficiency natural gas furnace. Only the essentials to get by and prevent damage which could have been prevented.

Indeed we were. The problem is you can't separate this equipment by circuit when it shares the circuit with other loads. It's all very easy when you have a building wired to support this, but that just isn't the norm.

By the time you add up the cost of rewiring to suit (which, over here, is about to skyrocket because manufacturers control the regulations), a storage system starts to look cost effective. And is still thousands of pounds over a simple grid-tie with no islanding.

You are spot on.  It’s not as sip
E as installing a transfer switch as some of these Dunning- Kruger yahoo engineers say.  A transfer switch will not trigger the inverter to start producing power. And you are correct my house has three sub panels in addition to the one at the mains.  I, like most in the US can’t change the wiring easily.  We have a built in refrigerator so I can’t even get to the plug if I want to plug it into a generator with an extension cord.

Reason electricity is son expensive in California as in $0.54 per kWhr is why are paying huge amounts to the executives in bonuses every year.  Money has to come from somewhere.

I have a 6.5 kW solar system on my house.  After the tax payer rebates my system will be paid off in just about four years if the power company doesn’t canoe their rates.  But they are.  Once they do payback is going to be 10 years if not more.
 

[tom66]

So roughly 30,000  GWh energy usage in CA for a year.  At say $0.54/kWh let's say $0.30/kWh of that is going to executive bonuses.   That means the executives are receiving $9 billion a year in bonuses.

I want to be those executives!!  No somehow I think this is something more structural relating to bad organisation or management.

[NiHaoMike]

I have a 6.5 kW solar system on my house.  After the tax payer rebates my system will be paid off in just about four years if the power company doesn’t canoe their rates.  But they are.  Once they do payback is going to be 10 years if not more.

Or invest in automated energy management to make better use of solar power once net metering is no longer available.

[Alti]

For each circuit we simply install a relay after the circuit breaker, ouside the panel before the load to disconnect that circuit.(..)

This solution in the simplest form is called "load shedding switch". It is a switchgear installed in electrical cabinet. A link to one of the products.

I want to be those executives!!  No somehow I think this is something more structural relating to bad organisation or management.

You want to be an executive, earn piles of dollars, and you complain about their business model?

[sandalcandal]

I want to be those executives!!  No somehow I think this is something more structural relating to bad organisation or management.

You want to be an executive, earn piles of dollars, and you complain about their business model?

Perhaps lost in translation but he was clearly to me being sarcastic to make a point that the costs are in fact not due executive bonuses but an inefficient business as a whole.

[DougSpindler]

What’s the cost of the transfer switch? Well this might be nice in theory I just don’t see how it can be done. Most residential homes don’t have room next to their circuit breaker panel for another electrical panel

The PG&E CEO exec is making $5million a year.  Then you have to factor in dividends to shareholders. And most importantly the wildfires and gas line explosion’s PG&E caused. You got a pay off those tens of thousands of homeowners who lost their homes. 

[Electrodynamic]

Monkeh

Indeed we were. The problem is you can't separate this equipment by circuit when it shares the circuit with other loads. It's all very easy when you have a building wired to support this, but that just isn't the norm.
By the time you add up the cost of rewiring to suit (which, over here, is about to skyrocket because manufacturers control the regulations), a storage system starts to look cost effective. And is still thousands of pounds over a simple grid-tie with no islanding.

Your correct and one size does not fit all.

In Canada, all appliances including HVAC, garage door openers etc require a dedicated circuit since the 80's I believe. However as you say the older houses were a hodge podge of mixed circuits often blowing the breakers or fuses. So in your case what were talking about probably wouldn't be an option. I have done many projects on older houses and it's always a nightmare. I found breaker panels hidden in the walls, twisted connections made with tar/linen and town gas piping under light fixtures used as the common ground, lol.

I was lucky enough to have designed and built my last three houses as a general contractor so I overbuilt everything. All appliances and HVAC have dedicated circuits and I also separated all the lighting and other important circuits. I do all the wiring myself from the meter base on which is legal in Canada as a homeowner because everything must pass inspection. So as a contractor my perspective is very different from other people in other countries and I'm used to doing everything myself. I have never actually hired another contractor personally only subcontractors for my customers projects.

Regards

[Electrodynamic]

Alti

This solution in the simplest form is called "load shedding switch". It is a switchgear installed in electrical cabinet. A link to one of the products.

I work with Johnson controls and Siemens control systems every day and both have a common format. First is the master building controller (MBC) which is the main networked computer. Second is the PLC panel which are micro-computers with digital/analog input/output connections. Third is any auxiliary connection/devices such as analog to pneumatic, contactors, controllers, VFD's and such.

However in it's simplest form all we need is a programmable PLC with the correct number of input/output connections. I prefer to separate everything rather than use dedicated devices such as a load shedding switch. Our Johnson control systems use a PLC in a relay cabinet to switch all the 120v/15A load circuits including small inductive loads and 240/480/600v contactors for the larger loads.

It's important to get past all the tech talk and understand the foundation is programmed computers reading sensor inputs and controlling stuff with switches. It's actually very easy once we get into it and anyone can do it.

Regards

[DougSpindler]

So is this something you would install in your house? And if so how much would it cost?

[bdunham7]

It's important to get past all the tech talk and understand the foundation is programmed computers reading sensor inputs and controlling stuff with switches. It's actually very easy once we get into it and anyone can do it.

The question for me is, in the residential context and specifically, in my house, why would I want to do this?

[DougSpindler]

It's important to get past all the tech talk and understand the foundation is programmed computers reading sensor inputs and controlling stuff with switches. It's actually very easy once we get into it and anyone can do it.

The question for me is, in the residential context and specifically, in my house, why would I want to do this?

Someone posted it is being a solution.  Seems impractical to me, I’m just wondering how impractical it is?

[Marco]

Indeed we were. The problem is you can't separate this equipment by circuit when it shares the circuit with other loads. It's all very easy when you have a building wired to support this, but that just isn't the norm.

Don't any of the big inverter suppliers have wireless switches specifically for this? You could imagine for instance a system which simply have wireless switches latch off when mains falls away, then the home manager does the switch over with a small delay and resupplies power, with all loads on switches staying off to make sure the inverter can supply enough power. The same for when mains comes back, turning the switches back on, not instant but good enough and no batteries in the switches or extra wiring necessary.

We have a built in refrigerator so I can’t even get to the plug if I want to plug it into a generator with an extension cord.

Didn't your kitchen installer use a removable baseboard?

[Electrodynamic]

Doug

So is this something you would install in your house? And if so how much would it cost?

Basically anywhere I have the need, it's hard to explain.

For example, I needed a 120v/15A pump control for my horse waterer/well I drilled in the pasture. I just wanted a device to monitor the water level and turn on the pump and heater. Apparently what I was asking is impossible so I used a PLC, capacitive level sensor and pump relay to manage level control. I also used a temperature sensor/relay to control the heater and alarm to a strobe light on low temp/low level. Six years on my $60 controller has had no issues while my friends using drop in heaters and float controls always have issues.

In another case the $1300 control board/heater relay controller on my hot tub blew out. So I used a PLC, temperature sensor, clamp on current sensor to monitor the 7hp pump status and replaced the cheap 25A relay with a 75A SSR. So I could upgrade the heater controller so it never blows again for around $300 versus $1300 for a questionable control board and $200 labor.

I probably have six or seven PLC based systems controlling stuff and to be honest I don't know what I would do without them. It's just brilliant that we can take a common problem with no cheap solution, add some intelligent design and it's better than anything we can buy off the shelf.

Regards

[DougSpindler]

Indeed we were. The problem is you can't separate this equipment by circuit when it shares the circuit with other loads. It's all very easy when you have a building wired to support this, but that just isn't the norm.

Don't any of the big inverter suppliers have wireless switches specifically for this? You could imagine for instance a system which simply have wireless switches latch off when mains falls away, then the home manager does the switch over with a small delay and resupplies power. The same for when mains comes back, not instant but good enough and no battery in the switches or extra wiring necessary.

We have a built in refrigerator so I can’t even get to the plug if I want to plug it into a generator with an extension cord.

Didn't your kitchen installer use a removable baseboard?

Yes there is a removable baseboard.  But it's not that easy as there are landing feet that need to be retracted.  Then once reinstalled it needs to be releveled as the feet are lowered.  It's time consuming.

No, the inverters have no switch.  And even if there were a switch how would you "fake" the inverter out into thinking the grid power has returned.  One would need batteries and an inverter to "trigger" the inverter into delivering power.  It's not as simple as installing a transfer switch, there's a lot more to it that going it Lowes as the guy who insulted me says.

[Marco]

No, the inverters have no switch.

I wasn't really thinking in terms of cheaply modifying an existing inverter, but having a system which could be cheaply installed in a house with legacy wiring. I know say SMA has wireless switches, I just don't know if it can use that with it's backup storage system to change the load to something the backup can keep up with.

That said, if you use a separate inverter on the battery you can first turn the transfer switch, then turn on the battery inverter, which subsequently fools the solar inverter to turn back on. In theory ...

[CatalinaWOW]

What’s the cost of the transfer switch? Well this might be nice in theory I just don’t see how it can be done. Most residential homes don’t have room next to their circuit breaker panel for another electrical panel

The PG&E CEO exec is making $5million a year.  Then you have to factor in dividends to shareholders. And most importantly the wildfires and gas line explosion’s PG&E caused. You got a pay off those tens of thousands of homeowners who lost their homes.

PG&E has a bit over $5 million customers.  I won't argue over the excessiveness of that figure, but if it went to zero your monthly electric bill would go down by less than a dime.  You need to look elsewhere for savings if you want to make a meaningful cut in your bill.  Even if you zeroed the salaries of a hundred execs making that kind of money the $10 cut in your monthly bill wouldn't solve any financial problems for you.

[Marco]

Yes there is a removable baseboard.  But it's not that easy as there are landing feet that need to be retracted.  Then once reinstalled it needs to be releveled as the feet are lowered.  It's time consuming.

If I remove the baseboard I can simply pull a power strip forward and get access to the plugs for the appliances.

[free_electron]

one thing i notice in this thread is that people are going for undersized installations. Get an installation that can delivers some juice and get an inverter that won't fold under load. I understand that not everyone has the roof space to do this , or the power consumption so that it is beneficial. But in a number of cases it is.

I designed my system looking at (manly) one factor : cost. The electricity bill is x times 12 months times 20 years. What budget does that give me ? (not even accounting for price increases )

Based on that calculation , a 17 Kw solar array , 4 power walls, biiig inverter. total cost over 20 years : monthly payment of about 250$ . that's half of my summer / winter bill and 3/4 of my off-season bill. so i save at least 30% not accounting electricity price increases and net metering return. so i win no matter what.

Restrictions ? none.  The inverter is more than capable of powering everything without requiring load shedding and other shenanigans. no need for splitting circuits, shedding relays and whatnot.

Anyway. i will post updates. install begins in 10 days.

[Electrodynamic]

Marco

I wasn't really thinking in terms of cheaply modifying an existing inverter, but having a system which could be cheaply installed in a house with legacy wiring. I know say SMA has wireless switches, I just don't know if it can use that with it's backup storage system to change the load to something the backup can keep up with.

It sounds a little sketchy using wireless however the technology is proven and it should work. Worst case scenario it loads the inverter and it trips on low voltage/over current.

That said, if you use a separate inverter on the battery you can first turn the transfer switch, then turn on the battery inverter, which subsequently fools the solar inverter to turn back on. In theory ...

Personally I have my doubts because the grid tie inverter is basically designed to transform all the DC input and push it into the grid as a 60Hz AC signal not a partial load. Will it synchronize with your battery inverter voltage or will it try to push all the solar energy into your isolated inverter grid then hold or raise the voltage until one of the inverters trips on over voltage?.

I would test it on a dummy load first with something like a 1000 watt resistance heater then an inductive load. Worst case scenario the inverters should trip on over voltage ... in theory.

Regards

[Marco]

It sounds a little sketchy using wireless

As I said, you can just let the switches latch off when the power goes down ... on inverter power, they stay off. If wireless fails that only becomes a problem when mains is back and the system tries to switch them back on.

[free_electron]

one i thing i just realize is that solar systems are a contraption put together from bits and pieces made by different manufacturers. We live in an age where we have DSP's and processors with unbelievable compute power.
Why can't we have one 'power controller'. The system is a big DC bus at , let's say 400 volts. One part of the 'controller' takes Solar current and feeds that on tthe DC bus. Another part of the controller is a bidirectional  DC/DC converter that charges batteries. A third section is a DC/AC inverter powering the house and a fourth one is a bidirectional inverter than can feed grid to DC bus or dc-bus to grid.

all these systems are PWM converters. they can all be controlled by the same loop.
- more solar than house draw ? - feed battery first , then grid
- more house draw than solar ? pull from battery , then grid

of course you can set a 'reserve' limit for the battery. a small AI system can learn the home behavior and predict how much reserve is needed from batteries.

the controller can easily detect when the grid goes 'out' and simply stop commutating the power mosfets the go from dc bus to grid. done. There is your 'isolation' switch.

seriously ... how complicated can this be ? it's a bunch of ac/dc and dc/ac converters fed from a common bus.
But the problem today is that this stuff is not integrated. the panels are made by x , the microinverters by y , the batteries and their chargers by z and the inverter by q . and nothing talks to each other. i'm not even sure 'talking' would be doable, probably to slow for the control loops. . it wudl be doable if the control loop runs on one processor.

[trobbins]

In Oz, the manufacturer Selectronics has grid-tie bi-directional inverters (general model range is SP PRO) that have all the embedded control and comms to actively control PV grid tie inverters, battery input (including actively controlling Li-Ion battery modules), and controlling backup gensets (like gas Generac and petrol and diesel), and controls the syncing and connection of the various mains generators and grid (in a no-break manner, and with control of export limit), and has control outputs for load or other peripheral control, and can be paralleled or connected as 3-ph blocks.  The individual inverter block size can be down at 2-3kW all the way up to 20kW block size (eg. so the simplest basic 3ph system can be up to 60kW).  So some manufacturers do suit domestic/remote, and suit low cost standard domestic grid connected PV inverters.

[Monkeh]

It sounds a little sketchy using wireless

As I said, you can just let the switches latch off when the power goes down ... on inverter power, they stay off. If wireless fails that only becomes a problem when mains is back and the system tries to switch them back on.

So you're proposing every single item in the property get a wireless NO relay (which means burning power just to have it switched on..) just to handle the edge case of the grid going out?

[TheNewLab]

Solar on your own roof combined with your own storage.  They can get stuffed.
In about 2 weeks i will have a 17KW solar installation combined with 4 Tesla powerwalls good for 52kw/h . It'll cut my monthly cost in half.

  you must use an insane amount of power, why?

Maybe to power a number of all electric Vehicles.
Use long drives as a kind of therapy.
Search YouTube for guy who put too many solar panels on roof, decided to convert and old MG to EV. He shows off starting from 3rd gear and still burns rubber!

[ludzinc]

This is the type of question I find myself when looking over things at the house.  Basically a house is a bunch of things in close location, no itegration.

Take refrigeration, air conditioning and hot water.  You can get all of these with their own heat pump, fridge and a/c dumping heat, hot water dumping cold....  If there was a central compressor where waste fridge and a/c heat pre heated water, I do wonder what efficiencies can be gained there.

 

[TheNewLab]

This is an instance where people who have BEV are screwed even if they have solar panels.  With the grid off-line how do you charge your car if you have a BEV. 

So is almost every ICE car owner in that same situation.
Sure, keep some petrol handy, but how many do that, you can round it down to zero percent.

When the power company take the grid off-line that doesn't mean all of the city or the next city over is off-line as well.  When our house didn't have power for days, I could drive 10 minutes to the next city where the power was on and could have purchased gas. 

California has 72 different power companies.  Some cities produce there own electricity. 

So one person on one side of the street might have power, the person on the other side might not.
We are on the side of the street without power at the moment.

1.) Doug how are you counting 72 power companies? Last I counted was PG&E Southern Edison, and one city that has their own power for decodes.  Have cities, communities make up 69 independent power companies? Or are U counting power plants, or counting the listed number of EV re-charge stations.
2.) long term outage and only 10 minutes driving sucks. Can you use the Tesla run charging stations if you don't have a Tesla EV?
3.) SF YouTuber maker Simone Gertz. has a Truckla! a maker build. with pro ad commercial. That is my choice!
4.)  I remember Gov Arnold provided a 50% rebate for EV and hybrid back around 2006. It ended, Has that been renewed? There wer no commercial power was back then, would they add rebates for those also?

5.) lastly, On cost. Absolutely if you have to pay professionals for all of it, it will cost that much or more! However, Solar installing has become a racket in California. How about negotiating? and pushing for group, or multi-unit discount for Power walls. Finally, how much can you DIY. (safety is the major concern here)

[TheNewLab]

Gov Newsom, State Senate, whoever, already have plans to run numerous charging stations up and down i5 and along the other major freeways.

Aren't there some types of charging cable adaptesr where it uses a long extension cord and  connects into a standard AC electrical outlet.
It some how ups the voltage for EV, I remember some guy in downtown SF not finding a street parking spot for a charge station. Bitching about it, then pulled out this extension cord with some device and ran it into his business. Also saw years ago, pre-2000's period of solar interest, where a reporter did piece on Portland man doing same with a simple extension cord. Was a DIY EV,  "great for top up, full  charge done at home."

[DougSpindler]

@ TheNewLab  You are asking some really good questions.
The way I am counting power companies is these are the companies who exclusively sell electricity to residential and business customers in different geographical locations throughout the state.  PG&E and LA Power are the largest power providers in the country.  Scatter all over the state are small city or community providers of electricity. 

The reason why there are so many power companies has to do with how large our state is, and how each city wanted to have a couple of street lights at night. I took a college class where I learned about the electrification of our state over the past 140 years.  Santa Clara county for example is it's own power company.  They have four jet engines mounted into the ground to produce electricity. 

You might find this interesting.  When the jet engines are producing power our air is measurably cleaner.  Not all power companies produce power, so they buy it from the grid.   
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_United_States_electric_companies#California

One can use the Tesla charging stations even if you do not have a Tesla, but you have to buy an adaptor.  Cost for that adapter around $300.  Likewise Tesla car owners can buy an adapter for around $400 dollars to convert a non-Tesla charger so it can charge a Tesla.

I don't think it was a 50% rebate, but when I purchased my EV I received $12,500 in cash and rebates.

Solar sales in California is a racket, you got that right,  For the solar system installed on my home I was given quotes from between $15,000 to $60,000 for the same size system.  Just goes to show you how greedy the solar sales folks are.  They all work off of commission.

There are enough Tesla owners in California I'm sure Tesla is continuing to install additional chargers.  EV charging at work has become a perk for employees so they are installing EV chargers.

