This brings up a counter on the cell phone - as long as you have a 'interlock', even software driven, as long as it requires deliberate action to bypass such as uninstalling the program, it would probably still count, because the law doesn't specify 'not easy to bypass' for the interlock, merely that one be present.
That's a bit like tracking money via serial number. Sure, you can track each one individually, but if you don't have a list of the serial numbers for the bills the robbers just stole, they're still untrackable.
Not sure what you mean by that...? I haven't run across light socket yet where I could not directly replace an incandescent with a CFL or LED...?
That's because the adaptive CFL/LED 'bulb' is designed to go into the same size sockets. However, consider that before there were Compact flourescent lights you had just plain flourescent lights - the biggest standard being the T-8/12 bulbs in 4' fixtures. Not saying this arrangement is ideal in say, a bedroom*, but it's a fixture(IE light source holder) that's designed for the strengths of flourescent lights. As a result, rather than lasting ~8k hours, T-8 bulbs are expected to last 20-30k hours, using 17 watts to produce 1300 lumens(76.5 lumens per watt) vs 26 watts for 1750(67.3) for a common CFL. Replacement cost is about $4 per bulb, and the seperate ballast can be expected to last decades. But a fixture designed for FL generally doesn't look anything like one designed for incandescents.
Same sort of deal for LED lights. They still waste power as heat, and therefore have to dissipate it. Plus LEDs are natural floods, vs bulbs radiating in all directions naturally, necessating reflectors. Heat is an LED light's biggest enemy, and shoving everything(LED, power supply, current limiters) into a bulb then putting it in a fixture designed to contain the horrendous heat load of an incandescent is a recipe for 'harsh service' for it.
Change out the fixture for one where the power supply is seperate from the LED, you gain the ability to heatsink the lights and power seperately rather than insulating them together, and you can have a lighter weight fixture that will last decades and actually cost less. Better repairability as well - just replace individual LEDs or the power supply as necessary.
*Even though my dorm room has 4 sets of 2 of them right now, we could practically run a lighting studio in there, we normally only turn 1, maybe 2 of them on.
The more power people pull from the grid, the heavier it needs to be built, but like many things it scales up well. IE a powerline capable of carrying twice as much doesn't typically cost twice as much.
As such, with the 'wasters' using more juice, the conservers end up paying less.
You know, your analysis reminded me - wouldn't this be possibly more suited, at least in initial use, for use on a submarine or underwater structure? I could see it being useful if the overall power demands are less than electrolysis, cheaper, removes need to dispose of relatively large amounts of hydrogen, etc...
THEN you work on miniaturizing it so it can become the next generation of SCUBA.
The game can not hide the fact that an actual purchase is going to take place.
1. I'm an android user, not a Apple user. 2. Multiple people have given stories like this, and I've used a few 'kid' games as relaxing entertainment that pulled stuff like geekoid mentioned, and while as a scam-aware adult I recognize the ploys, I don't expect everybody to. 3. They try to make this as transparant as possible, such as the 'auto-purchasing' of 'X points' via real money if you don't have enough. It might no longer be possible to do this without the app store independently confirming every purchase, but in the old days? 4. I've seen enough scummy 'You have to click this little box 3 pages down to NOT install this adware along with the program I want', then it asks you twice to confirm that you DON'T want to install it, and it's like a logic game with the phrasing 'Are you sure you don't want to install X with BLAH BLAH BLAH BENEFITS' along with 'We'd really like to install X for you, can we?'.
I have clue. You have clue. We're adults. It takes time, and often being burned, for kids to develop 'clue' because it's more than just deductive reasoning, it requires knowledge of how the world works.
Mom's told me that as a very young child when I learned that 'paper money' was more valuable than 'coin money' I got upset and wanted paper money in exchange for things I bought when I gave them paper. Learning relational stuff, like how the item I was getting was in exchange for the money took a bit more time. On the other hand, I apparently took to the idea that I only got a limited amount of money to spend on what I wanted very seriously, and it drastically cut down on whining for cheap stuff*. When you only have $2 suddenly that toy that costs $2 but I knew even then would likely break before we get home doesn't look like a deal anymore.
It sounds like Code.org is pushing to have H-1B visa fees earmarked for education programs, rather than just going to general funds.
That's all well and good, but it's important to realize that funding is almost perfectly fungible.
