HDTenEightyP/NetNews huggingface dataset:
From: jws@billy.mlb.semi.harris.com (James W. Swonger)
Subject: Re: passive solar: fact or fiction
Date: Thu, 17 Dec 1992 18:33:40 GMT
Organization: Harris Semiconductor, Melbourne FL

 The answer to the fear of having an energy system that noone will be 
willing to service for you is, of course, to acquire or build a system
which you are capable of understanding and maintaining yourself. This
is referred to as "appropriate technology" in some circles, though it
does smack of condescension when somebody tries to decide what sort of
technology is appropriate for somebody else. 

 It's not like solenoid valves or copper pipe are likely to disappear
from the face of the earth. However, neither are laziness, greed or peoples'
desire to treat things as appliances even when they are actually dependencies.
A simple passive design is usually pretty hard to break or wear out. A
robust active design -could- be made reliable, but unfortunately the 
solar energy field is no more immune to fast-buck antics and corner-cutting
than any other industry. 
-- 
##########################################################################
#Irresponsible rantings of the author alone. Any resemblance to persons  #
#living or dead then yer bummin. May cause drowsiness. Alcohol may inten-#
#sify this effect. Pay no attention to the man behind the curtain. Billy!#
From: howard.smith@spacebbs.com (Howard Smith) 
Newsgroups: sci.energy
Subject: Re: IGNORANCE is BLISS -
Date: 15 Dec 92 14:58:00 GMT
Distribution: world
Organization: SPACE BBS - Menlo Park, CA - 10 Lines + 4gB - 415-323-4193
Reply-To: howard.smith@spacebbs.com (Howard Smith) 

TI>I have to spend six years to get degrees in the engineering field, go to
TI>conferences, take qualifying exams, etc. to be considered a competent
TI>memeber of the power industry.

TI>Greenpeace dresses up in power plant costumes and parades around a parking
TI>lot.

TI>Who's going to solve our energy problems of the future?

Easy! Engineers working on solar, wind and hydrogen energy systems -
energy systems with reserves to meet our needs for billions of
years, create minumum pollution of the environment and don't stir up
fright in the so-called "uneducated".

hhs
---
 . SLMR 2.1a . Unable to locate Coffee -- Operator Halted!
  
Newsgroups: sci.energy
From: gary@ke4zv.uucp (Gary Coffman)
Subject: Re: electric fuel gauges
Reply-To: gary@ke4zv.UUCP (Gary Coffman)
Organization: Gannett Technologies Group
Date: Fri, 18 Dec 1992 15:57:16 GMT

In article <1992Dec17.025137.21773@microsoft.com> sampa@microsoft.com (Sam Patton) writes:
>This may be a stupid question, but how do "fuel guages" work on electric
>vehicles?

They don't.

With a lead-acid battery, a voltmeter will give an indication of charge,
but depending on the condition of the battery and the temperature, the 
actual capacity can still vary widely. With NiCad and NiMH batteries, 
a voltmeter will only tell you that you've found empty. Probably the 
best way is to use a watthour meter to measure the amount of electricity 
put in and taken out of the battery. That's still not perfect, it takes 
about a 20% overcharge to make a battery reach full capacity, and rapid 
discharges will reduce a battery's capacity as much as 30% over slower 
discharges. The only sure measure you've got is when the lights dim and 
the vehicle slows to a halt, you know the battery needs charging.

Gary
Newsgroups: sci.energy
Subject: Re: Flywheel batteries as EV power source
From: oberland@vax.sonoma.edu
Date: 19 Dec 92 07:55:21 -0800
Organization: Sonoma State University

I was driving my car today and noted how close I am to the engine compartment.

Then, a thought went through my mind:
IF you can contain all that energy, it would naturally create one hell of a lot
of heat(anyone wnat to figure this out?).  I wonder if a person could withstand
being within 3 feet of such heat and remain alive(or even keep from burning)?

