Does POWER_OFF really work ? - VMS

This is a discussion on Does POWER_OFF really work ? - VMS ; In article , BobH writes: >VAXman- @SendSpamHere.ORG wrote in >news:47f22222$0$5615$607ed4bc@cv.net: > >> In article , BobH writes: >>>VAXman- @SendSpamHere.ORG wrote in >>>news:47f16c09$0$5615$607ed4bc@cv.net: >>> >>>> In article , JF Mezei >>>> writes: >>>>>VAXman- @SendSpamHere.ORG wrote: >>>>> >>>>>> 'Twould be fine with ...

+ Reply to Thread
Page 2 of 2 FirstFirst 1 2
Results 21 to 36 of 36

Thread: Does POWER_OFF really work ?

  1. Re: Does POWER_OFF really work ?

    In article , BobH writes:
    >VAXman- @SendSpamHere.ORG wrote in
    >news:47f22222$0$5615$607ed4bc@cv.net:
    >
    >> In article , BobH writes:
    >>>VAXman- @SendSpamHere.ORG wrote in
    >>>news:47f16c09$0$5615$607ed4bc@cv.net:
    >>>
    >>>> In article <47f15559$0$3857$c3e8da3@news.astraweb.com>, JF Mezei
    >>>> writes:
    >>>>>VAXman- @SendSpamHere.ORG wrote:
    >>>>>
    >>>>>> 'Twould be fine with me too but the power-hour wasn't about light
    >>>>>> pollution, it was a gesture about conserving energy. Power
    >>>>>> companies generate electric based on average demands. I really
    >>>>>> doubt that they made any fuel consumption changes based on a minor
    >>>>>> brief hour dip on the grid.
    >>>>>
    >>>>>Not sure how authoritative, but I heard the city of Toronto noticed
    >>>>>an 8% drop in electrical consumption during that hour.
    >>>>
    >>>> Could be but the generators were still turning!
    >>>
    >>>They may well be spinning, but the amount of energy they use is
    >>>proportional to the amount of power they are outputting. The wheels
    >>>on a car may turn at the same speed down hill and uphill, but downhill
    >>>the engine may be near idle, while uphill it is consuming gasoline at
    >>>a much greater rate, even theough it is turning, along with the
    >>>wheels, at the same speed.

    >>
    >> Gas turbines aren't enormously efficient! 60% at most. A 7% dip in
    >> the grid for an hour didn't affect anything significantly!

    >
    >My point of course is to contridict the notion that reducing output did
    >not conserver energy. If the gas turbines delivered 7% less energy then
    >to a first order approximation they consumed 7% less fuel, contrary to an
    >earlier assertion.


    Therefore, if I turn off all of the electric appliances in my home when my
    gas generator is running, it will run forever. That's cool! I suppose all
    of those Hummers queued up on the NJ roadways every morning heading into NYC
    where their occupants will consume more energy are saving gas by not moving.

    .... and, perhaps, average was not the best term to use. The power companies
    are aware of their demands. Average := some 'X' level of demand.


    --
    VAXman- A Bored Certified VMS Kernel Mode Hacker VAXman(at)TMESIS(dot)COM

    "Well my son, life is like a beanstalk, isn't it?"

    http://tmesis.com/drat.html

  2. Re: Does POWER_OFF really work ?

    JF Mezei wrote in
    news:47f15559$0$3857$c3e8da3@news.astraweb.com:

    > VAXman- @SendSpamHere.ORG wrote:
    >
    >> 'Twould be fine with me too but the power-hour wasn't about light
    >> pollution, it was a gesture about conserving energy. Power companies
    >> generate electric based on average demands. I really doubt that they
    >> made any fuel consumption changes based on a minor brief hour dip on
    >> the grid.

    >
    > Not sure how authoritative, but I heard the city of Toronto noticed an
    > 8% drop in electrical consumption during that hour.


