Moronic EU  propose to bring stage lighting under energy saving lighting rules - Page 1
Forum section: electronics / general

author: mikeselectricstuff
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: April 13, 2018, 08:44:34 am
content: https://www.change.org/p/the-eu-energy-directorate-keep-stage-lighting-exempt-from-proposed-legislation-changes

author: Brumby
author_rank: Unknown
timestamp: April 13, 2018, 08:53:47 am
content: How to send an industry back to the days of limelight.How to turn multi-millions worth of equipment into scrap.Certainly common sense is absent here ... unless there is a 20 year grandfathering period.

author: lukier
author_rank: Unknown
timestamp: April 13, 2018, 10:19:56 am
content: Does anyone has a source for this? Is it this document?https://ec.europa.eu/energy/sites/ener/files/documents/com_2016_773.en_.pdf

author: janoc
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: April 13, 2018, 02:41:40 pm
content: A much more useful thing to do is to lobby your European Parliament MPs and EC commissioners. That's what they are there for. These petitions are a dime a dozen every week and nobody ever reads them. Such "facebook activism" is pretty much hypocritical - it bugs me enough to sign an online petition/click the "Like" button but not enough to do anything of actual consequence about it.And seriously, this is again yet another "sky is falling" cry, with a petition to maintain the status quo - the same thing as when the original wolfram/tungsten bulbs were to be outlawed (or vacuum cleaners and what not). We are several years past that and - surprise - everyone survived and we are not back to candles.I am not a fan of stupid regulation but I simply don't believe that it would be impossible to find suitable replacements for wolfram bulbs, relegating the current equipment to scrap or requiring expensive refits. Right now nobody makes them simply because there is no demand. Once there will be, I am sure halogen bulbs or dimmable LEDs outfitted with the right sockets will appear in no time, given the size of the market.There are far worse things being rammed through in Brussels by various industrial lobbyists - such as the copyright reform that is so bad that it would possibly outlaw even Creative Commons, demand fees/tax for merely linking to news articles, make mandatory content filters (which could mean that Dave would have to implement one too as this forums allows user generated content and it is available in Europe) and similar nonsense. *That* could very kill the internet as we know it and nobody seems to be too concerned ...

author: NivagSwerdna
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: April 13, 2018, 03:08:58 pm
content: Quote from: janoc on April 13, 2018, 02:41:40 pmor simply leave the EU..

author: CopperCone
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: April 13, 2018, 04:39:31 pm
content: Sounds like there is money to be made

author: lukier
author_rank: Unknown
timestamp: April 13, 2018, 04:53:12 pm
content: Quote from: janoc on April 13, 2018, 02:41:40 pmI agree. The petition seems hysterical which reminds me of Daily Mail nonsense, hence why I asked for the sources. I cannot find anything related to the issue in the document I linked to which the petition seems to be refering.Usually, the way it works, that there is a slow phase out and there are transition periods before the act is in force. It doesn't mean that the European Commission will be raiding theatres and confiscating bulbs and fixtures.It might be true, regulations are not perfect and there are plenty of lobbyists in Brussels area, but I would prefer a source from europa.eu domain to confirm. Even then some random online petition is not a very effective way to change things.

author: james_s
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: April 13, 2018, 05:23:09 pm
content: How much energy can stage lighting possibly consume in the grand scheme of things? Sure it's inefficient but the fancy high efficiency LED street lighting along one main street through town likely consumes more energy than all the stage lighting in the whole city.

