Let's see, you're probably planning to spend $15,000-$20,000 after factoring in the incentives, in the hope that you'll reduce your power bills by enough to pay for that in some reasonable time. But, then, OH NO you discover that you'll have to pay $4.90/month, so of course you immediately abandon your plans, because now it's utterly hopeless that the project might ever have a decent return. Yeah, right...
I was once googling for "evacuated cylinder solar collector", and cmd-clicking all the links to open a batch of tabs to vendors of such. A few dozen tabs in, I looked over at my secondary monitor, and it was filled with a porn site. So you see, I "visited a pornographic site" that day.
I poked around the blog a bit. It's more than a little creepy. They have people's resumes and pay scales available for all to see. That's just weird. What did the janitors at Olive-Harvey do to deserve having their names and wages published? That's wholly inappropriate, and not necessary to make the author's point.
When you work for the government, your pay is a matter of public record, whether you're a senator or a janitor.
Abortion is a balance of rights between the mother and the unborn child. Obviously, her opinion rests on the unborn child having full rights as a human being, so she is basically supporting murder being illegal. Do you support murder being illegal?
No, but I do support a ban on the ridiculous use of the phrase "unborn child" to describe everything from a just-fertilized egg to a zygote to a full-term baby in the process of being born, in order to obfuscate the difficult medical and ethical question about when a developing fetus actually becomes a human being with some degree of consciousness and thus deserving of those rights.
I'm guessing that many perceived problems with stoves are caused by people who don't know how to properly operate their stoves.
Yep. I replaced an old shitty one. The new one will keep the core of the house toasty at -30F--that being about 1,500sqft with 22' high ceilings. Yet, the guy who sold it to me sold the exact same model to a little old lady the same year, and says he gets nothing from complaints from her about how it never gets really hot and doesn't heat worth a damn. Go figure;-)
(I have my own theory. This is a rural nearly all-white area. Guy who sold the stove was black. So, yeah, that's my theory about why she didn't listen when he showed her how to use her new stove. I listened, and well, the thing is like a damn blast furnace...)
And these highly efficient and clean-burning stoves were available in the 80s and probably much earlier.
And the thing is, you'd be shocked how much more efficient the ones available now are than the ones from the 80s! I replaced one, hoping for a 5-year payback, and it took just a bit over 2 years instead. (When we bought the house, the one from the 80s was not only less efficient, it was undersized, and after a few fires we realized that it could not effectively heat the house, and so we gave up on it, and got to experience what it's like to pay for all-electric the first winter. Ouch! Anyway, it is literally shocking how much heat the new one put out from a small amount of wood.)
At night energy consumption is super low, going down to 35% - 37% of daytime consumption.
Residential demand actually goes up when school lets out, and stays up until after dinner--which includes both late afternoon, and some time after dark. The utilities' peak demand is more during the day, but that's because of office workers...
You discharge the battery over daytime, at peak fluctuations. And you charge it again, during daytime.
Which makes charge retention even less of an issue, which was my original point.
Not holding a charge mean wasting energy at the end. It is like drilling a giant hole into a hydroelectric dam at the end.
The point is, in the most basic system, you'd expect to discharge the batteries every night.
Anyway, the other question is: What's the carbon footprint of these batteries including the whole life cycle on a sufficient long period of time to not bias the result?
Considering that their lifespan is actually measured in decades, probably not bad;-)
The problem, as always, is that's it not "just a battery", but "battery with charger with load monitor with safety protection with replacement batteries every few years", which greatly adds to the cost.
Perhaps this would be a use case for nickel-iron batteries? They have an extremely long life; the reason they fell out of use is because of low energy density and poor charge retention. But energy density matters much less in your crawl space than it does in your tablet or your car, and for this use, being able to hold a charge for only a few days would be fine.
Personally I prefer my home steam generator. It uses 100% renewable, carbon-cycle, eco-friendly biofuel (wood) to generate steam that drives a turbine generator. I can get about 3kW out of my setup.
Home-built or off-the-shelf? Link to plans or manufacturer or re-seller, please;-)
What would be useful would be to also compare the rate of non-Tesla car fires originating from the battery, with that of Teslas.
How in the hell would that be useful, when the Tesla batteries are the Tesla "fuel source"??? Think about it, that comparison would make absolutely no sense at all!