    Well, according to Edmonton Journal, Edmonton cut 1.5% compared to same
    period previous Saturday. Calgary was up 2.1% on the other hand.
    However Calgary was 12 C colder than previous, whereas Edmonton was only
    4 or 5 C colder. Power company spokesman is quoted as saying 10-15% is
    normal variation, so really it's lost in the noise.

    http://www.canada.com/edmontonjourna...story.html?id=
    5f6ba0de-d209-45e6-b568-d1df7772d4b4

    Earth Hour is mostly a conciousness-raising, educational, excercise.
    Proponents do not claim otherwise as far as I know.

    --
    ----------------------------------------------------------------
    A L B E R T A Alfred Falk falk@arc.ab.ca
    R E S E A R C H Information Systems Dept (780)450-5185
    C O U N C I L 250 Karl Clark Road
    Edmonton, Alberta, Canada
    http://www.arc.ab.ca/ T6N 1E4
    http://outside.arc.ab.ca/staff/falk/

  3. Re: Does POWER_OFF really work ?


    wrote in message
    news:47f249ca$0$5617$607ed4bc@cv.net...
    > In article

    , AEF
    writes:
    > >On Apr 1, 7:53 am, VAXman- @SendSpamHere.ORG wrote:
    > >> In article , BobH writes:
    > >> >VAXman- @SendSpamHere.ORG wrote in
    > >> >news:47f16c09$0$5615$607ed4bc@cv.net:
    > >>
    > >> >> In article <47f15559$0$3857$c3e8...@news.astraweb.com>, JF Mezei
    > >> >> writes:
    > >> >>>VAXman- @SendSpamHere.ORG wrote:
    > >>
    > >> >>>> 'Twould be fine with me too but the power-hour wasn't about light
    > >> >>>> pollution, it was a gesture about conserving energy. Power
    > >> >>>> companies generate electric based on average demands. I really
    > >> >>>> doubt that they made any fuel consumption changes based on a minor
    > >> >>>> brief hour dip on the grid.
    > >>
    > >> >>>Not sure how authoritative, but I heard the city of Toronto noticed

    an
    > >> >>>8% drop in electrical consumption during that hour.
    > >>
    > >> >> Could be but the generators were still turning!
    > >>
    > >> >They may well be spinning, but the amount of energy they use is
    > >> >proportional to the amount of power they are outputting. The wheels

    on a
    > >> >car may turn at the same speed down hill and uphill, but downhill the
    > >> >engine may be near idle, while uphill it is consuming gasoline at a

    much
    > >> >greater rate, even theough it is turning, along with the wheels, at

    the
    > >> >same speed.
    > >>
    > >> Gas turbines aren't enormously efficient! 60% at most. A 7% dip in

    the
    > >> grid for an hour didn't affect anything significantly!
    > >>
    > >> --
    > >> VAXman- A Bored Certified VMS Kernel Mode Hacker

    VAXman(at)TMESIS(dot)COM
    > >>

    > >
    > >See http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Heat_engine for typical heat-engine
    > >efficiencies.

    >
    > Then why didn't you consult wiki's gas turbine efficiency reference?
    >
    >
    >
    > >Remember the 3 laws of thermodynamics:
    > >
    > >1. You can't win.
    > >
    > >2. You can't even break even.
    > >
    > >3. You gotta play the game.

    >
    > Wow. I'm going to have to toss my Sears and Salinger "Thermodynamics,
    > Kinetic Theory, and Statistical Thermodynamics" in the fire as they've
    > mislead me on these laws.
    >
    > dU=dQ-dw ... hogwash!
    >
    > dS=dQ/T .... doggerel!
    >
    > lim S=0 .... utter bull****!
    > T->0
    >
    > If I should cross paths with Dr. Smith, I'll personally thank him for
    > wasting several hours a week for two semesters which would have been
    > better spent in the pub contemplating the adiabatic boundary keeping
    > heat flow (q) from my favorite beverages.
    >
    >
    > --
    > VAXman- A Bored Certified VMS Kernel Mode Hacker

    VAXman(at)TMESIS(dot)COM
    >
    > "Well my son, life is like a beanstalk, isn't it?"
    >
    > http://tmesis.com/drat.html#


    The pretty graphs and maths on the Wiki page reflect theoretical maximum
    efficiencies (usually Carnot efficiencies), as any thermodynamicist such as
    yourself (and maybe me, and probably a few others here) will know, which
    basically says that they hotter you burn the more efficient you can in
    principle get (oversimplification, but).