author: ajb
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: April 13, 2018, 07:54:25 pm
content: Quote from: janoc on April 13, 2018, 02:41:40 pmI'm not familiar with the details of the regulation, but regarding the cost of retrofits: The workhorse of theatrical lighting is the ellipsoidal reflector spot, aka "Leko". The standard in the industry for that class of fixture is the ETC Source Four. Without a lens tube (since those are common to the tungsten and LED versions), the tungsten fixture body costs about $330 new, and takes a 575W or 750W lamp. The LED retrofit kit for the tungsten body (Source 4WRD) costs $599 and is meant to be photometrically equivalent to a 575W tungsten fixture. There is no retrofit equivalent to the 750W lamp version. So that's $600 plus labor to retrofit each fixture, of which a theater may have anywhere from dozens to hundreds, and applications that have been relying on the increased output of the 750W lamp may have to increase their inventory of fixtures by ~30%, which means buying complete fixtures with lens tubes--at least $1000/ea for Source 4WRDs, depending on the type of lens needed--plus additional cabling.The other option is to buy Source Four LEDs, which cost about $2000 each. For flood fixtures, there's really no retrofit path, so that means buying new fixtures at $200-600 per LED par.There are cheaper options, to be sure, but it's going to be exceedingly difficult to match the performance and reliability of these sorts of fixtures at a lower cost.Native-LED fixtures require a data runs to each fixture, which means a lot of new cable to buy, and possibly new infrastructure wiring and distribution equipment. Older lighting desks may not be able to address the number of parameters required, especially since multi-color fixtures will require 3+ parameters each, in which case a new desk is in order, at a cost of anywhere between $10,000 and $80,0000, or more if redundant control or network processing is required. Venues that were designed for tungsten lighting (most of them) will probably need to have many of their dimmers converted to non-dim to be able to reliably power LED fixtures, so that's another $200 or so per circuit, plus labor.Of course, most theaters and production houses are moving in the direction of LED already,when they can afford it, which may mean buying a handful of new fixtures in a year. Being forced to upgrade everything in the next two years (if that is in fact what the new regs require) is going to be TREMENDOUSLY expensive to the point of impossibility for many organizations.

author: dmills
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: April 13, 2018, 08:03:24 pm
content: A decent rig in a large theatre can have a 150kW or so of TH lamp in it, maybe a little more, but not all of that will typically be in use in any given scene.Concert lighting is both better and worse, better because they all tend to use some mix of metal halide and LED, worse because the metal halide tends to stay powered up all night due to restrike and warm up issues.TH is desirable in theatres because of the mix of good CRI, continuous spectrum, a useful variability in colour temp with dimming level, the ability to dim smoothly right the way down to off (Yes that last 0.5% as the filaments drop into the infra red matters), and the ability to build reasonably compact high brightness sources (This last is what no LED really manages at useful power levels). Oh and NO FANS, being able to hear a pin drop is a feature not a bug!I saw a useful looking LED backend for a S4 at a show recently, but it had fans and swiftly transpired that the thing was projecting a beautiful hard edged circle BY IMAGING THE LED SURFACE not by producing a focal plain in the gate, made it somewhat less then really useful.Regards, Dan.

author: ajb
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: April 13, 2018, 08:07:19 pm
content: Quote from: dmills on April 13, 2018, 08:03:24 pmWas that the Source 4WRD, or a third party retrofit? I've seen that there are a few retrofit options but I would certainly expect better than you describe from ETC!

author: dmills
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: April 13, 2018, 08:54:22 pm
content: It was some third party thing really aimed I think at architectural usage.Regards, Dan.

author: janoc
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: April 14, 2018, 07:56:25 am
content: Quote from: ajb on April 13, 2018, 07:54:25 pmSure thing but keep in mind that that is in the condition where nobody is asking for these retrofit kits because unless the theater wants to move to LEDs on their own, they have no reason to. So it is a niche product, produced by one or two manufacturers, thus costing a ton of money.That will change as soon as more manufacturers come into the market (assuming the light fixtures are somewhat standardized and you aren't locked into buying replacement lamps only from the original vendor).It is exactly the same situation we had with LED bulbs or solar panels before - they were extremely expensive and difficult to get because of low demand. As the regulation went in effect a lot of new manufacturers showed up ("Hey, an untapped market!") and the prices plummeted. I do realize that stage lighting isn't anywhere near the size of normal domestic lightbulb market, but still.And re costs - yes, it may get expensive and some venues will not be able to afford it. Happens. The same thing happened with cinemas - there was no evil EU dictating energy efficiency standards there but Hollywood dictating all new fully digital projectors so that they can be locked down and DRM-ed right up the wazoo otherwise you don't get any new movies to show. A lot of small cinemas had to close because they couldn't afford such upgrade. And nobody wrote any petitions for them.I don't see why someone should be guaranteed to be able to do business without significant investments forever. Legislation changes all the time, it is not like others don't have to deal with such issues. The main problem is that if you just keep pushing the deadlines away or keep maintaining various exceptions in the legislation, nobody will actually change anything - why, when they don't have to ...

author: mikeselectricstuff
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: April 14, 2018, 08:26:37 am
content: QuoteThe issue here is there is absolutely no justification for regulation here. Theatrical & stage lighting is an insiginificant user of power. If anything, it makes matters worse due to the disposal of old equipment.Classic case of regulation where none is needed due to ignorance of those making it.

