HDTenEightyP/NetNews huggingface dataset:
From: gary@ke4zv.uucp (Gary Coffman)
Subject: Re: opening of the first self-sufficient solar house, Press Release
Reply-To: gary@ke4zv.UUCP (Gary Coffman)
Organization: Gannett Technologies Group
Date: Thu, 12 Nov 1992 05:39:00 GMT

In article <1992Nov10.210708.7449@mlb.semi.harris.com> jws@billy.mlb.semi.harris.com (James W. Swonger) writes:
>In article <JMC.92Nov10062745@SAIL.Stanford.EDU> jmc@cs.Stanford.EDU writes:
>>Is it thought to be desirable to not use the electric grid?
>
> Some people desire the ability to maintain their situation without depending
>on the "grid". Being dependent is not ideal, although we learn to live with
>it. Face it, we're all 60Hz junkies and even if the power company jacks up
>the rates, cuts the service and fouls the air, we keep on crawling to the
>candy man rather than go cold turkey. 
>
> You can make the argument that under some conditions it's better to owe
>on a mortgage than to pay cash and hold your homestead free and clear too. 
>Since you can't assign a cash value to independence, it must be of no
>value, right?

You can assign a cash value to freedom from the grid. Grid power costs
around $.10 per kWh in many areas of the US. The array in the German
house provides about 40 kWh per day, or about $4 worth of electricity
at grid prices per day. The house cost DM 1.6 million. At current mortgage
rates of 8%, that's 350 DM per day for *interest alone*. Now I don't know 
the current exchange rate, but I'm sure that 350 DM is more than $4. And
you still won't ever own the home free and clear unless you attack that
1.6 million principal.

> Has all power been restored in Miami yet? 

Few people lost power in Miami at all. Now Homestead, that's a different
matter. Few people have electricity there, but then few people have
*houses* there anymore either so the point is moot. A storm severe 
enough to destroy the grid is severe enough to damage self sufficient
solar homes too. And unlike the grid, where large teams of utility 
company personnel work round the clock to restore power, individual
homeowners must wait for the few independent contractors who can
repair their individual systems to get around to servicing their
homes. The scarcest thing in Florida is not electricity, it's plywood.

Gary
From: howard.smith@spacebbs.com (Howard Smith) 
Newsgroups: sci.energy
Subject: Re: Where to get Electric
Date: 6 Nov 92 09:42:00 GMT
Distribution: world
Organization: SPACE BBS - Menlo Park, CA - 10 Lines + 4gB - 415-323-4193
Reply-To: howard.smith@spacebbs.com (Howard Smith) 

PN>There was an article in the current EE Times about a guy selling electric
PN>cars. He didn't want to rely on new batter technology so he went low tech.
PN>He had enough of a challenge with the power electronics.

PN>Anyway, he claims a set of batteries lasts 3500 miles. That's not per
PN>charge, that's it. Period. That would be about two or three months for you.
PN>Of course, it's always possible someone dropped a digit or two.

I thought that figure of 3500 miles was a mis-print, so I called AC
Propulsion in San Dimas, California and they said it was correct, but
they also said it is "a very high performance car". In other words, if
driven at high speed with 0-60 in 7.8 seconds accelerations for 130
miles each day, the batteries would only last 3500 miles. If driven at
moderate speeds with moderate acceleration for 50 miles between
recharges, you could expect the lead acid batteries to last at least
35,000 miles. A lead acid battery does not last too long if repeatedly
drained to less than 50% of capacity.

The accursed, lead acid battery is what is holding the electric
automobile back, but with the battery consortium sitting on the nickel
metal hydride battery, and and General Motors sitting on the lithium
polymer battery (the two most likely technologies), we may have a wait
yet.

It is also quite easy to destroy a internal combustion engine in 3500
mile.

PN>>If it was 'only' a couple of grand to bolt in a {motor,batteries, controlle
PN>>etc.} I'd be willing to try it ...