Remember how back in the day ticketing by police in some area was used to fund the police departments? How this led to abuses and eventually most of those areas were forced to either put the ticket money in the general fund or education funds? All 'the government' needs to do in that case is reduce the organization's normal funding by the amount of earmarks it'll get (so it stays absolutely level), and increase the part of the government that is no longer getting those fees the same. The only difference is that now you have the local government pushing the police department to write more tickets to ensure the local schools are well funded.
In this case there may be no department that suffers, instead this amounts to an increase in the deficit, which harms us all. I will admit that I'm probably a bit more obsessed with a balanced budget/paid down deficit than is healthy, but geeze, something like 6% of our spending is already on interest. That's more than a lot of our programs, and somewhere between 1/3 and 1/2 of our largest 6 departments.
However, your complaints sound like you've been buying cheap CFLs, at least if the market is anything like it is in Finland. I've bought expensive (up to ten euros) CFLs of two or three different brands, and I can't remember which year I bought a single one of them, they last that long.
I've been writing the install date on my CFLs in permanent marker. Seeing '02 on a bulb I replaced last year was interesting.
A bit less? LEDs use 1/20th as much power as incandescents.
Incandescents don't matter when you're comparing LED and CFL. A common "100W" equivalent CFL produces 1750 lumens for 26 watts. A "100W" equivalent LED produces 1675 lumens for 20 watts. A true 100W incandescent is 1710
First: LEDs are approximately 5 times as efficient as Incandescent, CFL approximately 4 times as efficient. It wasn't that long ago that when I did the calcs at a store that they came out even, or even a little worse for the LEDs. There have been some inovations that increased LED efficiency since then.
Still: Run a 100W bulb for 10k hours@$.15 per kwh and it'll run $150 Run a 26W CFL for the same time and it'll be $39. Run a 20W LED and it'll be $30
When you look at the power savings - $110 when switching to a CFL, $9 if you upgrade from a CFL to LED. At over an OOM less power saved counts as 'a bit' to me in comparison. When you're looking at $2.27 per bulb for the CFL and $48 for the LED, consider that you're looking at saving $22.50 over the 25k hour life of the LED. You'll also need 3 CFLs(8k hour life vs 25k), amounting to about $30 saved, meaning you're still $18 in the hole for buying the LED(at least for now). I like some LED advantages - generally stronger, better cold performance, etc... But I'll be honest - I still have 2 CFLs from the last multipack I bought, I'm going to use those up before I go buying LED lights. Hopefully they'll have some nice fixtures I can install that are designed for LEDs by then.
Alternatively he's thinking about a closet/attic light that's used like once a month for 10 minutes.
I've lost more CFLs due to damage(being stupid) than burning out. A set of burned out lights turned out to be coming from a defective socket - fixing that fixed a lot of issues for the whole fixture(6 lights). For anybody with expensive equipment I recommend surge protection built into the breaker panel - some companies make ones that you can plug in just like a breaker.
Don't buy the cheapest of the cheap, be aware of how you're installing it(bathroom/upside down/sealed will kill them quicker). Personally, when you're looking at buying a light that can last over 5 years I think you should start considering looking for a fixture that suits the light source, rather than trying to shove the light source into a fixture. Especially with LEDs you can actually reduce costs as well as increasing lifespan this way.
One thing to realize about 'rough service' type bulbs is that they're even LESS efficient at creating light than regular bulbs since part of making them last that long is to make the filament thicker. Therefore it produces more infrared light.
Rough Service:.22 cents per lumen -.22 cents per lumen per 10k hours. 10.94 lumens per watt - 15M 'lumen-hours'*, 1.4k kwh, $140 over life of bulb@$.1per kwh CFL:.13 cents - 16 cents per 10k, 67.3 lumens per watt - 223 kwh, $22.30 Traditional:.07 cents per lumen (but only last ~750 hours)..93 per 10k hours. 16.9 lumens per watt - 888 kwh, $88.80
Roughly speaking, what you're saving in bulb replacement for the 'rough service' bulb you're more than paying for in electricity, which is why you normally used the 750 hour life ones - The $10.65 you save per 1500 lumens going with the rough service bulb cost you $51.20 in extra electricity costs.
I'm not so much green as cheap.
*10k hours times 1.5k lumens, or roughly 1 of these bulbs, brightness adjusted to average.
Who cares as long as he's paying for it? The strain caused by his usage should be reflected in his bill, thus he and his ilk end up paying for a slightly beefier power grid.
That is, if government regulation/pricing isn't blocking the companies from doing the necessary work/expansion.