author: janoc
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: April 14, 2018, 10:13:13 am
content: Quote from: mikeselectricstuff on April 14, 2018, 08:26:37 amThat I would agree with. On the other hand the concept of minimizing the amount of various exceptions and special cases is also laudable because it simplifies the enforcement and reduces the costs of complying with legislation in general.I think this is more "Heeelp, the sky is falling!!!" case again. Is it not possible for the theaters to stock up on spare lamps for their fixtures to last them for a few seasons while they are still available so that they can plan for any necessary upgrades at their convenience? Nobody is going to ban the use of their existing lighting fixtures, the only concern is that the replacement lamps may become more difficult to get if their sale is banned.They will have to do such upgrades and modernization at some point anyway. And while the lighting systems may be an insignificant user of power from the environmental point of view, the theater still has to pay a non-insignificant amount of money for the electricity, so moving to more eco-friendly lamps could have a positive effect on their budgets in the long term.So while this entire "lightbulb" legislation was probably unnecessary as a whole (people were replacing their incandescent bulbs with CFLs and LEDs anyway because they last longer and cost less in electricity bills, so legislating it only sped the process up a bit) it is not that huge of a deal as some people are trying to make out of it neither.

author: TheAmmoniacal
author_rank: Unknown
timestamp: April 14, 2018, 10:24:39 am
content: What's next? Greenhouses?

author: b_force
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: April 14, 2018, 03:15:07 pm
content: With all the respect, but I never get the facepalming, kicking and bashingIn general people are trying to make stuff more efficient, and for the better IMO.I work in the professional audio field, and yes for audio technicians it's to stupid for words that these old very heavy energy consuming light solutions are even still allowed.Sometimes using almost more than a small village. Especially in the areas were these big events are being held on a regular basisI would rather see it as a challenge for the tech industry. Good reasons to innovate.But I guess some people still like to live in caves and warm themselves with a crapy campfire.

author: Bud
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: April 14, 2018, 03:33:37 pm
content: Quote from: TheAmmoniacal on April 14, 2018, 10:24:39 amLights in sports arenas and stadiums.

author: TheAmmoniacal
author_rank: Unknown
timestamp: April 14, 2018, 03:35:09 pm
content: Quote from: Bud on April 14, 2018, 03:33:37 pmAnd then inside kitchen stoves/ovens? Wonder how LEDs would fare

author: wraper
author_rank: Unknown
timestamp: April 14, 2018, 03:46:34 pm
content: Quote from: janoc on April 13, 2018, 02:41:40 pmFor housing, all you need to do is replacing bulbs with LED counterpart as old bulbs fail. For stage lighting, you'll need to replace most of the equipment, not just bulbs.

author: NiHaoMike
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: April 14, 2018, 03:53:26 pm
content: Big Clive has done a lot of work on stage and other event lighting. Maybe he can explain why retrofitting old lighting equipment is not cost effective?

author: dmills
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: April 14, 2018, 03:54:50 pm
content: Thing is LED is NOT an improvement on Tungsten in theatre applications, except in so far as it pulls a little less power.Seriously, no squint likes cooking up at the top of a 'scope while focusing, and where it is practical the industry is LED or discharge already, but projecting a gobo needs a point source and costume (and set) types swear at you if you do not have continuous spectrum sources in use (Because discontinuous sources make the paint and dye look odd).Further I would note that like cars, modern lanterns are generally a lot more efficient then the old ones, in terms of lumens per watt (Even while using essentially the same technology), there is NO contest between a Source 4 or Pacific and say an old Furse or SIL 30. A Modern 750W unit is typically much brighter then an old 1,200W.Much of the advantage of LED is in generating efficient saturated colours by just emitting at the required wavelength, that works for concert and club lighting but if you need to start with a white source and then do subtractive mixing (Which you really do need for theatre) the efficiency quickly goes to pot even with LED.Oh and FANS are a complete non starter which makes a lot of high intensity sources way hard to deploy (The hum heads whine if you have too many fans in the rig).BTW the 'BAN' on tungsten filament is far more nuanced then that, I can still get 60W tungsten bulbs easily. They make FAR Better house lights then anything else, a 10 second fade on tunsten starting at maybe 40% of full shout looks good, the same thing on LED looks meh (And usually has an annoying snap out at the end), and TH does not last long at 40% power because the halide cycle does not get hot enough to run.We use about 40% on the house lights (which is way less then 40% in terms of light output) because the very low colour temperature looks GOOD in a largely red painted auditorium, total run on that system is about 2 hours a night so not particularly interesting.Sports and stadiums are actually usually going for reasonably efficient things anyway because power is a reasonably significant cost for them, and they basically just need white with little need for overly precise beam control, mostly they are MH of some form, which is pretty close to LED efficiencies already.Regards, Dan.