PN>You're talking about a lot of fancy expensive power electronics. Cost may go
PN>down eventually but right now a couple of grand seems very very low.

Your generalization about cost, derived from one poorly written article
in the EE Times, does not fit today's electric automobile industry
as a whole. With simpler electronics and the use of the variable gearing
in the existing mechanical transmission, a California certified
conversion that will meet his needs can be had for less than $6000.

However, the ultimate electric vehicle would employ an electric motor
in each wheel with coordinated electronic speed control, powered by a
hydrogen fuel cell, and with dynamic, electric breaking to put energy
back into storage. These technologies are on the shelf and the cost of
such a vehicle could be much less than present day automobiles with
their crude, internal combustion engines. The reason we don't have mass
production of such a clean, efficient, electric vehicle is strictly
political.

The one thing nature abhors more than a vacumn is inefficiency. (After
all, nature is more than 99% vacumn.) Our grossly inefficient society
then is doomed unless we begin to use a little intelligence.

hhs
---
 . SLMR 2.1a . I'm in shape ... round's a shape isn't it?
From: ems@michael.apple.com (E. Michael Smith)
Newsgroups: sci.energy
Subject: Propane Conversions (was Re: More chatter on electric vehicles ...)
Date: 13 Nov 92 01:45:16 GMT
Organization: Apple Computer Inc, Cupertino, CA

In article <1992Nov12.142358.5255@ee.gatech.edu> wung@puttgen.ee.gatech.edu writes:
>In article 1dt0kcINNii3@darkstar.UCSC.EDU, lizard@cats.ucsc.edu (Raul Essig) writes:
>>|
>>|Just to offer a positive example:  The University of Calif. at Santa Cruz
>>|has shuttle busses that circle the campus all day ( and some at night )
>>|and many of these run off of propane.  Many of the work crew pickups
>>|as also fueled by propane. 

>>|And considering that the cost of the
>>|propane is effectively HALF that of gasoline in California, they are
>>|saving quite a bit of money in the end.

I think this is bogus.  The last time I checked (about 2 weeks ago) the
TAX INCLUDED price of propane was about $1.10/gallon.

Then you need to adjust by 20% for the lesser fuel value of propane...
so call it $1.32/gallon of gasoline equivalent...  about the same 
as 'super' but far more expensive than 'regular'...

Now the University may well be able to dodge the gas tax, and may get
a bulk purchase rate for fuel, and may have some special alternative
fuels program participation subsidies; but none of that makes commercial
propane cheaper than gasoline for Joe Average Consumer.

>So what was the capital cost in converting these things to propane?

About $1200 to $2000 depending on how much and what kind of tankage
you want to buy.

>Have they figured out the return on investment?  

It varies radically with the prevaling flux of interest rates and
propane costs and gasoline costs.  ALL of these have high rates of
change, so the ROI calculation is bogus at best.  Right now, for
retail propane at my local shop, the ROI would be negative (since
unleaded gasoline is cheaper/mile).

>How about factory
>built propane burning vehicles?  How much are they?

None available at present for retail car customers.  There are some
trucks available, I think, to fleet purchasers ... (Though that program
may have ended by now ...)  They just do the conversion for you and
tack on the price, modulo the economies of scale that they have.. 

I've been wanting to put a propane kit on my truck for about 5 years 
now.  It hasn't been a profitable option throughout that whole time.

With some (modestly) new catalysts, propane can easily be converted
to aromatic hydrocarbons (i.e. very expensive high octane gasoline)
so there is no longer an economic reason for the oil companies to 
sell it 'dirt cheap' as a refinery waste product (like it was in
the '60s or so...)  Don't look to make money from a propane conversion.