[DougSpindler]

Want to know how people in California who installed solar are about to get screwed by PG&E?  PG&E's received permission from the state to change rates for solar customers.  Solar customers are "paid" by PG&E for surplus electricity.  During the summer during peak hours PG&E currently "pays" me $0.54 kWhr.  I can then use that payment to buy electricity for $0.14 during off-peak hours.  This allows me to sell PG&E 1 kWhr and receive 3.8 kWhr in return.

This was a real incentive for people to install solar.  Here's how PG&E is getting their revenge.  When rates change (for some starting on January 1, 2021), PG&E is will only pay $0.16.  This means when I need to buy a kWh from PG&E during peak I will have to sell them 3.25 kWhr. 

I'm screwed, as is everyone else who installed solar who is a PG&E customer.  My system currently offsets 100% of my electric bill.  Which is why I purchased solar.  Soon as the rates change, I'll be lucky if it offsets 50% of my bill.  Others with much larger systems will be lucky if 30% of their bill is offset.

The slimly solar sales folks know this, but aren't telling people this.  Solar sales is such a racket.

[tom66]

Why should you not be paid closer to wholesale rates?  You must have known that when you installed the golden rates would not stay forever.  You're essentially being subsidised by all the other customers.

In the UK you get paid about 5p/kWh for any energy you feed in and draw it back at 15p/kWh.  The 4.5p/kWh rate is actually more than most companies are paid for their energy outside of peak rates.  (The average strike price is £40/MWh, or about 4p/kWh.)  The rest of the cost is billing, metering, theft, grants to poorer homes ('warm home discount', etc.),  smart meter installations and of course maintenance.

[Marco]

So you're proposing every single item in the property get a wireless NO relay (which means burning power just to have it switched on..) just to handle the edge case of the grid going out?

Just the loads which would trip an undersized backup. So mostly a subset of heating, AC, boiler, washer/drier, dishwasher (just isolate any car charger at the fuse box). Then if needed/wanted and with sufficient excess power you could turn any of them back on manually while on backup power.

The lights stay on regardless and more importantly the fridge and freezer.

[Monkeh]

So you're proposing every single item in the property get a wireless NO relay (which means burning power just to have it switched on..) just to handle the edge case of the grid going out?

Just the loads which would trip an undersized backup. So mostly a subset of heating, AC, boiler, washer/drier, dishwasher (just isolate any car charger at the fuse box). Then if needed/wanted and with sufficient excess power you could turn any of them back on manually while on backup power.

The lights stay on regardless and more importantly the fridge and freezer.

That would work if you have a deeply inadequate storage solution (which is a waste of money, do it right or don't bother), but it wouldn't help a storageless solar inverter any.

[free_electron]

One can use the Tesla charging stations even if you do not have a Tesla, but you have to buy an adaptor.  Cost for that adapter around $300.  Likewise Tesla car owners can buy an adapter for around $400 dollars to convert a non-Tesla charger so it can charge a Tesla.

That's not correct. you can not charge a regular car from a Tesla charger. The connector is different and no, there is no adapter. Tesla charger charge Tesla's only. Reason being is that there is a difference charging from 120 or 240 and the supercharger. when charging from 110 or 240 the on-board charger does the work. when supercharging the on-board charger disengages and only transmits telemetry to the charger which is in the groundstation.

If you are talking about a destination or home charger , i believe there is an aftermarket contraption but don't know anything about that.
As for a Tesla charging form a J1772 that adapter comes standard with the car.

[free_electron]

I'm screwed, as is everyone else who installed solar who is a PG&E customer.  My system currently offsets 100% of my electric bill.  Which is why I purchased solar.  Soon as the rates change, I'll be lucky if it offsets 50% of my bill. 

so add a few panels ! and a battery. pack.
I personally don't care about this net metering. if it gets me something fine. if not fine too. The idea is to not need the grid. : large array , large storage

[Monkeh]

One can use the Tesla charging stations even if you do not have a Tesla, but you have to buy an adaptor.  Cost for that adapter around $300.  Likewise Tesla car owners can buy an adapter for around $400 dollars to convert a non-Tesla charger so it can charge a Tesla.

That's not correct. you can not charge a regular car from a Tesla charger. The connector is different and no, there is no adapter. Tesla charger charge Tesla's only. Reason being is that there is a difference charging from 120 or 240 and the supercharger. when charging from 110 or 240 the on-board charger does the work. when supercharging the on-board charger disengages and only transmits telemetry to the charger which is in the groundstation.

Reason being they're the Apple of automotive.

[Marco]

That would work if you have a deeply inadequate storage solution (which is a waste of money, do it right or don't bother)

If you can't supply your own power year round completely off grid even with 100+ year weather occurrences it's a waste of money ... do it right or don't bother, complete autarky or bust!

[bdunham7]

That's not correct. you can not charge a regular car from a Tesla charger. The connector is different and no, there is no adapter. Tesla charger charge Tesla's only. Reason being is that there is a difference charging from 120 or 240 and the supercharger. when charging from 110 or 240 the on-board charger does the work. when supercharging the on-board charger disengages and only transmits telemetry to the charger which is in the groundstation.

All DCFS (Chademo and CCS) work that way.  There's no particular reason an adapter couldn't be made and I presume Tesla simply won't allow it to be used even for a fee.  They do make adapters to go the other way (charge your Tesla from Chademo or CCS) because the owners of those chargers don't discriminate by make. As an additional wrinkle, Tesla now uses the Euro-CCS plug in Europe.

[free_electron]

All DCFS (Chademo and CCS) work that way.  There's no particular reason an adapter couldn't be made and I presume Tesla simply won't allow it to be used even for a fee.  They do make adapters to go the other way (charge your Tesla from Chademo or CCS) because the owners of those chargers don't discriminate by make. As an additional wrinkle, Tesla now uses the Euro-CCS plug in Europe.

There is a difference.
Tesla made cars when there was no infrastructure. so they built it. you can't sit around for years waiting for someone to begin if you want something done. and even now the standards are in flux,  requiring different connectors that are incompatible...

That being said : here in the US i have no idea where there are chademo or ccs stations. i see a few j1772 stations left and right but the number is small. if i pull into a parking lot where there is a supercharger there are like 20 stalls for Tesla and 2 to 3 with a j1772 ... The companies building the charging networks are rolling out very slowly. And i have not seen any chargers being put in by car makers themselves.it is always some charging company. i beleive one is partially owned by volkswagen.

second point : why are those connectors so horrific ? it's like it is done on purpose. make em big and bulky, hard to handle and heavy including heavy cables , and then require a horrific looking door on the car where they need plugging in. yuckk. we've got what now ? 8 or nine different types , none of which are compatible with each other ?

i think i charged once on a j1772 to try it out but the charge rate was miserable and i had to pay for it. So no, thanks.

[bdunham7]

https://www.electrifyamerica.com/locate-charger/

There are about 500 stations in operation with a few hundred more on the way.  All of the other manufacturers have cooperated on this and I don't expect to see too much brand-specific charging infrastructure other than Tesla.

second point : why are those connectors so horrific ? it's like it is done on purpose. make em big and bulky, hard to handle and heavy including heavy cables , and then require a horrific looking door on the car where they need plugging in. yuckk. we've got what now ? 8 or nine different types , none of which are compatible with each other ?

The CCS connector is a bit bulky, but 'horrific looking door'?  I'm not that aesthetically sensitive that I would convulse at the sight of a painted charging door that is about the same size as any other fuel door.  The CCS is dominating the market right now--only Nissan retains Chademo and as I said, even Tesla is going to Euro-CCS in Europe.  The CCS setup is clunky because it is backwards-compatible with J1772. There are really only two incompatible connectors right now in the non-Tesla US system--Chademo and CCS.  Compatibility with J1772 is important because home and destination (parking garage) J1772 chargers work just fine, even though J1772 is too slow to be practical for enroute charging.  J1772 has actually become scarcer, EVGo has removed a lot of theirs and others (Blink) have just stopped working.  I don't think anyone is installing them new anymore.

[Electrodynamic]

Doug

This was a real incentive for people to install solar.  Here's how PG&E is getting their revenge.  When rates change (for some starting on January 1, 2021), PG&E is will only pay $0.16.  This means when I need to buy a kWh from PG&E during peak I will have to sell them 3.25 kWhr.

I'm screwed, as is everyone else who installed solar who is a PG&E customer.  My system currently offsets 100% of my electric bill.  Which is why I purchased solar.  Soon as the rates change, I'll be lucky if it offsets 50% of my bill.  Others with much larger systems will be lucky if 30% of their bill is offset.

The power company probably did the same math and decided peaking plants, renewables and/or storage was more profitable which was inevitable in my opinion.

However we can play the same game using intelligent design. Rather than give them energy we could store the power for our own use bypassing feed in. Or use any excess power to heat a hot water tank for domestic hot water and heating. Basically any kind of storage levels the playing field.

In my area they don't have peak rates or smart metering to any large degree and power is generally exchanged at the same rate. However I just signed onto a REA 5 year coop rate at $0.065/kWhr so power is still relatively cheap. In fact it only increased by $0.003 in the last 9 years because of all the renewables coming on line which is kind of nice.

Most places in Canada were smart and foresaw the future so they deregulated the industry separating producers and grid operators. They also mandated that any power fed into the system as a minimum is paid at the same rate as that used. Were not big on monopolies up here and try our best to avoid them.

Regards

[Electrodynamic]

ludzinc

This is the type of question I find myself when looking over things at the house.  Basically a house is a bunch of things in close location, no itegration.

Take refrigeration, air conditioning and hot water.  You can get all of these with their own heat pump, fridge and a/c dumping heat, hot water dumping cold....  If there was a central compressor where waste fridge and a/c heat pre heated water, I do wonder what efficiencies can be gained there.

Exactly, my brother had a 5kW heat pump pool heater blowing cold air to atmosphere when it was 37C outside. His 5kW pool heat pump was literally running at the same time as his 5kW house AC and I was just shaking my head. Why not remove the heat from the house and put it in the pool?. There is nothing intelligent about the way most people manage energy which also creates many business opportunities for us.

Regards

[free_electron]

The CCS connector is a bit bulky, but 'horrific looking door'?

take a look at the nissan leaf and you will understand what i mean ...


now compare that to the tesla charge port ...


the nissan door is like 1/4 of the width of the car. the tesla door is a little 4 by 5 cm patch hidden in the taillight. and the tesla connector handles double the power than the nissan contraption. It is ridiculous to use such bulky connectors. Even the mennekes (europe) connector is a ridiculous thing. It cna barely do 50 ampere. The tesla 'variant' uses two pins to  backport the supercharger onto that mennekes outline and they pump 120 kilowatt through it without issues.
Don;t these connector makers know how to make a pin and socket that can handle some power ? i really don't get it. it is ridiculous . you don't need 50 pins for all this stuff. 3 pins or 4 max.  2 or 3 for power ( 2 phase , 3 phase and high power dc ) and one for communication. you don't even need a ground for communication. capacitively couple it and detect the edges.

The other designs are contraptions bolted together to shoehorn in things they did not think about. first j1772 , then an addon with two more high power prongs, then chademo with 8 wires . it all hangs together with ducttape and rubber bands.

[coppice]

second point : why are those connectors so horrific ? it's like it is done on purpose. make em big and bulky, hard to handle and heavy including heavy cables , and then require a horrific looking door on the car where they need plugging in. yuckk. we've got what now ? 8 or nine different types , none of which are compatible with each other ?

Some cars try to keep the charging port door quite discrete, while others seem to use it to scream out "I'M AN ELECTRIC CAR". The connector itself has to be big and chunky. Its going to be handled roughly, so it needs to be rugged. It carrys high current, and needs to do so reliably as the contacts age and get dirty, so those contacts need to be chunky. Some of these cables have a water cooling circuit inside them, and that is going to bulk them up quite a bit. However, that is an example of them trying to avoid the cables being to unwieldy. Using thicker copper and no cooling makes the whole structure stiffer, and harder to work with.

Overall the connectors on the car and the end of the lead are no bigger than those used for gas or diesel. What puzzles me is how little rain protection these connection systems seem to have.

[free_electron]

The connector itself has to be big and chunky.  Its going to be handled roughly, so it needs to be rugged. It carrys high current, and needs to do so reliably as the contacts age and get dirty, so those contacts need to be chunky. Some of these cables have a water cooling circuit inside them, and that is going to bulk them up quite a bit. However, that is an example of them trying to avoid the cables being to unwieldy. Using thicker copper and no cooling makes the whole structure stiffer, and harder to work with.

Overall the connectors on the car and the end of the lead are no bigger than those used for gas or diesel. What puzzles me is how little rain protection these connection systems seem to have.

why ?

Tesla connector :

rugged ? check
high current ? check 300 to 400 ampere
water cooling ? check

Try explaining me again why the connectors need to be that bulky. i still don't get it.

for your enjoyment : second picture on the right is the tesla US supercharger connector. can handle 250Kilowatt.

[tom66]

the nissan door is like 1/4 of the width of the car. the tesla door is a little 4 by 5 cm patch hidden in the taillight. and the tesla connector handles double the power than the nissan contraption. It is ridiculous to use such bulky connectors. Even the mennekes (europe) connector is a ridiculous thing. It cna barely do 50 ampere. The tesla 'variant' uses two pins to  backport the supercharger onto that mennekes outline and they pump 120 kilowatt through it without issues.
Don;t these connector makers know how to make a pin and socket that can handle some power ? i really don't get it. it is ridiculous . you don't need 50 pins for all this stuff. 3 pins or 4 max.  2 or 3 for power ( 2 phase , 3 phase and high power dc ) and one for communication. you don't even need a ground for communication. capacitively couple it and detect the edges.

The other designs are contraptions bolted together to shoehorn in things they did not think about. first j1772 , then an addon with two more high power prongs, then chademo with 8 wires . it all hangs together with ducttape and rubber bands.

If the Tesla port is so superior, why do European Model 3's use CCS?

Also, CCS supports water cooling and 500kW fast charging (in latest standard.)  The North American Tesla connector is almost certainly limited to 250kW, due to its smaller contact area.

[coppice]

the nissan door is like 1/4 of the width of the car. the tesla door is a little 4 by 5 cm patch hidden in the taillight. and the tesla connector handles double the power than the nissan contraption. It is ridiculous to use such bulky connectors. Even the mennekes (europe) connector is a ridiculous thing. It cna barely do 50 ampere. The tesla 'variant' uses two pins to  backport the supercharger onto that mennekes outline and they pump 120 kilowatt through it without issues.
Don;t these connector makers know how to make a pin and socket that can handle some power ? i really don't get it. it is ridiculous . you don't need 50 pins for all this stuff. 3 pins or 4 max.  2 or 3 for power ( 2 phase , 3 phase and high power dc ) and one for communication. you don't even need a ground for communication. capacitively couple it and detect the edges.

The other designs are contraptions bolted together to shoehorn in things they did not think about. first j1772 , then an addon with two more high power prongs, then chademo with 8 wires . it all hangs together with ducttape and rubber bands.

If the Tesla port is so superior, why do European Model 3's use CCS?

Also, CCS supports water cooling and 500kW fast charging (in latest standard.)  The North American Tesla connector is almost certainly limited to 250kW, due to its smaller contact area.

I expect this comes down to 2 things. First, if Tesla lock themselves into their own charging network in the US they don't have much to lose. Locking themselves out of the CCS networks has a bigger impact in Europe, especially in countries like Norway, with their high penetration rate for EVs. Second, the J1772 plug in the US is a mess. Early on in its development colleagues were asking me about ideas for adding features to J1772 in ways that you would only normally investigate for a mature system needing a grafted on enhancement. In reality there were no chargers in place at that time, and the whole design should still have been much more fluid. The CCS2 plug is easy to criticise. Its not clear why the AC charger is in car, rather than on your wall or in the lead. There is no clear reason for that big box in the home lead to only incorporate protection circuitry. If the CCS2 plug were DC only it would be a lot smaller. However, CCS2 is reasonably sane, and its the only common ground that allows a car to plug into most chargers.

[james_s]

the nissan door is like 1/4 of the width of the car. the tesla door is a little 4 by 5 cm patch hidden in the taillight. and the tesla connector handles double the power than the nissan contraption. It is ridiculous to use such bulky connectors. Even the mennekes (europe) connector is a ridiculous thing. It cna barely do 50 ampere. The tesla 'variant' uses two pins to  backport the supercharger onto that mennekes outline and they pump 120 kilowatt through it without issues.
Don;t these connector makers know how to make a pin and socket that can handle some power ? i really don't get it. it is ridiculous . you don't need 50 pins for all this stuff. 3 pins or 4 max.  2 or 3 for power ( 2 phase , 3 phase and high power dc ) and one for communication. you don't even need a ground for communication. capacitively couple it and detect the edges.

Who cares how big the door is though? The Leaf like most other modern cars is hideously ugly, you don't buy a Leaf for the style. I haven't seen the connector that goes into it, but the connectors my friend's Kia and another friends Chevy Spark use are not unusually bulky.

[Ed.Kloonk]

Even a reasonable 3-4kW solar system would provide enough to run fans,  fridges/freezers, even a microwave oven, without storage, when the sun is up.
Enough to make a power cut more bearable.

Here we are at the end of October when the sun is lower in the sky.  At what time do you think the panels would be producing enough power to power a refrigerator?  And for how many hours? Not sure why one would want to power fans in fall.  Around this time is when we turn on the heater.  Think those solar panels could heat the house?

I've found that I only need to provide enough power for the internet router and charge a few phones (to access FB) and that is all that I need to do to keep the lounge lizards happy. They have very thick blankets. What do you need a fridge for? We don't refrigerate corn chips.

 

[bdunham7]

The CCS2 plug is easy to criticise. Its not clear why the AC charger is in car, rather than on your wall or in the lead. There is no clear reason for that big box in the home lead to only incorporate protection circuitry. If the CCS2 plug were DC only it would be a lot smaller. However, CCS2 is reasonably sane, and its the only common ground that allows a car to plug into most chargers.

There's also no reason that the box needs to be smaller--space is generally a non issue.  While I'm sure you could pack my J1772 EVSE into a smaller box, it wouldn't be a competitive advantage. J1772 is an old and very simple standard, but it still works perfectly adequately for home and destination charging and there is a very significant installed base--by that I mean I have one in my garage.  I see no competitive advantage in Teslas sleeker connector unless one has an Apple-like obsession with unnecessary aesthetics.  Yes, the CCS connector looks like a goofy monster.  So what?

[bdunham7]

I've found that I only need to provide enough power for the internet router and charge a few phones (to access FB) and that is all that I need to do to keep the lounge lizards happy. They have very thick blankets. What do you need a fridge for? We don't refrigerate corn chips.

We like our beer cold.