author: wraper
author_rank: Unknown
timestamp: April 14, 2018, 03:56:31 pm
content: Quote from: mikeselectricstuff on April 14, 2018, 08:26:37 amNot regulation, but around 2010 Greenpeace forced Apple to get rid of PVC in their products (world's third-most widely produced synthetic plastic polymer). As a result, Apple cables are going to landfill after 3-6 months of use unlike any other cheapest crap which lasts much longer. Well done, environment saved, my ass.

author: dmills
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: April 14, 2018, 04:07:18 pm
content: It comes down to needing a continuous spectrum point source approximation that can be powered (and DIMMED right the way down to black) with thyristor phase controlled power (Because that is what theatres make available in large numbers of circuits).Turns out that that need to dim smoothly right the way to black on phase controlled power is something a hot wire is actually really good at, LED not so much!You are also talking about an industry where cash for capex is a rare and usually spoken for thing, there are PLENTY of places with 1970s control gear (and lanterns) where the only major work done was fitting a new lamp socket on a spacer when the world moved from tungsten filament to tungsten halogen (And I know one or two where tungsten filament still gets used).Regards, Dan.

author: janoc
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: April 14, 2018, 04:27:34 pm
content: Quote from: wraper on April 14, 2018, 03:56:31 pmWhich is just so convenient excuse for their crappy and very expensive cables. And complete BS as well too - the cables are simply poorly made, with insufficient strain relief, so they regularly fray and break at the connectors.No other major manufacturer has these issues, even the "low end" ones like Dell or Nokia, despite also reducing/eliminating their PVC use. Apple's "disposable" cables are completely in line with their other design decisions towards unrepairable, straight-into-landfill hardware that breaks at the slightest disturbance.Greenpeace was hounding them for the use of toxic chemicals by their suppliers and poor recycling policies, not because of PVC use in cables (which Apple has been phasing out since the 90s anyway, way before this issue with Greenpeace).It is well documented here:https://www.cnet.com/news/how-apple-and-greenpeace-made-peace/That was Jobs's own decision at the time because they wanted to be seen as a green company, not something Greenpeace has forced them to do (as if they could even if they wanted).Don't blame the treehuggers for Apple's incompetence (or intentional planned obsolescence) here.

author: janoc
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: April 14, 2018, 04:51:56 pm
content: Quote from: wraper on April 14, 2018, 03:46:34 pmA serious question from someone who has seen the lighting gear but doesn't really work in the industry - why would you need to do that?I understand that the older gear uses various triac and even resistor (the really old stuff) dimmers which cannot easily dim LEDs. OK, so the dimmer may need to be replaced too. However why e.g. a console and the wiring to it would need changing as is being claimed? It is all normally controlled by DMX, no? (assuming a reasonably modern setup, not someone moving rheostats by hand to dim lights ...)If the LED "bulb" has some sorts of "smarts" and needs digital control, I would only expect that there would be some sort of driver instead of the dimmer box talking to the console over DMX again.Now I totally get that retrofitting an old fixture may not be cost effective (or even possible) and could cost more than getting a new one and that making the new hw work with the existing console/programs/whatever will be a pain but that's a different issue.I also don't buy the arguments that the current LED-based (or other - e.g. halogen or something yet different) replacements are unusable because of different light output, fan noise, etc. Sure, could well be today - but that doesn't mean that will still be the case in two years time too. Especially if this kind of legislation comes into power, creating a large market for better lamps. If it will still be like that towards the end of that transitional period, sure, then there will be a legitimate issue and a complaint to be made.@dmills has a lot of good points why tungsten lamps are still used in these applications, thanks for the illuminating (pun intended) info.

author: james_s
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: April 14, 2018, 05:02:22 pm
content: Quote from: janoc on April 14, 2018, 04:51:56 pmOptics. Stage lighting lamps have precisely shaped and placed filaments that are critical to the optics in a fixture. No LED source can properly match this, you need a whole new fixture designed for the LED source.It's just stupid anyway, stage lighting is an absolutely insignificant blip on the total energy consumption of any community. There are FAR bigger issues to look at. Given the shoestring budgets of a lot of theaters it's not a stretch to say that many of them will simply collapse and go away if this becomes law.

