HDTenEightyP/NetNews huggingface dataset:
From: Tom Gray <tgray@igc.apc.org>
Newsgroups: sci.energy
Date: 12 Oct 92 10:21 PDT
Subject: --New Zealand Scientists Push Wind
Nf-ID: #N:cdp:1466300090:000:2345
Nf-From: cdp.UUCP!tgray    Oct 12 10:21:00 1992


From: Tom Gray <tgray>
Subject: --New Zealand Scientists Push Wind

/* Written 10:13 am  Oct 12, 1992 by tgray@igc.apc.org in igc:en.energy */
/* ---------- "--New Zealand Scientists Push Wind" ---------- */
NEW ZEALAND HYDROPOWER CRISIS
LEADS TO CALL FOR MORE WIND

The New Zealand Wind Energy Task Force, a group of scientists,
called for new efforts to investigate and use wind energy in the
face of a drastic shortage of electric power, according to The
Solar Letter.

Research by the task force in the late 1970s and early 1980s, the
article said, has indicated that New Zealand could obtain an amount
of power equal to 20 percent of its current electricity demand from
wind energy.

However, Keith Dawber, a physicist at Otago University and a member
of the Task Force, has described the country's progress in the use
of wind energy as "unbelievably slow."
For a number of years, New Zealand enjoyed a surplus of electric
power, but recently a drought has cut deeply into supplies of
hydropower, and power rationing may result.  According to a recent
analysis by the U.S. Department of Commerce, "In some areas
industries may be threatened [by the power shortage] and
corporations are looking to standby supply sources independent of
the national [electric power distribution system]."

Dawber has urged that New Zealand install four demonstration wind
projects, two on each of the country's main islands.

===============================

The American Wind Energy Association (AWEA) has authorized me to offer
an electronic edition of its newsletter, _Wind Energy Weekly_, from
which the above article is excerpted, at no cost.

For those of you who have not previously seen excerpts from back issues
on Usenet or Bitnet, the _Weekly_ reports on the outlook for renewable
energy, energy-related environmental issues, and renewable energy
legislation in addition to wind industry trade news.  The electronic
edition normally runs about 10kb in length.

If you would like a free electronic subscription, send me an e-mail
request.  Please include information on your position, organization,
and reason for interest in the publication.

*******************************************************************
Tom Gray                                 EcoNet/PeaceNet: tgray@igc
Internet/Bitnet: tgray@igc.apc.org    UUCP: uunet!pyramid!cdp!tgray
From: brodesky@td2cad.intel.com (Michael Brodesky)
Newsgroups: sci.energy
Subject: Does Solar power/Wind power pay for itself.
Date: 12 Oct 92 22:30:47 GMT
Organization: intel corporation



	Another Newbie question. I was wondering if the return on solar
and wind power generators covers the inital set up and operating costs?



Michael

--
Michael Brodesky Internet Mbrodesky@sc9.Intel.com
UUCP : {pur-ee,qanad,oliveb,decwrl,hplabs}!intelca!mipos3!td2cad!brodesky
During the week I climb left to right. On weekends I climb up and down.
Rootbeer^2 = Beer ?
From: millerj@gn.ecn.purdue.edu (Snide Pucker)
Newsgroups: sci.energy
Subject: Fixing the Nuclear "Problem" (was Re: Another NUKE bites the dust ...)
Date: 7 Oct 92 16:15:49 GMT
Organization: Purdue Univ School of Nuclear Engg//Argonne Nat'l Lab--Reactor Engg

In article <1992Oct7.005030.6473@gallant.apple.com> ems@gallant.apple.com (Mike Smith) writes:
#>
#>>[...]. You are right though, this sort of article
#>>is precisely why people are afraid of things nuclear.
#>
#>So what can be done about it?


   Continued proliferation of heaps and gobs of accurate, objective information.
(preferably without beating people over the head with textbooks yelling about
how stupid and Liberal they are =).