    Consequently the efficiency of typical steam-driven coal/oil/gas-fired
    thermal generation is indeed down in the 40% region. Gas turbine engines
    burn rather hotter and consequently have a higher theoretical maximum
    efficiency. The CC in CCGT comes from "combined cycle gas turbine"; you use
    the waste heat from the gas turbine to raise steam to turn another turbine,
    which allows you to get closer to the theoretical maximum. But still only
    maybe 60% or so overall, and with a whole load of its own challenges (e.g.
    hotter combustion produces more pollutants such as oxides of nitrogen).

    Incidentally, could I have 7% of your assets and income please? You said
    yourself 7% wasn't significant, so presumably you wouldn't notice. Maybe.

    Are we nearly done yet?

    Regards
    John



  4. Re: Does POWER_OFF really work ?

    In article , "John Wallace" writes:
    >{...snip...}
    >
    >Incidentally, could I have 7% of your assets and income please? You said
    >yourself 7% wasn't significant, so presumably you wouldn't notice. Maybe.


    7% of nothing is nothing. Have at it. In fact, if you want, I'll toss in
    3% of nothing to round out the figures.


    >Are we nearly done yet?


    I was the only one, outside of perhaps JF who first mentioned it, who knew
    what the 'hour of power' was and was about, and answered the initial query.
    I didn't see that 7% topple any prices on the oil market so I'll conclude,
    whether you like my conclusion or not, that Earth Hour was inconsequential.

    --
    VAXman- A Bored Certified VMS Kernel Mode Hacker VAXman(at)TMESIS(dot)COM

    "Well my son, life is like a beanstalk, isn't it?"

    http://tmesis.com/drat.html

  5. Re: Does POWER_OFF really work ?

    In article <47f10ca6$0$5650$607ed4bc@cv.net>, VAXman- @SendSpamHere.ORG
    writes:

    > >See http://www.darksky.org/

    >
    > 'Twould be fine with me too


    Right, a good goal but a completely different topic.

    > but the power-hour wasn't about light pollution,
    > it was a gesture about conserving energy. Power companies generate electric
    > based on average demands. I really doubt that they made any fuel consumption
    > changes based on a minor brief hour dip on the grid.


    Indeed. Also, unexpected changes in load can lead to problems with the
    grid.


  6. Re: Does POWER_OFF really work ?

    In article <47f15559$0$3857$c3e8da3@news.astraweb.com>, JF Mezei
    writes:

    > VAXman- @SendSpamHere.ORG wrote:
    >
    > > 'Twould be fine with me too but the power-hour wasn't about light pollution,
    > > it was a gesture about conserving energy. Power companies generate electric
    > > based on average demands. I really doubt that they made any fuel consumption
    > > changes based on a minor brief hour dip on the grid.

    >
    > Not sure how authoritative, but I heard the city of Toronto noticed an
    > 8% drop in electrical consumption during that hour.


    Even if authoritative, it's not very significant. The total savings are
    negligible. The problem with such events is that people get the feeling
    that they are doing something significant when really they aren't.


  7. Re: Does POWER_OFF really work ?

    Phillip Helbig---remove CLOTHES to reply wrote:

    > Even if authoritative, it's not very significant. The total savings are
    > negligible. The problem with such events is that people get the feeling
    > that they are doing something significant when really they aren't.


    The electrical savings for 1 hours are not very significant. What is
    significant is that a group of sheep loving aussies were able to start a
    movement that resulted in enough people in many cities around the world
    to make a single gesture that registered onto the grids.

    It is more a gesture to sensitise people to the need to save energy.
    Baby steps.