author: rstofer
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: April 14, 2018, 05:12:11 pm
content: How is this any different than the US banning Mercury Vapor lamps back in the mid '70s?There was the thought that cracked envelopes allowed UV to escape causing about 1 cancer death per year. For that we changed out millions and millions of fixtures/ballasts/lamps. Sure, we saved a lot of energy going to High Pressure Sodium (and even more if we picked the monochromatic Low Pressure Sodium) but that wasn't the driving force behind retrofitting - in the '70s. It might be today...Of course, the ban itself has been dragging on for 30 years or so. I think the MV lamp is finally a thing of the past.Here's a pretty nice comparison of High Pressure Sodium versus LEDhttp://www.stouchlighting.com/blog/led-vs-hps-lps-high-and-low-pressure-sodium

author: wraper
author_rank: Unknown
timestamp: April 14, 2018, 05:14:45 pm
content: Quote from: janoc on April 14, 2018, 04:27:34 pmStrain relief is not the issue and BTW Apple cables do have sort of strain relief. Also I have a lot of USB cables without strain relief and none of them breaks. So it's an issue with material used in outer layer of the cable as it's what always breaks first. As of eliminating PVC in electronics, it's stupid. PVC piping alone has so much PVC that cables would not come even close.

author: janoc
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: April 14, 2018, 05:18:55 pm
content: Quote from: james_s on April 14, 2018, 05:02:22 pmOK, but then those fixtures aren't *that* expensive. It still doesn't answer my question about the wiring and the lighting console, though.Quote from: james_s on April 14, 2018, 05:02:22 pmI think it is more about eliminating exceptions seen as not really justified than about saving energy on some larger scale from this. Those exceptions have also costs and open potential loopholes. Yes, it is a stupid regulation. But claiming that world will collapse because of it is a going a bit overboard.Concerning budgets - well, if this comes into a law, there will be several years of time during which the theaters can plan and perform the upgrades. If they stockpile on the bulbs, even longer. It is not like someone is telling them - you have to do this 1 million work until tomorrow or your shop will not be allowed to open. Even a small venue should be able to include it in their budgets like that, especially since they probably don't use so many fixtures in the first place.The lack of good quality alternatives for tungsten bulbs is a lot more relevant issue there, IMO.

author: janoc
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: April 14, 2018, 05:21:50 pm
content: Quote from: wraper on April 14, 2018, 05:14:45 pmThe key is "sort of". If a cheap Chinese factory somewhere is able to make a cable that doesn't break, Apple's competitors that have to follow the same laws and rules are able to make cables that don't break, it is surely not because of PVC (or lack of it) in the cable sleeve/insulation that they break, is it?That's a total red herring, sorry.

author: james_s
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: April 14, 2018, 05:39:56 pm
content: Yes they really are *that* expensive. When you might have a hundred or so fixtures at $400-$1200 each and you survive on a shoestring budget, replacing all of the lighting could absolutely bury many theaters. And all for what? An insignificant energy savings? What happens to all these high quality older instruments, we send them to the landfill? Sorry but this just seems like something crafted by one of those nanny types who absolutely have to have control over what someone else somewhere is doing. Bottom line is that someone who lacks any sort of expertise in theatrical lighting should have no part in legislating it. Really that applies to everything, and it seems to be all too common, lawmakers trying to legislate things they do not understand.Regarding mercury vapor streetlighting, that was also misguided in my opinion, yes HPS is more efficient but in many cases 400W mercury lamps were replaced with 400W HPS lamps so zero energy savings. We got more light but it was ugly orange light that created a lot of glare rather than really lighting anything up, but there are two very significant factors here. One, there are many orders of magnitude more street lights than theatrical lights and they typically run all night long every night so any small savings becomes far more significant. Second, much of these replacements were paid for with taxpayer money which is practically an endless supply, or at least it is treated that way. Spending $10 Million replacing all the streetlights in a city is no problem, spending $60,000 replacing all the lighting in a small theater is a *huge* expense.

author: wraper
author_rank: Unknown
timestamp: April 14, 2018, 05:55:39 pm
content: Quote from: janoc on April 14, 2018, 05:21:50 pmAs I said, my micro USB and USB-C cables don't have strain relief at all and nothing breaks. Competitors use PVC insulation, that's the difference. There is no rule against using PVC in cables.