I can't easilty figure it out, but I would figure it would be like a blast-
furnace at 3 feet or less, within a second or so.
Would I survive?
From: curry@hplred.HPL.HP.COM (Bo Curry)
Date: Mon, 14 Dec 1992 20:07:15 GMT
Subject: Re: Notch another one up for the Greennazis
Organization: Hewlett-Packard Laboratories, Palo Alto, CA
Newsgroups: sci.energy

/ hplred:sci.energy / steinly@topaz.ucsc.edu (Steinn Sigurdsson) / 12:38 pm  Dec  9, 1992 /
In article <51599@seismo.CSS.GOV> stead@skadi.CSS.GOV (Richard Stead) writes:

   In article <1992Dec8.214003.25985@inel.gov>, dpe@inel.gov (Don Palmrose) writes:
   > In article <51597@seismo.CSS.GOV>, stead@skadi.CSS.GOV (Richard Stead) writes:
   > > 
   > > "Because of the high rate of emission of alpha particles and
   >                   ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^

   > "high rate of emission" one must inhale or ingest a large quantity of Pu.

   That is a high rate of emission.  0.6 micrograms will emit something like
   2 million alphas per second.  Pu 239 is described as "warm to the touch"
   due to the high rate of alphas.

   > In the 1970 Edition of the Radiological Health Handbook, it gives the 
   > following values for the maximum permissible body burdens for occupational 
   > exposure (page 206 to 208):

   > Radionuclide and decay        Organ        Max. burden (microcuries)  

   > U-238 (alpha, gamma, beta)    Kidney       5.0e-3
   >                               Bone         0.06
   >                               Total Body   0.5

   > Pu-239 (alpha, gamma)         Bone         0.04
   >                               Liver        0.4
   >                               Kidney       0.5
   >                               Total Body   0.4


   more susceptible to cancer in general.  I do not doubt that there are more
   toxic substances than Pu, but U is not one of them.  I'm surprised you didn't
   suggest Po.  Po210 is an alpha emmitter with a half-life of 138 days.  The
   maximum body burden for it is 0.03 microcuries which is 0.0068 nanograms.
   The CRC also mentions that this is 250 billion times as toxic as HCN (cyanide)
   weight-for-weight.  And Polonium is relatively common, having several
   industrial uses, so a toxicologist is likely to need to know about it.

Yup, nominally I'd put Po as about 100,000 times more toxic then
Pu by this measure. As it is a Radon daughter it occurs naturally.
Actually by burning U and breeding to Pu and burning that some of
the Po burden is side-stepped - anyone with a handy table of decay
rates want to compare whether breeding and burning Pu produces more
doses of "maximum permissible body burdens" than are disposed of
by avoiding the uranium decay series?


   Not necessarily helpful  I think that when Pu enters the marrow, it is actually
   in the bone itself, not the marrow cells.  It should substitute for Ca in
   the bone structure.  A marrow transplant would probably leave the Pu behind
   to make leukemia all over again.  I doubt there is any effective treatment
   for over-exposure to Pu.

Actually I've heard Pu can be leached out with some organic compounds,
so it can be flushed out of the body with treatment - anyone know
what the current status of that is?

|  Steinn Sigurdsson	|I saw two shooting stars last night		|
|  Lick Observatory	|I wished on them but they were only satellites	|
| steinly@lick.ucsc.edu |Is it wrong to wish on space hardware?		|
| "standard disclaimer"	|I wish, I wish, I wish you'd care - B.B. 1983	|
----------
From: daryl@bovill.auspex.com (Daryl Starr)
Newsgroups: sci.energy
Subject: Re: Flywheel batteries as EV power source
Date: 16 Dec 92 22:37:26 GMT
Organization: Auspex Systems

Has anyone thought of the gyroscopic effect of the flywheel?