  8. Re: Does POWER_OFF really work ?

    In article <47f33e26$0$23904$c3e8da3@news.astraweb.com>, JF Mezei writes:
    >Phillip Helbig---remove CLOTHES to reply wrote:
    >
    >> Even if authoritative, it's not very significant. The total savings are
    >> negligible. The problem with such events is that people get the feeling
    >> that they are doing something significant when really they aren't.

    >
    >The electrical savings for 1 hours are not very significant. What is
    >significant is that a group of sheep loving aussies were able to start a
    >movement that resulted in enough people in many cities around the world
    >to make a single gesture that registered onto the grids.
    >
    >It is more a gesture to sensitise people to the need to save energy.
    >Baby steps.


    The gas guzzler, also knows as the automobile, seems to be the biggest
    offender; not the electric light. How about getting the 'sheep loving
    aussies' to push for a Walk-Week or Moped-Month!

    Of course, da 'rats' in proNJ don't believe saving gas is important! In
    order to push their agendas and throw a hissy fit because they did't get
    their way on budget referendum, they've pulled school bussing here. So,
    instead of mass transportation of 60+ kids/school bus, mom and/or dad go
    to and fro two times a day to transport Junior and/or Missy to school!
    Therefore, if the school is 10 miles away, I go on a 40 mile a day round
    trip! Multiply that by 60 kids per bus and that's a lot of wasted fuel!
    60 kids * 40 miles = 2400 aggregate miles! Figuring an average of 20MPG
    and that's 120 gallons of fuel. One bus going on a 20 mile pickup loop,
    even if it gets *only* 1 MPG, is saving fuel.

    The same economy goes for all the business suits in Hummer SUVs trekking
    into NYC each morning. Gawd fordid they'd take the train or bus or even
    car pool! I took the bus when I trekked into the NYC area each morning.
    It was less stress too save for those days when my furosemide, zaroxolyn
    and enalapril kicked in and there was no toilet on the bus. Why didn't I
    bring along a jug?

    Anyway, while we little mice were saving electric crumbs during the hour-
    of-power, all of the fat-cats were having us for lunch.

    --
    VAXman- A Bored Certified VMS Kernel Mode Hacker VAXman(at)TMESIS(dot)COM

    "Well my son, life is like a beanstalk, isn't it?"

    http://tmesis.com/drat.html

  9. Re: Does POWER_OFF really work ?

    In article <47f2b9f4$0$5610$607ed4bc@cv.net>, VAXman- @SendSpamHere.ORG writes:
    >In article , "John Wallace" writes:
    >>{...snip...}
    >>
    >>Incidentally, could I have 7% of your assets and income please? You said
    >>yourself 7% wasn't significant, so presumably you wouldn't notice. Maybe.

    >
    >7% of nothing is nothing. Have at it. In fact, if you want, I'll toss in
    >3% of nothing to round out the figures.
    >
    >
    >>Are we nearly done yet?

    >
    >I was the only one, outside of perhaps JF who first mentioned it, who knew
    >what the 'hour of power' was and was about, and answered the initial query.
    >I didn't see that 7% topple any prices on the oil market so I'll conclude,
    >whether you like my conclusion or not, that Earth Hour was inconsequential.


    You didn't notice the price of crude falling in the last week

    see

    http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/business/7324356.stm

    after it had reached $108 on the 27th March 2008

    see

    http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/business/7316138.stm


    (for a monthly graph see

    http://oil-price.net/index.php?lang=en

    )


    Forget what the analysts are saying this fall was obviously the result
    of Earth Hour


    David Webb
    Security team leader
    CCSS
    Middlesex University


    >
    >--
    >VAXman- A Bored Certified VMS Kernel Mode Hacker VAXman(at)TMESIS(dot)COM
    >
    > "Well my son, life is like a beanstalk, isn't it?"
    >
    >http://tmesis.com/drat.html