-- 

E. Michael Smith  ems@apple.COM

'Whatever you can do, or dream you can, begin it.  Boldness has
 genius, power and magic in it.'  -  Goethe

I am not responsible nor is anyone else.  Everything is disclaimed.
From: gary@ke4zv.uucp (Gary Coffman)
Newsgroups: sci.energy
Subject: Re: Renewable energy from the sun
Date: 10 Nov 92 16:47:55 GMT
Reply-To: gary@ke4zv.UUCP (Gary Coffman)
Organization: Gannett Technologies Group

In article <1992Nov6.171522.1259@access.usask.ca> choy@skorpio.usask.ca (I am a terminator.) writes:
>Most of our energy comes from the sun (which is not renewable, but we
>have no control of this). If we conserve energy, can we live off solar
>energy alone? What has been shown? Let's compare our basic energy needs
>to the energy we can get from sunlight. Can we gather enough energy from
>sunlight to live on and to construct energy saving goods? Do we have an
>energy surplus?

Emphatically yes, we have an energy surplus. The solar energy striking
the earth is about 7.8E18 kilowatt-hours per day. World energy consumption
is about 7E12 kilowatt-hours. So solar alone, if totally converted to
useful power, exceeds current demand by over 100,000 times. Now plant life
would be rather unhappy if we tapped a large fraction of available solar
energy directly, but we can tap it indirectly by burning deceased plants
in the form of coal and oil, or wood, alcohol, or methane. Or we can tap
it indirectly by harnessing falling water via hydroelectric plants. Or
we can tap it indirectly by harnessing moving air via windmills.

Then there are the non-solar sources of energy. We can tap the Moon's
gravitational energy via tide power plants. We can tap the radioactive
decay heat of the Earth via geothermal plants. We can tap nuclear power
directly through fission power plants. And hopefully we will soon be
able to tap fusion power directly in fusion power plants. The latter
three sources can rival the Sun in the amount and duration of available
energy they can supply. Note that all energy sources, including the
Sun, are nuclear energy sources, with the exception of gravitational
potential energy.

Gary
Newsgroups: sci.energy
From: moroney@ramblr.enet.dec.com
Subject: Re: Plutonium
Organization: Digital Equipment Corporation
Date: Fri, 13 Nov 1992 07:05:34 GMT

Can anyone knowledgable make an educated guess as to the isotopic composition
of the plutonium being sent to Japan?  As in how much Pu-239 (the stuff good
for bombs), how much Pu-240 (which makes bombs 'fizzle' as discussed several
times in this group), how much of anything else relevant?

-Mike
Newsgroups: sci.energy
From: "barry ross" <barry.ross@canrem.com>
Subject: nuclear waste
Reply-To: "barry ross" <barry.ross@canrem.com>
Organization: Canada Remote Systems
Distribution: sci
Date: 11 Nov 92 13:33:56 EST


HS>Yes, but nuclear is not the cleanest and not the least expensive. Wind
HS>and solar are cleaner and now wind power is less expensive.

Howard,

I do not disagree with you, but what is your source of facts?
---
  DeLuxe 1.12 #10554  Now using Qmail DeLuxe...and loving it!
--
Canada Remote Systems  - Toronto, Ontario
World's Largest PCBOARD System - 416-629-7000/629-7044
Newsgroups: sci.energy
From: kwyatt@ccscola.Columbia.NCR.COM (Kershner Wyatt)
Subject: Re: More chatter on electric vehicles ...
Keywords: electric school busses ?
Organization: NCR Corp, E&M-Columbia, Columbia, SC
Date: Fri, 13 Nov 92 13:13:55 GMT

In article <1992Nov11.184055.7336@srg.srg.af.mil> akerson@deimos.af.mil (Pete Akerson - akerson%srg@uunet.uucp) writes:
>  As a filthy black cloud farted out of the school bus ahead
>of me on my way to work, I wondered 
>"Why arent those things electric ?"
>Think about it :
>Very low mileage fixed routes.
>Maximum speed need not be 55 mph.
>Time to recharge in the middle of the day.
>Huge vehicle size to carry big heavy (lead?) batteries.
>and use an old gas buss for occaisional field trips.