Besides, residential power usage has been falling for quite some time, indicating to me that people ARE replacing their power hungry appliances with ones of less appetite. I was surprised when my LCD TV turned out to be using more power per square inch of screen than my old CRT, but LED TVs cut power usage quite a bit themselves. People moving from desktop computers to laptops to tablets, with a power use drop each step. MOST people I know have at least partially converted to CFL/LED* lighting, with only low usage areas remaining.
Note: Aside from 'severe duty' bulbs in things like the oven I have CFLs all through my house except for 1 closet and the crawlspace, which will probably be replaced by LED lights when the bulbs(finally) go. Note: Average usage for those lights are less than 1 hour/month.
*Though I think that fixtures designed for the different light types is better than plugging in adapting bulbs.
Sounds like you're still maintaining it though. Consider something like a marriage license registry system that was set up in the '50s then consider the effects of gay marriage on it...
There's a reason I specified 'tends', and while if the program was written portable enough you can be fine, sometimes it's not and you're stuck searching for a 286 motherboard or something.
Why shouldn't it be used? If it ain't broke, don't fix it.
Because it tends to keep getting creakier and creakier, and when it finally does break you're up the creek without a paddle because the parts and skills to fix it don't exist anymore.
Advice from a white guy sitting in a suburban home in front of his expensive computer.
More like 'in the basement of his parent's suburban home'.
Still, we need to consider WHY said single mother has 5+ kids, and fix that. I'm not one for the 'traditional family', but I'm one who supports the extended family caring for children. IE I don't think even 2 adults is good enough, I want 3+. As such, while I recognize that some single mothers have adequate support structure with extended family helping(grandparents, typically), it's normally a pretty bad situation.
I think we're just going to have to agree to disagree here. I do see where you're coming from, but IMO any device that's handling that kind of current and directs any of it to power onboard low-voltage DC circuitry needs to be thermally fused as well as breakered.
I think you've missed my argument: I'm not saying that they shouldn't provide thermal protection. They should. What I'm arguing is that the need to do so at the outlet was non-obvious. If you assume that everything is up to code, you don't need to worry about the outlet, as there's protection upstream to cut it off if necessary.
I don't actually know if the cord HAS any 'low-voltage DC Circuitry'. From what I've read it contains a GFCI breaker and uses some sort of resistor setup to determine what's plugged in. Could be something like 1 Ohm = 120@12A, 10=120@16A, 100 = 240V@24A, 500 = 240@40A, etc....
What it sounds like is that they're adding thermal protection forward, more towards the outlet. Plus adding some code for the chargers that attempts to detect a circuit that's not up to code.
210.20A says that, but you also have: 210.3 Rating. Branch circuits recognized by this article shall be rated in accordance with the maximum permitted ampere rating or setting of the overcurrent device. The rating for other than individual branch circuits shall be 15, 20, 30, 40, and 50 amperes. Where conductors of higher ampacity are used for any reason, the ampere rating or setting of the specified overcurrent device shall determine the circuit rating.
Not to mention the exception in 210.20A: Exception: Where the assembly, including the overcurrent devices protecting the branch circuit(s), is listed for operation at 100 percent of its rating, the ampere rating of the overcurrent device shall be permitted to be not less than the sum of the continuous load plus the noncontinuous load.
From reviewing the code book, the concern isn't safety, it's that many circuit breakers will start popping below their rated capacity if pressed to over 80% for long periods of time(3+ hours). Oddly enough, the CH series breakers in my house are 100% rated, so I could safely pull 15A off a 15A breaker all day long. Good thing my wiring is up to code.