Blah, blah, blah...She obviously doesn't know if they're minimal, because she doesn't know if they exist. You can love or hate it, but at least if you're going to argue for one side or the other, present some fucking facts.
The fact is that multiple studies have tried to document the extent of the alleged savings, and the conclusions vary from 0.18% at the high end, to an even more minuscule increase at the "low" end of the savings. Therefore her statement that "actual energy savings are minimal, if they exist at all" is a completely accurate summary of the facts.
I would not in the least mind having a 26" or 27", 2560 x 1440 monitor on my desk. That should have been the next reasonable step up in monitor resolution... but try to find one from a major manufacturer!
For whatever reason, they seem to have been coming and going for the past year or two. If you don't find them this month, check back next month and you'll find several...
The resolution of the human eye for somebody with astoundingly good vision is about one arc minute.
1) No, that's average, not astounding, vision. (The actual limit seems to be about 0.4 arc minutes.)
2) As with *any* sampling scheme, there are issues with aliasing. Granted, the human vision system is not exactly (or even remotely) a digital scanner, but as a simple analogy it's fairly accurate to say that the limit beyond which no improvement can be detected is actually not the same as the limit at which individual pixels cannot be resolved, but is instead a bit higher.
Slashdot Mirror
Let's see, you're probably planning to spend $15,000-$20,000 after factoring in the incentives, in the hope that you'll reduce your power bills by enough to pay for that in some reasonable time. But, then, OH NO you discover that you'll have to pay $4.90/month, so of course you immediately abandon your plans, because now it's utterly hopeless that the project might ever have a decent return. Yeah, right...
I was once googling for "evacuated cylinder solar collector", and cmd-clicking all the links to open a batch of tabs to vendors of such. A few dozen tabs in, I looked over at my secondary monitor, and it was filled with a porn site. So you see, I "visited a pornographic site" that day.
I poked around the blog a bit. It's more than a little creepy. They have people's resumes and pay scales available for all to see. That's just weird. What did the janitors at Olive-Harvey do to deserve having their names and wages published? That's wholly inappropriate, and not necessary to make the author's point.
When you work for the government, your pay is a matter of public record, whether you're a senator or a janitor.
This proves the old adage that no more programmers should be involved on a project than you can fit into a VW Bug with pizza and beer.
Crowbars work better ;-)
Abortion is a balance of rights between the mother and the unborn child. Obviously, her opinion rests on the unborn child having full rights as a human being, so she is basically supporting murder being illegal. Do you support murder being illegal?
No, but I do support a ban on the ridiculous use of the phrase "unborn child" to describe everything from a just-fertilized egg to a zygote to a full-term baby in the process of being born, in order to obfuscate the difficult medical and ethical question about when a developing fetus actually becomes a human being with some degree of consciousness and thus deserving of those rights.
I'm guessing that many perceived problems with stoves are caused by people who don't know how to properly operate their stoves.
Yep. I replaced an old shitty one. The new one will keep the core of the house toasty at -30F--that being about 1,500sqft with 22' high ceilings. Yet, the guy who sold it to me sold the exact same model to a little old lady the same year, and says he gets nothing from complaints from her about how it never gets really hot and doesn't heat worth a damn. Go figure ;-)
(I have my own theory. This is a rural nearly all-white area. Guy who sold the stove was black. So, yeah, that's my theory about why she didn't listen when he showed her how to use her new stove. I listened, and well, the thing is like a damn blast furnace...)
Generally, if you want to see actually decent modern energy efficient heating technology go visit Sweden, Norway or Finland.
Yes, that's true: this, for instance ;-)
And these highly efficient and clean-burning stoves were available in the 80s and probably much earlier.
And the thing is, you'd be shocked how much more efficient the ones available now are than the ones from the 80s! I replaced one, hoping for a 5-year payback, and it took just a bit over 2 years instead. (When we bought the house, the one from the 80s was not only less efficient, it was undersized, and after a few fires we realized that it could not effectively heat the house, and so we gave up on it, and got to experience what it's like to pay for all-electric the first winter. Ouch! Anyway, it is literally shocking how much heat the new one put out from a small amount of wood.)