   Naturally, this will take a long time to fix (...still going...).



   On a side note via press bashing, I saw a pretty good special on CNN
about the press-bias covering the Presidential race (with numerous
analogies to other topics as well).  One of the people interviewed said
that the press holds the Constitutional Right to Free Speech(tm) dear
but shirks the responsibility that freedom entails (as in the responsibility
to not publish lies, crap, and hoakiness in the name of responsible
journalism).

   By the way, I don't believe that the AP press release bias was due to
anti-nuclear sentiment, but sensationalism in the first degree.  The
anti-nuke stuff was consequential.

---
 "Unfortunately, I belong to that satan-worshipping breed of neofascists
  who have the gall to support the obviously idiotic, environmentally-
  disastrous notion that nuclear power can be used in constructive
  ways without converting the planet into an uninhabitable wasteland"
							   --me
-- 
---
   Jerry W. Miller                   #   "Opinions?  Of course they
   millerj@gn.ecn.purdue.edu         #    are mine, do YOU want them?"
   Purdue Univ. School of Nuclear Engg//Argonne Nat'l Lab--Reactor Engg
Newsgroups: sci.energy
From: sherwood@space.ualberta.ca (Sherwood Botsford)
Subject: Re: Economist article on car battery and flywheel technology.
Organization: University Of Alberta, Edmonton Canada
Date: Fri, 16 Oct 1992 18:39:26 GMT

In any case all that energy is going to get converted into heat, in a  
hurry.  If we grant a flywheel with the same energy density as  
gasoline, this is going to take some awesome containment.

However, two points:
1.	It seems to me that we routinely travel with gasoline in  
lightly shielded containers.  We know that under certain circumstances  
that gasoline can turn the car into a death trap, and harm people  
nearby.  We have to assess risk, much as we do with other technologies.

2.	Depending on the failure mode of the flywheel, if it's possible  
to change that energy to hot gas, it may well be possible to design a  
containment chamber that channeled the resulting gas in relatively  
harmless directions. (E.g. straight up.)  While this couldn't be a  
certain help (Bad news if it fails after you've rolled onto your roof.)  
I think that it has some possibilities.
Newsgroups: sci.energy
From: steve_olson@npd.novell.com
Subject: Windpower -> Savonius vs. Prop. 
Reply-To: steve_olson@npd.novell.com
Organization: Novell, Inc.
Date: Fri, 16 Oct 1992 14:32:36 GMT

Does anyone have any experience with the Savonius rotor as a power
source? I read
an old article n The Mother Earth News that described the Savonius Rotor
as more
efficient. The claim was that the S-Rotor can change from prevailing
winds, to intercept
energy from gusts without having to change direction like the prop windmills.

All information I have seen shows the prop as being more efficient, but
this probably 
assumes that the wind is at a constant speed and coming from a fixed
direction. 


Steveo


Newsgroups: sci.energy
From: msolomon@mitre.org (Moise Solomon)
Subject: Re: FREE-ENERGY TECHNOLOGY
Followup-To: sci.energy
Organization: The MITRE Corporation
Date: Wed, 7 Oct 1992 16:08:36 GMT

In article <1992Oct6.165400.1559@cnsvax.uwec.edu>, mcelwre@cnsvax.uwec.edu
wrote:
> 
> 
>           
>             
>                             FREE-ENERGY TECHNOLOGY
>                        by Robert E. McElwaine, Physicist

[Stuff deteled... I laughed too hard the first time to read it again!]

Ever see an actual working model of one of your so called "Free Energy
Machines?"  The patient office will patent anything, it doesn't mean it
will work.

By the way, Tesla coils require large amounts of electricity to operate. 
NO FREE-ENERGY HERE!