Daryl
Newsgroups: sci.energy,talk.environment
From: jmc@SAIL.Stanford.EDU (John McCarthy)
Subject: Re: NEWS: UN Convenes Special Meeting on Nuclear Transports
Followup-To: sci.energy,talk.environment
Reply-To: jmc@cs.Stanford.EDU
Organization: Computer Science Department, Stanford University
Date: 14 Dec 92 16:18:59

A very ingenious press release, interspersing what the IMO and IAEA
said with Greenpeace propaganda and lies.  For example, referring
to the plutonium being extracted from the used fuel elements as
waste is an intentional lie.
--
John McCarthy, Computer Science Department, Stanford, CA 94305
*
He who refuses to do arithmetic is doomed to talk nonsense.

Newsgroups: sci.energy,talk.environment
From: pauld@cs.washington.edu (Paul Barton-Davis)
Subject: Re: IGNORANCE is BLISS - But EDUCATION is SEXIST
Organization: Precipitating Pendulums Postal Party Poopers
Date: Tue, 15 Dec 92 19:24:55 GMT

In article <1992Dec15.021837.5569@gn.ecn.purdue.edu> constant@gn.ecn.purdue.edu (Tino) writes:
>I have to spend six years to get degrees in the engineering field, go to
>conferences, take qualifying exams, etc. to be considered a competent
>memeber of the power industry.
>
>Greenpeace dresses up in power plant costumes and parades around a parking
>lot.
>

       "It was not that he was indifferent to success. He studied the
  bulletins from the Agricultural Extension Service as assiduously as
  anybody. All winter, he pored over the reports of the crop variety
  trials, making notes of new hybrids to try. He kept his own careful
  perfomance records in the pocket notebooks handed out by seed
  companies. He had a soil testing kit and used it religiously. He meant
  to be the best farmer possible. It was just that he didn't see the
  connection between farming well and getting rich.
	I had grown to adolescence and seen something of the world. He
  made me furious. One day I shouted at him, "You are like the soldier
  in the army who insists that everyone is out of step!" I thought
  myself very clever.
	He stared back at me, white with contempt. "Have you ever
  considered," he said, "the possibility that the soldier may be right".

				- "Remember the Flowers", Paul Gruchow
				   (c) Journal of Gastronomy

Don't take your education so seriously, Tino. And never underestimate
your opponents, especially when they wear costumes.

-- paul
-- 
hybrid rather than pure; compromising rather than clean;    | Militant Agnostic
distorted rather than straightforward; ambiguous rather than| I Don't Know
articulated; both-and rather than either-or; the difficult  |   and You Don't
unity of inclusion rather than the easy unity of exclusion. |   Know Either
From: stead@skadi.CSS.GOV (Richard Stead)
Newsgroups: sci.energy
Subject: Re: Notch another one up for the Greennazis
Date: 13 Dec 92 21:40:24 GMT

In article <1992Dec12.044341.16500@sugra.uucp>, ken@sugra.uucp (Kenneth Ng) writes:
> In article <51588@seismo.CSS.GOV: stead@skadi.CSS.GOV (Richard Stead) writes:
> :In article<1992Dec5.045552.1667@sugra.uucp>,ken@sugra.uucp (Kenneth Ng) writes:
> The presumation I made was land and ocean have an equal probablity of having
> the plutonium particle land.  I suspect that most of the rain comes down on
> the mountains alongside of oceans.  This would make my estimate conservative.
> Does anyone know for sure?

_I_ know for sure!  For cryin' out loud, do you just doubt any statement
that contradicts your presumptions?  If you want to check it
out, grab any meteorology text.  For trivia buffs, not only does most rain
fall on the oceans, most lightning occurs there, too.

> : Anyway, all this shows is that your example is a poor one
> :for evaluating the lethality of Pu.
> 
> I was not evaluating the lethality of plutonium.  In an article that is no

What?
The following, in your own words:
> :> need to traverse 9 square feet.  I really suspect a lethality of 0.5 nanogram
> :> is really unrealistic.
Looks like an evaluation of the lethality of Plutonium to me.

> no data.  I'm not even sure what I would look it up under.  I did presume
> that the particles would go all over the world.  Since at least a fair
> amount of the material would go into the stratosphere, I think that is
> a fair assumption.

Only a tiny fraction ends up in the stratosphere.  The vast majority of
stuff is dropped within a few miles of ground zero.