I have said the same things about mail trucks for years.  Torque, not speed
needed.  Idle, idle, idle, flat to the floor, idle, ad nauseum.  I really had
a tizzy when I found out that the official USPS truck in my neighborhood was
a 6 cylinder...

School buses electric?  Probably wouldn't provide the acceleration and speed
the one driver obviously needs in my subdivision.  One of these days, that 
guy is going to nail someone pulling out of a driveway and kill a few kids
in the process.  The school board doesn't seem to care and the police don't
seem to ever be around at that time.  

How about less buses?  Shift school times (still within "normal" working hours)
and use the same buses for more than one route/school?  There seems to be a
game played in our school district of "let's not let any bus get more than
40,000 miles on it -- it's worn out then".  I remember when my school got 
bus service -- we bought used buses - third owners, and the lowest mileage
one had 130,000 miles on it.  The reason:  They had lots of life left in them,
and they were cheap.  Well, they ran (usually pretty well), just ignore the
holes in the floor, and the ...

Your proposition is an interesting one, but I wonder how long the charge would
hold in this type of operation?  I know, I know, you have enough frame to 
load the thing up with batteries.  But then how could the drivers siphon the
fuel for their own vehicles??  Seemed to be a favorite pastime of a lot of
drivers when the price of fuel went up in the 70s.
-- 
Kershner Wyatt
kwyatt@ccscola.ColumbiaSC.ncr.com

My opinions are my own and aren't necessarily my employer's.
Xref: sparky sci.energy:5349 sci.environment:12681
From: carl@SOL1.GPS.CALTECH.EDU (Carl J Lydick)
Newsgroups: sci.energy,sci.environment
Subject: Re: opening of the first self-sufficient solar house, Press Release
Date: 12 Nov 92 13:34:06 GMT
Reply-To: carl@SOL1.GPS.CALTECH.EDU
Organization: HST Wide Field/Planetary Camera
NNTP-Posting-Host: sol1.gps.caltech.edu

In article <1992Nov12.053900.1471@ke4zv.uucp>, gary@ke4zv.uucp (Gary Coffman) writes:
=You can assign a cash value to freedom from the grid. Grid power costs
=around $.10 per kWh in many areas of the US. The array in the German
=house provides about 40 kWh per day, or about $4 worth of electricity
=at grid prices per day. The house cost DM 1.6 million. At current mortgage
=rates of 8%, that's 350 DM per day for *interest alone*. Now I don't know 
=the current exchange rate, but I'm sure that 350 DM is more than $4. And
=you still won't ever own the home free and clear unless you attack that
=1.6 million principal.

Er, Gary?  You ought to be looking a the difference in cost between the house
in question and a conventional house; not the total cost of the house.

As usual in the sort of propaganda to which you're responding, the original
press release didn't give nearly enough information for anybody to determine
whether or not the house was economical.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Carl J Lydick | INTERnet: CARL@SOL1.GPS.CALTECH.EDU | NSI/HEPnet: SOL1::CARL

Disclaimer:  Hey, I understand VAXen and VMS.  That's what I get paid for.  My
understanding of astronomy is purely at the amateur level (or below).  So
unless what I'm saying is directly related to VAX/VMS, don't hold me or my
organization responsible for it.  If it IS related to VAX/VMS, you can try to
hold me responsible for it, but my organization had nothing to do with it.
Newsgroups: sci.energy
From: gel24@gel.ulaval.ca (Usager_temporaire)
Subject: solar cells
Summary: questions about solar cells
Keywords: solar cells
Organization: Universite Laval
Date: Wed, 11 Nov 1992 03:12:25 GMT


Does anyone know how much energy is needed to make a solar cell
(polycristalline, monocristalline and amorphous) ?

What is the longevity of a solar cell (50% of initial power)
for each type of cell above ?


Thank you !