  10. Re: Does POWER_OFF really work ?

    BobH wrote:
    > VAXman- @SendSpamHere.ORG wrote in
    > news:47f22222$0$5615$607ed4bc@cv.net:
    >
    >> In article , BobH writes:
    >>> VAXman- @SendSpamHere.ORG wrote in
    >>> news:47f16c09$0$5615$607ed4bc@cv.net:
    >>>
    >>>> In article <47f15559$0$3857$c3e8da3@news.astraweb.com>, JF Mezei
    >>>> writes:
    >>>>> VAXman- @SendSpamHere.ORG wrote:
    >>>>>
    >>>>>> 'Twould be fine with me too but the power-hour wasn't about light
    >>>>>> pollution, it was a gesture about conserving energy. Power
    >>>>>> companies generate electric based on average demands. I really
    >>>>>> doubt that they made any fuel consumption changes based on a minor
    >>>>>> brief hour dip on the grid.
    >>>>> Not sure how authoritative, but I heard the city of Toronto noticed
    >>>>> an 8% drop in electrical consumption during that hour.
    >>>> Could be but the generators were still turning!
    >>> They may well be spinning, but the amount of energy they use is
    >>> proportional to the amount of power they are outputting. The wheels
    >>> on a car may turn at the same speed down hill and uphill, but downhill
    >>> the engine may be near idle, while uphill it is consuming gasoline at
    >>> a much greater rate, even theough it is turning, along with the
    >>> wheels, at the same speed.



    >> Gas turbines aren't enormously efficient! 60% at most. A 7% dip in
    >> the grid for an hour didn't affect anything significantly!


    Except for the fact a large majority of the generating plants are
    actually coal-fired and you have to keep them coals hot. And in the case
    of hydro or nuclear, you can't even shut the spillways or do whatever it
    takes to cool down a nuclear plant for 1 hr... Again, a 1hr 7% reduction
    did very little to conserve any real energy. When you think about it,
    electricity is only uses real energy at the point at which it is
    generated. Once AC is generated, it cannot be stored for "a rainy day".
    It is used as it is generated and only as it is generated - well maybe
    a few seconds to cross the grid... Having visited many power plants
    during my days as a DEC Field service eng, trust me, 7% was not even
    worth it... The only way to make it worth it is 7% permanent reduction.


    And IIRC, POWER_OFF did work on the 8800's...

  11. Re: Does POWER_OFF really work ?

    On Apr 2, 10:43*pm, Michael Austin wrote:
    > BobH wrote:
    > > VAXman- *@SendSpamHere.ORG wrote in
    > >news:47f22222$0$5615$607ed4bc@cv.net:

    >
    > >> In article , BobH writes:
    > >>> VAXman- *@SendSpamHere.ORG wrote in
    > >>>news:47f16c09$0$5615$607ed4bc@cv.net:

    >
    > >>>> In article <47f15559$0$3857$c3e8...@news.astraweb.com>, JF Mezei
    > >>>> writes:
    > >>>>> VAXman- @SendSpamHere.ORG wrote:

    >
    > >>>>>> 'Twould be fine with me too but the power-hour wasn't about light
    > >>>>>> pollution, it was a gesture about conserving energy. *Power
    > >>>>>> companies generate electric based on average demands. *I really
    > >>>>>> doubt that they made any fuel consumption changes based on a minor
    > >>>>>> brief hour dip on the grid.
    > >>>>> Not sure how authoritative, but I heard the city of Toronto noticed
    > >>>>> an 8% drop in electrical consumption during that hour.
    > >>>> Could be but the generators were still turning!
    > >>> They may well be spinning, but the amount of energy they use is
    > >>> proportional to the amount of power they are outputting. *The wheels
    > >>> on a car may turn at the same speed down hill and uphill, but downhill
    > >>> the engine may be near idle, while uphill it is consuming gasoline at
    > >>> a much greater rate, even theough it is turning, along with the
    > >>> wheels, at the same speed.
    > >> Gas turbines aren't enormously efficient! *60% at most. *A 7% dip in
    > >> the grid for an hour didn't affect anything significantly!