You missed my entire point.  You can't determine the lethality or toxicity
(the 0.5 ng people have been tossing around here is an estimated exposure
limit to prevent harm, the total body burden limit is larger, but still not
a lethality) by the series of assumptions you make - then claiming that
since significant number of people are not dead, that Pu is not so harmful.
Pu is easily detected by its characteristic gamma energy - if any Pu were
just sitting around from the atmospheric tests - it would have been spotted
by 100's of labs that routinely measure gamma energies for whatever reason.
Whether Plutonium is as lethal as Greenpeace claims or completely benign,
your "test" does not determine this one way or the other.


--
Richard Stead
Center for Seismic Studies
Arlington, VA
stead@seismo.css.gov
Newsgroups: sci.energy
From: russ@pmafire.inel.gov (Russ Brown)
Date: Mon, 14 Dec 92 17:46:29 GMT
Organization: WINCO
Subject: Re: Electric Vehicle
Summary: 
Followup-To: 
Organization: WINCO
Keywords: 

In article <Dec11.232412.63015@yuma.ACNS.ColoState.EDU> kk881595@longs.LANCE.ColoState.Edu writes:
>In article <1992Dec11.154137.15298@cs.rochester.edu>, dietz@cs.rochester.edu (Paul Dietz) writes:
>
>|> more difficult to repair.  Increasing the mileage of a car from 30 to
>|> 40 mpg only saves about $1300 or so over the (say) 150,000 mile life
>                           ^^^^^
>|> of the car.  This savings would be spread over years in the future,
>|> while the higher price of the car would have to be paid up front.
>
>Bingo.  So lets raise the price of gas to $10/gal and it will
>then be economical for us all to drive electric cars. ;?)
>
>Kevin

At the risk of ignoring the twisted smiley, the price of gas is only one
component of the equation.  

Note that on an energy basis, the EV is not more efficient than an IC
vehicle of comparable (or even superior) performance characteristics. 
On a CO2 per mile, it is worse.

All that the EV offers is an opportunity to shift pollution from the
point of use (abuse, if you like) to somewhere else.  This is an
externalization of environmental costs, and I would prefer to keep the
clean regions of our country clean.

The environmental purity and other "advantages" of the EV are one of the
more inventive con jobs of the last decade.  A bad joke.
From: howard.smith@spacebbs.com (Howard Smith)
Newsgroups: sci.energy
Subject: Re: electric fuel gauges
Date: 20 Dec 92 18:59:00 GMT
Reply-To: howard.smith@spacebbs.com (Howard Smith)
Organization: SPACE BBS - Menlo Park, CA - 10 Lines + 4gB - 415-323-4193

GC>With a lead-acid battery, a voltmeter will give an indication of charge,
GC>but depending on the condition of the battery and the temperature, the
GC>actual capacity can still vary widely. With NiCad and NiMH batteries,
GC>a voltmeter will only tell you that you've found empty. Probably the
GC>best way is to use a watthour meter to measure the amount of electricity
GC>put in and taken out of the battery. That's still not perfect, it takes
GC>about a 20% overcharge to make a battery reach full capacity, and rapid
GC>discharges will reduce a battery's capacity as much as 30% over slower
GC>discharges. The only sure measure you've got is when the lights dim and
GC>the vehicle slows to a halt, you know the battery needs charging.

The performance of NiMH batteries is reasonably predictable so that a
bi-directional  watt-meter and a very simple computer could give
results as accurate as the gas gage in the average IC car.