Standard Disclaimer Applies
From: yodaiken@chelm.cs.umass.edu (victor yodaiken)
Newsgroups: sci.energy
Subject: Re: Nuke Stupidity Rebuttal
Date: 10 Oct 92 02:36:05 GMT
Organization: University of Massachusetts, Amherst

In article <1992Oct8.220710.15082@pmafire.inel.gov> russ@pmafire.inel.gov (Russ Brown) writes:
>In article <54402@dime.cs.umass.edu> yodaiken@chelm.cs.umass.edu (victor yodaiken) writes:
>
>Much dialogue deleted:
>
>>
>>And here you go again. You have not looked up the articles I cite, you
>>have not found counter references in other scientific literature, yet you
>>have no qualms about suggesting that I have "wrenched" quotes "out of
>>context" and even rewritten quotes. you apparently believe that accusation
>>is a reasonable substitute for research. Feeble.
>>
>>yodaiken@chelm.cs.umass.edu
>
>Although it may be so regarded in the social sciences, looking up stuff
>in the library is a literature search, not research.  Studying,
>analyzing, calculating, thinking, thinking, thinking . . . is closer to
>a partial description of research.

The word "research"  has a broader dictionary and scholarly meaning: even
in the hard sciences people will "look stuff up in the library", as you
so elegantly put it. And, since Mr. Van Pelt is asserting that I have 
rewritten quotes to support my point of view, it seems only fair that he
either apologize or produce some evidence.  Of course, he will do neither,
since he apparently believes that he can divine the accurate contents
of cited articles without actually reading them.


-- 


yodaiken@chelm.cs.umass.edu

Newsgroups: sci.energy
From: dean@vexcel.com (Dean Alaska)
Subject: Re: Electric Car summary
Keywords: forget it
Organization: VEXCEL Corporation, Boulder CO
Date: Thu, 15 Oct 1992 18:27:26 GMT

In article <1992Oct15.080450.34@ke4zv.uucp> gary@ke4zv.UUCP (Gary Coffman) writes:
>In article <1992Oct14.154836.2290@vexcel.com> dean@vexcel.com (Dean Alaska) writes:
>>
>>It seems that in the near future electric cars (ZEVs) will fit into
>>niche markets.  The two car family could have 1 ic car and
>>1 ZEV for taking the kids to school and going to the market.  I
>>don't think their proponents see them replacing ic cars in the
>>short-term.  The ZEV law in California gives a boost to research
>>and helps to define the niche.
>
>Of course it pretty much says "screw you" to the *1* car family.
>Buying a second car for a niche use is an economic hardship for
>many, and a waste of resources for all.
>
>Gary

Where do you get his from?  Nobody will be forced to buy a ZEV so noone
will be screwed or subjected to unwanted hardships.
-- 

		dingo in boulder	(dean@vexcel.com)
From: jgd@dixie.com (John De Armond)
Newsgroups: sci.energy
Subject: Re: Economist article on car battery and flywheel technology.
Date: 15 Oct 92 04:07:49 GMT
Organization: Dixie Communications Public Access.  The Mouth of the South.

pngai@adobe.com (Phil Ngai) writes:

>ethanb@ptolemy.astro.washington.edu (Ethan Bradford) writes:

>>And accidents are not too terrible; though the rim is
>>moving at 8,650kph, if it fails it merely produces hot fluff, which the
>>housing can contain.

>And a nuclear bomb is merely 50 pounds of very hot metal.

>Why do I get the feeling I am being mislead by the author of this
>article?

Why are you not the only one?  Putting this in numbers I can relate to,
this works out to 7883 feet per second.  For some perspective, the fastest
small arms bullet only does about 4800 fps and then we're talking about
a 50 grain pill.  Military knetic penetrators that can penetrate several
feet of armorplate weigh perhaps a few pounds and speed in the 5000 fps
range.  To spare the nitpickers the effort, yeah I know the KPs are
tungsten or DU.  I know that.  ON the other hand, there will never
be several feet of armor around a flywheel.  Since we're dealing with
a velocity-squared situation, the energy of this flywheel slouching 
along at almost 8000 fps is at least a tad bit more than "hot fluff".
How much did that flywheel weigh again?

