They are both complete systems that can't be taken in parts-- with a single voltage you end up with higher fault currents and arc flash hazards, so additional safeguards are needed like the fuse in the UK plug. But, the lack of step-down transformers for larger buildings means less space is needed. I much prefer the US 480V to the ROW 380-400V, as it reduces voltage drop and provides more distribution flexibility. (The Canadians take it a notch higher.)
But, the utilization future will be 24VDC. It just makes more sense to have room-level power supplies to make everything downstream be more flexible.
I have only looked at a few locations seriously, but any harbor with 66kV infrastructure (or better) is not especially challenging. Ideally though, you would dock near a deep water wind farm and run floating submarine cables from the barge to a connection point.
A single LNG carrier could support about 50MW average demand for a year, easily. I generally don’t think it is better to go the non-green route, but 70MWe isn’t enough in my mind to justify the logistical risks. It makes sense at some value, but that just seems too small. Look at the challenges of decommissioning Enterprise as a baseline.
Terrible argument-- presumably you would stay in deep water where that is a low priority, if it was a fixed installation.
To me the real opportunity is in being able to "quickly" deploy 100-500MW generation capacity to an area that has been hit by some kind of problem. If you can fit it in a Suezmax sized ship, it would have tremendous reach. The Russian 70MW in the article seems too small to really be useful-- you would almost be better off with a LNG tanker and big turbine integrated together.
The Bay Area (and California as a whole really) needs to wake up and take a cold, hard look at a number of things that will have a huge impact on their future. I'm in SoCal now, but many of the same issues are really going to come to a head here very shortly. I could live many other places with lower costs and avoid much of the stupid metropolitan planning debacle... and still have nice weather.
But, people have been bitching ever since they first got here, so take it all with a grain of salt. Money talks...
Presumably they are from census data, but... I think the census breaks it out per worker. Looking at a number of extra-urban communities, either my perception of how many people commute to work is way off, or the numbers are. There is something providing a favorable bias in rural areas in general.
For Longview, WA, the metro area population is 3x the city population, and it looks like there is major employment in Kalma which is about in-line with the average commute time, so I might be able to see it.
So, what would you do in order to encourage the actual competition? By saying a half-mile, you need about 20 individual customers to justify a line extension in suburbia, improving access. If you can get 30 you are golden. Sure, if it is a half-mile for 3-5 subscribers it is hard to justify still, but the more penetration you have the more options there are for everyone.
The anti-competitive practices might need some regulation though...
Not really a rational approach; line extensions should be viable for business users (to a point). The challenge comes when one provider is the LEC for one side of a street, but another is on the opposite side. It takes a CLEC to cross the lines, renting access from either or both providers.
Likewise, should bad locations in a city/area be given preference for subsidies when alternate locations exist that have competition?
Personally, I would love to see opportunities for small ISPs because of the broken market. Might not help everyone, but it is a reasonable starting point.
For average daily commute (round trip), the daily time seems off. Some areas of LA or SF for example should be well over 77 average-- minimum of 100, but I could see 120. A few other cities raise flags as well. Only explanation I can see is they are counting unemployed people.
Not complaining about my daily 35-minute round trip commute on the bike though.
I was actually laughing at a very wealthy friend using an aol.com address a few weeks ago. Most of my email is hosted via Gmail, kind of wish I still had my shitgoddamngetoffyourassandjam@usa.net or my @compuserve.com email address too... but hey, need to let go some time...
Interestingly enough, that isn't universally true. I noticed a particular island I dream of having a home on seriously discounting costal homes, and there is no buffer zone. There are other factors, but unless these homes are on non-traditional stilts, there is a huge discount.
The $2B revenue isn’t that odd— it basically says they want an established player where the government revenue will not dominate their books. Financial resilience.
That was my hope too... but apparently the infrastructure required to support multiple reactors pretty much all needs to be in place with the first— you can scale the reactors, turbines, power equipment, etc... but the cost is very much front-loaded.