1. NEC doesn't concern itself with users. It concerns itself with installers, inspectors, and professionals. The code is designed such that even if the user is clueless the worst that is supposed to happen is that the breaker trips. 2. Again, this is when the anticipated load is known during construction. NEC assumes users are idiots who can and will hook more things up in the future, thus the requirement for overhead. A 15A circuit with a 15A breaker is supposed to be safe even if you draw only 1 watt under the level at which the breaker would trip, with a 'worst case' situation being that the breaker fails open early. 3. UL Listed 1500 watt heaters are sold all the time, and they don't have timers. There's also no warnings about 'no more than 3 hours at a time'. If I was at home I'd grab my copy of the code book, but it's all about expected use when wiring, not use once the wires are in place. Breakers are always supposed to trip before damage in case of too much current draw. It's only when wiring isn't up to code - installed wrong or damaged that it's an issue. 4. You're assuming that the Model S, where the charging off a 5-15 port is listed at '110V, 12A, 1400W' is going to continue to draw 1.4kw, as opposed to using all it's fancy current limiting circuitry to limit it to 12A as opposed to 1.4kw. 5. Again, the NEC doesn't do JACK about consumers. Consumers aren't expected to know the NEC, about any 3 hour rule, etc... Now, if an electrician doing the wiring for a house is told that 'We expect to use outlet X for a space heater all night long' if he's doing it to code he'd have to run 12 gauge for a 20A breaker for that circuit, as opposed to 14 gauge/15A. For that matter, if they try it with a 'standard' 15A breaker as opposed to a 'full load' one, they'll probably get nuisance trips after a short period of time. A standard 15A breaker will start tripping if you draw more than 12A for over 3 hours. When it'll trip after that depends on the manufacturer, product line, and individual breaker. 6. Can't say about it's power factor level, other than given it's flexibility I think that it'd use a 'huge' switchmode power supply, and if's a power factor correcting one it should be quite good.
I think you're missing a bit about the Tesla Model S - the charger(s) are located IN the vehicle. The most recent fire involving a Tesla was traced to most likely have started in the outlet that the car was charging from - the car itself was only minorly damaged, the chargers not at all.
The 'Wall charger adapter' that is being replaced in the article amounts to a fancy power cord - allowing you to plug different adapters onto the end to plug it into everything from a 15A@120V circuit all the way up to a 50A@240V one. It has some circuitry to tell the car what plug you stuck on the end so it 'knows' how much to draw 12A-40A.
Part of the concern for replacing the power cord is in case the user plugs it into an outlet that doesn't meet code(perhaps anymore). Heck, I'm currently in a 240V area and I've seen multiple outlets go bad - not the plugs, the outlets themselves. So it's a real concern. There have been some reported instances where either the outlet or the plug adapter malfunctioned. It can be hard to tell the difference sometimes, as the heat damages both.
I think the thing to consider here is that there's probably a bevy of thermal sensors, fuses, and cutoffs in Tesla's cars. Same deal with the ovens and dryers - the sensors are within the appliance itself, not the outlet as I specified.
Basically, putting thermal sensors in a dryer near the heating elements/air stream to prevent damage there makes sense. Having one in the oven to shut it down before it reaches combustion temperatures also makes senses. Putting one in the plug to try to detect that the outlet is overheating is non-standard.
According to NEC, a standard 15 amp residential wall socket must be derated to 12 amps for any continuous load that lasts longer than 4 hours.
Incorrect in almost every way. 1. NEC doesn't 'derate' anything. 2. an up to code 15A wall socket is good for 15A, period. Probably 20A(they're rated for 20A passthrough; it's fairly common to run a 20A circuit with more 15A sockets). It's the wiring behind the socket that's the real concern... 3. The 12A is for 'dedicated load' use when designing a dedicated circuit(or deciding whether you need one). IE if you KNOW what an outlet is going to be used for before you install it. Maximum design load on a circuit is 80% of the Max. Because 15-20A circuits normally power multiple devices, there are more rules there, like how many outlets are allowed on a circuit. Due to the tendency to use heating appliances in kitchens(toasters, microwaves, etc..), there's fewer outlets allowed per circuit, and 20A is much more likely to be required. So if you're looking at a 14A device, you're required to install a 20A circuit, not a 15. This is partially to avoid having to redo work when the customer replaces said item with a 'heavy duty' one that draws just a touch more... 4. If you're putting an outlet on the circuit, the circuit must be rated for what can plug into said outlet. 5. Besides, Tesla Model S only draws 1.4kw when pluged into a NEMA5-15, 100 watts LESS than a common (US) space heater on 'high'.
I'd say that this is 20/20 hindsight in what's still a relatively new field. Do oven outlets normally have a temperature shutoff in them? It's the only other common household item that could be drawing over 30A on a routine basis that I can think of that actually has a plug, as opposed to being hardwired.
In-house testing problably got a most of the 1% stuff and almost all of the.1% problems., now they're working on the.01% problems with ~25k cars now in the field.
Slashdot Mirror
This brings up a counter on the cell phone - as long as you have a 'interlock', even software driven, as long as it requires deliberate action to bypass such as uninstalling the program, it would probably still count, because the law doesn't specify 'not easy to bypass' for the interlock, merely that one be present.