[DougSpindler]

I've found that I only need to provide enough power for the internet router and charge a few phones (to access FB) and that is all that I need to do to keep the lounge lizards happy. They have very thick blankets. What do you need a fridge for? We don't refrigerate corn chips.

We like our beer cold.

What about corn chips?

[bdunham7]

Try explaining me again why the connectors need to be that bulky. i still don't get it.

The one you are showing are compatible with 3-phase power.  The US CCS is almost as bulky, but is backwards compatible with J1772 without any adapter.  The DCFS section isn't that bulky and may be more robust.

for your enjoyment : second picture on the right is the tesla US supercharger connector. can handle 250Kilowatt.

Can it?

[NiHaoMike]

So you're proposing every single item in the property get a wireless NO relay (which means burning power just to have it switched on..) just to handle the edge case of the grid going out?

Latching relays don't use power to stay on or off.

That would work if you have a deeply inadequate storage solution (which is a waste of money, do it right or don't bother), but it wouldn't help a storageless solar inverter any.

Some newer solar inverters can do backup during the day without batteries.

I can see that being a popular option for those who prefer or already have some other storage solution, such as portable battery packs.

[Monkeh]

So you're proposing every single item in the property get a wireless NO relay (which means burning power just to have it switched on..) just to handle the edge case of the grid going out?

Latching relays don't use power to stay on or off.

And when the inverter chokes out, you can't turn them off.

Some newer solar inverters can do backup during the day without batteries.

https://www.eevblog.com/forum/renewable-energy/california-without-electricity-again-solarwind-no-help/msg3305122/#msg3305122

Good luck with that.

[james_s]

Even a reasonable 3-4kW solar system would provide enough to run fans,  fridges/freezers, even a microwave oven, without storage, when the sun is up.
Enough to make a power cut more bearable.

Here we are at the end of October when the sun is lower in the sky.  At what time do you think the panels would be producing enough power to power a refrigerator?  And for how many hours? Not sure why one would want to power fans in fall.  Around this time is when we turn on the heater.  Think those solar panels could heat the house?

I've found that I only need to provide enough power for the internet router and charge a few phones (to access FB) and that is all that I need to do to keep the lounge lizards happy. They have very thick blankets. What do you need a fridge for? We don't refrigerate corn chips.

 

I quite comfortably run my whole house on a 2kW generator during power outages. That includes the refrigerator, gas furnace, lights, TV, computers and other assorted stuff. My hot water, furnace and kitchen range are all gas so they present very little electrical load. The things I can't reasonably run on that little generator are my microwave oven and clothes dryer, and I do have to do some load management so I don't try to run too many of the larger loads at once. I can't run my AC either but I've never had a power outage in the middle of summer.

If I had a gas dryer I think I'd do just fine with a 4kW system, it's very rare that I see more than about 2500W on my energy monitor when I'm not running the dryer or AC. Most of the time it hovers under 500W.

[fourfathom]

[...] I can't run my AC either but I've never had a power outage in the middle of summer. [...]

California has had widespread power outages and rolling blackouts during the summer.  Too many people were using air conditioning for the system to handle.  For that matter, the smoke from the massive fires significantly reduced the output from solar panels.  The smoke also reduced the air temperature by several degrees, and this went on for a couple of weeks.

[Monkeh]

[...] I can't run my AC either but I've never had a power outage in the middle of summer. [...]

California has had widespread power outages and rolling blackouts during the summer.  Too many people were using air conditioning for the system to handle.

Perhaps if people let them use those "useless, evil, communist" load controls, everyone could get some cold without darkness.

[maginnovision]

They have incentives to let them control your AC but in a lot of areas of California that won't do much because they just set your temp. In the summer if it's 90 outside at 10am it doesn't matter since your AC would still run all day. When do they have the most problems? When it's the hottest. I guess they could monitor and map every circuit of your breaker and cut loads(except AC?) but that's not going to help our electric bills when they make us pay for it over time with interest.

Since having control of your thermostat doesn't work they just pick an area and say fuck this lot and cut the power so that others can keep it. It's really common for mains stuff to blow(up) during the summer. My dad was without power for 4 days as part of "load management" while it was 110 at his house. I keep voting against these people but they keep getting elected anyway.

[Electrodynamic]

maginnovision

Since having control of your thermostat doesn't work they just pick an area and say fuck this lot and cut the power so that others can keep it. It's really common for mains stuff to blow(up) during the summer. My dad was without power for 4 days as part of "load management" while it was 110 at his house. I keep voting against these people but they keep getting elected anyway.

If the humidity if not too high a person could use a whole house evaporative cooler which uses 90% less energy.
https://www.homedepot.com/p/Champion-Cooler-6500-CFM-Down-Draft-Roof-Evaporative-Cooler-for-2400-sq-ft-Motor-Not-Included-5000-DD/100161511

A 1/2 hp motor draws 600w on average, the circulation pump is negligible so a reasonably sized solar system should have no problems. Sure there is more maintenance and it requires water but 90% less power is a big deal.

Regards

[james_s]

Evaporative coolers only work well in desert climates, anywhere else they just make the air sticky and humid. Up here in the northwest the main benefit of AC is removing humidity from the air, the reduced temperature is an added bonus.

[tom66]

Not to mention an evaporative cooler requires a constant supply of water, which in an area like California seems like robbing Peter to pay Paul.

[free_electron]

If the Tesla port is so superior, why do European Model 3's use CCS?

politics ? the mandate for 'standards' led by politicians who understand nothing about technology ? my guess , i don't know.
Of course it is nice not to have vendor lock-in like apple with their proprietary connectors. But looking at the path to come to CCS ..  This guy over here sells oranges. We as a consortium of pear growers are going to define what the orange juice should look like...

[NiHaoMike]

They have incentives to let them control your AC but in a lot of areas of California that won't do much because they just set your temp. In the summer if it's 90 outside at 10am it doesn't matter since your AC would still run all day. When do they have the most problems? When it's the hottest. I guess they could monitor and map every circuit of your breaker and cut loads(except AC?) but that's not going to help our electric bills when they make us pay for it over time with interest.

Perhaps the solution is to run the A/C more before the peak, effectively making the peak wider but lower?

[tom66]

If the Tesla port is so superior, why do European Model 3's use CCS?

politics ? the mandate for 'standards' led by politicians who understand nothing about technology ? my guess , i don't know.
Of course it is nice not to have vendor lock-in like apple with their proprietary connectors. But looking at the path to come to CCS ..  This guy over here sells oranges. We as a consortium of pear growers are going to define what the orange juice should look like...

But they could have used their modified Mennekes connector and still be compliant with EU regs.  Model S/X still have this.
My guess is Tesla, at least in Europe, see the writing on the wall, with networks like Ionity and Fortum offering similar capability to superchargers but for all makes.

The question is whether Tesla will bring a N.A.  CCS adapter to market - Electrify America has a substantial network built out now.

[SilverSolder]

They have incentives to let them control your AC but in a lot of areas of California that won't do much because they just set your temp. In the summer if it's 90 outside at 10am it doesn't matter since your AC would still run all day. When do they have the most problems? When it's the hottest. I guess they could monitor and map every circuit of your breaker and cut loads(except AC?) but that's not going to help our electric bills when they make us pay for it over time with interest.

Perhaps the solution is to run the A/C more before the peak, effectively making the peak wider but lower?

If you turn off the A/C, the house heats up surprisingly fast.  -  The answer might be in better insulation, even in hot climates!

[tom66]

Solar film on windows plus blinds can make a huge difference.  As can reflective paint and loft insulation.

[NiHaoMike]

How many hours wide is the peak currently? I'd imagine you'll get at least an hour or two of storage time, enough to make a significant difference in the peak.

A combination of more solar and ice storage air conditioning will probably be the easiest solution for the summer.

[Marco]

And when the inverter chokes out, you can't turn them off.

You could have a capacitor to supply the power to turn off a latching relay electronically when mains/inverter power falls away.

Then again it will need a wifi/zigbee transceiver, so is the power consumption of a normally open relay really relevant?

[Monkeh]

And when the inverter chokes out, you can't turn them off.

You could have a capacitor to supply the power to turn off a latching relay electronically when mains/inverter power falls away.

Then again it will need a wifi/zigbee transceiver, so is the power consumption of a normally open relay really relevant?

You could, but that's another large, costly component with a lifetime..

Wifi or better, more appropriate radios can be very low power. A big hunk of a relay capable of surviving real-world high power loads? Not so much.

We're more or less rehashing the reason solar is split into two main categories: Grid-tie with no islanding capability, and large storage backed..

[SilverSolder]

And when the inverter chokes out, you can't turn them off.

You could have a capacitor to supply the power to turn off a latching relay electronically when mains/inverter power falls away.

Then again it will need a wifi/zigbee transceiver, so is the power consumption of a normally open relay really relevant?

You could, but that's another large, costly component with a lifetime..

Wifi or better, more appropriate radios can be very low power. A big hunk of a relay capable of surviving real-world high power loads? Not so much.

We're more or less rehashing the reason solar is split into two main categories: Grid-tie with no islanding capability, and large storage backed..

I guess there is a third category of "DIY projects" where someone has made some kind of custom solution for their house, even if it is as simple as an extension cord from their fridge to a battery bank or a generator.  It all depends how often the power goes, how much $ and effort to put into it.

[Marco]

You could, but that's another large, costly component with a lifetime..

It takes around 20 mJ to set/reset this latching relay, a couple microfarads at mains voltage is more than enough.

[CatalinaWOW]

A lot of these solutions, although relatively simple from a technical standpoint, face regulatory issues.  Anything which has any chance whatsoever of back feeding the grid requires certification and approval.  Your analysis of the robustness of the isolation is insufficient and it appears from here that the motivation to evaluate them on the government and power company side is small.

You can always go outlaw, but if something goes wrong everything you own is at risk.  There will be no legal defense.

[Marco]

A lot of these solutions, although relatively simple from a technical standpoint, face regulatory issues.

They'll sell you 5kW backup storage systems which can work with an Automatic Transfer Switch and try to power your house right now. That it will instantly trip due to overload is your own problem.

Outside of extreme nanny states like Oz.

[Monkeh]

A lot of these solutions, although relatively simple from a technical standpoint, face regulatory issues.  Anything which has any chance whatsoever of back feeding the grid requires certification and approval.  Your analysis of the robustness of the isolation is insufficient and it appears from here that the motivation to evaluate them on the government and power company side is small.

There is no difficulty whatsoever in the isolation. It's a long, long solved problem. The issue is in keeping an installation alive when the output of the panels can drop by several kW in seconds, minutes if the wind's slow.

A storage solution will pay you back (eventually, perhaps). Everything else is sunk money.

[maginnovision]

I've considered a battery backup(with and without solar) but I always come back to the heat. Tesla powerwall for instance recommends indoor install if temps are regularly over 86 or under 32. We get below freezing and are commonly over 86. My house isn't set up for a battery room.

[NiHaoMike]

The issue is in keeping an installation alive when the output of the panels can drop by several kW in seconds, minutes if the wind's slow.

Not too difficult to make wireless or PLC connected relays that can disconnect less important loads in milliseconds. Or, for that matter, smart loads that are aware of the power situation and will automatically adjust usage. Such an approach would make sense to integrate portable battery packs into the system.

[Monkeh]

The issue is in keeping an installation alive when the output of the panels can drop by several kW in seconds, minutes if the wind's slow.

Not too difficult to make wireless or PLC connected relays that can disconnect less important loads in milliseconds.

.. but again, it's costly and fairly impractical to do that to an existing installation. Why on earth would you put significant money into that over storage?

[CatalinaWOW]

I agree that isolation is a long solved problem.  Just as switches and connectors are long solved problems.  The issue is installing a homebrew solution as suggested in several of these posts.

[Monkeh]

I agree that isolation is a long solved problem.  Just as switches and connectors are long solved problems.  The issue is installing a homebrew solution as suggested in several of these posts.

Well, that's exactly why normal grid-tie inverters have to comply with standards preventing them from islanding.

[NiHaoMike]

.. but again, it's costly and fairly impractical to do that to an existing installation. Why on earth would you put significant money into that over storage?

The whole point of using PLC or wireless is to remove the need for extensive rewiring. Smart plugs are cheap.

[Monkeh]

.. but again, it's costly and fairly impractical to do that to an existing installation. Why on earth would you put significant money into that over storage?

The whole point of using PLC or wireless is to remove the need for extensive rewiring. Smart plugs are cheap.

Not when you need to put them on every single point of load they're not. Especially if you'd like them to last.

[tszaboo]

If the Tesla port is so superior, why do European Model 3's use CCS?

politics ? the mandate for 'standards' led by politicians who understand nothing about technology ? my guess , i don't know.
Of course it is nice not to have vendor lock-in like apple with their proprietary connectors. But looking at the path to come to CCS ..  This guy over here sells oranges. We as a consortium of pear growers are going to define what the orange juice should look like...

Yeah, they might not understand technology, but they understand politics. They also know, that they sholdn't rely on one company to dominate a market and standardize on something that can charge a Renault Zoe (however crap their charger is) so people and companies have a choice. Just like when EU decided that companies have to put a freaking USB port on the phone, no matter how much they want to use their proprietary crap. You are welcome.

[trobbins]

A lot of these solutions, although relatively simple from a technical standpoint, face regulatory issues.

They'll sell you 5kW backup storage systems which can work with an Automatic Transfer Switch and try to power your house right now. That it will instantly trip due to overload is your own problem.
Outside of extreme nanny states like Oz.

Yeh most people in Oz don't mind still being alive due to mandatory need for an electrician to change house wiring (to maintain regulatory compliance) and test protective functions like mandated earth leakage CBs, and protective earth distribution with a specific wire as the active, and any generator that could connect to the grid needing an approved isolation/auto disconnect switch, and zero new cases and deaths from Covid - its a different world indeed over here.

[coppice]

If you turn off the A/C, the house heats up surprisingly fast.  -  The answer might be in better insulation, even in hot climates!

Insulation of walls and the roof in hot climates is a no brainer. However, windows are a problem. In a cold climate you double or triple glaze, but in a hot climate this can greatly increase the greenhouse effect and heat the place up. Double glazing with coatings on the inner surface, well protected from damage, help to offset the greenhouse effect, but the only really effective solution for insulation against a hot sun is a sealed box.

[james_s]

Yeh most people in Oz don't mind still being alive due to mandatory need for an electrician to change house wiring (to maintain regulatory compliance) and test protective functions like mandated earth leakage CBs, and protective earth distribution with a specific wire as the active, and any generator that could connect to the grid needing an approved isolation/auto disconnect switch, and zero new cases and deaths from Covid - its a different world indeed over here.

You seriously are not allowed to DIY home wiring there, even if you pull a permit and have it inspected? I would go crazy being treated like a small incompetent child by the government. It's very, very rare for someone to be hurt by messing with wiring here. If you obey the law and follow the code there are not too many ways to screw it up, and hacks who ignore the law are not going to be stopped by another law preventing them from doing it. As for generators, we require a proper isolated transfer switch here too, anything that could potentially backfeed the grid is illegal. It's perfectly acceptable for a homeowner to install it themselves though, so long as they get it signed off by an inspector who will check that it has been done correctly.

[Marco]

Yeh most people in Oz don't mind still being alive due to mandatory need for an electrician to change house wiring

If most people in Oz need electricians to prevent that from happening that does not reflect kindly on them

[maginnovision]

Yeh most people in Oz don't mind still being alive due to mandatory need for an electrician to change house wiring

If most people in Oz need electricians to prevent that from happening that does not reflect kindly on them

I liked your first response better.

[NiHaoMike]

Insulation of walls and the roof in hot climates is a no brainer. However, windows are a problem. In a cold climate you double or triple glaze, but in a hot climate this can greatly increase the greenhouse effect and heat the place up. Double glazing with coatings on the inner surface, well protected from damage, help to offset the greenhouse effect, but the only really effective solution for insulation against a hot sun is a sealed box.

Cheap, low tech solution: cut cardboard to fit window and glue aluminum foil on one side. Now you have a reflector to bounce the direct sunlight back out, easily removable when not needed. If you want some light in, just make it an imperfect fit.

[trobbins]

I would go crazy being treated like a small incompetent child by the government.

The aim has been to save lives, and a continuing improvement in safety practices over decades, and more recently verification, have suppressed deaths.  Some countries see 1 death as 1 too many, rather than a civil rights impost - sort of like gun control, and Covid protection.  We also use 240Vac, which makes any tingle that much more shocking.

[SilverSolder]

I would go crazy being treated like a small incompetent child by the government.

The aim has been to save lives, and a continuing improvement in safety practices over decades, and more recently verification, have suppressed deaths.  Some countries see 1 death as 1 too many, rather than a civil rights impost - sort of like gun control, and Covid protection.  We also use 240Vac, which makes any tingle that much more shocking.

In some countries, trade unions are very protective of work for their members - where they have an influence on lawmaking, you sometimes see very strong rules against DIY of any kind.  This is the other side of the coin from laissez-faire capitalism.   Balance?  We've heard of it!

[ahbushnell]

Insulation of walls and the roof in hot climates is a no brainer. However, windows are a problem. In a cold climate you double or triple glaze, but in a hot climate this can greatly increase the greenhouse effect and heat the place up. Double glazing with coatings on the inner surface, well protected from damage, help to offset the greenhouse effect, but the only really effective solution for insulation against a hot sun is a sealed box.

That's why we have shades on the windows in the summer.  Double glazed windows are great.

[james_s]

The aim has been to save lives, and a continuing improvement in safety practices over decades, and more recently verification, have suppressed deaths.  Some countries see 1 death as 1 too many, rather than a civil rights impost - sort of like gun control, and Covid protection.  We also use 240Vac, which makes any tingle that much more shocking.

No, the aim is bullshit protectionism, the IBEW (electrician's union) would have the same laws here if they could get away with it. It seems so strange to me that so many people are willing to be treated like small children in the name of saving everyone from themselves. The folly of seeing 1 death as too many is that zero deaths is not achievable, so setting it as a goal is carte blanche to implement whatever rules they want, but suckers fall for the rhetoric. Meanwhile as with the other topic you mention that is frowned upon to discuss around here, these regulations only work on people who obey the laws and regulations, and those people are not the problem in the first place.

For the record, we use 240V here too, it's just a split phase. 277V is common for lighting circuits in commercial/industrial situations although DIY is rare in those. The vast majority of electrocutions are caused by faulty appliances, damaged cords and the like, legally done DIY electrical work deaths are down in the noise floor. Laws against it are trade protectionism, nothing more.

[trobbins]

James_s, perhaps if you put a bit more effort in to the history of standards revisions in Australia you would note that they are not driven by electrician union pressure.  You may have your own beef about what happens in your country, but don't stereotype other countries if you don't know and just want to push your own view.