author: janoc
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: April 14, 2018, 06:12:26 pm
content: Quote from: wraper on April 14, 2018, 05:55:39 pmThe strain relief sleeve on Apple cables is too thin and splits easily, after which the cable starts fraying around the connectors. The other common problem is that the outer insulation simply splits apart in places where the cable is being bent and the inner conductors wear against the synthetic rubber (or what is that thing Apple uses for the outer sleeve), even with normal use.You say yourself that there is no rule against using PVC in cables (and you can make decent cable with other insulation than PVC too - certainly for the price Apple is selling them for) - so why are you trying to blame this on Greenpeace?Here is an alternative explanation, from someone who claims to have actually worked for Apple:https://www.reddit.com/r/pics/comments/hvuhg/apple_why/c1yuah6/(tl;dr - classic Apple style decision making - design trumps engineering)

author: b_force
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: April 14, 2018, 06:27:03 pm
content: Quote from: wraper on April 14, 2018, 03:46:34 pmThat's not true at all. 90% of the energy being used is because of the lights.Well, it depends a little what type of venue you're talking about of course.For exactly this reason you can't even sell the electronics (audio en light controllers) for being "efficient", since the light bulbs themselves just consume that much.Like I said, with all the respect, but anno 2018 it's more than ridiculous to use old fashioned light bulbs anymore.LED are just fine and looking fine, people who still think they are harsh and ugly have been living underneath a rock for the last few years.On a personal level I also don't get it, when I was using old light bulbs it was about 40% of my energy bill.With LED it went down to just about 15%, which is pretty significant per month.Also a lot of older houses/hotels/hostels are very happy with it, since they have limited fuses available, so they don't blow up as many fuses in the winter.

author: wraper
author_rank: Unknown
timestamp: April 14, 2018, 07:04:07 pm
content: Quote from: janoc on April 14, 2018, 06:12:26 pmBecause there is nothing wrong with PVC to begin with. Replacements are not only less durable but are not inherently flame retardant and cause more harm to the environment as cannot be recycled unlike PVC. There is no good replacement for PVC. Even apple uses PVC power cords in Korea and India because replacements do not comply to legislation.https://www.wireweb.de/wire-reports/pvc-free-cable-an-alternative-_33434_de/QuoteQuoteQuoteGreenpiece is a stupid organisation, all about hype and not actual research and environment.

author: wraper
author_rank: Unknown
timestamp: April 14, 2018, 07:13:30 pm
content: This cable without any strain relief survived more use than 99% of the cables will ever see.

author: glarsson
author_rank: Frequent Contributor
timestamp: April 14, 2018, 08:01:34 pm
content: Quote from: wraper on April 14, 2018, 07:04:07 pmSo true. Even their ex-president, Patrick Moore, agrees with this statement.

author: james_s
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: April 14, 2018, 08:19:28 pm
content: Quote from: b_force on April 14, 2018, 06:27:03 pmWe're not talking about household light bulbs here, these are expensive and very specialized stage lighting instruments, you cannot simply replace the bulb with an LED and expect it to work. It's the same reason there are no legal LED retrofit bulbs for automotive headlights, the optical properties of the lamp are critical and LEDs require different optics.

author: Bratster
author_rank: Frequent Contributor
timestamp: April 14, 2018, 08:34:03 pm
content: Quote from: janoc on April 14, 2018, 05:18:55 pm

author: Zero999
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: April 14, 2018, 08:37:13 pm
content: I think they should focus on other things: what about all those inefficient, wasteful, antiquated audio amplifiers? Especially the class A value/tube ones! They should all be banned and replaced with class D amplifiers, with efficient swithed mode power supplies of course! The only place for glassware and even semiconductors on massive heatshinks is the museum.I can see that being very unpopular, especially with the audiophool crowd, but it would probably safe more energy, than banning incandescent stage lighting.

author: janoc
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: April 14, 2018, 08:38:28 pm
content: QuoteSo? But that was Apple's choice -PVC is not banned to be used in cable insulation!Neither in Europe, nor in America, even that Greenpeace didn't make them to switch away from it, despite what you are trying to push here.Absolutely nobody is preventing Apple from shipping PVC insulated cables, nor from reinforcing the parts that are most often wearing through.Quote from: wraper on April 14, 2018, 07:04:07 pmSo, you are basically blaming Greenpeace for Apple's incompetence only because you don't like Greenpeace and not because they actually have anything to do with the poor design of those Apple branded cables?Or I really don't get neither your reasoning nor point here.