Another perspective.  Back in my college days, we had a NASA contract
to research micrometeorite impact.  We were shooting BBs at targets 
at velocities in this range.  These little BBs easily penetrated
18 inches of steel, leaving a molten, gapping hole several inches
in diameter.  Even when we had material thick enough to stop the thing,
an amount of material was spalled from the back side roughly the same 
mass as that melted from the front.  Impressive little pills.

Anyone care to calculate what would happen if nothing more serious than
dumping vacuum occured?  I suspect the frictional heating would
decompose most composites, if not outright vaporize it.

Can I have the unshielded, high enrichment reactor for my trunk instead?

John
-- 
John De Armond, WD4OQC               |Interested in high performance mobility?  
Performance Engineering Magazine (TM) |
Marietta, Ga                         |Interested in high tech and computers? 
jgd@dixie.com                        |Write me about PE Magazine
Need Usenet public Access in Atlanta?  Write Me for info on Dixie.com.
Newsgroups: sci.energy
From: akerson@deimos.af.mil (Pete Akerson - akerson%srg@uunet.uucp)
Subject: Re: ANOTHER Form of COLD FUSION
Organization: Arinc Research Corp.
Date: Thu, 15 Oct 92 17:30:22 GMT



mcelwre@cnsvax.uwec.edu writes :

...
>> The reaction N2 --> CO, catalysed by very hot iron, 
>> creates a CARBON-MONOXIDE POISON HAZARD for welder operators 
>> and people near woodstoves (even properly sealed ones).
...

I did not see any smileys - so - I have to ask :
did someone post that while you were logged in, but 
away from your terminal ?

otherwise, "If you dry this on out, you could fertilize the lawn."
Newsgroups: sci.energy
From: tauzero@netcom.com (Rob Tow)
Subject: need info on high power batteries
Keywords: batteries high power
Organization: Netcom - Online Communication Services  (408 241-9760 guest) 
Date: Tue, 13 Oct 1992 19:37:55 GMT

I am interested, in connection with a research project at Interval Research,
in very high power batteries, both what is currently available, and what is
likely to be available over the next decade.

Any pointers will be much appreciated.


***


Rob Tow
Interval Research Corp.
1801C Page Mill Road
Palo Alto, CA
voice: (415)-354-8675
fax:   (415)-354-0872                           
email: rob_tow@interval.com
 or:   tauzero@netcom.com
 or:   tauzero@well.sf.ca.us
Newsgroups: sci.energy
From: schenk@cs.toronto.edu (Eric Schenk)
Subject: Re: Economist article on car battery and flywheel technology.
Organization: Department of Computer Science, University of Toronto
Date: 16 Oct 92 18:16:33 GMT

borowski@hpspkla.spk.hp.com (Don T. Borowski) writes:
>In sci.energy, pngai@adobe.com (Phil Ngai) writes:
>In article <ETHANB.92Oct13110800@ptolemy.astro.washington.edu> ethanb@ptolemy.astro.washington.edu (Ethan Bradford) writes:
>>>And accidents are not too terrible; though the rim is
>>>moving at 8,650kph, if it fails it merely produces hot fluff, which the
>>>housing can contain.
>>And a nuclear bomb is merely 50 pounds of very hot metal.
>>Why do I get the feeling I am being mislead by the author of this article?
>Just think about this "hot fluff" in terms of the amount of energy it had
>been storing before disintegration.  Presumably, we are talking about the
>amount of energy stored in about a gallon of gasoline when the flywheel is
>spun up.

If this spun up flywheel is suppose to allow the car to go as far
as it would on a tank of gas, then I think we are talking about considerably
more than a gallon of gasoline. Anybody have any idea just how strong
the housing is supposed to be?


