They are unable to do this, which is why it's a problem in Germany. They ended up solving it by taking a lot of older coal plants out of mothballed status and putting them online as spinning reserve, and it's well documented that bringing new wind farms online in Germany has been severely limited by lack of availability of new spinning reserve to cover them.
You're answering to someone who thinks that natural gas plant turbines can be spun up fast.
He's unaware that turbines that are in spinning reserve are actually already spun up, they're just on "no load" cycle. Spinning turbine up takes a long time.
And turbines hooked to generators on large scale are by far the most efficient form of converting thermal energy to electric energy that we know of. That is why we use them for power generation universally across the globe, regardless of how the thermal energy is produced.
I'll take that bet. How much money are you willing to give me for free?
That being because "electric storage" problem has been actively researched for over 100 years now with no solution in sight, and whoever actually invents a viable method is bound to eclipse Gates in his personal wealth in his lifetime because it would allow for two things: 1. Complete spin-down of spinning reserve. This would bring savings that would pull all world economies out of current recession cycle overnight. 2. Ability to actually do something that hasn't been done outside developed countries - reliable AC power on global scale.
Again, this doesn't work the way you think. Technological solution for what you propose DOES NOT EXIST. If you invent one, such as those "centrifuges" you suggest that actually are cost-effective (current ones are not), you will have "more money than god".
Because that particular problem would solve a huge amount of issues and likely end our dependence on burner plants nearly overnight, as well as make grids incredibly cheap to maintain as we could just drop the requirement of having spinning reserve completely.
Going off the grid is silly. The reason we have a grid in the first place is because it's much more efficient (specifically COST efficient) to have centralized production of power that doesn't easily cut off when something goes wrong.
If you want to go off grid on your own, go for it. I suspect that experiment won't last very long once you discover just how difficult it is to actually maintain a stable 120/220/230V 60/50HZ AC 24/7 that stays in phase. Most people really don't want to go back to third world style "power doesn't actually work 24/7 and you keep getting outages when something fails", and most of our home appliances are simply no longer designed for that sort of power input. They expect 24/7 reliable power.
Australia's solar policy has been called an "unmitigated disaster". It's basically a method of subsidising the rich by taxing the poor which is approaching the point of collapse. Even the massively pro-green sites like reneweconomy have been forced to admit there is a significant problem (though they try to obfuscate this by talking up the other relevant points like spinning reserve that burns coal). http://reneweconomy.com.au/201...
Easy solution: if you don't want to pay for batteries, you pay for upgrades to the grid necessary to make your method of microgeneration sustainable.
Well, it's not easy because solar sales would crash if solar microgenerators would actually have to pay for these costs instead of passing them on to others.
Because the power involved is on a completely different level. Solutions used in low power applications would burn out when used for high power applications.
Essentially your entire argument is about your utter ignorance of how grids work. They MUST be centralized and aware of the entire grid because parts of grid failing have a nasty tendency of causing cascade failures. And that is really, REALLY hard to do, so instead we have what is essentially a patchwork of hacks of various kinds to keep the frequency, voltage, AC phase of all relevant grids, power factor, etc balanced in all parts across each part of grid, ranging from power plant interconnects and high voltage long range transfer lines down to the residential grids. This is not a small feat. I really recommend reading up on what it actually takes to reliably produce and deliver stable and "clean" AC current to your residential socket. There's a reason why it's almost unheard of to have reliable power outside well developed regions.
When you have residential grids behaving erratically, everything else must adjust to compensate as to not go out of phase and cause a cascade failure across the entire grid. This process is invisible to normal user, but there's a massive amount of specialist people and hardware doing a lot of work to make it actually work properly.
Germans have this problem in spades and are going through the same fight as we speak. The only advantage they have is that they have better planned mostly centralized installations and get less power from solar because of geographic location of German state. This helps to stall the creep of this problem to an extent, but it doesn't solve it.
There is another problem here as well, which has caused significant upheaval in Australia. Solar subsidies have effectively ended up as a tax on the poor which is subsidising the rich. This is because poor are forced to pay full price for all electricity they use, while rich can simply buy the microproducer plant to put on their roof and use net metering to effectively get paid from common pool paid mostly by poor who can't afford those.
Since we're talking about infrastructure that is necessary for everyone, it ends up as excessive tax on poor that is used to subsidise the rich on costs of infrastructure used by everyone.
Not just some but essentially full agreement. The problem here is that when solar starts a production spike, all houses in the region with solar will suddenly spike at once. That is what causes the overloads in the residential circuit which was never designed to handle such spikes because they were never considered when grid was built.
The only solutions are: 1. Massive investment into grid upgrades, which comes with increase in maintenance costs. 2. Capping solar's ability to dump into the grid while keeping the current grid and it's relatively low maintenance costs (solution proposed here).
Problem with #2 is that it significantly reduces ROI of solar installation, as it's being actively marketed with ROI that enables solar microproducers to dump excess into the grid at a good price. This was lobbied in back when solar was just starting, and no one thought of the current scenario - solar that is popular enough to threaten grid stability.