The best way of preventing a low battery is to plug it in every night.
Saves all that wear and tear of going to the gas station and spilling
gas on your shoes.

hhs

---
 . SLMR 2.1a . My reality check just bounced.
From: donnelly@nosc.mil (Thomas F. Donnelly)
Newsgroups: sci.energy
Subject: Re: Electric Vehicle
Date: 15 Dec 92 17:44:08 GMT
Organization: Naval Ocean Systems Center, San Diego


 russ@pmafire.inel.gov (Russ Brown) writes:
 howard.smith@spacebbs.com (Howard Smith)  writes:
>>DK>But wait! An honest electric car advocate should compare a CD=0.19 electric
>>DK>vehicle with a SIMILARLY STREAMLINED gas vehicle.
>>
>>Name one! There aren't many proposed as a family car. Most
>>"streamlined" gas cars are open on the bottom and don't produce anywhere
>>near CD=0.9.
>         ^^^
>Misprint?
>
>Honda Accord Coupe has a CD of about 0.31.  The Mazda RX-7 (w/o spoiler)
>may be even lower.  Rough recollection of lowest "standard" car CD is
>about 0.29.

Several cars have a Cd of about .29.  The lowest standard car Cd I have 
seen is the Opel Calibra (European), which has .26.  It looks quite roomy, 
with a shape very similar to an Acura Integra hatchback.  It is 
possible to get somewhat lower, but this does not pay off for auto 
manufacturers, especially not in this country, where gas is so cheap.  
People buy a car based on styling - whether it "looks" aerodynamic, not 
on whether or not that spoiler is functional.  In general, trying to lower 
Cd below .29 only makes much difference if gas is several times as 
expensive, or if speeds are much higher, say > 90mph.  Both of these 
conditions are true in Germany.
It is not appropropriate to compare an electrical car to a gas car with 
the same Cd, because it is easier to streamline the electrical one - no 
radiator, no exhaust under car so bottem can be streamlined, small motor 
so there are more shape options (batteries can go anywhere).

		T. Donnelly        donnelly@cod.nosc.mil
Newsgroups: sci.energy
From: oberland@vax.sonoma.edu
Newsgroups: sci.energy
Subject: Re: Electric Vehicle
Date: 17 Dec 92 01:58:49 GMT
Organization: Sonoma State University

One more note:
Most of the engine wear that occurs happens when you start the vehicle.
I may only drive 5000 miles a year, but I drive it almost every day.

I may only go 5K a year, but my engine and transmission are getting
more like 20K+ of highway driving a year(I don't do much Highway driving,
either)

The vehicle, between time getting to it, and the short-trips(the engine
runs bad enough due to its not getting hot enough that I HAVE to take it
for about 20miles a week at 65+ just to lubricate the thing properly)

Compare 50K on, say, a delivery vehicle to get a more realistic average.
Also, if I had a stick, all those short trips would burn my clutch out
fairly fast(I used to deliver pizzas(their car) and the clutch went out 
at LEAST every year.)

Joe
From: howard.smith@spacebbs.com (Howard Smith)
Newsgroups: sci.energy
Subject: Re: Electric Vehicle
Date: 20 Dec 92 18:59:00 GMT
Reply-To: howard.smith@spacebbs.com (Howard Smith)
Organization: SPACE BBS - Menlo Park, CA - 10 Lines + 4gB - 415-323-4193

GC>Well I screwed this up royally, let's try again.

GC>A pound of gas has 118,000 BTU and there are 7 pounds to the gallon.
GC>So a gallon of gas has 826,000 BTU. A BTU is 293e-6 kWH, so a gallon
GC>of gas is equivalent to 242 kWH. IC engines are about 23% efficient,
GC>so a gallon of gas is equivalent to 55.66 kWH. At $.11 a kWH, a gallon
GC>of gas is equivalent to $6.12 of electricity. So gas has to reach
GC>$6.12 a gallon before electricity becomes cost competitive. And that's
GC>if the vehicles are the same price.

But aren't you forgetting that mechanically coupled EVs are better
than 50% efficient from the plug to the street and direct drives can
approach 80%. That, coupled with the reduced rates many utilities give
for off-hours charging, makes the EV more than competitive.

The efficiency of ICs has been quoted in other places as only 4-5% to
the street, but I'm not sure if that is from the pump or from the
well-head.

An additional factor in favor of EVs is that they consume very little
energy when stalled in traffic - so that the mileage of an EV with
regenerative braking is nearly the same in the city as on the highway.