LA does actually have a universal pass; the action of transferring is easy enough, but the wait and...transfer station demographics particularly in LA can be a bit of a problem. The Tube, MTR, SMRT, or Tunnelbana make it quite easy to transfer within the subway, and not entirely painful between modes, but LA has a long way to go there.
Generally speaking what happens is that the utility does a circuit extension to the property as “general facilities” rather than “customer facilities.” If the latter, the full bill goes to the owner, but common-use services theoretically benefit all users.
The game is that a transmission line extension generally doesn’t provide a benefit for an established community, although at times it will help improve system resilience.
Rode the bus to work today in LA. There are some great bus services (like Commuter Express) that solve problems for people that can afford a car... and can afford someone to drive them to work. The areas with direct service to downtown via train work well too.
What is painful and makes a lot of people avoid public transit in LA is the need to transfer. That is an urban planning issue more than a transit issue though.
Not sure how much better they make life in Los Angeles. The region is at a breaking point, and everything that can be done to limit individual car trips makes life better for everyone.
No, the first was in the late 90's when they forced consumer electronics to have power factor corrected power supplies and limited harmonic distortion. The amount of money and resources wasted because of cheap power supplies requiring building electrical infrastructure upgrades was stupefying.
It is good to keep the US in check as the default standards-bearer. They have shown this repeatedly.
Interesting points. If the buidings are on leased land (and it isn't a triple-net lease where land property taxes are passed on to the tenant), then it isn't entirely unreasonable to depreciate the original construction down to almost zero, and just pay taxes on the depreciated value of the improvements since original construction.
Add in the Prop 13 effect. and it doesn't sound nearly as absurd.
I have wanted a POE NTP wall clock for a while, but that doesn't abrogate the utility of WWV. It is useful to have a terrestrial time reference in case things go to shit in orbit. It is good to have a variety of independent time references.
But, my clocks are wwvb, which someone else pointed out is apparently not impacted.
Slashdot Mirror
They are both complete systems that can't be taken in parts-- with a single voltage you end up with higher fault currents and arc flash hazards, so additional safeguards are needed like the fuse in the UK plug. But, the lack of step-down transformers for larger buildings means less space is needed. I much prefer the US 480V to the ROW 380-400V, as it reduces voltage drop and provides more distribution flexibility. (The Canadians take it a notch higher.)
But, the utilization future will be 24VDC. It just makes more sense to have room-level power supplies to make everything downstream be more flexible.
I have only looked at a few locations seriously, but any harbor with 66kV infrastructure (or better) is not especially challenging. Ideally though, you would dock near a deep water wind farm and run floating submarine cables from the barge to a connection point.
A single LNG carrier could support about 50MW average demand for a year, easily. I generally don’t think it is better to go the non-green route, but 70MWe isn’t enough in my mind to justify the logistical risks. It makes sense at some value, but that just seems too small. Look at the challenges of decommissioning Enterprise as a baseline.
Terrible argument-- presumably you would stay in deep water where that is a low priority, if it was a fixed installation.
To me the real opportunity is in being able to "quickly" deploy 100-500MW generation capacity to an area that has been hit by some kind of problem. If you can fit it in a Suezmax sized ship, it would have tremendous reach. The Russian 70MW in the article seems too small to really be useful-- you would almost be better off with a LNG tanker and big turbine integrated together.
I practically work remotely already, although my commute is just a few miles on a bike.
The Bay Area (and California as a whole really) needs to wake up and take a cold, hard look at a number of things that will have a huge impact on their future. I'm in SoCal now, but many of the same issues are really going to come to a head here very shortly. I could live many other places with lower costs and avoid much of the stupid metropolitan planning debacle... and still have nice weather.
But, people have been bitching ever since they first got here, so take it all with a grain of salt. Money talks...
Presumably they are from census data, but... I think the census breaks it out per worker. Looking at a number of extra-urban communities, either my perception of how many people commute to work is way off, or the numbers are. There is something providing a favorable bias in rural areas in general.
For Longview, WA, the metro area population is 3x the city population, and it looks like there is major employment in Kalma which is about in-line with the average commute time, so I might be able to see it.