1. Have a much greater range. In most cases you will be able to hear a station transmitting from tens of kilometers away, in some cases, hundreds. Cell tower range is limited to single digit kilometers in most cases due to optimization for speed over range. Towers over less populated areas will be optimized for range, but even those barely cover ten to twenty kilometers in best case scenarios. Also, see 4. 2. Are typically designed to have backup power in case of an emergency, and are generally often hardened against many disasters because they are supposed to be used to transmit emergency messages. 3. On a final note, most FM receivers also have AM receiver function. That has range of hundreds of kilometers, thousands during the night due to skywave effect. This is the best technology for emergency broadcasts, as one station can cover up to thousands of kilometers radius around itself. 4. Are one way transmitters. That means they don't rely on phone's weak transmitter's ability to reach the tower.
Real problem here is that most of the world is still on FM. That means things like emergency broadcasts, information fed to cars, playing radio while you're driving and so on. Tourism/transit in Norway is going to become a whole lot more annoying.
Someone has to start, but it would be nice if they kept at least a small part of the spectrum for visitors from the rest of Europe.
This appears to be more of a bringing "internet way" closer to how things are done in real life.
As in if someone anonymously puts up a poster on private land that defames you, you actually get to challenge it in court and if it's found to be libel it's taken down.
This is censorship in the same way as "not allowing libel" is censorship.
My VDSL2 connection is sold as 100/10, which according to my router is currently connected at 86552/10000 kbps. It's very common around here to have fibre to apartment complex and then VDSL2 over telephone lines for last mile.
And this is indeed my personal connection, not shared with everyone on the same cable loop.
Honestly, modern Pike's Peak race is kinda lame. Full tarmac start to finish, sadly boring grip driving.
Tip your hat to the old pre-2011 Pike's Peak which was mostly gravel road with some tarmac when driving was far, FAR more intense. Here's the legendary Ari Vatanen run in the 405 T16 from the 1990. https://www.youtube.com/watch?...
Featuring some crazy stuff like driving that monster of a car with one hand while shielding eyes from the sun glare with another through turns at high speed.
Nope. Bankruptcy specifically voids most of the promissory obligations like these, and if steam were to go under, company that purchased it would likely push it through bankruptcy to get rid of most of the said obligations.
Slashdot Mirror
They are unable to do this, which is why it's a problem in Germany. They ended up solving it by taking a lot of older coal plants out of mothballed status and putting them online as spinning reserve, and it's well documented that bringing new wind farms online in Germany has been severely limited by lack of availability of new spinning reserve to cover them.
You're answering to someone who thinks that natural gas plant turbines can be spun up fast.
He's unaware that turbines that are in spinning reserve are actually already spun up, they're just on "no load" cycle. Spinning turbine up takes a long time.
And turbines hooked to generators on large scale are by far the most efficient form of converting thermal energy to electric energy that we know of. That is why we use them for power generation universally across the globe, regardless of how the thermal energy is produced.
I'll take that bet. How much money are you willing to give me for free?
That being because "electric storage" problem has been actively researched for over 100 years now with no solution in sight, and whoever actually invents a viable method is bound to eclipse Gates in his personal wealth in his lifetime because it would allow for two things:
1. Complete spin-down of spinning reserve. This would bring savings that would pull all world economies out of current recession cycle overnight.
2. Ability to actually do something that hasn't been done outside developed countries - reliable AC power on global scale.
Who pays for load balancing and necessary infrastructure for what you suggest?
Because that is what the entire fight is about right now.
Again, this doesn't work the way you think. Technological solution for what you propose DOES NOT EXIST. If you invent one, such as those "centrifuges" you suggest that actually are cost-effective (current ones are not), you will have "more money than god".
Because that particular problem would solve a huge amount of issues and likely end our dependence on burner plants nearly overnight, as well as make grids incredibly cheap to maintain as we could just drop the requirement of having spinning reserve completely.
Going off the grid is silly. The reason we have a grid in the first place is because it's much more efficient (specifically COST efficient) to have centralized production of power that doesn't easily cut off when something goes wrong.
If you want to go off grid on your own, go for it. I suspect that experiment won't last very long once you discover just how difficult it is to actually maintain a stable 120/220/230V 60/50HZ AC 24/7 that stays in phase. Most people really don't want to go back to third world style "power doesn't actually work 24/7 and you keep getting outages when something fails", and most of our home appliances are simply no longer designed for that sort of power input. They expect 24/7 reliable power.
They already very much want you to "cut them off". It would save them a lot of balancing headaches.
Problem is that you don't want to because that destroys your ROI on solar installation, which assumes significant savings that come from net metering.
Australia's solar policy has been called an "unmitigated disaster". It's basically a method of subsidising the rich by taxing the poor which is approaching the point of collapse. Even the massively pro-green sites like reneweconomy have been forced to admit there is a significant problem (though they try to obfuscate this by talking up the other relevant points like spinning reserve that burns coal).
http://reneweconomy.com.au/201...
Easy solution: if you don't want to pay for batteries, you pay for upgrades to the grid necessary to make your method of microgeneration sustainable.
Well, it's not easy because solar sales would crash if solar microgenerators would actually have to pay for these costs instead of passing them on to others.