    >
    > Except for the fact a large majority of the generating plants are
    > actually coal-fired and you have to keep them coals hot. And in the case
    > of hydro or nuclear, you can't even shut the spillways or do whatever it
    > takes to cool down a nuclear plant for 1 hr... Again, a 1hr 7% reduction
    > did very little to conserve any real energy. *When you think about it,
    > electricity is only uses real energy at the point at which it is
    > generated. *Once AC is generated, it cannot be stored for "a rainy day".
    > * It is used as it is generated and only as it is generated - well maybe
    > a few seconds to cross the grid... * Having visited many power plants
    > during my days as a DEC Field service eng, trust me, 7% was not even
    > worth it... *The only way to make it worth it is 7% permanent reduction.
    >
    > And IIRC, POWER_OFF did work on the 8800's...- Hide quoted text -
    >
    > - Show quoted text -


    While what you and others have said is no doubt true, I think the
    purpose of the earth day excercise was more a public awareness thing
    than coal Vs nuke Vs hydro and thermodynamics, etc.

    If it got people thinking about not leaving a light on when not needed
    or similar, then it accomplished something.

    As I mentioned earlier in this thread it's a start.

  12. Re: Does POWER_OFF really work ?

    On Apr 1, 9:42 am, VAXman- @SendSpamHere.ORG wrote:
    > In article , AEF writes:
    >
    >
    >
    > >On Apr 1, 7:53 am, VAXman- @SendSpamHere.ORG wrote:

    [...]
    > >> Gas turbines aren't enormously efficient! 60% at most. A 7% dip in the
    > >> grid for an hour didn't affect anything significantly!

    >
    > >> --
    > >> VAXman- A Bored Certified VMS Kernel Mode Hacker VAXman(at)TMESIS(dot)COM

    >
    > >Seehttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Heat_enginefor typical heat-engine
    > >efficiencies.

    >
    > Then why didn't you consult wiki's gas turbine efficiency reference?


    This question is too vague to answer.

    >
    > >Remember the 3 laws of thermodynamics:

    >
    > >1. You can't win.

    >
    > >2. You can't even break even.

    >
    > >3. You gotta play the game.

    >
    > Wow. I'm going to have to toss my Sears and Salinger "Thermodynamics,
    > Kinetic Theory, and Statistical Thermodynamics" in the fire as they've
    > mislead me on these laws.
    >
    > dU=dQ-dw ... hogwash!
    >
    > dS=dQ/T .... doggerel!
    >
    > lim S=0 .... utter bull****!
    > T->0


    Do you get it or not? Here it looks like you don't.

    >
    > If I should cross paths with Dr. Smith, I'll personally thank him for
    > wasting several hours a week for two semesters which would have been
    > better spent in the pub contemplating the adiabatic boundary keeping
    > heat flow (q) from my favorite beverages.


    Here it looks like you do.

    >
    > --
    > VAXman- A Bored Certified VMS Kernel Mode Hacker VAXman(at)TMESIS(dot)COM
    >

    [...]

    AEF

  13. Re: Does POWER_OFF really work ?

    In article <3abe5a74-b36b-412d-b715-866358e6152c@m71g2000hse.googlegroups.com>, AEF writes:
    >On Apr 1, 9:42 am, VAXman- @SendSpamHere.ORG wrote:
    >> In article , AEF writes:
    >>
    >>
    >>
    >> >On Apr 1, 7:53 am, VAXman- @SendSpamHere.ORG wrote:

    >[...]
    >> >> Gas turbines aren't enormously efficient! 60% at most. A 7% dip in the
    >> >> grid for an hour didn't affect anything significantly!

    >>
    >> >> --
    >> >> VAXman- A Bored Certified VMS Kernel Mode Hacker VAXman(at)TMESIS(dot)COM

    >>
    >> >Seehttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Heat_enginefor typical heat-engine
    >> >efficiencies.

    >>
    >> Then why didn't you consult wiki's gas turbine efficiency reference?

    >
    >This question is too vague to answer.
    >
    >>
    >> >Remember the 3 laws of thermodynamics:

    >>
    >> >1. You can't win.

    >>
    >> >2. You can't even break even.

    >>
    >> >3. You gotta play the game.