Patrick Dery
Laval University
Quebec
gel24@gel.ulaval.ca
Newsgroups: sci.energy
From: downey@ils.nwu.edu (Greg Downey)
Subject: Re: opening of the first self-sufficient solar house, Press Release
Followup-To: sci.energy,sci.environment
Organization: Institute for the Learning Sciences
Date: Fri, 13 Nov 1992 18:47:21 GMT

In article <JMC.92Nov10062745@SAIL.Stanford.EDU>, jmc@SAIL.Stanford.EDU
(John McCarthy) wrote:
> Is it thought to be desirable to not use the electric grid?

And then the discussion revolved around absolutes of either being "on grid"
(supposedly getting ALL of your power from the grid) or "off grid".  

Question: Isn't it possible to transfer power produced from decentralized
systems BACK onto the grid?  I thought much of the interest in home
generation of electricity (as opposed to home generation of heat) was that
when you produced a surplus, you could sell it back to the grid, and when
you operated at a deficit, you could buy from the grid -- eliminating the
need for expensive and possibly toxic electrical storage systems.

-- GREG       Practice random               ONE PENNY SHEET
              kindness and senseless        PO BOX 641342
              acts of beauty                Chicago IL 60664-1342
From: ems@michael.apple.com (E. Michael Smith)
Newsgroups: sci.energy
Subject: Re: Where to get Electric Car kits?
Date: 7 Nov 92 02:40:25 GMT
Organization: Apple Computer Inc, Cupertino, CA

In article <1992Nov6.212303.11884@adobe.com> pngai@adobe.com (Phil Ngai) writes:
>In article <1992Nov5.200422.5865@michael.apple.com> ems@michael.apple.com (E. Michael Smith) writes:

>If you do it for high efficiency, then you are essentially constructing
>a VERY LARGE switching power supply which can also take energy back
>(when braking). 

That's the hard part.  Efficiency and taking back the energy.  I'd
just skip the regenerative braking in a garage hack design ...

>If you want 100 horsepower, that's about 75,000 watts. At 100 volts,

100 HP?  Electric?  My God, man, I'm talking about a HONDA ... with
a 1500 cc gasoline engine at present.  I think 15-20 is more like it...

>750 amps. Probably 10-15 horsepower is enough, but we're still talking
>serious power electronics. Got any 75 amp relays?

Why, yes, several.  One on each starter motor in each of my cars.
High capacity relays are rather easy to buy, too.

>>BIG power electronics, yes.  But fancy?  A 120 VDC battery stack could 
>>be charged from a large bridge rectifier and a resistor (with a LOT of 
>>personal monitoring!).  The 'power electronics' CAN be as simple as a set of 
>>relays to cut in more or less of the battery stack.  (DUMB way to do it,
>
>Well, you could do that. Might be interesting. You wouldn't get the
>absolute best efficiency but it might be good enough.

I've seen it done.  The car made and interesting clicking sound as
the 'gas pedal' was pushed and all the relays would 'click-clack'
into different configurations.  Had remarkably smooth acceleration
given the discreet power levels available, though...  I think it 
was 4 power levels?  Or was it 8?  Anyway, it had a real rats nest
of big cables going to big relays to rearrange all the batteries
into different serial/parallel configureations so they would 
discharge evenly.

I don't know how much power the relays used/lost, but it wasn't too
significant relative to the power available.  The guy used to drive
it all over Davis, Ca. in the '70s.  He used to leave it in 3rd
most of the time (if I'm remembering right) and only shift to
4th for the freeway or 2 on down if he really wanted to accelerate
fast or was getting a bit feeble on battery charge...  

Had a 'butt ugly' fibreglass body over a VW? frame? with batteries
tucked all over the place.  I think he eventually built a semiconductor
power controller for it, but I wasn't hanging around by then so I may
just be remembering him saying he was going to do it ;-)

Well, so much for dusty old memories from when I wasn't paying too
much attention to power stuff ... and when IC's were new ...