[Electrodynamic]

James

No, the aim is bullshit protectionism, the IBEW (electrician's union) would have the same laws here if they could get away with it. It seems so strange to me that so many people are willing to be treated like small children in the name of saving everyone from themselves. The folly of seeing 1 death as too many is that zero deaths is not achievable, so setting it as a goal is carte blanche to implement whatever rules they want, but suckers fall for the rhetoric. Meanwhile as with the other topic you mention that is frowned upon to discuss around here, these regulations only work on people who obey the laws and regulations, and those people are not the problem in the first place.

Here in Canada the homeowner can do all there own electrical work so long as it's inspected. I have wired three of the new homes I built from the meter base on and three basements to date. Nothing to it, everything was up to code and passed inspection with no problems.

Now they changed the gas fitting regulations and after 30 years of pipe/gas fitting they told me I'm not qualified to run a gas line to my BBQ, what a joke.

Regards

[Marco]

James_s, perhaps if you put a bit more effort in to the history of standards revisions in Australia you would note that they are not driven by electrician union pressure.  You may have your own beef about what happens in your country, but don't stereotype other countries if you don't know and just want to push your own view.

Regardless in many countries the regulations are much lighter. Trying to micromanage homeowners to the point that backup solutions need certified solutions with load shedding seems unique to Oz.

It's not entirely fair to require that level of certification from the backup solution. Standard mains fusing can't even necessarily handle worst case load for a completely legal setup, why should the backup be so tightly regulated? Tripping an overload isn't dangerous, just annoying.

[james_s]

Sorry but the concept of a homeowner not being permitted to work on their own wiring that they own even if they have the work inspected is just absolutely laughable. I cannot fathom what was going through the mind of a politician who thought this was a good idea, or citizens who permitted this sort of draconian control over their lives to take place or anybody who actually thinks it's ok, I just really hope this nonsense doesn't spread to my country. I chose a different career path but I was properly trained by a licensed electrician in the family and I have also wired several houses from start to finish, and I've redone sub-par work done by "real" electricians on several occasions. I do everything at or above code, and damned if I'm going to let some bureaucrat tell me I'm not allowed to do that.

I suppose they don't allow you to work on your own car either? You could kill somebody if you put something together wrong you know. Can't have that happening now can we? Are you allowed to hang a picture on your wall yourself or must you hire a licensed professional for that? An improperly hung picture could fall and injure somebody. 

[trobbins]

James_s, if you have a valid example that relates to Oz, then happy to hear it being used, but pulling examples out of the air appears to again just be you trying to push your own wheelbarrow.

Sort of like UK, oz has had electrical standards, and standards committees, and electrical rules, that have been prepared and maintained by professionals in the industry over many many decades.  It is not driven by politics as you seem to infer.

[Monkeh]

Sort of like UK, oz has had electrical standards, and standards committees, and electrical rules, that have been prepared and maintained by professionals in the industry over many many decades.  It is not driven by politics as you seem to infer.

I don't know about Oz but it's driven mostly by the whims of the manufacturers here lately.

[themadhippy]

but it's driven mostly by the whims of the manufacturers

And the "professional" trade cartel organisations

[CatalinaWOW]

Sort of like UK, oz has had electrical standards, and standards committees, and electrical rules, that have been prepared and maintained by professionals in the industry over many many decades.  It is not driven by politics as you seem to infer.

I don't know about Oz but it's driven mostly by the whims of the manufacturers here lately.

I am curious about the details of the process.  Is there a threshold for deaths/injuries per year?  A goal for cost (installation, maintenance and attached equipment)?  Usability?   There are models and math to balance all of those factors and more, but which factors are used and how are the details set?  People often casually say that safety is the goal, without realizing there are always trade offs.  Perfect electrical safety is actually easy to achieve - just eliminate all electrical power - but few would accept that solution.

[rsjsouza]

I didn't read the entire thing, but perhaps New Zealand is not as draconian as we are being led to believe?
https://codehub.building.govt.nz/home/resources/nzecp-512004/

The electrical code of practice allows owners of domestic electrical installation to carry out specified electrical wiring work without having an appropriate electrical qualification.
They are considered to have met the requirements of the Electricity Act and Regulations set out in the Foreword if they follow this code of practice.

If so, then the theory that New Zealand cares more for the safety of their people than other nations goes down the drain.   

[trobbins]

rsjsouza, maybe you should read the whole thread - there is no mention of New Zealand.  So whatever theory or view you have on New Zealand - it is just in your own head as far as this thread is concerned.   

[themadhippy]

In the uk the wiring regs aren't  statutory,regardless of what some trade body will lead you to believe.What is mandatory is the electrical supplies act. Things get complicated with residential premises,or premises  with the same supply as a residential premises,  which  are  covered by  part p .This falls under the building regulations,some  are  statutory some aren't .  You can do certain works without notification  and in theory your  able to carry out any work you like,but to comply fully to the letter of the law it must be  signed off by someone register under the "competent person scheme",however due to the liability risk good luck finding someone willing to do this.It used to be a case  the councils inspector would sign of the work (for a fee)but that's become rarer than rocking horse shit. To give an example of the uk scene,a person who has followed a traditional apprenticeship ,passed there  trade exams,holds the latest regulations certificate and over the years  has worked on everything from small  domestic to large industrial installations,but not registered under the  competent person scheme is not legally allowed to change a light fitting in there  bathroom.

[Monkeh]

In the uk the wiring regs aren't  statutory,regardless of what some trade body will lead you to believe.What is mandatory is the electrical supplies act. Things get complicated with residential premises,or premises  with the same supply as a residential premises,  which  are  covered by  part p .This falls under the building regulations,some  are  statutory some aren't .  You can do certain works without notification  and in theory your  able to carry out any work you like,but to comply fully to the letter of the law it must be  signed off by someone register under the "competent person scheme",however due to the liability risk good luck finding someone willing to do this.It used to be a case  the councils inspector would sign of the work (for a fee)but that's become rarer than rocking horse shit. To give an example of the uk scene,a person who has followed a traditional apprenticeship ,passed there  trade exams,holds the latest regulations certificate and over the years  has worked on everything from small  domestic to large industrial installations,but not registered under the  competent person scheme is not legally allowed to change a light fitting in there  bathroom.

Meanwhile some bathroom fitter who took a brief course in which wire goes where is registered and going around changing CUs.

[james_s]

Meanwhile some bathroom fitter who took a brief course in which wire goes where is registered and going around changing CUs.

If the work passes inspection then who cares how adequate his training was? They obviously figured it out well enough to the work correctly, it's not rocket science, any idiot with reasonable attention to detail and the ability to read a book and follow instructions could do it. An improperly done job is not going to pass inspection (if the inspectors are doing their job) and if you replace a panel that's the sort of thing you'd have to have inspected. Here the power company won't reconnect the meter (with a tamper seal) unless the panel has been inspected and signed off. Someone could technically change the panel with the service live but that would be pretty foolish to attempt and if they ever try to sell the house the lack of a signed inspection form in the panel is going to come up and may stop a bank from financing the home.

Here the trade unions have lobbyists and the building codes are influenced heavily by what the unions want. They say the code is all about safety and some of it is, but much of it is just designed to protect the union stooges by making it more difficult for people to do it themselves. If it was actually about safety they would outlaw those horrible spring loaded backstab terminals that are allowed here, the electricians love them because they can have an apprentice run around and install all the sockets and switches in no time but they're garbage, I've personally seen too many close calls and I'm sure quite a few house fires that just get ruled as "electrical" were caused by those.

[Ed.Kloonk]

If the work passes inspection then who cares how adequate his training was? They obviously figured it out well enough to the work correctly, it's not rocket science, any idiot with reasonable attention to detail and the ability to read a book and follow instructions could do it.

But that's the thing. The mistake too many ppl make with 230v is that they have not had the full training that includes reading and understanding the rule book but also understanding that the wiring is for 230vac not 12vdc and what that entails. And those ppl tend to not know how to avoid a fire hazard where it matters, in spite of what the book says. The inspector is time constrained enough and is unlikely to open every junction box or insect behind every switch plate looking for the 'bunch of grapes'.

 

[SilverSolder]

If the work passes inspection then who cares how adequate his training was? They obviously figured it out well enough to the work correctly, it's not rocket science, any idiot with reasonable attention to detail and the ability to read a book and follow instructions could do it.

But that's the thing. The mistake too many ppl make with 230v is that they have not had the full training that includes reading and understanding the rule book but also understanding that the wiring is for 230vac not 12vdc and what that entails. And those ppl tend to not know how to avoid a fire hazard where it matters, in spite of what the book says. The inspector is time constrained enough and is unlikely to open every junction box or insect behind every switch plate looking for the 'bunch of grapes'.

 

Bad 110V connections are actually a worse fire hazard than 220V,  given the sqr(I)R losses are 4x higher for the same wattage device.

[rsjsouza]

rsjsouza, maybe you should read the whole thread - there is no mention of New Zealand.  So whatever theory or view you have on New Zealand - it is just in your own head as far as this thread is concerned.   

I shouldn't post when I am coffee deprived... 

[themadhippy]

If the work passes inspection then who cares how adequate his training was

what inspection,on minor works its often the person carrying out the work that  signs it off.

[ahbushnell]

If the work passes inspection then who cares how adequate his training was? They obviously figured it out well enough to the work correctly, it's not rocket science, any idiot with reasonable attention to detail and the ability to read a book and follow instructions could do it.

But that's the thing. The mistake too many ppl make with 230v is that they have not had the full training that includes reading and understanding the rule book but also understanding that the wiring is for 230vac not 12vdc and what that entails. And those ppl tend to not know how to avoid a fire hazard where it matters, in spite of what the book says. The inspector is time constrained enough and is unlikely to open every junction box or insect behind every switch plate looking for the 'bunch of grapes'.

 

Bad 110V connections are actually a worse fire hazard than 220V,  given the sqr(I)R losses are 4x higher for the same wattage device.

That's why a larger gauge wire is used for higher current.  So that's not true.

[themadhippy]

That's why a larger gauge wire is used for higher current.  So that's not true.

The size of conductor has nothing to do with it, a shit connection on 110v will be producing 4 times the heat energy than the same shit connection on 220v for the same load

[coppice]

That's why a larger gauge wire is used for higher current.  So that's not true.

The size of conductor has nothing to do with it, a shit connection on 110v will be producing 4 times the heat energy than the same shit connection on 220v for the same load

I wonder how 110V high current and 220V low current contacts compare for their self cleaning effect?

[james_s]

If the work passes inspection then who cares how adequate his training was

what inspection,on minor works its often the person carrying out the work that  signs it off.

I was specifically referring to his comment about someone replacing consumer units/breaker panels, that's not something that at least in my country is going to require a permit and inspection to do it legally.

Small stuff like changing a switch or socket the law is virtually irrelevant, there's no way to stop someone from doing it themselves if they wish. I suppose it could be made harder by not selling the supplies in stores but that will just drive people to purchase sketchy stuff of questionable quality from online sellers. Obstacles to make it harder really only make it harder to do it properly.

[Ed.Kloonk]

If the work passes inspection then who cares how adequate his training was

what inspection,on minor works its often the person carrying out the work that  signs it off.

I was specifically referring to his comment about someone replacing consumer units/breaker panels, that's not something that at least in my country is going to require a permit and inspection to do it legally.

Small stuff like changing a switch or socket the law is virtually irrelevant, there's no way to stop someone from doing it themselves if they wish. I suppose it could be made harder by not selling the supplies in stores but that will just drive people to purchase sketchy stuff of questionable quality from online sellers. Obstacles to make it harder really only make it harder to do it properly.

Mostly agree with all that so long as the person understands the concept of trip curves and fits the matching replacement breaker.

The danger is when they make an uniformed decision to change the characteristic of the breaker because the it's tripping too much. And when it all goes to shit and finally ask for help they won't fess up.

[themadhippy]

I was specifically referring to his comment about someone replacing consumer units/breaker panels, that's not something that at least in my country is going to require a permit and inspection to do it legally.

In the uk that's classed as notifiable work,so you either pay for a " registered competent person" to do it , or  do it yourself and  pay for someone to carry out the notification(good luck). Of course theirs nothing stopping you doing the work yourself and keeping quiet,however doing this  will invalidate any household insurance you have and may  cause problems when selling the property

[ahbushnell]

That's why a larger gauge wire is used for higher current.  So that's not true.

The size of conductor has nothing to do with it, a shit connection on 110v will be producing 4 times the heat energy than the same shit connection on 220v for the same load

I think you should go to engineering school.

Give me an example with data. 

For instance a 1 kW microwave oven. 

[SilverSolder]

That's why a larger gauge wire is used for higher current.  So that's not true.

The size of conductor has nothing to do with it, a shit connection on 110v will be producing 4 times the heat energy than the same shit connection on 220v for the same load

I think you should go to engineering school.

Give me an example with data. 

For instance a 1 kW microwave oven.

OK, say the oven is plugged into a wall outlet.  Inside the outlet, the hot wire is connected with a screw, and the connection has oxidized over the years.   It has a resistance of 1 ohm in this example.

What happens to the power dissipated in the oxidized connection with 220V vs 110V supply, given a 1Kw microwave oven?
 

[CatalinaWOW]

That's why a larger gauge wire is used for higher current.  So that's not true.

The size of conductor has nothing to do with it, a shit connection on 110v will be producing 4 times the heat energy than the same shit connection on 220v for the same load

I think you should go to engineering school.

Give me an example with data. 

For instance a 1 kW microwave oven.

OK, say the oven is plugged into a wall outlet.  Inside the outlet, the hot wire is connected with a screw, and the connection has oxidized over the years.   It has a resistance of 1 ohm in this example.

What happens to the power dissipated in the oxidized connection with 220V vs 110V supply, given a 1Kw microwave oven?

You are right.  So why did the world stop at 220V?  Those connections would be four more times as safe at 440V.  The answer is that other considerations over ride this particular behavior.  In both countries.  There are advantages and disadvantages for both 110V and 220V.  They both work well enough that there has been no compelling reason for most people to switch.  Even if there is some slight advantage for one system or the other, most people are quite comfortable with the system they grew up with, and have fears and suspicions about the other.  Those emotional factors and the cost of conversion are more than enough to over ride any differences between the two approaches.

[tom66]

I'd argue 110V is fine for most appliances but the fact that you need 230V for dryers, ovens, etc. show that it's inadequate for higher loads - and therefore 230V is a better solution.

For instance my Panasonic combi microwave can use 3kW when it operates the 1600W oven and 1000W microwave,  or 1600W oven and 1400W grill.  That is the power you don't get in a tabletop microwave in the USA which is nice to have.

[richard.cs]

You are right.  So why did the world stop at 220V?  Those connections would be four more times as safe at 440V.

History mainly. The USA has a system that provides pretty much the highest voltage that works with carbon filament lamps, and Europe have a system that provides pretty much the highest voltage that's sensible for the later coiled-coil tungsten filament lamps.

Actually, the main disadvantage of the US system is that split-phase exists *at all*. It means you have a different setup to get higher voltages domestically than you do commercially where you want actual 3-phase for rotating machines, and as a result there are too many different supply types and voltages that don't really have distinct advantages over each other. Again this is down to history, the US started with DC and split-phase is the logical, if technically inferior, successor to that.

The early-adopter always ends up with with a less-optimal system.

[SilverSolder]

That's why a larger gauge wire is used for higher current.  So that's not true.

The size of conductor has nothing to do with it, a shit connection on 110v will be producing 4 times the heat energy than the same shit connection on 220v for the same load

I think you should go to engineering school.

Give me an example with data. 

For instance a 1 kW microwave oven.

OK, say the oven is plugged into a wall outlet.  Inside the outlet, the hot wire is connected with a screw, and the connection has oxidized over the years.   It has a resistance of 1 ohm in this example.

What happens to the power dissipated in the oxidized connection with 220V vs 110V supply, given a 1Kw microwave oven?

You are right.  So why did the world stop at 220V?  Those connections would be four more times as safe at 440V.  The answer is that other considerations over ride this particular behavior.  In both countries.  There are advantages and disadvantages for both 110V and 220V.  They both work well enough that there has been no compelling reason for most people to switch.  Even if there is some slight advantage for one system or the other, most people are quite comfortable with the system they grew up with, and have fears and suspicions about the other.  Those emotional factors and the cost of conversion are more than enough to over ride any differences between the two approaches.

Agree, I have lived in countries with both systems and in practice, it seldom matters.   

The only thing I missed was the 3.1kW electric kettles that I have only seen in the UK...   sometimes, getting a cup of coffee quickly is an urgent matter!  -   I fixed that by importing a British kettle and tapping into the 220V for the stove... 

[ahbushnell]

That's why a larger gauge wire is used for higher current.  So that's not true.

The size of conductor has nothing to do with it, a shit connection on 110v will be producing 4 times the heat energy than the same shit connection on 220v for the same load

I think you should go to engineering school.

Give me an example with data. 

For instance a 1 kW microwave oven.

OK, say the oven is plugged into a wall outlet.  Inside the outlet, the hot wire is connected with a screw, and the connection has oxidized over the years.   It has a resistance of 1 ohm in this example.

What happens to the power dissipated in the oxidized connection with 220V vs 110V supply, given a 1Kw microwave oven?

It will get hot. 

[richard.cs]

The only thing I missed was the 3.1kW electric kettles that I have only seen in the UK...   sometimes, getting a cup of coffee quickly is an urgent matter!  -   I fixed that by importing a British kettle and tapping into the 220V for the stove... 

They're even quicker if you wire them between phases.  Somewhat surprisingly they seem to survive just fine, the thermal coupling to the water must be very good. I have a photo somewhere taken after a field test at work, when all the kit was packed away and we were sitting around making/drinking tea waiting for the hired 250 kW diesel generator to be collected. That was not an efficient way to make tea.

[themadhippy]

I think you should go to engineering school.

Na never liked skool,but  the collage of further education i attended to study  electric string knitting  was ok.

For instance a 1 kW microwave oven. 

well as you ask so nicely.,first we'll assume its a purley restive load,cant have those reactive components  getting in the way of a good story.
I for 1kw at 220v is about 4.54 A
I for 1Kw at 110v,about 9 amps
someone mentioned 1 ohm as the shit connection value
power lost   due to shit connection on 220 v is I²R or 4.5 x 4.5 x 1 =20.25w
power lost  due to shit connection on 110 v is I²R or9 x 9 x 1 =81W
 There we have it ,a shit connection at 110v wastes 4 times more  power than the same shit conection at 220v and not a mention of the conductor size.
ahbushnell if you'd like the phone number of my old collage to book  the  big boys course  of  electrical engineering  feel free to contact me,but be warned the collage got knocked down over 20 years ago so course availability might be a bit limited

[richard.cs]

For instance a 1 kW microwave oven. 

well as you ask so nicely.,first we'll assume its a purley restive load,cant have those reactive components  getting in the way of a good story.
I for 1kw at 220v is about 4.54 A
I for 1Kw at 110v,about 9 amps
someone mentioned 1 ohm as the shit connection value
power lost   due to shit connection on 220 v is I²R or 4.5 x 4.5 x 1 =20.25w
power lost  due to shit connection on 110 v is I²R or9 x 9 x 1 =81W
 There we have it ,a shit connection at 110v wastes 4 times more  power than the same shit conection at 220v and not a mention of the conductor size.