Depends on the cop that stops you. I've seen trucker GPS units that have 10"+ screens on them. Since they're to help navigation, they're legal.
That's a bit like tracking money via serial number. Sure, you can track each one individually, but if you don't have a list of the serial numbers for the bills the robbers just stole, they're still untrackable.
Gold is at least pretty and useful in a number of industrial and electrical applications.
Of course, I don't trade in gold coins anyways - assessment costs* will eat up any 'profits' from gold price increases 9 times out of 10.
*To determine the purity of the gold hasn't changed since you got the coins.
Not sure what you mean by that...? I haven't run across light socket yet where I could not directly replace an incandescent with a CFL or LED...?
That's because the adaptive CFL/LED 'bulb' is designed to go into the same size sockets. However, consider that before there were Compact flourescent lights you had just plain flourescent lights - the biggest standard being the T-8/12 bulbs in 4' fixtures. Not saying this arrangement is ideal in say, a bedroom*, but it's a fixture(IE light source holder) that's designed for the strengths of flourescent lights. As a result, rather than lasting ~8k hours, T-8 bulbs are expected to last 20-30k hours, using 17 watts to produce 1300 lumens(76.5 lumens per watt) vs 26 watts for 1750(67.3) for a common CFL. Replacement cost is about $4 per bulb, and the seperate ballast can be expected to last decades. But a fixture designed for FL generally doesn't look anything like one designed for incandescents.
Same sort of deal for LED lights. They still waste power as heat, and therefore have to dissipate it. Plus LEDs are natural floods, vs bulbs radiating in all directions naturally, necessating reflectors. Heat is an LED light's biggest enemy, and shoving everything(LED, power supply, current limiters) into a bulb then putting it in a fixture designed to contain the horrendous heat load of an incandescent is a recipe for 'harsh service' for it.
Change out the fixture for one where the power supply is seperate from the LED, you gain the ability to heatsink the lights and power seperately rather than insulating them together, and you can have a lighter weight fixture that will last decades and actually cost less. Better repairability as well - just replace individual LEDs or the power supply as necessary.
*Even though my dorm room has 4 sets of 2 of them right now, we could practically run a lighting studio in there, we normally only turn 1, maybe 2 of them on.
The more power people pull from the grid, the heavier it needs to be built, but like many things it scales up well. IE a powerline capable of carrying twice as much doesn't typically cost twice as much.
As such, with the 'wasters' using more juice, the conservers end up paying less.
You know, your analysis reminded me - wouldn't this be possibly more suited, at least in initial use, for use on a submarine or underwater structure? I could see it being useful if the overall power demands are less than electrolysis, cheaper, removes need to dispose of relatively large amounts of hydrogen, etc...
THEN you work on miniaturizing it so it can become the next generation of SCUBA.
The game can not hide the fact that an actual purchase is going to take place.
1. I'm an android user, not a Apple user.
2. Multiple people have given stories like this, and I've used a few 'kid' games as relaxing entertainment that pulled stuff like geekoid mentioned, and while as a scam-aware adult I recognize the ploys, I don't expect everybody to.
3. They try to make this as transparant as possible, such as the 'auto-purchasing' of 'X points' via real money if you don't have enough. It might no longer be possible to do this without the app store independently confirming every purchase, but in the old days?
4. I've seen enough scummy 'You have to click this little box 3 pages down to NOT install this adware along with the program I want', then it asks you twice to confirm that you DON'T want to install it, and it's like a logic game with the phrasing 'Are you sure you don't want to install X with BLAH BLAH BLAH BENEFITS' along with 'We'd really like to install X for you, can we?'.
Because they have a clue.
I have clue. You have clue. We're adults. It takes time, and often being burned, for kids to develop 'clue' because it's more than just deductive reasoning, it requires knowledge of how the world works.
Mom's told me that as a very young child when I learned that 'paper money' was more valuable than 'coin money' I got upset and wanted paper money in exchange for things I bought when I gave them paper. Learning relational stuff, like how the item I was getting was in exchange for the money took a bit more time. On the other hand, I apparently took to the idea that I only got a limited amount of money to spend on what I wanted very seriously, and it drastically cut down on whining for cheap stuff*. When you only have $2 suddenly that toy that costs $2 but I knew even then would likely break before we get home doesn't look like a deal anymore.
It sounds like Code.org is pushing to have H-1B visa fees earmarked for education programs, rather than just going to general funds.
That's all well and good, but it's important to realize that funding is almost perfectly fungible.