At night energy consumption is super low, going down to 35% - 37% of daytime consumption.
Residential demand actually goes up when school lets out, and stays up until after dinner--which includes both late afternoon, and some time after dark. The utilities' peak demand is more during the day, but that's because of office workers...
You discharge the battery over daytime, at peak fluctuations. And you charge it again, during daytime.
Which makes charge retention even less of an issue, which was my original point.
Not holding a charge mean wasting energy at the end. It is like drilling a giant hole into a hydroelectric dam at the end.
The point is, in the most basic system, you'd expect to discharge the batteries every night.
Anyway, the other question is: What's the carbon footprint of these batteries including the whole life cycle on a sufficient long period of time to not bias the result?
Considering that their lifespan is actually measured in decades, probably not bad ;-)
The problem, as always, is that's it not "just a battery", but "battery with charger with load monitor with safety protection with replacement batteries every few years", which greatly adds to the cost.
Perhaps this would be a use case for nickel-iron batteries? They have an extremely long life; the reason they fell out of use is because of low energy density and poor charge retention. But energy density matters much less in your crawl space than it does in your tablet or your car, and for this use, being able to hold a charge for only a few days would be fine.
Personally I prefer my home steam generator. It uses 100% renewable, carbon-cycle, eco-friendly biofuel (wood) to generate steam that drives a turbine generator. I can get about 3kW out of my setup.
Home-built or off-the-shelf? Link to plans or manufacturer or re-seller, please ;-)
While we're at it, let's compare the number of gas fires that occur in Tesla and non-Tesla cars. :-)
I defer to you. Your attempt to draw attention to the stupidity of that comment was far more concise and effective than mine.
..and the people pointing to this to impugn Tesla, need to get a grip.
Nah, I suspect those people have a very firm grip on the facts and know exactly what they are doing!
What would be useful would be to also compare the rate of non-Tesla car fires originating from the battery, with that of Teslas.
How in the hell would that be useful, when the Tesla batteries are the Tesla "fuel source"??? Think about it, that comparison would make absolutely no sense at all!
Except in this case background-check companies will likely sell this as a service.
HIPAA, medical privacy, case closed.
Rather, what employer is going to hire someone who has made a claim in the past?
The information will most certainly not identify individuals.
AtivceX? Go, Timmay! You're a kickass editor!
You too, since you missed the chance to pick on him for:
- "first adapter"
- "South Korean's"
This is actually the most illiterate post in a few weeks!
I see that reading comprehension is not your strong point. I defy you to point to any bias in it. I sided neither for or against daylight saving time.
Your bias is in insisting that a completely accurate summary of available research was incorrect.
Blah, blah, blah...She obviously doesn't know if they're minimal, because she doesn't know if they exist. You can love or hate it, but at least if you're going to argue for one side or the other, present some fucking facts.
The fact is that multiple studies have tried to document the extent of the alleged savings, and the conclusions vary from 0.18% at the high end, to an even more minuscule increase at the "low" end of the savings. Therefore her statement that "actual energy savings are minimal, if they exist at all" is a completely accurate summary of the facts.
It's not a bank where you deposit an hour and get it back in a 'savings account.'
But you do. You put an hour in, in the spring, and take it back out, in the fall ;-)
I would not in the least mind having a 26" or 27", 2560 x 1440 monitor on my desk. That should have been the next reasonable step up in monitor resolution... but try to find one from a major manufacturer!
For whatever reason, they seem to have been coming and going for the past year or two. If you don't find them this month, check back next month and you'll find several...
there is no way you will get a connection to a tower at 35000 feet moving at 500mph
Yes you can. If you will recall, this was proven on 9/11/2001.
With crappy resolution considering it's a 27" display.
Bullshit. Find a 27" monitor with higher resolution and post a link.
The resolution of the human eye for somebody with astoundingly good vision is about one arc minute.
1) No, that's average, not astounding, vision. (The actual limit seems to be about 0.4 arc minutes.)
2) As with *any* sampling scheme, there are issues with aliasing. Granted, the human vision system is not exactly (or even remotely) a digital scanner, but as a simple analogy it's fairly accurate to say that the limit beyond which no improvement can be detected is actually not the same as the limit at which individual pixels cannot be resolved, but is instead a bit higher.