Worth noting that when people refer to the power rating of a microwave oven they normally mean heating power. A typical UK microwave oven is around 800 W with an input power on the order of 1300 W - they are not especially efficient sources of microwaves, but this is offset by the high food-heating efficiency once the microwave energy is generated.

20W dissipated in a small volume is plenty to cause a fire.

[David Hess]

Worth noting that when people refer to the power rating of a microwave oven they normally mean heating power. A typical UK microwave oven is around 800 W with an input power on the order of 1300 W - they are not especially efficient sources of microwaves, but this is offset by the high food-heating efficiency once the microwave energy is generated.

I compared the efficiency of my electric stove to my microwave oven a couple years ago and it was a wash, which means the microwave oven is more expensive to use because its maintenance costs are higher.

[SilverSolder]

Worth noting that when people refer to the power rating of a microwave oven they normally mean heating power. A typical UK microwave oven is around 800 W with an input power on the order of 1300 W - they are not especially efficient sources of microwaves, but this is offset by the high food-heating efficiency once the microwave energy is generated.

I compared the efficiency of my electric stove to my microwave oven a couple years ago and it was a wash, which means the microwave oven is more expensive to use because its maintenance costs are higher.

Maybe I've been lucky, but I've never had a microwave oven break.

Not so lucky with electric stoves.  -  one memorable failure mode:  put a hot saucepan lid on the glass surface.  Wait for the water vapor inside the lid to condense.  Listen as the glass shatters as it gets sucked into the lid by the strong vacuum created! 

[drussell]

I'd argue 110V is fine for most appliances but the fact that you need 230V for dryers, ovens, etc. show that it's inadequate for higher loads - and therefore 230V is a better solution.

We have 240v here.  We just also have 120v available for that majority of random devices where 240v simply isn't required.

For instance my Panasonic combi microwave can use 3kW when it operates the 1600W oven and 1000W microwave,  or 1600W oven and 1400W grill.  That is the power you don't get in a tabletop microwave in the USA which is nice to have.

You can use that exact same microwave here just fine.  You would just need to change the plug in your microwave-cubby in the kitchen to a NEMA 6-15 instead of the usual 5-15...  They look like this:



Works great for those awesome British 3000W kettles too! 
(or a deep frier, or an air compressor, or a medium-size welder, large table saw or radial arm saw, etc. etc.)

[SilverSolder]

I'd argue 110V is fine for most appliances but the fact that you need 230V for dryers, ovens, etc. show that it's inadequate for higher loads - and therefore 230V is a better solution.

We have 240v here.  We just also have 120v available for that majority of random devices where 240v simply isn't required.

For instance my Panasonic combi microwave can use 3kW when it operates the 1600W oven and 1000W microwave,  or 1600W oven and 1400W grill.  That is the power you don't get in a tabletop microwave in the USA which is nice to have.

You can use that exact same microwave here just fine.  You would just need to change the plug in your microwave-cubby in the kitchen to a NEMA 6-15 instead of the usual 5-15...  They look like this:



Works great for those awesome British 3000W kettles too! 
(or a deep frier, or an air compressor, or a medium-size welder, large table saw or radial arm saw, etc. etc.)

Not only that, you could go for a NEMA 10-50 (220V, 50A) outlet if you need serious amounts of power -  e.g., I have a 7kW electric space heater in the garage powered from one of these.  I also use that outlet for a welder. 




Basically, the North American system is quite flexible and not at all limited to 110V.   The only downside is that you may need to do some wiring to get access to the higher power levels!

[drussell]

Basically, the North American system is quite flexible and not at all limited to 110V.   The only downside is that you may need to do some wiring to get access to the higher power levels!

Indeed.

My utility heater (one of those standard 4800W fan-based "construction/garage" heaters) originally had the standard 6-30 plug on it, but I prefer the locking L-types in the garage for things like compressor, heaters, welders, etc. like I use on all my live sound PA & lighting gear, so when I bought the heater about 25 years ago I also bought about 80 or 100' of good quality cord and an L6-30 plug, removed the original cable at the strain relief and put on the super-long cord.  VERY handy, I can use it way out in the driveway in a vehicle or whatever...  No point in any sort of extension cord, it just has a built-in really, really long cord so I can use it pretty much wherever I want without dinking around.   

The 6-50 is more common for welders, though....  so you have ground instead of 120/240 ability with the neutral but no ground.

[james_s]

Combining replies from several posts...

I've had microwaves fail, but never in a way that I was unable to fix. Cracked solder joints are the most common problem, I've also replaced the HV capacitor in at least a couple of them and a relative's microwave somehow arced and burned off the end of the magnetron, I found a salvaged magnetron that fit and it worked fine after that.

The voltage is a compromise and there is no clear winner. I believe 110V was originally chosen by Edison as the highest that he considered safe, and it resulted in practical filament lengths for early lamps which initially was all domestic electricity was used for. Even much later, 240V is inferior for incandescent lamps, if you look at for example a 60W 240V British lamp and look at the rated lumens, it is closer a 40W 120V American lamp, the efficiency hit of the requisite longer more slender filament is considerable. The higher voltage is clearly superior for higher powered loads, and in the modern era with incandescent lamps mostly in the past and inexpensive and efficient voltage conversion possible I'm confident the USA would standardize on the same single phase 240V to neutral used in Europe. At the time our system was developed though they did what they did in order to provide 240V for the higher powered loads like electric heat that were becoming popular while retaining compatibility with legacy 120V devices. 240V is itself a compromise, 277V used in commercial lighting or 480V used in larger industrial stuff is certainly superior performance-wise, but that is quite a lot more dangerous to work with than 120 or even 240V and you start to require much more expensive semiconductors and capacitors in a power supply that has to accept 480V.

While technically possible to install a 240V receptacle anywhere in most US homes, I don't know offhand if code allows it. Our dryers, cook stoves, larger air conditioners, welders, some air compressors and the like are 240V and many do plug into receptacles, but they are large clunky things rated at 30-50A. The smaller 15-20A receptacles are sometimes seen with air compressors and large window AC units but the latter is the only time I've seen one of those receptacles in a living space. While unlikely a problem in practice, it is a potential issue that our 240V consists of two live wires both floating 120V above ground while Europe/UK have one side at earth potential and the other floating at 240V. 

[james_s]

In the uk that's classed as notifiable work,so you either pay for a " registered competent person" to do it , or  do it yourself and  pay for someone to carry out the notification(good luck). Of course theirs nothing stopping you doing the work yourself and keeping quiet,however doing this  will invalidate any household insurance you have and may  cause problems when selling the property

That's almost exactly how it is here, except that the inspector is a state employee and the inspection is a fixed cost that is part of the permitting process. Laws vary from state to state, require you to be licensed in order to do the work for hire, but AFAIK a homeowner is allowed to do the work on their own home in every state, provided they get a permit. A lot of un-permitted work also gets done, people adding light fixtures or receptacles, that sort of thing, but it doesn't seem to be a big enough problem for anyone to crack down on, and I expect that's the case anywhere. A determined (or cheap) person is gonna do what they're gonna do. IMHO it's best to have the information and materials available to do the job properly and encourage people to hire a pro if they are not comfortable doing it.

[Marco]

You can use that exact same microwave here just fine.

Seems expensive to buy though, even built in. Americans seems allergic to built in appliances (except for some obscure reason microwaves integrated with hoods) and obviously anything free standing will only be for 120. The really common European appliance category of compact built in combination microwave/convection-oven/grill are boutique items in the US.

[james_s]

Seems expensive to buy though, even built in. Americans seems allergic to built in appliances (except for some obscure reason microwaves integrated with hoods) and obviously anything free standing will only be for 120. The really common European appliance category of compact built in combination microwave/convection-oven/grill are boutique items in the US.

Built in microwaves are not all that uncommon here, usually it's a mounting kit for a standalone one though. I think they are not as common because microwaves tend to be shorter lived than larger kitchen appliances for various reasons. The exhaust hood (over counter) type are popular just due to the space saving, and hoods are all a standard size so it's easy to change out one over-counter microwave for another.

[maginnovision]

I would strongly dislike a built-in microwave since I never use a microwave. Total waste of space.

[drussell]

While technically possible to install a 240V receptacle anywhere in most US homes, I don't know offhand if code allows it. Our dryers, cook stoves, larger air conditioners, welders, some air compressors and the like are 240V and many do plug into receptacles, but they are large clunky things rated at 30-50A. The smaller 15-20A receptacles are sometimes seen with air compressors and large window AC units but the latter is the only time I've seen one of those receptacles in a living space.

Well, here at least, you couldn't just substitute 240v 6-15 outlets throughout your house or something, you're always still required to have the 5-15s within 6' cord distance along any wall (so 12' between outlets in a normal room, etc.) but you can pretty much put any type of receptacle required for any particular device in wherever it is required.  Code here is a MINIMUM standard.  If the last reno on your kitchen is less than 40 years old, code would have been in force which requires that our microwave plug must be its' own 14ga or 12ga circuit anyway, so changing it to 240V would just require changing to a double-pole breaker (and wrapping the exposed white wire with proper red electrical tape, etc. to indicate that it's connected to the other L instead of neutral, etc. if you want to properly comply with code for the change...)  Ditto for fridge (additional clock plug is still allowed), separate dining area plug circuit, all kitchen counter plugs since the 70s have had to be split-duplex with a maximum of 2 plugs per circuit, which makes it easy to install a single 6-15 in the kitchen for 240V appliances although they've started often using the also-allowed two-plug 20A variant which actually REDUCES your countertop watts availability, but it saves on one copper conductor...  Poor workmanship IMHO if you do it that way, but it's cheaper and it's now allowed by code.   

It really all comes down to copper.... 

The typical North American installation uses way more total copper with multiple, lower voltage, higher current lines than the 240v/32A ring mains general utility circuits used in the UK where you can get away with using tiny strands of copper as long as everything is properly connected.

We're still 240V, it's just that we're center tapped 240V, and we run most of our cell phone chargers, lamps, electronics and general appliances off one side of the transformer at 120V instead of everything being all the way up at 240V.

[SilverSolder]

I would strongly dislike a built-in microwave since I never use a microwave. Total waste of space.

They have their uses:   Reheating stuff quickly...  especially liquids e.g. beverages, soups work well.  Also, they work extremely well for cooking fish fillets...

But I could absolutely live without one. 

[maginnovision]

Yea, I definitely understand the uses and the only thing I really miss is slightly burnt microwave popcorn. Melts in your mouth.

[themadhippy]

looks like the uk is going to run on hot air

Work is beginning on what is thought to be the world's first major plant to store energy in the form of liquid air.

It will use surplus electricity from wind farms at night to compress air so hard that it becomes a liquid at -196 Celsius.

Then when there is a peak in demand in a day or a month, the liquid air will be warmed so it expands.

The resulting rush of air will drive a turbine to make electricity, which can be sold back to the grid.

The 50MW facility near Manchester will store enough power for roughly 50,000 homes.

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-54841528

[james_s]

looks like the uk is going to run on hot air

Work is beginning on what is thought to be the world's first major plant to store energy in the form of liquid air.

It will use surplus electricity from wind farms at night to compress air so hard that it becomes a liquid at -196 Celsius.

Then when there is a peak in demand in a day or a month, the liquid air will be warmed so it expands.

The resulting rush of air will drive a turbine to make electricity, which can be sold back to the grid.

The 50MW facility near Manchester will store enough power for roughly 50,000 homes.

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-54841528

It sounds interesting, but I wonder what the total efficiency will work out to? We have some hydro plants in my region that use surplus capacity to pump water uphill to a separate reservoir and then the pumps double as turbines to generate power as it flows back down.

[drussell]

...
We have some hydro plants in my region that use surplus capacity to pump water uphill to a separate reservoir and then the pumps double as turbines to generate power as it flows back down.

Pumped water gravity storage is actually a pretty good way to store a relatively large amount of energy where geography and geology permit...

[CatalinaWOW]

Pumped air storage has been done before.   Lots of losses but if the energy is too cheap to meter who cares.

[DougSpindler]

As if compressed air and stored water for storing energy are something new.

Just look at what is happening in Nevada, Lake Mead.  Lake levels are down 200 feet, the lake will never fill again.  Similar story in California.

With man caused climate change the weather here has changed.  We just aren't getting getting as much snow and rain as we once did. This is leading droughts and to water shortages.  There are some cities that run out of water in the summer.  Like in Germany's Ruhr valley areas of California have sunk into 30 feet into the ground because of ground water being pumped out of the ground.

Nuclear fusion is looking better everyday.  Yes it's still years off, but you got a better plan?  With energy from nuclear fusion all of the radioactive waste is gone in 25 years.  What could be safer?

[coppice]

Just look at what is happening in Nevada, Lake Mead.  Lake levels are down 200 feet, the lake will never fill again.  Similar story in California.

With man caused climate change the weather here has changed.  We just aren't getting getting as much snow and rain as we once did. This is leading droughts and to water shortages.  There are some cities that run out of water in the summer.  Like in Germany's Ruhr valley areas of California have sunk into 30 feet into the ground because of ground water being pumped out of the ground.

If you want to be impressed by particular examples, look how much the climate has improved since the dust bowl of the 1930s.

The height of the water table, rivers and lakes in various parts of the US has fallen a lot in recent decades. I can find material saying the main cause is too much water being taken out for human use, and I can find material saying its because too little water is being injected into the system. The conflict between those viewpoints makes me think nobody really understands the big picture. However, its easy to be swayed be a few anecdotal experiences. The first time you fly into Phoenix, and see all those swimming pools evaporating the waters of the Colorado River into the dry desert air, it very easy to be convinced the dominant effect on the Colorado River is just how much water the rapidly goring Pheonix uses. That doesn't make it an accurate assessment, though.

[ahbushnell]

I think you should go to engineering school.

Na never liked skool,but  the collage of further education i attended to study  electric string knitting  was ok.

For instance a 1 kW microwave oven. 

well as you ask so nicely.,first we'll assume its a purley restive load,cant have those reactive components  getting in the way of a good story.
I for 1kw at 220v is about 4.54 A
I for 1Kw at 110v,about 9 amps
someone mentioned 1 ohm as the shit connection value
power lost   due to shit connection on 220 v is I²R or 4.5 x 4.5 x 1 =20.25w
power lost  due to shit connection on 110 v is I²R or9 x 9 x 1 =81W
 There we have it ,a shit connection at 110v wastes 4 times more  power than the same shit conection at 220v and not a mention of the conductor size.
ahbushnell if you'd like the phone number of my old collage to book  the  big boys course  of  electrical engineering  feel free to contact me,but be warned the collage got knocked down over 20 years ago so course availability might be a bit limited

If you had gone to school you would know that larger gauge wire is used when the current is higher.  Granted lower voltage requires more copper and is more expensive.  Therefore the the resistance is lower. 

[ahbushnell]

As if compressed air and stored water for storing energy are something new.

Just look at what is happening in Nevada, Lake Mead.  Lake levels are down 200 feet, the lake will never fill again.  Similar story in California.

With man caused climate change the weather here has changed.  We just aren't getting getting as much snow and rain as we once did. This is leading droughts and to water shortages.  There are some cities that run out of water in the summer.  Like in Germany's Ruhr valley areas of California have sunk into 30 feet into the ground because of ground water being pumped out of the ground.

Nuclear fusion is looking better everyday.  Yes it's still years off, but you got a better plan?  With energy from nuclear fusion all of the radioactive waste is gone in 25 years.  What could be safer?

Lake Meade is hydro power (now).  It's not a storage system (now).  But there is talk of modifying it be a stored system by adding pumps.  There is another lake down stream.  I have been down that canyon below the dam by canoe.  Very nice.   

[Monkeh]

If you had gone to school you would know that larger gauge wire is used when the current is higher.  Granted lower voltage requires more copper and is more expensive.  Therefore the the resistance is lower.

The gauge of the wire is irrelevant because we're talking about a faulty joint.

[themadhippy]

If you had gone to school you would know that larger gauge wire is used when the current is higher. 

At skool yes we were taught this,we were also taught to read the question and understand it before answering instead of just assuming we knew what the question was asking and jump in with both feet and get it totally wrong.Jump forward a year or 2 and at collage many of the falsehoods taught us at skool were removed, for example we learned that  you dont always need a larger gauge wire for a higher current,a wire with a 1.5mm csa might only be rated at 15A but another piece of 1.5mm² is rated for 31A.both with  copper conductors  and installed identically,confusing this electrickery stuff  aint it.

[DougSpindler]

Just look at what is happening in Nevada, Lake Mead.  Lake levels are down 200 feet, the lake will never fill again.  Similar story in California.

With man caused climate change the weather here has changed.  We just aren't getting getting as much snow and rain as we once did. This is leading droughts and to water shortages.  There are some cities that run out of water in the summer.  Like in Germany's Ruhr valley areas of California have sunk into 30 feet into the ground because of ground water being pumped out of the ground.

If you want to be impressed by particular examples, look how much the climate has improved since the dust bowl of the 1930s.

The height of the water table, rivers and lakes in various parts of the US has fallen a lot in recent decades. I can find material saying the main cause is too much water being taken out for human use, and I can find material saying its because too little water is being injected into the system. The conflict between those viewpoints makes me think nobody really understands the big picture. However, its easy to be swayed be a few anecdotal experiences. The first time you fly into Phoenix, and see all those swimming pools evaporating the waters of the Colorado River into the dry desert air, it very easy to be convinced the dominant effect on the Colorado River is just how much water the rapidly goring Pheonix uses. That doesn't make it an accurate assessment, though.

If you want to be impressed by particular examples, look how much the climate has improved since the dust bowl of the 1930s.

Not sure what your point is.  How has the climate “improved” since the dust bowl.  The dust bowl was caused by man’s actions of clearing the land for farming.  But that affected the weather for a number of yers.  The climate had already been changing.  Look at how the farmers are struggling to grow crops today because of man caused climate change.  THe crops they could grow a few decades ago won’t grow due to man caused climate change.

How is that an improvement? 

 

[coppice]

If you want to be impressed by particular examples, look how much the climate has improved since the dust bowl of the 1930s.

Not sure what your point is.  How has the climate “improved” since the dust bowl.  The dust bowl was caused by man’s actions of clearing the land for farming.  But that affected the weather for a number of yers.  The climate had already been changing.  Look at how the farmers are struggling to grow crops today because of man caused climate change.  THe crops they could grow a few decades ago won’t grow due to man caused climate change.

How is that an improvement? 