Remember how back in the day ticketing by police in some area was used to fund the police departments? How this led to abuses and eventually most of those areas were forced to either put the ticket money in the general fund or education funds? All 'the government' needs to do in that case is reduce the organization's normal funding by the amount of earmarks it'll get (so it stays absolutely level), and increase the part of the government that is no longer getting those fees the same. The only difference is that now you have the local government pushing the police department to write more tickets to ensure the local schools are well funded.
In this case there may be no department that suffers, instead this amounts to an increase in the deficit, which harms us all. I will admit that I'm probably a bit more obsessed with a balanced budget/paid down deficit than is healthy, but geeze, something like 6% of our spending is already on interest. That's more than a lot of our programs, and somewhere between 1/3 and 1/2 of our largest 6 departments.
However, your complaints sound like you've been buying cheap CFLs, at least if the market is anything like it is in Finland. I've bought expensive (up to ten euros) CFLs of two or three different brands, and I can't remember which year I bought a single one of them, they last that long.
I've been writing the install date on my CFLs in permanent marker. Seeing '02 on a bulb I replaced last year was interesting.
A bit less? LEDs use 1/20th as much power as incandescents.
Incandescents don't matter when you're comparing LED and CFL.
A common "100W" equivalent CFL produces 1750 lumens for 26 watts.
A "100W" equivalent LED produces 1675 lumens for 20 watts.
A true 100W incandescent is 1710
First: LEDs are approximately 5 times as efficient as Incandescent, CFL approximately 4 times as efficient. It wasn't that long ago that when I did the calcs at a store that they came out even, or even a little worse for the LEDs. There have been some inovations that increased LED efficiency since then.
Still:
Run a 100W bulb for 10k hours@$.15 per kwh and it'll run $150
Run a 26W CFL for the same time and it'll be $39.
Run a 20W LED and it'll be $30
When you look at the power savings - $110 when switching to a CFL, $9 if you upgrade from a CFL to LED. At over an OOM less power saved counts as 'a bit' to me in comparison. When you're looking at $2.27 per bulb for the CFL and $48 for the LED, consider that you're looking at saving $22.50 over the 25k hour life of the LED. You'll also need 3 CFLs(8k hour life vs 25k), amounting to about $30 saved, meaning you're still $18 in the hole for buying the LED(at least for now).
I like some LED advantages - generally stronger, better cold performance, etc... But I'll be honest - I still have 2 CFLs from the last multipack I bought, I'm going to use those up before I go buying LED lights. Hopefully they'll have some nice fixtures I can install that are designed for LEDs by then.
He must work at 4550 East Avenue in Livermore, CA
Alternatively he's thinking about a closet/attic light that's used like once a month for 10 minutes.
I've lost more CFLs due to damage(being stupid) than burning out. A set of burned out lights turned out to be coming from a defective socket - fixing that fixed a lot of issues for the whole fixture(6 lights). For anybody with expensive equipment I recommend surge protection built into the breaker panel - some companies make ones that you can plug in just like a breaker.
Don't buy the cheapest of the cheap, be aware of how you're installing it(bathroom/upside down/sealed will kill them quicker). Personally, when you're looking at buying a light that can last over 5 years I think you should start considering looking for a fixture that suits the light source, rather than trying to shove the light source into a fixture. Especially with LEDs you can actually reduce costs as well as increasing lifespan this way.
One thing to realize about 'rough service' type bulbs is that they're even LESS efficient at creating light than regular bulbs since part of making them last that long is to make the filament thicker. Therefore it produces more infrared light.
Consider that the Newcandescent produces 1094 lumens while the 26 Watt CFLs produce 1750. Regular 100 watts are 1690
Rough Service: .22 cents per lumen - .22 cents per lumen per 10k hours. 10.94 lumens per watt - 15M 'lumen-hours'*, 1.4k kwh, $140 over life of bulb@$.1per kwh .13 cents - 16 cents per 10k, 67.3 lumens per watt - 223 kwh, $22.30 .07 cents per lumen (but only last ~750 hours). .93 per 10k hours. 16.9 lumens per watt - 888 kwh, $88.80
CFL:
Traditional:
Roughly speaking, what you're saving in bulb replacement for the 'rough service' bulb you're more than paying for in electricity, which is why you normally used the 750 hour life ones - The $10.65 you save per 1500 lumens going with the rough service bulb cost you $51.20 in extra electricity costs.
I'm not so much green as cheap.