    >>
    >> Wow. I'm going to have to toss my Sears and Salinger "Thermodynamics,
    >> Kinetic Theory, and Statistical Thermodynamics" in the fire as they've
    >> mislead me on these laws.
    >>
    >> dU=dQ-dw ... hogwash!
    >>
    >> dS=dQ/T .... doggerel!
    >>
    >> lim S=0 .... utter bull****!
    >> T->0

    >
    >Do you get it or not? Here it looks like you don't.


    Do you have any powers of comprehension whatsoever?



    >> If I should cross paths with Dr. Smith, I'll personally thank him for
    >> wasting several hours a week for two semesters which would have been
    >> better spent in the pub contemplating the adiabatic boundary keeping
    >> heat flow (q) from my favorite beverages.

    >
    >Here it looks like you do.


    Thermodynamics is a waste of time. Got it!

    --
    VAXman- A Bored Certified VMS Kernel Mode Hacker VAXman(at)TMESIS(dot)COM

    "Well my son, life is like a beanstalk, isn't it?"

    http://tmesis.com/drat.html

  14. Re: Does POWER_OFF really work ?

    On Apr 5, 8:04 pm, VAXman- @SendSpamHere.ORG wrote:
    > In article <3abe5a74-b36b-412d-b715-866358e61...@m71g2000hse.googlegroups.com>, AEF writes:
    >
    >
    >
    > >On Apr 1, 9:42 am, VAXman- @SendSpamHere.ORG wrote:
    > >> In article , AEF writes:

    >
    > >> >On Apr 1, 7:53 am, VAXman- @SendSpamHere.ORG wrote:

    > >[...]
    > >> >> Gas turbines aren't enormously efficient! 60% at most. A 7% dip in the
    > >> >> grid for an hour didn't affect anything significantly!


    Well, if the process is 60% efficient, that means it takes 1/.6 times
    the power in terms of heat input to produce the electric power. So the
    less efficient the process, the more in raw materials you save by
    reducing electrical usage.

    >
    > >> >> --
    > >> >> VAXman- A Bored Certified VMS Kernel Mode Hacker VAXman(at)TMESIS(dot)COM

    >
    > >> >Seehttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Heat_enginefortypical heat-engine
    > >> >efficiencies.

    >
    > >> Then why didn't you consult wiki's gas turbine efficiency reference?


    Why? The reference I provided (albeit with an unfortunate typo) was
    quite sufficient. I saw no need to go any further. So why didn't YOU
    consult any of this?

    >
    > >This question is too vague to answer.

    >
    > >> >Remember the 3 laws of thermodynamics:

    >
    > >> >1. You can't win.

    >
    > >> >2. You can't even break even.

    >
    > >> >3. You gotta play the game.

    >
    > >> Wow. I'm going to have to toss my Sears and Salinger "Thermodynamics,
    > >> Kinetic Theory, and Statistical Thermodynamics" in the fire as they've
    > >> mislead me on these laws.

    >
    > >> dU=dQ-dw ... hogwash!

    >
    > >> dS=dQ/T .... doggerel!

    >
    > >> lim S=0 .... utter bull****!
    > >> T->0

    >
    > >Do you get it or not? Here it looks like you don't.

    >
    > Do you have any powers of comprehension whatsoever?


    You mean the above about tossing out your thermo book is supposed to
    be amusing? It is so bad and lame as an attempt at humor I didn't know
    what to make of it. Hence my response.

    >
    > >> If I should cross paths with Dr. Smith, I'll personally thank him for
    > >> wasting several hours a week for two semesters which would have been
    > >> better spent in the pub contemplating the adiabatic boundary keeping
    > >> heat flow (q) from my favorite beverages.

    >
    > >Here it looks like you do.

    >
    > Thermodynamics is a waste of time. Got it!


    What a knee-slapper! ;-)

    >
    > --
    > VAXman- A Bored Certified VMS Kernel Mode Hacker VAXman(at)TMESIS(dot)COM

    [...]