At least up to this point, the only people having problems growing crops have been in areas becoming more arid, but others have become wetter and are better for growing. So, far nobody really understands those patterns. Soil moisture changes have been a recurring problem over the entire history of farming. Any temperature issues seen so far in crops very sensitive to temperature, like wheat, seem to have been optimised out, by the careful selection of varieties. Those varieties have always been very sensitive to latitude anyway.

[drussell]

Things like pulling over 25,000,000,000,000 litres of water per year out of the Ogallala Aquifer, where some areas are now drawn down to the point of inaccessibility, which will take itself about 6000 years to replenish from rainwater also might have something to do with some of the changes seen over the past 75 years or so, especially....

https://youtu.be/7CxA8PeDhIc

[Marco]

Population and consumption growth have outstripped the impact of climate change by orders of magnitude ... and as long as we keep increasing living standards world wide they ain't going to stop doing so any time soon.

[DougSpindler]

If you want to be impressed by particular examples, look how much the climate has improved since the dust bowl of the 1930s.

Not sure what your point is.  How has the climate “improved” since the dust bowl.  The dust bowl was caused by man’s actions of clearing the land for farming.  But that affected the weather for a number of yers.  The climate had already been changing.  Look at how the farmers are struggling to grow crops today because of man caused climate change.  THe crops they could grow a few decades ago won’t grow due to man caused climate change.

How is that an improvement? 

At least up to this point, the only people having problems growing crops have been in areas becoming more arid, but others have become wetter and are better for growing. So, far nobody really understands those patterns. Soil moisture changes have been a recurring problem over the entire history of farming. Any temperature issues seen so far in crops very sensitive to temperature, like wheat, seem to have been optimised out, by the careful selection of varieties. Those varieties have always been very sensitive to latitude anyway.

I would like to see where you are getting your information, because that’s certainly not what farmers are saying.  With the changes in climate over the decades the local weather has changed.  Have you actually talked to any farmers?  Their livelihood is on the line as they scramble to find crops they can grow as the ones they were growing just don’t do as well as they did decades ago. There are a few crops which now can be grown in England due to climate change which were never able to be grown there.

Are you sure the source from where you are getting your information is credible?  There are many companies being paid to sell doubt and confusion about man caused climate change.  Hope you are not being duped these companies who are being paid to distort the truth.

[themadhippy]

Have you actually talked to any farmers

ah farmers the bastions of honesty,always claiming to be skint and loosing money hand over fist whilst jumping into there new top of the range 4x4 to go and pick up there latest subsidy cheque

[Marco]

Any farmer trying to farm like decades ago is a lost cause to begin with.

Hell, knowledge about the extent of micronutrient depletion is more recent than that.

[coppice]

I would like to see where you are getting your information, because that’s certainly not what farmers are saying.  With the changes in climate over the decades the local weather has changed.  Have you actually talked to any farmers?  Their livelihood is on the line as they scramble to find crops they can grow as the ones they were growing just don’t do as well as they did decades ago. There are a few crops which now can be grown in England due to climate change which were never able to be grown there.

Are you sure the source from where you are getting your information is credible?  There are many companies being paid to sell doubt and confusion about man caused climate change.  Hope you are not being duped these companies who are being paid to distort the truth.

Have you tried looking at why those farmers are having problems? In most cases its issues like the one in the video drussell posted above. Most farming has not been sustainable since the very beginning of farming. Did you learn about the fertile crescent as one of the cradles of civilisation in school? Its not so fertile any more. It hasn't been very fertile since before industrialisation. Much of American farming relies on large scale irrigation from ancient aquifers that are depleting. Other parts of the world are similar. The top soil has eroded so badly in much of Europe that despite the massive amounts of oil industry sourced fertiliser spread on it each year, researchers say much of it is likely to be infertile in another century. You know why the Yellow River in China is yellow, don't you? Its vast amount of loess washing into the ocean, as it has been since the dawn of farming. Now there 8 billion of us, the pressure on soil quality, aquifers and so on seem like the biggest threat we face. The climate threat is overrated.

[Marco]

Top soil didn't erode, it was used up.

For intensive farming soil needs to be treated as a substrate, normal geological renewal of nutrients is on a completely different scale, not just for macronutrients. Farmers are adapting, for instance by starting to use ground up volcanic rock as a standard part of the fertilization (regenerative farming is smoke and mirrors, cow stomachs are not fusion plants).

You can also use sewer sludge to close the nutrient loop, but because of industry and medicine that's a bit dirty.

All in all it would be better if there were just a lot less people, so geological renewal processes are fast enough to keep up.

[drussell]

Have you tried looking at why those farmers are having problems? In most cases its issues like the one in the video drussell posted above.

That link is to just a single segment excerpt from the full Pumped Dry documentary.
For anyone who is interested, the full version of the documentary is available here:

https://youtu.be/RjsThobgq7Q

[coppice]

Top soil didn't erode, it was used up.

Its a combination. There is a lot of eroded top soil in rivers each year.

You can also use sewer sludge to close the nutrient loop, but because of industry and medicine that's a bit dirty.

A lot of treated sewage has been going onto farmland since the first sewage treatment plants were built. However, in many areas there is too high a heavy metals content in the sewage for the stuff to go on the land. It would just pollute the land. Slowly companies are being pushed to clean up the quality of their sewage output, to remove the nasty pollutants close to source, so that more digested sewage from the public sewers is usable on the land. Is a slow process.

[coppice]

Have you tried looking at why those farmers are having problems? In most cases its issues like the one in the video drussell posted above.

That link is to just a single segment excerpt from the full Pumped Dry documentary.
For anyone who is interested, the full version of the documentary is available here:

https://youtu.be/RjsThobgq7Q

There are a couple of examples of poor water resource use in that documentary, like growing asparagus for export in semi-desert conditions. However, most of the problems they cover are the direct consequence of trying to feed 8 billion people. Cutting the water consumption of those farms in Kansas would require an enormous use of additional resources. We would need vast amounts of additional energy to be able to desalinate the ocean and provide the amount of fresh water needed to farm as we do now. I've looked down on those circular fields from airliners. They look very strange if you don't know what leads to those green circles packed together on a brown landscape. I've been in Mumbai multiple times when its the season where farmers reach breaking point, because of wells failing. The news is full of stories about bankrupt farmers travelling to Mumbai in the hope of finding some kind of work, and of farmers committing suicide.

Multiple times in that documentary someone referred to their problem as "drought", when the problems are not related to the weather. Its all about taking ground water at a higher rate than it naturally replenish. India produced its food for thousands of years, relying only on the surface water, and only having problems when multiple dry years happened. Modern well technology could have freed them from worrying about those dry years, by using the aquifers as a backup. Instead, the population expanded to rely on the aquifer for 75% of irrigation every single year.

[NiHaoMike]

On water use, they should phase out factory farming since it uses a lot of water and land to make a comparatively small amount of food, replacing it with sustainable farming.

[CatalinaWOW]

On water use, they should phase out factory farming since it uses a lot of water and land to make a comparatively small amount of food, replacing it with sustainable farming.

Do you have actual data to support this assertion?  I come from a family that has farmed over the Ogillalah Aquafir since the mid 1880s.  There is no question that the tapping of this aquifer is unsustainable, but it did result in huge increase in crop yields over prior practices.  You are right about the need to move to more sustainable farming, which "factory" farms are doing from economic necessity.  These methods (at least in the regions I am familiar with) reduce tilling, do more rotation than was already done and result in comparable yields, often at lower cost due to reduced fuel and chemical purchases.  But they don't reduce water consumption dramatically without dramatically reducing yields.  The lands over the Ogillala don't support high intensity agriculture (tradional, factory or sustainable) on natural rainfall.  But the lands that can sustain these crops on natural rainfall can't sustain 8 billion people.

The solution is to somehow get back to a couple billion humans or less humans on the planet.  It is an incredibly difficult problem to solve ethically.  I certainly don't have an ethical solution.  But if we don't find one the earth will solve it for us, and it will be as cruel as anything we can imagine.

[NiHaoMike]

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Intensive_animal_farming#Environmental_impact

[CatalinaWOW]

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Intensive_animal_farming#Environmental_impact

This article discusses animal feed.  While animal feed is a significant portion of the crop in that part of the world, historically wheat is the dominant crop in the area and is seldom used as feed for animals other than the human sort.  If the world converts to a vegetable diet they will still have to deal with the vagaries of the weather in large portions of the croplands, particularly including the area over the Oglalla.

[coppice]

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Intensive_animal_farming#Environmental_impact

This article discusses animal feed.  While animal feed is a significant portion of the crop in that part of the world, historically wheat is the dominant crop in the area and is seldom used as feed for animals other than the human sort.  If the world converts to a vegetable diet they will still have to deal with the vagaries of the weather in large portions of the croplands, particularly including the area over the Oglalla.

Industrial animal farming can be quite destructive, and its hard to imagine wheat or rice being produced in an industrial manner. However, industrial crop farming has numerous benefits for a certain range of crops. Farming in greenhouses can greatly reduce evaporation loss, help control pests, reduce fertilizer usage, and so on.

[DougSpindler]

None of these arguments have anything to do with man caused climate change.  You are providing other explanations, which   I am not disagreeing with.  But none the address the issue of why plant crops which could not be grown in some areas such as the UK because the climate has been too cold can now be grown there.

Likewise crops which require a certain number of cold days to produce aren’t producing because these crops are receiving the cold days to to man caused climate change?

This has nothing to do with soil or water.  It’s all climate related.

[coppice]

None of these arguments have anything to do with man caused climate change.  You are providing other explanations, which   I am not disagreeing with.  But none the address the issue of why plant crops which could not be grown in some areas such as the UK because the climate has been too cold can now be grown there.

Likewise crops which require a certain number of cold days to produce aren’t producing because these crops are receiving the cold days to to man caused climate change?

This has nothing to do with soil or water.  It’s all climate related.

"The UK can now grow additional crops" is a strange example to choose. That seems like an improvement, not a threat. Crops that cannot be harvested until the first frosts come (i.e. where no frost == a spoiled crop) is certainly a problem. A bigger one may be the seed industry, that relies heavily on cold conditions in winter to maintain the sterility of the "seed" (where seed can be things like seed potatoes) until spring. The people with expertise in producing, say, high quality seed potatoes can't easily relocate to somewhere colder and carry on. The whole point of the discussion about ground water and soil condition is its a huge negative over much of the Earth; its not something you can simple relocate away from, or choose a different crop over; things have gotten rapidly worse in just the last 50 years, as the world's population has outstripped the surface water supply; and people are afraid to address it seriously as they haven't a clue what to do.... or more cynically, how to make some serious cash out of a "cure". Climate change is just more fashionable right now, as there are all sorts of ways to make a buck. From my childhood it has been easy to find material about the groundwater problem, and current affair programs have addressed it from time to time. However people just shrug and move on, while we face the threat of being starved back to a few hundred million global population in time for this to provide a natural solution to climate change.

[CatalinaWOW]

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Intensive_animal_farming#Environmental_impact

This article discusses animal feed.  While animal feed is a significant portion of the crop in that part of the world, historically wheat is the dominant crop in the area and is seldom used as feed for animals other than the human sort.  If the world converts to a vegetable diet they will still have to deal with the vagaries of the weather in large portions of the croplands, particularly including the area over the Oglalla.

Industrial animal farming can be quite destructive, and its hard to imagine wheat or rice being produced in an industrial manner. However, industrial crop farming has numerous benefits for a certain range of crops. Farming in greenhouses can greatly reduce evaporation loss, help control pests, reduce fertilizer usage, and so on.

Part of the problem here is defining what is meant by "industrial farming".  Here in the US it is sometimes interpreted as anything not done on a family farm.  While ignoring the fact that most families still in the farming business have very large farmlands and use large equipment to crop the land, which are the exact images used when condemning "industrial farming".  These are the exact practices used to grow wheat and rice in the US.  It is what you do when labor costs are high.

Sustainable agriculture has similar fluidity.  In some circles it means old school small farms with a few milk goats and chickens and all hand labor.  It is sustainable, and with some modern input on plant types and details of measuring nutrient deficiencies can support somewhat larger populations than existed when these methods were abandoned.  But can't support them with modern lifestyles, it requires giving up travel, leisure time, and many other things.  Few define sustainable as hydroponics and the like unless it is augmented with some buzzword like "vertical farming".

[DougSpindler]

None of these arguments have anything to do with man caused climate change.  You are providing other explanations, which   I am not disagreeing with.  But none the address the issue of why plant crops which could not be grown in some areas such as the UK because the climate has been too cold can now be grown there.

Likewise crops which require a certain number of cold days to produce aren’t producing because these crops are receiving the cold days to to man caused climate change?

This has nothing to do with soil or water.  It’s all climate related.

"The UK can now grow additional crops" is a strange example to choose. That seems like an improvement, not a threat. Crops that cannot be harvested until the first frosts come (i.e. where no frost == a spoiled crop) is certainly a problem. A bigger one may be the seed industry, that relies heavily on cold conditions in winter to maintain the sterility of the "seed" (where seed can be things like seed potatoes) until spring. The people with expertise in producing, say, high quality seed potatoes can't easily relocate to somewhere colder and carry on. The whole point of the discussion about ground water and soil condition is its a huge negative over much of the Earth; its not something you can simple relocate away from, or choose a different crop over; things have gotten rapidly worse in just the last 50 years, as the world's population has outstripped the surface water supply; and people are afraid to address it seriously as they haven't a clue what to do.... or more cynically, how to make some serious cash out of a "cure". Climate change is just more fashionable right now, as there are all sorts of ways to make a buck. From my childhood it has been easy to find material about the groundwater problem, and current affair programs have addressed it from time to time. However people just shrug and move on, while we face the threat of being starved back to a few hundred million global population in time for this to provide a natural solution to climate change.

You do understand we are talking about climate CHANGE, not climate destruction.  You do get the difference. Man caused climate change does offer some benefits if you look at the microscopic level.  But if you look at the bigger picture it is devastating.  This if the Titanic after it hit the iceberg.  As the ship was sinking the band was playing beautiful music. 

Your body body temperature is 98.6 when you are not ill.  What happens to you when your temperature rises a few degrees?  You have a fever, maybe a headache and an upset stomach.  Don't you just feel miserable?  I know I do.  Same thing is happening with our planet.  We are already seeing large sections of the Great Barrier reef being killed off by a temperature increase of just a few degreases.

This is just one example of hundreds.  If you sum up all of the climate "changes" which we have seen say over the past 50 years we are screwed.  Look at what's happening to Greenland and glaciers all over the world.  Glaciers have been around for tens of thousands of years and they are disappearing in our lifetime.  Would you consider the sinking of the Titanic a benefit?  What about the loss of glaciers?



 

[drussell]

[coppice]

You do understand we are talking about climate CHANGE, not climate destruction.  You do get the difference. Man caused climate change does offer some benefits if you look at the microscopic level.  But if you look at the bigger picture it is devastating.  This if the Titanic after it hit the iceberg.  As the ship was sinking the band was playing beautiful music. 

Your body body temperature is 98.6 when you are not ill.  What happens to you when your temperature rises a few degrees?  You have a fever, maybe a headache and an upset stomach.  Don't you just feel miserable?  I know I do.  Same thing is happening with our planet.  We are already seeing large sections of the Great Barrier reef being killed off by a temperature increase of just a few degreases.

This is just one example of hundreds.  If you sum up all of the climate "changes" which we have seen say over the past 50 years we are screwed.  Look at what's happening to Greenland and glaciers all over the world.  Glaciers have been around for tens of thousands of years and they are disappearing in our lifetime.  Would you consider the sinking of the Titanic a benefit?  What about the loss of glaciers?

I have no idea what your opening point is supposed to be. You can't destroy a climate, you can only change it. The climate it whatever it is. It either favours human flourishing, or it doesn't. If the lack of ground water culls much of the human population within this century, it might prove to have been the key issue we should have addressed. If it does, in fact, cull them, the reduced pressure on climate change and other species would probably mean anything we haven't driven to extinction will bounce back quite quickly. As George Carlin so wisely said, the Earth is not in danger. Only we are.

[DougSpindler]

As George Carlin so wisely said, the Earth is not in danger. Only we are.

George is not quite right.  In 7.5 billion years the Sun will become a red giant larger than Earth's orbit.  But by that time the Earth's orbit will have decayed and the Earth will have "fallen" into the Sun.

Maybe we should not worry about man caused climate change and worry about the Sun burning out.  We still have a bit of time

[coppice]

As George Carlin so wisely said, the Earth is not in danger. Only we are.

George is not quite right.  In 7.5 billion years the Sun will become a red giant larger than Earth's orbit.  But by that time the Earth's orbit will have decayed and the Earth will have "fallen" into the Sun.

Maybe we should not worry about man caused climate change and worry about the Sun burning out.  We still have a bit of time

You are just too incoherent to have a meaningful exchange with. The whole point of the argument about ground water is it appears to be the shortest term threat we face... unless we are missing something even shorter term.

[james_s]

The thing that strikes me about the climate change thing is that both the current trend and the optimistic scenario are both firmly in the "we're screwed" territory, and the absolute best case drastic measures outcome is pretty bad too. It's easy to see why people just throw up their hands or question the value of making great sacrifices toward what appears to be a futile effort.

[SilverSolder]

It is probably more like a bunch of small sacrifices than one big one, it seems to me.  The alternatives to fossil fuels are pretty much here already, we just have to step up the speed of implementation?

Even nuclear could be dusted off and modernised...

[james_s]

It is probably more like a bunch of small sacrifices than one big one, it seems to me.  The alternatives to fossil fuels are pretty much here already, we just have to step up the speed of implementation?

Even nuclear could be dusted off and modernised...

Well they all add up, and the burden will be different for different people.

I've long been a cautious proponent of nuclear but few things get the hardcore environmental types worked up like bringing that up.

[DougSpindler]

We are not quite there....  But what is the problem with nuclear fusion?
If it were not for nuclear fusion solar panels would not work and plants would not grow.  Isn’t that what ITER is all albout?  In the US we have NIF.

[SilverSolder]

My understanding is that there are better fission processes available today, and safer reactor types - so even fission could be rationally discussed, even if the old style finicky reactors are off the table.

[coppice]

We are not quite there....  But what is the problem with nuclear fusion?

I think you just answered your own question.

[james_s]

My understanding is that there are better fission processes available today, and safer reactor types - so even fission could be rationally discussed, even if the old style finicky reactors are off the table.

An ironic effect of the anti-nuclear thing is that a lot of old, inefficient and less safe plants are still operating instead of being replaced by more modern, safer and more efficient plants.

[drussell]

My understanding is that there are better fission processes available today, and safer reactor types - so even fission could be rationally discussed, even if the old style finicky reactors are off the table.

An ironic effect of the anti-nuclear thing is that a lot of old, inefficient and less safe plants are still operating instead of being replaced by more modern, safer and more efficient plants.