*10k hours times 1.5k lumens, or roughly 1 of these bulbs, brightness adjusted to average.
Who cares as long as he's paying for it? The strain caused by his usage should be reflected in his bill, thus he and his ilk end up paying for a slightly beefier power grid.
That is, if government regulation/pricing isn't blocking the companies from doing the necessary work/expansion.
Besides, residential power usage has been falling for quite some time, indicating to me that people ARE replacing their power hungry appliances with ones of less appetite. I was surprised when my LCD TV turned out to be using more power per square inch of screen than my old CRT, but LED TVs cut power usage quite a bit themselves. People moving from desktop computers to laptops to tablets, with a power use drop each step. MOST people I know have at least partially converted to CFL/LED* lighting, with only low usage areas remaining.
Note: Aside from 'severe duty' bulbs in things like the oven I have CFLs all through my house except for 1 closet and the crawlspace, which will probably be replaced by LED lights when the bulbs(finally) go. Note: Average usage for those lights are less than 1 hour/month.
*Though I think that fixtures designed for the different light types is better than plugging in adapting bulbs.
Sounds like you're still maintaining it though. Consider something like a marriage license registry system that was set up in the '50s then consider the effects of gay marriage on it...
There's a reason I specified 'tends', and while if the program was written portable enough you can be fine, sometimes it's not and you're stuck searching for a 286 motherboard or something.
Why shouldn't it be used? If it ain't broke, don't fix it.
Because it tends to keep getting creakier and creakier, and when it finally does break you're up the creek without a paddle because the parts and skills to fix it don't exist anymore.
Advice from a white guy sitting in a suburban home in front of his expensive computer.
More like 'in the basement of his parent's suburban home'.
Still, we need to consider WHY said single mother has 5+ kids, and fix that. I'm not one for the 'traditional family', but I'm one who supports the extended family caring for children. IE I don't think even 2 adults is good enough, I want 3+. As such, while I recognize that some single mothers have adequate support structure with extended family helping(grandparents, typically), it's normally a pretty bad situation.
I think we're just going to have to agree to disagree here. I do see where you're coming from, but IMO any device that's handling that kind of current and directs any of it to power onboard low-voltage DC circuitry needs to be thermally fused as well as breakered.
I think you've missed my argument: I'm not saying that they shouldn't provide thermal protection. They should. What I'm arguing is that the need to do so at the outlet was non-obvious. If you assume that everything is up to code, you don't need to worry about the outlet, as there's protection upstream to cut it off if necessary.
I don't actually know if the cord HAS any 'low-voltage DC Circuitry'. From what I've read it contains a GFCI breaker and uses some sort of resistor setup to determine what's plugged in. Could be something like 1 Ohm = 120@12A, 10=120@16A, 100 = 240V@24A, 500 = 240@40A, etc....
What it sounds like is that they're adding thermal protection forward, more towards the outlet. Plus adding some code for the chargers that attempts to detect a circuit that's not up to code.
210.20A says that, but you also have:
210.3 Rating. Branch circuits recognized by this article shall be rated in accordance with the maximum permitted ampere rating or setting of the overcurrent device. The rating for other than individual branch circuits shall be 15, 20, 30, 40, and 50 amperes. Where conductors of higher ampacity are used for any reason, the ampere rating or setting of the specified overcurrent device shall determine the circuit rating.
Not to mention the exception in 210.20A:
Exception: Where the assembly, including the overcurrent devices protecting the branch circuit(s), is listed for operation at 100 percent of its rating, the ampere rating of the overcurrent device shall be permitted to be not less than the sum of the continuous load plus the noncontinuous load.
From reviewing the code book, the concern isn't safety, it's that many circuit breakers will start popping below their rated capacity if pressed to over 80% for long periods of time(3+ hours). Oddly enough, the CH series breakers in my house are 100% rated, so I could safely pull 15A off a 15A breaker all day long. Good thing my wiring is up to code.
1. NEC doesn't concern itself with users. It concerns itself with installers, inspectors, and professionals. The code is designed such that even if the user is clueless the worst that is supposed to happen is that the breaker trips.
2. Again, this is when the anticipated load is known during construction. NEC assumes users are idiots who can and will hook more things up in the future, thus the requirement for overhead. A 15A circuit with a 15A breaker is supposed to be safe even if you draw only 1 watt under the level at which the breaker would trip, with a 'worst case' situation being that the breaker fails open early.