So, what would you do in order to encourage the actual competition? By saying a half-mile, you need about 20 individual customers to justify a line extension in suburbia, improving access. If you can get 30 you are golden. Sure, if it is a half-mile for 3-5 subscribers it is hard to justify still, but the more penetration you have the more options there are for everyone.
The anti-competitive practices might need some regulation though...
Not really a rational approach; line extensions should be viable for business users (to a point). The challenge comes when one provider is the LEC for one side of a street, but another is on the opposite side. It takes a CLEC to cross the lines, renting access from either or both providers.
Likewise, should bad locations in a city/area be given preference for subsidies when alternate locations exist that have competition?
Personally, I would love to see opportunities for small ISPs because of the broken market. Might not help everyone, but it is a reasonable starting point.
For average daily commute (round trip), the daily time seems off. Some areas of LA or SF for example should be well over 77 average-- minimum of 100, but I could see 120. A few other cities raise flags as well. Only explanation I can see is they are counting unemployed people.
Not complaining about my daily 35-minute round trip commute on the bike though.
Sure... and instead of using a domain name, go for your IPv6 address! Make sure to do it as a .gif though so you don't get too much spam...
Another fun option is to host all this on a sheva plug at the company's hq.
I was actually laughing at a very wealthy friend using an aol.com address a few weeks ago. Most of my email is hosted via Gmail, kind of wish I still had my shitgoddamngetoffyourassandjam@usa.net or my @compuserve.com email address too... but hey, need to let go some time...
Interestingly enough, that isn't universally true. I noticed a particular island I dream of having a home on seriously discounting costal homes, and there is no buffer zone. There are other factors, but unless these homes are on non-traditional stilts, there is a huge discount.
The $2B revenue isn’t that odd— it basically says they want an established player where the government revenue will not dominate their books. Financial resilience.
That was my hope too... but apparently the infrastructure required to support multiple reactors pretty much all needs to be in place with the first— you can scale the reactors, turbines, power equipment, etc... but the cost is very much front-loaded.
I think that is just for initial installation-- I have never seen an update trigger it. The update mechanism might need to be stealth though.
LA does actually have a universal pass; the action of transferring is easy enough, but the wait and ...transfer station demographics particularly in LA can be a bit of a problem. The Tube, MTR, SMRT, or Tunnelbana make it quite easy to transfer within the subway, and not entirely painful between modes, but LA has a long way to go there.
Generally speaking what happens is that the utility does a circuit extension to the property as “general facilities” rather than “customer facilities.” If the latter, the full bill goes to the owner, but common-use services theoretically benefit all users.
The game is that a transmission line extension generally doesn’t provide a benefit for an established community, although at times it will help improve system resilience.
Rode the bus to work today in LA. There are some great bus services (like Commuter Express) that solve problems for people that can afford a car... and can afford someone to drive them to work. The areas with direct service to downtown via train work well too.
What is painful and makes a lot of people avoid public transit in LA is the need to transfer. That is an urban planning issue more than a transit issue though.
Not sure how much better they make life in Los Angeles. The region is at a breaking point, and everything that can be done to limit individual car trips makes life better for everyone.
No, the first was in the late 90's when they forced consumer electronics to have power factor corrected power supplies and limited harmonic distortion. The amount of money and resources wasted because of cheap power supplies requiring building electrical infrastructure upgrades was stupefying.
It is good to keep the US in check as the default standards-bearer. They have shown this repeatedly.
Fixed that for you.
$56 Million to the COUNTY, not total.
Interesting points. If the buidings are on leased land (and it isn't a triple-net lease where land property taxes are passed on to the tenant), then it isn't entirely unreasonable to depreciate the original construction down to almost zero, and just pay taxes on the depreciated value of the improvements since original construction.
Add in the Prop 13 effect. and it doesn't sound nearly as absurd.
I have wanted a POE NTP wall clock for a while, but that doesn't abrogate the utility of WWV. It is useful to have a terrestrial time reference in case things go to shit in orbit. It is good to have a variety of independent time references.
But, my clocks are wwvb, which someone else pointed out is apparently not impacted.