Indeed!!  Talk about unintended consequences...   

Nuclear is actually a viable thing if we get past the legacy designs and the reasons for such.

I'm still waiting for my "electricity too cheap to meter."   

[coppice]

I'm still waiting for my "electricity too cheap to meter."   

This was always a misleading phrase, in a similar way to things like reliability figures. Perhaps there will one day be a generation technology that makes metering the energy pointless. However, that wouldn't make electricity free. It would just mean a variable bill being replaced by a fixed, and still fairly large, bill to pay for the network. In fact, if you get rid of usage based billing, small consumers would see a considerable rise in their bills.

[james_s]

I'm still waiting for my "electricity too cheap to meter."   

This was always a misleading phrase, in a similar way to things like reliability figures. Perhaps there will one day be a generation technology that makes metering the energy pointless. However, that wouldn't make electricity free. It would just mean a variable bill being replaced by a fixed, and still fairly large, bill to pay for the network. In fact, if you get rid of usage based billing, small consumers would see a considerable rise in their bills.

It was just a product of the optimism from the rapid rate of scientific progress at the time. This was an era that had seen us go from rickety wood and fabric airplanes to sleek modern jetliners over a period of just 20 years or so. Nuclear power was a brand new and promising technology and the possibilities of technology seemed limitless.

Of course in the real world people have an insatiable appetite for energy. If it was ever so cheap that it wasn't metered then people would just start using immense amounts of it and there's no way any practical grid could keep up. Electric resistance heat, it's extremely convenient, who cares about insulation, just run the heat, power is free. It's humid in the house, turn the air conditioner on too, fluorescent and HID lamps last a long time when they're used continuously, just leave the lights on 24 hours a day, set up a server farm in the basement, old servers are cheap! Lots of people would do stuff like this and that's not even looking at the modern era where practical EVs are available. If electricity were free virtually everyone would get one. So no, even if it were free to generate limitless electricity, it would still make sense to meter it and charge by use.

[DougSpindler]

We are not quite there....  But what is the problem with nuclear fusion?

I think you just answered your own question.

Umm, do you not understand the need and importance of scientific research to make discoveries?  Ever hear of the Manhattan Project?  Or the Apollo program to land a man on the moon and bring him back safely?  The day before the first atomic bomb was detonated it was said it might not work.  And don't you think in 1962 people like you were saying we will never be able to land a man on the moon.  Heck there are people today who say we still haven't done it even though we have rocks from the moon to prove we have.

So far all of the experiments are showing it is possible.  Don't you think if we put the resources to it we would figure it out?



 

[james_s]

We are not quite there....  But what is the problem with nuclear fusion?

I think you just answered your own question.

Umm, do you not understand the need and importance of scientific research to make discoveries?  Ever hear of the Manhattan Project?  Or the Apollo program to land a man on the moon and bring him back safely?  The day before the first atomic bomb was detonated it was said it might not work.  And don't you think in 1962 people like you were saying we will never be able to land a man on the moon.  Heck there are people today who say we still haven't done it even though we have rocks from the moon to prove we have.

So far all of the experiments are showing it is possible.  Don't you think if we put the resources to it we would figure it out?
 

He didn't say there is no point in continuing to try, but he was accurate in saying that the problem with fusion is that we are not there yet. It has been "10 years away" my entire life and I have not seen any reports of getting appreciably closer.

[coppice]

We are not quite there....  But what is the problem with nuclear fusion?

I think you just answered your own question.

Umm, do you not understand the need and importance of scientific research to make discoveries?  Ever hear of the Manhattan Project?  Or the Apollo program to land a man on the moon and bring him back safely?  The day before the first atomic bomb was detonated it was said it might not work.  And don't you think in 1962 people like you were saying we will never be able to land a man on the moon.  Heck there are people today who say we still haven't done it even though we have rocks from the moon to prove we have.

Do you not understand English? The need to do research has little to do with us relying on the results. We need to seriously research fusion, with a strong focus on practical power generation. However, with the results we have seen so far we still have no clear idea if it will ever be practical. There is no way we can plan around fusion power today.

So far all of the experiments are showing it is possible.  Don't you think if we put the resources to it we would figure it out?

Nothing so far has shown that fusion power is practical. We are still well away from break even. The best that has happened so far is a bit more power came out of the reaction than went into the reaction. The amount of power that went into the experimental system has always been far above what went into the reaction. so the amount which came out of the reaction has always been well below what went into the system. Also, nobody has been able to sustain a strong reaction for extended periods. Remember that a viable tokamak or stellerator based power station would need to run a stable reaction all day every day, or at least with only minor interruptions, to be feasible. A pulsed system, like the NIF one, would need to be able to steadily pulse fire all day every day. Nobody is close to that.

If ITER works out well, it should release more energy than the system consumes, and may be able to sustain a reaction for extended periods. However, its still unlikely to produce enough excess power to be a practical power plant. Also, its still a research project. It might work out badly.

[ahbushnell]

We are not quite there....  But what is the problem with nuclear fusion?

I think you just answered your own question.

Umm, do you not understand the need and importance of scientific research to make discoveries?  Ever hear of the Manhattan Project?  Or the Apollo program to land a man on the moon and bring him back safely?  The day before the first atomic bomb was detonated it was said it might not work.  And don't you think in 1962 people like you were saying we will never be able to land a man on the moon.  Heck there are people today who say we still haven't done it even though we have rocks from the moon to prove we have.

So far all of the experiments are showing it is possible.  Don't you think if we put the resources to it we would figure it out?
 

He didn't say there is no point in continuing to try, but he was accurate in saying that the problem with fusion is that we are not there yet. It has been "10 years away" my entire life and I have not seen any reports of getting appreciably closer.

Actually it has been 30 years.  I remember that in the 60's. 

[CatalinaWOW]

Application of money and talent does not guarantee success.  Read the "Emperor of All Maladies", a book describing the efforts since the times of the Egyption pyramids to cure cancer.  The book points out that it has been an active goal of "modern" medicine since the 1890s, and that there have been several highly funded and staffed "Wars on Cancer" in the subsequent 130 years. With some success in the last 60.  And those limited inroads which have occurred at roughly 20 year intervals have all been accompanied by hopes that final victory is just around the corner.

[DougSpindler]

Application of money and talent does not guarantee success.  Read the "Emperor of All Maladies", a book describing the efforts since the times of the Egyption pyramids to cure cancer.  The book points out that it has been an active goal of "modern" medicine since the 1890s, and that there have been several highly funded and staffed "Wars on Cancer" in the subsequent 130 years. With some success in the last 60.  And those limited inroads which have occurred at roughly 20 year intervals have all been accompanied by hopes that final victory is just around the corner.

.

I agree, how many people have beet working on a perpetual motion machine and almost achieved success?  All of them.  I can say the same for all of those people who think they can power their car with water using an HH O generator which is powered by the movement of the car.  Ot the Nikola truck which is hydrogen powered by only works if rolling down a hill.

Do you think we would have computers today if it were not for some huge failures?  Just look at the number of well known companies who screwed up.  RCA, the capacitance disk.  Kodak, digital camera.  Polaroid and their instant developing 8mm movie film.

You might want to read more than “Emperor of All Maladies”.  First off cancer is not one “disease” but a category or type of disease.  We current know of around 250 types of cancer.  Each one is unique and has to be treated differently.  To say we know little about cancer would be false.  We know a lot and over the last 100 years have “cures” for several types of cancer.  Others, we know very little about.

Something we still can’t explain is why ionizing radiation in low doses causes cancer 30 years in the future.  But in higher doses it can “cure” cancer.  All cancers are natural, meaning cancer is your bodies “DNA” programming changing over time, can be fast of very slow, where your body is turning against itself and the DNA programming has gone crazy if you will.  What’s crazy is is you look inside some tumors they have hair and teeth growing in them.

We have come a long way over the past 5,000 years when it comes to cancer.  But then again there is a lot we still don’t have a clue about.

Take a look at the disease Progeria.  There have only been about 100 people who have had this disease.  Poodle who have this disease age 10 times faster than everyone else.  Incredibly we found the cause.

Ready for this?  It’s one bit flip in the DNA.  We know exactly which bit/base pair in the DNA which has been flipped.  Will we find a cure for such a rare disease...  Maybe.  Only way we will find it is if we look.

[CatalinaWOW]

Application of money and talent does not guarantee success.  Read the "Emperor of All Maladies", a book describing the efforts since the times of the Egyption pyramids to cure cancer.  The book points out that it has been an active goal of "modern" medicine since the 1890s, and that there have been several highly funded and staffed "Wars on Cancer" in the subsequent 130 years. With some success in the last 60.  And those limited inroads which have occurred at roughly 20 year intervals have all been accompanied by hopes that final victory is just around the corner.

.

You might want to read more than “Emperor of All Maladies”.  First off cancer is not one “disease” but a category or type of disease.  We current know of around 250 types of cancer.  Each one is unique and has to be treated differently.  To say we know little about cancer would be false.  We know a lot and over the last 100 years have “cures” for several types of cancer.  Others, we know very little about.

And you might want to read that much, as the book references the fact that we have learned that cancer is not a single disease (maybe).   And goes through the stages of our understanding of the family of diseases up to fairly recent date of publication.   If we knew how ionizing radiation makes the problem we might understand that there is a common thread to all of them.

To say that we can cure some kinds cancer is often a bit of hype.  The common definition for cure is survival for five years after diagnosis.  The experience in my circle of acquaintances is that very few have survived the cancer.  Some have lived two or more decades before it got them.  There are true cures, but more common is the situation with one drug highly advertised on television.  In small print at the bottom of the adds they mention that people on their wonder drug survive several months longer than people with current treatments.

But all of that is irrelevant to the point.  I agree that you don't know what is possible until you have tried.  And even then you don't really know.  We haven't proved that faster than light travel is impossible.  Only that it is not possible under our current understanding of physics.  Same thing applies to perpetual motion.  There may be some way around it.  Some people thought zero point energy was going to provide us something virtually indistinguishable from a perpetual motion machine even though you could show through appropriate mathematics that it didn't violate our current understanding of thermodynamics.   But unless you already know most of the answer there is no assurance that putting a huge team together and spending lots of money will get you something wonderful.  Sometimes it is just too hard.  Sometimes the economics don't work out.  Sometimes like with cancer the more you work on a problem the more problems turn up.  One disease turns into hundreds, each of which has dozens of subtypes.   Sometimes it is actually impossible under our current understanding of the world, like time machines.  And sometimes, like burning lots of fossil fuel effects that aren't obvious early in the process make the idea only a temporary success.

[DougSpindler]

I like it that you mention a perpetual motion machine might be possible one day, but just think about it.  If there were such a thing as a perpetual motion machine it would be continually producing heat to the point we would all burn-up.  You had better hope we never find one.

As for cancer there are around 250 different types.  And incredibly there have been a number of well documented cases where someone with terminal cancer given six months to live, without any treatment, the cancer has completely disappeared.  The five year survivorship depends on the specific type of cancer.  We are able to cure some cancers completely.  Others we have made no progress.  Do you think we should give up?  We may never find a cure.  Or who knows, we might find a cure next year.

[f4eru]

Hi,
Perpetual motion is not impossible, it's just not useful.
A space probe launched at high speed out of the solar system is inperpetual motion because it doesn't interact with anything.
But you can't use it to do any work, for exactly the same reason.

It's like a battery with no self discharge : a limited amount of energy kept in a closed bottle. Useless.

Now this is the reason why we use solar, wind and hyro power more and more every day: Energy that doesn't destroy the environment, and with free unlimited supply.

[coppice]

Perpetual motion is not impossible, it's just not useful.

Once we figure out for sure whether the current universe will expand forever, or end in a grand coalescence, we'll know if motion can truly be perpetual.

[SilverSolder]

Perpetual motion is not impossible, it's just not useful.

Once we figure out for sure whether the current universe will expand forever, or end in a grand coalescence, we'll know if motion can truly be perpetual.

 

[DougSpindler]

Hi,
Perpetual motion is not impossible, it's just not useful.
A space probe launched at high speed out of the solar system is inperpetual motion because it doesn't interact with anything.
But you can't use it to do any work, for exactly the same reason.

It's like a battery with no self discharge : a limited amount of energy kept in a closed bottle. Useless.

Now this is the reason why we use solar, wind and hyro power more and more every day: Energy that doesn't destroy the environment, and with free unlimited supply.

Ummm  are you saying a space probe is immune to the effect of gravity?  Don’t think so. Gradations pull is slowing the space probe down.  Heck, even our Sun is slowing the rotation of the Earth.  One day the Earth’s orbit will decay into the Sun. That is unless the Sun becomes a red dwarf.  Then the Sun will absorb the earth.   

[SilverSolder]

Hi,
Perpetual motion is not impossible, it's just not useful.
A space probe launched at high speed out of the solar system is inperpetual motion because it doesn't interact with anything.
But you can't use it to do any work, for exactly the same reason.

It's like a battery with no self discharge : a limited amount of energy kept in a closed bottle. Useless.

Now this is the reason why we use solar, wind and hyro power more and more every day: Energy that doesn't destroy the environment, and with free unlimited supply.

Ummm  are you saying a space probe is immune to the effect of gravity?  Don’t think so. Gradations pull is slowing the space probe down.  Heck, even our Sun is slowing the rotation of the Earth.  One day the Earth’s orbit will decay into the Sun. That is unless the Sun becomes a red dwarf.  Then the Sun will absorb the earth.

Hopefully, we will have perfected space travel before that happens...

[bdunham7]

Ummm  are you saying a space probe is immune to the effect of gravity?  Don’t think so.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Escape_velocity

[fourfathom]

Outer space is not a pure vacuum.  There are stray atoms and subatomic particles (including light from the stars), as well as larger dust and debris.  This will all slow down or deflect any object coasting through space.  So this isn't even a form of perpetual motion, and obviously any attempt to extract energy from such a moving body will also not be perpetual in the strict sense.  Of course it might as well be perpetual in some cases (such as tidal flow power generation), given humanity's likely lifespan and the mass of our planet.

Gravity does not directly cause the slowing of earths rotation.  Gravity does cause internal friction (tides on the surface, in the molten core, etc) and this frictional energy loss (as heat) is what is slowing our rotation.

[james_s]

Well if you get an object moving in space, the energy stored in the mass is so much greater than any of the tiny external forces present then that motion is about as perpetual as anything in the universe. That's the point that was trying to be made though I think, perpetual motion is not useful, something being in motion does not equal work being done. If you spin up a flywheel in a zero G vacuum it will keep on spinning, but it isn't doing any work. It is storing potential energy in the same way that if you lift a rock and set it on top of a tall object it will store potential energy, you can extract that energy from it but the result is the rock will be closer to the ground or the flywheel will be spinning slower with every bit of energy you extract to do work.

[fourfathom]

OK.  But "perpetual motion" is a specific thing, and none of the examples provided are that. 

I suppose we could call those non-perpetual-motion things "low entropy" sources instead, but that term just doesn't have the same ring to it.

[SilverSolder]

Are things like spinning electrons etc. at the sub-atomic level examples of perpetual motion, in a way?

[DougSpindler]

Are things like spinning electrons etc. at the sub-atomic level examples of perpetual motion, in a way?

Not at all.  They are affected by temperature.  To hot and you have a plasma.  Too cold and no movement.
Not to mention they pop into and out of existence.

Then there is nuclear decay.  One moment you have 10 atoms and at another you 5.  Your perpetual motion has just disappeared.

[CatalinaWOW]

All of these replies about perpetual motion show that my example was misunderstood.  Nuclear fission plants would be viewed by folks in ancient societies as something like perpetual motion.   A building with heat coming out and no wood, water or other source of power going in.  And not just a little heat.  Probably more power than was consumed by the entire roman empire, a quantity that would have been difficult for a citizen of the time to comprehend.  Zero point energy looked for a bit to have a similar relationship for us, but didn't pan out.  But as far as I know nothing precludes something from being out there.  Just needs some massive new source or sink of energy that we are not currently aware of.  Anyone who believes we know everything there is to know about the universe is living in the same fools paradise as Victorian scientists.

[DougSpindler]

 See what you are saying, and you are right nuclear powers including energy from our Sun could look like a perpetual motion machine to someone living 200 years ago.

As for ever finding a perpetual motion machine which actually worked, that about the consequences foe a moment. Can you name one machine which when operating does not produce ny heat?  If we ever found a true perpetual motion machine as it operated it would be constantly producing more het energy the system/machine had in the first place.  Perpetual motion means you have more energy then when you started.  Think about it.  This would result in global warming to a new level.  Just means if we every found a true perpetual motion machine we would burn ourselves up in no time from all of that newly created heat energy.  A true perpetual machine would be nuclear explosion that never ends.

[NiHaoMike]

As for ever finding a perpetual motion machine which actually worked, that about the consequences foe a moment. Can you name one machine which when operating does not produce ny heat?  If we ever found a true perpetual motion machine as it operated it would be constantly producing more het energy the system/machine had in the first place.  Perpetual motion means you have more energy then when you started.  Think about it.  This would result in global warming to a new level.  Just means if we every found a true perpetual motion machine we would burn ourselves up in no time from all of that newly created heat energy.  A true perpetual machine would be nuclear explosion that never ends.

Send that machine to Mars and you'll solve a big problem of trying to build a habitable base there.

Or more likely, what ends up being "free energy" is actually capturing energy from the environment and will decrease heat dissipation somewhere to balance things out.

[DougSpindler]

As for ever finding a perpetual motion machine which actually worked, that about the consequences foe a moment. Can you name one machine which when operating does not produce ny heat?  If we ever found a true perpetual motion machine as it operated it would be constantly producing more het energy the system/machine had in the first place.  Perpetual motion means you have more energy then when you started.  Think about it.  This would result in global warming to a new level.  Just means if we every found a true perpetual motion machine we would burn ourselves up in no time from all of that newly created heat energy.  A true perpetual machine would be nuclear explosion that never ends.

Send that machine to Mars and you'll solve a big problem of trying to build a habitable base there.

Or more likely, what ends up being "free energy" is actually capturing energy from the environment and will decrease heat dissipation somewhere to balance things out.

How's that going to work?  Everything will just heat up.  Talking about man caused climate change.

[NiHaoMike]

A hypothetical free energy machine that just generated energy from nowhere will still be better joule per joule than burning fossil fuels since it does not emit CO2. If you think about it, fossil fuels are just digging up energy that has been stored underground for millions of years.

[SilverSolder]

That's true of any energy source we have, including nuclear -  it is all trapped potential energy, which we then liberate!

[coppice]

That's true of any energy source we have, including nuclear -  it is all trapped potential energy, which we then liberate!

Not quite. We either release stored energy ourselves, or we let a third party, like the sun, do it for us, and collect some.