Eric Schenk               Department of Computer Science, University of Toronto
schenk@cs.toronto.edu
Newsgroups: sci.energy
From: jens4813@hgc.edu (Kevin Jensen)
Subject: Re: Does Solar power/Wind power pay for itself.
Organization: The Hartford Graduate Center
Date: Tue, 13 Oct 1992 19:44:28 GMT

Eventually it pays for itself!! I too am looking for info
on when the equipment pays for itself. (Break even point!!)


Newsgroups: sci.energy
From: ems@michael.apple.com (E. Michael Smith)
Subject: Home Power Magazine, new address
Organization: Apple Computer Inc.
Date: Thu, 8 Oct 1992 00:37:18 GMT

I just called up Home Power Magazine to get a subscription, using
the phone number posted here not too long ago.  The address posted
then has changed.

The new address for them is:

Home Power Magazine 
P.O.Box 520
Ashland, Oregon
	 97520


Their phone number is still (916) 475-3179.

When I asked to get a subscription they did explain that while they
took credit cards over the phone, they were in a remote location and
used a 'radio phone' (I presume this meant cellular...) and that some
folks didn't want their CC numbers broadcast ...

I'm sending them a check...  The yearly cost is $15.

DISCLAIMER:  I have no relationship at all with them, and I've not even
read the magazine yet since I havn't sent them my check yet ...  Don't 
call me if something happens in your life that you don't like.

-- 

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: DC->AC
Date: 15 Oct 92 08:00:07 GMT
Reply-To: gary@ke4zv.UUCP (Gary Coffman)
Organization: Gannett Technologies Group

In article <1910029@hpspkla.spk.hp.com> borowski@hpspkla.spk.hp.com (Don T. Borowski) writes:
>
>The conversion from AC to DC and DC to AC has long been done without rotating
>machinery.  The largest scale example in the U.S. is the Pacific Intertie,
>which sends power from the Columbia River down to Los Angeles using a DC
>transmission line. 

MG sets are still in use for certain jobs. At very low power demands,
solid state rectifiers and inverters have taken over. At the other
extreme end of the scale, solid state devices have also taken over.
But in the mid-range, motor-generator sets are still the most economical
choice in many cases. They also have the benefit of dealing gracefully
with large transients. Many large computer installations still use MG sets
for this reason.

Gary
Newsgroups: sci.energy
From: kudzu@netcom.com (Michael Sierchio)
Subject: Re: Windpower -> Savonius vs. Prop. 
Organization: True Love, and Home-Grown Tomatoes
Date: Fri, 16 Oct 1992 22:20:54 GMT

In article <Bw7xqC.76o@Novell.COM> steve_olson@npd.novell.com writes:

>Does anyone have any experience with the Savonius rotor as a power
>source? I read an old article n The Mother Earth News that described
>the Savonius Rotor as more efficient. The claim was that the S-Rotor
>can change from prevailing winds, to intercept energy from gusts
>without having to change direction like the prop windmills.

It is in no way more efficient -- it is considerably less so, and does
not scale well -- the S-rotors typically have a great deal more rotating
mass per power output.  

They *are* self-starting, and do not need to be oriented into the wind,
but they are much less efficient than prop-type wind energy conversion
devices.  Their chiefest advantage is that they're cheap.

>All information I have seen shows the prop as being more efficient, but
>this probably assumes that the wind is at a constant speed and coming
>from a fixed direction.

Nah, it's almost trivial to orient a prop into the wind -- or, have a
slight negative dihedral, lose a little efficiency, and you have a prop
windmill that is self-orienting (away from the wind).
-- 
+--------------------------------------------------------------------------+
|  Michael Sierchio                          1563 Solano Avenue, Suite 123 |
|  kudzu@netcom.com                                Berkeley, CA 94707-2116 |
+--------------------------------------------------------------------------+
Newsgroups: sci.energy
From: pngai@adobe.com (Phil Ngai)
Subject: Re: Economist article on car battery and flywheel technology.
Organization: Adobe Systems Incorporated
Date: Wed, 14 Oct 1992 17:21:52 GMT