Big advantage!

Hell of a lot less smog too!

hhs
---
 . SLMR 2.1a . Nothing is so smiple that it can't get screwed up.
From: mwilson@ncratl.AtlantaGA.NCR.COM (Mark Wilson)
Newsgroups: sci.energy
Subject: Re: Flywheel batteries as EV power source
Date: 16 Dec 92 17:29:36 GMT
Organization: NCR Engineering and Manufacturing Atlanta -- Atlanta, GA

In article <1992Dec15.004956.465@mtu.edu> cmwolf@mtu.edu (christopher m. wolf) writes:
|The same flywheels are referenced in the last IEEE.  They are low mass, very 
|high speed devices.  The low mass does not obstruct cornering, while the
|high speed and low diameter helps them to store more power.  They supposedly
|should take about 10 minutes to fully "charge", given a large enough (not
|impossible) power source, although usually not available in the normal home.
|They should be made of a composite fiber material, so if they should break 
|apart, they will basically turn into something resembling cotton, instead of

Enough energy to drive a car an appreciable distance, is by definition, a
lot of energy.  Releasing that much energy, instantaneously, regardless of
the storage mechanism of the energy, will cause, in scientific terms, one
damn big boom.

That cotton of yours had better be non-flammable, becuase when it hits the
air it is going to be very hot, and it will come in contact with the air
unless the sides of your containment vessel are several inches thick.  That
amount of energy well melt through anything less.

Even if it is non-flammable, that much hot mass comming into contact with
the air will cause the air to heat and expand, violently.
-- 
Mob rule doesn't become any prettier, just because the mob start to call itself
a government.
It ain't charity if you are using someone else's money.
Mark.Wilson@AtlantaGA.NCR.com
Newsgroups: sci.energy
From: andrewt@watson.ibm.com (Andrew Taylor)
Subject: Re: Flywheel batteries as EV power source
Date: Thu, 17 Dec 1992 16:20:50 GMT
Disclaimer: This posting represents the poster's views, not necessarily those of IBM
Organization: IBM T.J. Watson Research Center

In article <15940@auspex-gw.auspex.com> daryl@bovill.auspex.com (Daryl Starr) writes:
>Has anyone thought of the gyroscopic effect of the flywheel?

About 2 months ago there was a piece in the NY Times business section on
a start-up company developing flywheel technology.  The company didn't
seem think crashes were a problem. I believe they said they had already
done crash tests but they did see gyroscopic effects as an obstacle.

Andrew Taylor
From: mwilson@ncratl.AtlantaGA.NCR.COM (Mark Wilson)
Newsgroups: sci.energy
Subject: Re: Electric Vehicle
Date: 14 Dec 92 17:45:29 GMT
Organization: NCR Engineering and Manufacturing Atlanta -- Atlanta, GA

In <1992Dec11.173643.1@vax.sonoma.edu> oberland@vax.sonoma.edu writes:

|This may be fun(returning to Electric vehicles thread):
|Figure in the cost of maintaining a vehicle for 100K miles.
|now an electirc vehicle(no transmission probs(WHY you use a IV transmission))
|no cooling system. on tuneups. no oil changes. no muffler changes(this just
|cost me 150 lately-they had to fix the exhaust system as well), etc...

|This is why an electric vehicle is so good, imo.  You can finance the cost of a 
|more expensive vehicle, but the higher cost of maintaining a gas vehicle is
|soimething that you have to live with on a monthly basis.

|"..gheez... they want HOW much for a new muffler?"
|"..600 for a clutch job!?!?"
|"..<whine>I can't afford a new transmission.  Guess I'll have to sell the car"

|I would quite gladly spend a bit more to get this peace-of-mind.  Adding a
|new(whatever) usually comes at a time when you cannot afford it.

I think you have forgotten the cost of replacing all of those batteries
every couple of years.

-- 
Mob rule doesn't become any prettier, just because the mob start to call itself
a government.
It ain't charity if you are using someone else's money.
Mark.Wilson@AtlantaGA.NCR.com