[Pulsepowerguy]

Give up on this idea of "perpetual motion" folks. Entropy is invariably net positive in this universe. An object shot out into the depths of space is merely on object in motion which has nothing to do with perpetual motion. Physics: worth learning.

[SilverSolder]

Give up on this idea of "perpetual motion" folks. Entropy is invariably net positive in this universe. An object shot out into the depths of space is merely on object in motion which has nothing to do with perpetual motion. Physics: worth learning.

This is very unaccepting of perfectly valid alternative points of view!  We are going to have to talk with HR about this! 

[DougSpindler]

A hypothetical free energy machine that just generated energy from nowhere will still be better joule per joule than burning fossil fuels since it does not emit CO2. If you think about it, fossil fuels are just digging up energy that has been stored underground for millions of years.

Exactly - And if you have a perpetual motion machine it means less energy is being put in and more coming out as heat.  Over time there will be so much heat we've created it will make current man caused climate change insignificant.

[CatalinaWOW]

Numbers are such pesky things.  Current climate change is not caused by the stored energy released from fossil fuels (well a tiny fraction is), but by the release of CO2 which captures a very slightly bigger fraction of the output of that other "perpetual motion machine", the sun.  If we found some other source for the energy we actually consume and stopped emitting the CO2 we would have far less climate change.  Or energy consumption would have to grow an incredible amount for it to be a direct problem. 

[DougSpindler]

Numbers are such pesky things.  Current climate change is not caused by the stored energy released from fossil fuels (well a tiny fraction is), but by the release of CO2 which captures a very slightly bigger fraction of the output of that other "perpetual motion machine", the sun.  If we found some other source for the energy we actually consume and stopped emitting the CO2 we would have far less climate change.  Or energy consumption would have to grow an incredible amount for it to be a direct problem.

You are correct.  And this would be possible.  Every device which uses fossil fuel would have to be equipped with a cyclotron to transmute the CO2.  Let’s see, if we added transmute Carbon to Nitrogen we would have NO2.  That’s no good.  Now we wold have man caused climate change due to NO2.  Or we could transmute the Nitrogen to Fluorine.  If you thought the gas warfare in World War 1 was a terrible way to die, read up on how Fluorine, specifically, HF kills.  Once you do, you would beg to be killed by any of the World War gases and realize just how much better CO2 emissions are for our human life.  One difference is we will be around a bit longer.

Just as the laws of entropy tell us perpetual motion machines are impossible.  But if one were ever found we would be creating so much heat energy we were burned up by the heat in a never ending nuclear explosion.

Now we do know how to transmute elements so turning our atmosphere into HF or NO2 is possible.  But it was sure as shit kill everting on the planet far sooner that C02.

We have to obey the laws of physics and chemistry.  As soon as we don’t, we are finished.


 

[CatalinaWOW]

Numbers are such pesky things.  Current climate change is not caused by the stored energy released from fossil fuels (well a tiny fraction is), but by the release of CO2 which captures a very slightly bigger fraction of the output of that other "perpetual motion machine", the sun.  If we found some other source for the energy we actually consume and stopped emitting the CO2 we would have far less climate change.  Or energy consumption would have to grow an incredible amount for it to be a direct problem.

You are correct.  And this would be possible.  Every device which uses fossil fuel would have to be equipped with a cyclotron to transmute the CO2.  Let’s see, if we added transmute Carbon to Nitrogen we would have NO2.  That’s no good.  Now we wold have man caused climate change due to NO2.  Or we could transmute the Nitrogen to Fluorine.  If you thought the gas warfare in World War 1 was a terrible way to die, read up on how Fluorine, specifically, HF kills.  Once you do, you would beg to be killed by any of the World War gases and realize just how much better CO2 emissions are for our human life.  One difference is we will be around a bit longer.

Just as the laws of entropy tell us perpetual motion machines are impossible.  But if one were ever found we would be creating so much heat energy we were burned up by the heat in a never ending nuclear explosion.

Now we do know how to transmute elements so turning our atmosphere into HF or NO2 is possible.  But it was sure as shit kill everting on the planet far sooner that C02.

We have to obey the laws of physics and chemistry.  As soon as we don’t, we are finished.

I suppose you could try the cyclotron path.  To quote someone, you never know until you try.  Others might prefer nuclear power charging electric cars.  Nah, that would never work.

[DougSpindler]

Why don’t we just go with nuclear cars.  Ford had a concept car called the Ford Fusion.  No need for a cyclotron, but then of course we could use Doc. Brown’s Mr. Fusion and would have time travel.  Just as likely as a perpetual motion machine.

[Pulsepowerguy]

Silly me. I failed to catch on to this thread being a series of jokes. Here goes:
We just need a really warm cup of tea. Then we can create the Improbability Drive (see Douglas Adams), which can then generate any number of useful things. Whales in space, and self-aware ferns.
 

[drussell]

There is currently a serious lack of Space Whales.

[Electrodynamic]

Silversolder

Are things like spinning electrons etc. at the sub-atomic level examples of perpetual motion, in a way?

The Conservation of Energy (COE) states energy cannot be created or destroyed only transformed so any energy as motion present must always be present. So when someone say's there is no such thing as perpetual motion there basically saying they don't believe in the COE. More so they believe energy can simply disappear into nothingness in violation of the COE.

The fact is, if something loses energy or motion then something else must gain what was lost to maintain the COE. In essence everything is in perpetual motion either as particles or electromagnetic waves and nothing is lost or gained only transformed.

I think fusion is the future and if the Sun, a star, can do it so can we. We basically smash/fuse some hydrogen atoms together forming helium and energy is released in the process. Transforming some of the particles internal motional energy into oscillations as heat and radiation as EM waves we can use. 

[DougSpindler]

Very well stated.  Sad we don’t teach this concept very well in our schools.  What we do teach is we should believe in the impossible.  And maybe one day we will find an exception to COE as in a perpetual motion machine.  Problem in believing in the impossible is that then you are a sucker for every con and religion.

[Pulsepowerguy]

"Perpetual motion" is synonymous with the concepts of "Free Energy" and "Over Unity", all of which violate the laws of physics. Spinning electrons simply have stored energy, as do objects hurtling through space. People are (rightly) fascinated with magnets, but there is no free energy to be had from them. There is no way out of this. Everything depends on gradients. Without gradients life cannot exist. Entropy recognizes that the gradient goes one way.

[DougSpindler]

Yup  And if you know you chemistry it’s the same thing with CO2 being the lowest energy state from fossil fuels.  Fossil fuel has one of the highest energy densities.

[NiHaoMike]

"Perpetual motion" is synonymous with the concepts of "Free Energy" and "Over Unity", all of which violate the laws of physics.

Not true, solar power is a form of free energy that is not perpetual motion or overunity.

[DougSpindler]

"Perpetual motion" is synonymous with the concepts of "Free Energy" and "Over Unity", all of which violate the laws of physics.

Not true, solar power is a form of free energy that is not perpetual motion or overunity.

You are joking right?  Please tell us you were not taught this.  Solar energy is not free energy in either the physics or financial sense.

[Electrodynamic]

pulsepowerguy

"Perpetual motion" is synonymous with the concepts of "Free Energy" and "Over Unity", all of which violate the laws of physics.

I would agree there are many misunderstanding and scams out there however something in perpetual motion does not violate the COE. Just the opposite and the law demands that something in motion remain in motion unless acted upon by an external force. Once acted upon the energy or motion is then transferred between the two things with nothing lost and nothing gained only transformed.

Spinning electrons simply have stored energy, as do objects hurtling through space. People are (rightly) fascinated with magnets, but there is no free energy to be had from them. There is no way out of this. Everything depends on gradients. Without gradients life cannot exist. Entropy recognizes that the gradient goes one way.

Everything has stored energy because everything is in motion on some level as particle motion/oscillations or EM waves. The energy is in the inherent motion which cannot be created or destroyed only transformed. If this was not true then fission/fusion and chemistry would not work so of course everything has energy in it.

Entropy acts outward radiating energy but Syntropy acts inward concentrating energy. If everything acts outward then why does Gravity concentrate matter and energy?. Why does a tree concentrate water, sunlight energy, CO2 and produce O2 and hydrocarbons?. The gradient of force always balances Entropy with Syntropy otherwise it would violate the COE. Ergo, all energy going somewhere must also arrive somewhere, it's the law.
 

[Pulsepowerguy]

pulsepowerguy

"Perpetual motion" is synonymous with the concepts of "Free Energy" and "Over Unity", all of which violate the laws of physics.

I would agree there are many misunderstanding and scams out there however something in perpetual motion does not violate the COE. Just the opposite and the law demands that something in motion remain in motion unless acted upon by an external force. Once acted upon the energy or motion is then transferred between the two things with nothing lost and nothing gained only transformed.

Spinning electrons simply have stored energy, as do objects hurtling through space. People are (rightly) fascinated with magnets, but there is no free energy to be had from them. There is no way out of this. Everything depends on gradients. Without gradients life cannot exist. Entropy recognizes that the gradient goes one way.

Everything has stored energy because everything is in motion on some level as particle motion/oscillations or EM waves. The energy is in the inherent motion which cannot be created or destroyed only transformed. If this was not true then fission/fusion and chemistry would not work so of course everything has energy in it.

Entropy acts outward radiating energy but Syntropy acts inward concentrating energy. If everything acts outward then why does Gravity concentrate matter and energy?. Why does a tree concentrate water, sunlight energy, CO2 and produce O2 and hydrocarbons?. The gradient of force always balances Entropy with Syntropy otherwise it would violate the COE. Ergo, all energy going somewhere must also arrive somewhere, it's the law.

Your interpretations are mostly wrong. Not all energy is kinetic, entropy does not "radiate", and "syntropy" is a philosophical term - not scientific. Entropy has no opposite  - it is either positive or negative, but overall it is positive.

Please get a proper education on the subject before making assertions that are loosely based on physics. I suggest "Science Asylum" on YT as a start.

[NiHaoMike]

You are joking right?  Please tell us you were not taught this.  Solar energy is not free energy in either the physics or financial sense.

The overunity machines claimed to be "free energy" machines cost something to make so they're not truly free either. Also note that solar power is not just photovoltaics. A good example of solar collectors that truly cost nothing to make are weeds - they just self replicate with no human intervention. Turning that into a useful energy source for us is often another story, although I suppose you could burn the weeds to stay warm...

[Electrodynamic]

pulsepowerguy

Your interpretations are mostly wrong. Not all energy is kinetic, entropy does not "radiate", and "syntropy" is a philosophical term - not scientific. Entropy has no opposite  - it is either positive or negative, but overall it is positive.

Then it should be simple to name one form of energy not directly related to motion on some level which is?...

I prefer Entropy-Syntropy rather than negative entropy which seems absurd. Should we call up negative down or left negative right, it's absurd.

[SilverSolder]

pulsepowerguy

Your interpretations are mostly wrong. Not all energy is kinetic, entropy does not "radiate", and "syntropy" is a philosophical term - not scientific. Entropy has no opposite  - it is either positive or negative, but overall it is positive.

Then it should be simple to name one form of energy not directly related to motion on some level which is?...

I prefer Entropy-Syntropy rather than negative entropy which seems absurd. Should we call up negative down or left negative right, it's absurd.

Stored energy - like a compressed spring?   The energy of the original movement was converted into a stored force that you can "get back".

"left negative right" - loved it!  It would be an awesome addition to any car navigation system...   "At the next intersection, take a negative right"! 

[DougSpindler]

pulsepowerguy

Your interpretations are mostly wrong. Not all energy is kinetic, entropy does not "radiate", and "syntropy" is a philosophical term - not scientific. Entropy has no opposite  - it is either positive or negative, but overall it is positive.

Then it should be simple to name one form of energy not directly related to motion on some level which is?...

I prefer Entropy-Syntropy rather than negative entropy which seems absurd. Should we call up negative down or left negative right, it's absurd.

Stored energy - like a compressed spring?   The energy of the original movement was converted into a stored force that you can "get back".

"left negative right" - loved it!  It would be an awesome addition to any car navigation system...   "At the next intersection, take a negative right"! 

My wife does that all of the time.  She tells me “RIGHT HERE” so I turn right then she completes the sentence by saying “TURN LEFT”.  Then she tell me why did I turn right when she told me “right here, turn left.

 

[ahbushnell]

Off Topic?   

[DougSpindler]

Off Topic?   

Boy are you grumpy.  Does you wife tell you, Left right here?

[SilverSolder]

Off Topic?   

No...   negative on topic! 

[DougSpindler]

Off Topic?   

No...   negative on topic! 

What type of spin are you?  Up, down, strange, charm, bottom, or top?

[Electrodynamic]

Silversolder

Stored energy - like a compressed spring?   The energy of the original movement was converted into a stored force that you can "get back".

Potential energy sounds correct on the surface however if all forces/energy in material things relates to the motion of particles and EM waves then it doesn't qualify. It's like saying that stationary ball with all it's particle/fields moving near the speed of light isn't moving. I would imagine a compressed spring would have compressed EM fields acting on the particles causing a change in there motion which is a change in the energy which was stored.

Doug

My wife does that all of the time.  She tells me “RIGHT HERE” so I turn right then she completes the sentence by saying “TURN LEFT”.  Then she tell me why did I turn right when she told me “right here, turn left.

Been there, done that, lol. 

There is a lot of popular terminology and theory in science which seems ambiguous. I was taught conventional flow notation in school (+ >> -) then changed to electron flow notation (- >> +) once I learned more about how everything works. Now I see the newer high school science textbooks use electron flow notation as well. I can't even imagine not using electron flow notation because everything seems backwards and counterintuitive.

[SilverSolder]

[...] if all forces/energy in material things relates to the motion of particles and EM waves [...]

That's a big "if" though?  Strong/weak nuclear forces?  Spooky action at a distance, etc.?

[Pulsepowerguy]

pulsepowerguy

Your interpretations are mostly wrong. Not all energy is kinetic, entropy does not "radiate", and "syntropy" is a philosophical term - not scientific. Entropy has no opposite  - it is either positive or negative, but overall it is positive.

Then it should be simple to name one form of energy not directly related to motion on some level which is?...

The electric field in a capacitor, chemical bonds, or better yet; a piano hanging over your head.

I prefer Entropy-Syntropy rather than negative entropy which seems absurd. Should we call up negative down or left negative right, it's absurd.

Why make up a word? Try increasing or decreasing entropy.

[Electrodynamic]

Silversolder

That's a big "if" though?  Strong/weak nuclear forces?  Spooky action at a distance, etc.?

There are many things we do not know and much of science is based upon a line of reason with respect to the facts we know.

The bigger and better our telescopes the more we see and what we see is in continuous motion. The more powerful our microscopes the more we see and what we see is in continuous motion. Therefore we could conclude the more we look the more we will continue to see and it will be in motion. We can never know for sure however all the evidence we have points in this direction.

If this is true then the best energy technology breakthrough would probably relate to the inherent motion of matter as a variation of fission or fusion. We know energy is in matter as atomic motion we just need to find a practical way to get it. Maybe like this...

https://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2020/10/201002091029.htm

A team of University of Arkansas physicists has successfully developed a circuit capable of capturing graphene's thermal motion and converting it into an electrical current.

[Electrodynamic]

Pulsepowerguy

Why make up a word? Try increasing or decreasing entropy.

Why not?, we started with no words and keep making up new ones as we go along so were making progress, lol.

For the record I did not make it up...https://psychology.wikia.org/wiki/Syntropy

Syntropy is a term popularized by Buckminster Fuller but also developed by others to refer to an "anti-entropy" or "negentropy". The following definition, referencing Fuller, can be found on a web site on "Whole Systems": "A tendency towards order and symmetrical combinations, designs of ever more advantageous and orderly patterns. Evolutionary cooperation. Anti-entropy."[1] Fuller's use dates to 1956[2].

Others who have contributed important ideas include Luigi Fantappié, Italian mathematician, who apparently coined the term syntropy in 1942, published in 1944, describing a unified theory of the physical and biological world[3]. His ideas incorporated general systems theory ideas from Ludwig von Bertalanffy on negentropy and from Ilya Prigogine on the thermodynamics of dissipative systems. Richard Feynman "and Fantappié (1949) showed that syntropy inverts the arrow of time, and lets information move from the future to the past." [4].

Nobel Prize winner Albert Szent-Györgyi apparently proposed to replace the term negentropy with syntropy in 1974 [5]. His ideas are explained in some depth at a Creation Science website [6] although he was not an advocate[7]

Note many Nobel winning physicists also agree with the term Syntropy.

[DougSpindler]

Silversolder

That's a big "if" though?  Strong/weak nuclear forces?  Spooky action at a distance, etc.?

There are many things we do not know and much of science is based upon a line of reason with respect to the facts we know.

The bigger and better our telescopes the more we see and what we see is in continuous motion. The more powerful our microscopes the more we see and what we see is in continuous motion. Therefore we could conclude the more we look the more we will continue to see and it will be in motion. We can never know for sure however all the evidence we have points in this direction.

If this is true then the best energy technology breakthrough would probably relate to the inherent motion of matter as a variation of fission or fusion. We know energy is in matter as atomic motion we just need to find a practical way to get it. Maybe like this...

https://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2020/10/201002091029.htm

A team of University of Arkansas physicists has successfully developed a circuit capable of capturing graphene's thermal motion and converting it into an electrical current.

Is this like the nuclear battery chip which we are told can charge your cell phone for the next thousand years?  Only problem is it takes over 2 years to produce enough electricity to charge the cell phone.  Dave has a great video on it, 

[Electrodynamic]

Doug

Is this like the nuclear battery chip which we are told can charge your cell phone for the next thousand years?  Only problem is it takes over 2 years to produce enough electricity to charge the cell phone.  Dave has a great video on it,

The first computers weighed tons and filled a building now I have a smart phone with millions of times more computing power which also allows  global communications. I have a good feeling about this technology and all the biggest breakthroughs are coming from nanotechnology related energy systems.

This concept is basically Maxwell's Demon, harnessing thermal motion on the atomic level to produce electricity, Maxwell would be proud of how far we have come in my opinion.

[DougSpindler]

Doug

Is this like the nuclear battery chip which we are told can charge your cell phone for the next thousand years?  Only problem is it takes over 2 years to produce enough electricity to charge the cell phone.  Dave has a great video on it,

The first computers weighed tons and filled a building now I have a smart phone with millions of times more computing power which also allows  global communications. I have a good feeling about this technology and all the biggest breakthroughs are coming from nanotechnology related energy systems.

This concept is basically Maxwell's Demon, harnessing thermal motion on the atomic level to produce electricity, Maxwell would be proud of how far we have come in my opinion.

As Dave pointed out in his video, the only problem is those pesky laws of physics.  For thousands of years people have been working on perpetual motion machines and are really close to making it reality.  If only they would have looked at the laws of physics and the math first instead of believing it could be done.