In article <ETHANB.92Oct13110800@ptolemy.astro.washington.edu> ethanb@ptolemy.astro.washington.edu (Ethan Bradford) writes:
>The following article is from The Economist, September 26th, 1992.
>...
>The AFS design could work at speeds of 200,000rpm or more; stronger
>fibres and better bearings could make it even faster.  A simple version
>23cm (nine inches) across, made of off-the-shelf materials, could store
>at least as much energy per pound as lithium-polymer batteries.
>...
>And accidents are not too terrible; though the rim is
>moving at 8,650kph, if it fails it merely produces hot fluff, which the
>housing can contain.

And a nuclear bomb is merely 50 pounds of very hot metal.

Why do I get the feeling I am being mislead by the author of this
article?

-- 
My opinions are my own.
Happy owner of a new Mitsubishi Expo.

Xref: sparky sci.energy:4892 sci.med:18945 sci.med.physics:414 rec.motorcycles:35615
From: davidt@ecst.csuchico.edu (David Taylor)
Newsgroups: sci.energy,sci.med,sci.med.physics,rec.motorcycles
Subject: Heat loss from the human head
Date: 10 Oct 92 18:41:13 GMT
Organization: California State University, Chico
NNTP-Posting-Host: cscihp.ecst.csuchico.edu


 
HI,

I am a mechanical engineering student in the process of completing my senior 
project.  This project is to design, build and test a thermoelectric
cooling system for a motorcycle helmet.

For sometime, I have been tring to learn the rate of heat dissipated or
lost by the human head in a normal room enviroment.  I have been through
the journals and cd roms at school looking for this information.  I have
been given many suggestions, but none which were documentable.

Please, If ANYONE out there knows of a article, journal or other reference
which may contain this information pleas write me.  Also if you have           
suggestions on where to write please contact me.

For the initial computer models, I have been using the numbers given to
me, but for the final model and the report my team (and professors)
require a documentable source.

Thank you for your help,

David Taylor
Mechanical Engineering Student
California State University, Chico
Newsgroups: sci.energy
From: amirza@bronze.ucs.indiana.edu (Anmar Caves)
Subject: Re: Does Solar power/Wind power pay for itself.
Organization: Indiana University
Date: Tue, 13 Oct 1992 14:22:37 GMT

In article <Bw157D.4or@inews.Intel.COM> brodesky@td2cad.intel.com (Michael Brodesky) writes:
>
>
>	Another Newbie question. I was wondering if the return on solar
>and wind power generators covers the inital set up and operating costs?

The answer to both pf your questions is it not usually, it depends,
and maybe.

Solar, wind, and hydro are all very site dependant.

Generally, if you can get a grid connection for free, even the best
solar site won't be cost-competitive with the grid once the storage
and power conditioning equipment is factored in.  If you have to run
in new power lines any significant distance (about 1000' in most parts
of the country), and you have a good site then solar can be
competitive, or cheaper.  Don't take this as gospel as the cost of
home power equipment is dropping, and while this is true today, it may
not be two years from now.

Wind has a good chance of being cost effective if the site is good.
Hydro has the best chance of actually being cheaper depending on the
site.  A hydro site evaluation I did once would have produced
electricity for about $.03 a kWh over the system life.  That included
the generator, control electronics (no battery needed), piping, dam,
and generator shed.  The user would have paid $.05 a kWh to buy
electricity from the utility, not including the cost of running the
lines.

I do alternative energy site evaluations and system designs as a
hobby/side business.


-- 
Anmar Mirza   # Chief of Tranquility  #My Opinions! NotIU's! #Purveyor of
EMT-D         # Base, Lawrence Co. IN # Legalize Explosives! #nontraditional
N9ISY (tech)  # Somewhere out on the  #I've got my own fusion#family values
Networks Tech.# Mirza Ranch.C'mon over#plant. Just ask me.   #Space For Rent