    AEF

  15. Re: Does POWER_OFF really work ?

    In article
    <45895c6b-18be-41d4-889a-a0ec935aa3d1@u69g2000hse.googlegroups.com>,
    DaveG wrote:

    > While what you and others have said is no doubt true, I think the
    > purpose of the earth day excercise was more a public awareness thing
    > than coal Vs nuke Vs hydro and thermodynamics, etc.
    >
    > If it got people thinking about not leaving a light on when not needed
    > or similar, then it accomplished something.
    >
    > As I mentioned earlier in this thread it's a start.


    As a case in point I once moved from a small apartment with electric
    cooker and electric water heating to a largish house with gas cooker and
    water heating. I could not understand why my electricity bill went up
    until I realised I was leaving a lot more lights on.

    --
    Paul Sture

    Sue's OpenVMS bookmarks:
    http://eisner.encompasserve.org/~stu...bookmarks.html

  16. Re: Does POWER_OFF really work ?

    On Apr 3, 10:28*am, DaveG wrote:
    > On Apr 2, 10:43*pm, Michael Austin wrote:
    >
    >
    >
    >
    >
    > > BobH wrote:
    > > > VAXman- *@SendSpamHere.ORG wrote in
    > > >news:47f22222$0$5615$607ed4bc@cv.net:

    >
    > > >> In article , BobH writes:
    > > >>> VAXman- *@SendSpamHere.ORG wrote in
    > > >>>news:47f16c09$0$5615$607ed4bc@cv.net:

    >
    > > >>>> In article <47f15559$0$3857$c3e8...@news.astraweb.com>, JF Mezei
    > > >>>> writes:
    > > >>>>> VAXman- @SendSpamHere.ORG wrote:

    >
    > > >>>>>> 'Twould be fine with me too but the power-hour wasn't about light
    > > >>>>>> pollution, it was a gesture about conserving energy. *Power
    > > >>>>>> companies generate electric based on average demands. *I really
    > > >>>>>> doubt that they made any fuel consumption changes based on a minor
    > > >>>>>> brief hour dip on the grid.
    > > >>>>> Not sure how authoritative, but I heard the city of Toronto noticed
    > > >>>>> an 8% drop in electrical consumption during that hour.
    > > >>>> Could be but the generators were still turning!
    > > >>> They may well be spinning, but the amount of energy they use is
    > > >>> proportional to the amount of power they are outputting. *The wheels
    > > >>> on a car may turn at the same speed down hill and uphill, but downhill
    > > >>> the engine may be near idle, while uphill it is consuming gasoline at
    > > >>> a much greater rate, even theough it is turning, along with the
    > > >>> wheels, at the same speed.
    > > >> Gas turbines aren't enormously efficient! *60% at most. *A 7% dipin
    > > >> the grid for an hour didn't affect anything significantly!

    >
    > > Except for the fact a large majority of the generating plants are
    > > actually coal-fired and you have to keep them coals hot. And in the case
    > > of hydro or nuclear, you can't even shut the spillways or do whatever it
    > > takes to cool down a nuclear plant for 1 hr... Again, a 1hr 7% reduction
    > > did very little to conserve any real energy. *When you think about it,
    > > electricity is only uses real energy at the point at which it is
    > > generated. *Once AC is generated, it cannot be stored for "a rainy day".
    > > * It is used as it is generated and only as it is generated - well maybe
    > > a few seconds to cross the grid... * Having visited many power plants
    > > during my days as a DEC Field service eng, trust me, 7% was not even
    > > worth it... *The only way to make it worth it is 7% permanent reduction.

    >
    > > And IIRC, POWER_OFF did work on the 8800's...- Hide quoted text -

    >
    > > - Show quoted text -

    >
    > While what you and others have said is no doubt true, I think the
    > purpose of the earth day excercise was more a public awareness thing
    > than coal Vs nuke Vs hydro and thermodynamics, etc.
    >
    > If it got people thinking about not leaving a light on when not needed
    > or similar, then it accomplished something.
    >
    > As I mentioned earlier in this thread it's a start.- Hide quoted text -
    >
    > - Show quoted text -


    Replying to my own post.....

    I've been using the term "earth day" when the correct term is "earth
    hour".

    My mistake.


+ Reply to Thread
Page 2 of 2 FirstFirst 1 2