-- 

E. Michael Smith  ems@apple.COM

'Whatever you can do, or dream you can, begin it.  Boldness has
 genius, power and magic in it.'  -  Goethe

I am not responsible nor is anyone else.  Everything is disclaimed.
From: lizard@cats.ucsc.edu (Raul Essig)
Newsgroups: sci.energy
Subject: Re: FREE-ENERGY TECHNOLOGIES
Date: 5 Nov 1992 09:26:12 GMT
Organization: University of California; Santa Cruz
NNTP-Posting-Host: am.ucsc.edu


In article <1992Nov4.185407.2123@cnsvax.uwec.edu> mcelwre@cnsvax.uwec.edu writes:
>
>                            FREE-ENERGY TECHNOLOGIES
.
.
.
>                                   Robert E. McElwaine
>												B.S. Physics, UW-EC

All I can say is that the day I see a "FREE-ENERGY" machine working
in front of me, and I am allowed to poke around inside it, I will
believe it.  Unfortunately the vast majority of "free-energy" ideas
I have seen have asked for too much money in the mail, and far too little 
proof to be seen for them to be real claims.
I don't want to shoot down new ideas, but making claims of free energy
is not going to get anywhere, because there is no such thing!  It
may be possible for there to be very-very cheap energy, but nothing
is free!  If nothing else, you've got to build the machine, even
if it did theoretically run on a trivial fuel ( i.e. air, water, the
earth's magnetic field...)  Energy does not just perculate out of
the void.


-Raul Essig
Newsgroups: sci.energy,sci.environment
From: howard.smith@spacebbs.com (Howard Smith) 
Newsgroups: sci.energy
Subject: Where to get Electric Car
Date: 6 Nov 92 09:42:00 GMT
Distribution: world
Organization: SPACE BBS - Menlo Park, CA - 10 Lines + 4gB - 415-323-4193
Reply-To: howard.smith@spacebbs.com (Howard Smith) 

EMS>I know that commercial electric cars in large numbers will be available
EMS>'soon' in Calif. due to the legal mandate ... but I'm not really willing
EMS>to spend that kind of money...

EMS>I was thinking that when (if?) my Honda ever has the engine die, I
EMS>might convert it to electric.  (It is almost exclusively used for
EMS>less than 50 miles/day).

EMS>Someone had posted a while back about a 'kit' supplier or 'parts'
EMS>supplier...

They're practically in your backyard, Michael.

Electro Automotive
POB 1113-HP
Felton, CA 95018-1113

They sell a California certified kit which qualifies for an California
income tax credit of up to $1000 and no sales tax.

Send a SASE for info.

hhs
---
 . SLMR 2.1a . Hello, I am part number ................
From: eric14@bernina.ethz.ch (Eric Baltischwiler)
Subject: Re: opening of the first self-sufficient solar house, Press Release
Organization: Swiss Federal Institute of Technology (ETH), Zurich, CH
X-Newsreader: Tin 1.1 PL5
Date: Thu, 12 Nov 1992 12:47:43 GMT

On independance from the power grid...

: >>Is it thought to be desirable to not use the electric grid?
: 
: You can assign a cash value to freedom from the grid. Grid power costs
: around $.10 per kWh in many areas of the US. The array in the German
: house provides about 40 kWh per day, or about $4 worth of electricity
: at grid prices per day. The house cost DM 1.6 million. At current mortgage
: rates of 8%, that's 350 DM per day for *interest alone*. Now I don't know 
: the current exchange rate, but I'm sure that 350 DM is more than $4. And
: you still won't ever own the home free and clear unless you attack that
: 1.6 million principal.

The point to remember here is that this is a research project!  As a
deminstration it is very effective to isolate the house from the power
grid.  If you are looking at producing "real" houses then the design
goals would be different.  Parts of the design could be cheeply
implemented and parts not.  Clearly the pasive heating ideas are
usefull today.  Just as clearly going for zero outside power use is
not cost effective if you are building in normal setting.
Newsgroups: sci.energy