Because the power involved is on a completely different level. Solutions used in low power applications would burn out when used for high power applications.
Essentially your entire argument is about your utter ignorance of how grids work. They MUST be centralized and aware of the entire grid because parts of grid failing have a nasty tendency of causing cascade failures. And that is really, REALLY hard to do, so instead we have what is essentially a patchwork of hacks of various kinds to keep the frequency, voltage, AC phase of all relevant grids, power factor, etc balanced in all parts across each part of grid, ranging from power plant interconnects and high voltage long range transfer lines down to the residential grids.
This is not a small feat. I really recommend reading up on what it actually takes to reliably produce and deliver stable and "clean" AC current to your residential socket. There's a reason why it's almost unheard of to have reliable power outside well developed regions.
When you have residential grids behaving erratically, everything else must adjust to compensate as to not go out of phase and cause a cascade failure across the entire grid. This process is invisible to normal user, but there's a massive amount of specialist people and hardware doing a lot of work to make it actually work properly.
Germans have this problem in spades and are going through the same fight as we speak. The only advantage they have is that they have better planned mostly centralized installations and get less power from solar because of geographic location of German state. This helps to stall the creep of this problem to an extent, but it doesn't solve it.
There is another problem here as well, which has caused significant upheaval in Australia. Solar subsidies have effectively ended up as a tax on the poor which is subsidising the rich. This is because poor are forced to pay full price for all electricity they use, while rich can simply buy the microproducer plant to put on their roof and use net metering to effectively get paid from common pool paid mostly by poor who can't afford those.
Since we're talking about infrastructure that is necessary for everyone, it ends up as excessive tax on poor that is used to subsidise the rich on costs of infrastructure used by everyone.
Not just some but essentially full agreement. The problem here is that when solar starts a production spike, all houses in the region with solar will suddenly spike at once. That is what causes the overloads in the residential circuit which was never designed to handle such spikes because they were never considered when grid was built.
The only solutions are:
1. Massive investment into grid upgrades, which comes with increase in maintenance costs.
2. Capping solar's ability to dump into the grid while keeping the current grid and it's relatively low maintenance costs (solution proposed here).
Problem with #2 is that it significantly reduces ROI of solar installation, as it's being actively marketed with ROI that enables solar microproducers to dump excess into the grid at a good price. This was lobbied in back when solar was just starting, and no one thought of the current scenario - solar that is popular enough to threaten grid stability.
Yes, it's laziness. Not massive costs associated with having to build up monitoring and measuring on massive scale but "laziness".
Because these FM transmitters:
1. Have a much greater range. In most cases you will be able to hear a station transmitting from tens of kilometers away, in some cases, hundreds. Cell tower range is limited to single digit kilometers in most cases due to optimization for speed over range. Towers over less populated areas will be optimized for range, but even those barely cover ten to twenty kilometers in best case scenarios. Also, see 4.
2. Are typically designed to have backup power in case of an emergency, and are generally often hardened against many disasters because they are supposed to be used to transmit emergency messages.
3. On a final note, most FM receivers also have AM receiver function. That has range of hundreds of kilometers, thousands during the night due to skywave effect. This is the best technology for emergency broadcasts, as one station can cover up to thousands of kilometers radius around itself.
4. Are one way transmitters. That means they don't rely on phone's weak transmitter's ability to reach the tower.
Real problem here is that most of the world is still on FM. That means things like emergency broadcasts, information fed to cars, playing radio while you're driving and so on. Tourism/transit in Norway is going to become a whole lot more annoying.
Someone has to start, but it would be nice if they kept at least a small part of the spectrum for visitors from the rest of Europe.
This appears to be more of a bringing "internet way" closer to how things are done in real life.
As in if someone anonymously puts up a poster on private land that defames you, you actually get to challenge it in court and if it's found to be libel it's taken down.
This is censorship in the same way as "not allowing libel" is censorship.
Have you tried reading the article? Your claims are in direct conflict with the very thing you're commenting on.
Because this time it will be us making room for the next upcoming species.
Problem being that "errors on the line" can be caused by other people on the loop. As do many other issues with circle topology in general.
Are you even remotely aware of the costs of cabling an 8-story apartment building?
My VDSL2 connection is sold as 100/10, which according to my router is currently connected at 86552/10000 kbps. It's very common around here to have fibre to apartment complex and then VDSL2 over telephone lines for last mile.
And this is indeed my personal connection, not shared with everyone on the same cable loop.
Honestly, modern Pike's Peak race is kinda lame. Full tarmac start to finish, sadly boring grip driving.
Tip your hat to the old pre-2011 Pike's Peak which was mostly gravel road with some tarmac when driving was far, FAR more intense. Here's the legendary Ari Vatanen run in the 405 T16 from the 1990.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?...
Featuring some crazy stuff like driving that monster of a car with one hand while shielding eyes from the sun glare with another through turns at high speed.
Nope. Bankruptcy specifically voids most of the promissory obligations like these, and if steam were to go under, company that purchased it would likely push it through bankruptcy to get rid of most of the said obligations.
It's exceptionally obvious that national cinema we're talking about is not "major studio movies shot in European locations".