3. UL Listed 1500 watt heaters are sold all the time, and they don't have timers. There's also no warnings about 'no more than 3 hours at a time'. If I was at home I'd grab my copy of the code book, but it's all about expected use when wiring, not use once the wires are in place. Breakers are always supposed to trip before damage in case of too much current draw. It's only when wiring isn't up to code - installed wrong or damaged that it's an issue.
4. You're assuming that the Model S, where the charging off a 5-15 port is listed at '110V, 12A, 1400W' is going to continue to draw 1.4kw, as opposed to using all it's fancy current limiting circuitry to limit it to 12A as opposed to 1.4kw.
5. Again, the NEC doesn't do JACK about consumers. Consumers aren't expected to know the NEC, about any 3 hour rule, etc... Now, if an electrician doing the wiring for a house is told that 'We expect to use outlet X for a space heater all night long' if he's doing it to code he'd have to run 12 gauge for a 20A breaker for that circuit, as opposed to 14 gauge/15A. For that matter, if they try it with a 'standard' 15A breaker as opposed to a 'full load' one, they'll probably get nuisance trips after a short period of time. A standard 15A breaker will start tripping if you draw more than 12A for over 3 hours. When it'll trip after that depends on the manufacturer, product line, and individual breaker.
6. Can't say about it's power factor level, other than given it's flexibility I think that it'd use a 'huge' switchmode power supply, and if's a power factor correcting one it should be quite good.
I think you're missing a bit about the Tesla Model S - the charger(s) are located IN the vehicle. The most recent fire involving a Tesla was traced to most likely have started in the outlet that the car was charging from - the car itself was only minorly damaged, the chargers not at all.
The 'Wall charger adapter' that is being replaced in the article amounts to a fancy power cord - allowing you to plug different adapters onto the end to plug it into everything from a 15A@120V circuit all the way up to a 50A@240V one. It has some circuitry to tell the car what plug you stuck on the end so it 'knows' how much to draw 12A-40A.
Part of the concern for replacing the power cord is in case the user plugs it into an outlet that doesn't meet code(perhaps anymore). Heck, I'm currently in a 240V area and I've seen multiple outlets go bad - not the plugs, the outlets themselves. So it's a real concern. There have been some reported instances where either the outlet or the plug adapter malfunctioned. It can be hard to tell the difference sometimes, as the heat damages both.
I think the thing to consider here is that there's probably a bevy of thermal sensors, fuses, and cutoffs in Tesla's cars. Same deal with the ovens and dryers - the sensors are within the appliance itself, not the outlet as I specified.
Basically, putting thermal sensors in a dryer near the heating elements/air stream to prevent damage there makes sense. Having one in the oven to shut it down before it reaches combustion temperatures also makes senses. Putting one in the plug to try to detect that the outlet is overheating is non-standard.
According to NEC, a standard 15 amp residential wall socket must be derated to 12 amps for any continuous load that lasts longer than 4 hours.
Incorrect in almost every way.
1. NEC doesn't 'derate' anything.
2. an up to code 15A wall socket is good for 15A, period. Probably 20A(they're rated for 20A passthrough; it's fairly common to run a 20A circuit with more 15A sockets). It's the wiring behind the socket that's the real concern...
3. The 12A is for 'dedicated load' use when designing a dedicated circuit(or deciding whether you need one). IE if you KNOW what an outlet is going to be used for before you install it. Maximum design load on a circuit is 80% of the Max. Because 15-20A circuits normally power multiple devices, there are more rules there, like how many outlets are allowed on a circuit. Due to the tendency to use heating appliances in kitchens(toasters, microwaves, etc..), there's fewer outlets allowed per circuit, and 20A is much more likely to be required. So if you're looking at a 14A device, you're required to install a 20A circuit, not a 15. This is partially to avoid having to redo work when the customer replaces said item with a 'heavy duty' one that draws just a touch more...
4. If you're putting an outlet on the circuit, the circuit must be rated for what can plug into said outlet.
5. Besides, Tesla Model S only draws 1.4kw when pluged into a NEMA5-15, 100 watts LESS than a common (US) space heater on 'high'.
I'd say that this is 20/20 hindsight in what's still a relatively new field. Do oven outlets normally have a temperature shutoff in them? It's the only other common household item that could be drawing over 30A on a routine basis that I can think of that actually has a plug, as opposed to being hardwired.
In-house testing problably got a most of the 1% stuff and almost all of the .1% problems., now they're working on the .01% problems with ~25k cars now in the field.