author: james_s
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: April 14, 2018, 08:41:22 pm
content: Can we take the Apple/cable stuff somewhere else please and stick to the topic at hand?

author: janoc
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: April 14, 2018, 08:45:26 pm
content: Quote from: Bratster on April 14, 2018, 08:34:03 pmAh OK, thanks for explaining that. I have been under the assumption that it is more common to run the DMX lines near the lighting ramps and then have the dimmers nearby the lights to reduce the amount of cabling required, not in some remote room.If the setup is as you describe, then yes, quite a bit of a wiring job could be required.However, if someone invests into a totally proprietary system that works only with itself - then they pretty much have only themselves to blame.

author: The Soulman
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: April 14, 2018, 08:46:44 pm
content: LED theatre lighting are still not good enough to be a worthy replacement for the traditional lights.Even with the "latest technologies" such as high frequency dimming, amber drift and the addition of lime green to the colour spectrum the result stillisn't on par (pun intended), regardless of cost.Interested in the technology's development I haven't left a trade-show impressed.For show purposes (flashing colourful effect lights) LED is taking over HMI in a fast rate, the biggest force behind that is the size and weight benefit from LED and the lower cost.Either way at the theatre I work (as a sound-engineer) the electricity bill is largely dominated by 24/7 systems such as the massive ventilation system and computers/servers with the accompanying air-conditioning.

author: james_s
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: April 14, 2018, 08:51:20 pm
content: Quote from: janoc on April 14, 2018, 08:45:26 pmMany of the systems in use were installed 40-80 years ago, some even older. DMX was not an option then, it's not as if these weird proprietary systems were installed last week, at the time they were put in they were state of the art.

author: The Soulman
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: April 14, 2018, 09:00:59 pm
content: Quote from: Hero999 on April 14, 2018, 08:37:13 pmWell....Class-D amplifiers can be efficient near full power output and that is their main advantage, however typical use in a theatre is below 1% power output.The used smps aren't build for efficiency around that power level, the class-d amplifiers we have idle with a draw of about 700 Watts each (times 50...) + aircon to remove the resulting heat.Really want to replace those (for various other reasons) with linear power supply class-H.

author: b_force
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: April 14, 2018, 09:30:55 pm
content: Quote from: Hero999 on April 14, 2018, 08:37:13 pmFor the record, most professional audio amplifiers have been Class-D types for MANY years.However, the power usage of the stage lights and heating system is still using far more energy.btwNo body gives a damn about those few audiophools with tube amplifiers.That number is totally insignificant and not interesting, small market.(the music industry however is a very different story)But not to wake any sleeping angry dogs, but all these things are still nothing compared how some 'western countries' waste energy by the millions.QuoteAre we engineers or not?Seems like a nice challenge to me!!

author: wraper
author_rank: Unknown
timestamp: April 14, 2018, 09:39:05 pm
content: Quote from: b_force on April 14, 2018, 09:30:55 pmIf target is wasting money without a good reason, then sure. Particularly for me, outcome is more important than running the hoops. I prefer applying minimum effort for maximum result, not the way around.

author: james_s
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: April 14, 2018, 09:44:12 pm
content: Audiophools with tube amplifiers and stage lighting are actually a good comparison, both are tiny tiny drops in the bucket. It would not surprise me if the overall global energy consumption from audiophool gear is significantly higher than that of theatrical lighting. There just are not very many theaters, and if you look at the energy consumption on lighting per audience member it's going to be even more insignificant.

author: dmills
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: April 14, 2018, 09:47:01 pm
content: There are still places running analog (0 to 10V, polarity depending on manufacturer, 1 signal wire per channel) controls systems, it was a perfectly good standard back in the day and was used in systems having well over 100 channels of dimmer, sometimes the controls were digital, sometimes analogue (Banks of faders, diodes and switches).You cannot call yourself an operator until you have run a busy show on a Strand AMC or Threeset, and I know folk who say the same thing but for the Grandmaster (Direct power rheostats in series with the lamps, lots of mechanical linkages and gears, very steampunk, bits of wood, elbows, knees and feet were required to run a complex crossfade).There is at least one grand master still in (somewhat limited) service!Dimmers inside the auditorium volume are not popular due to the combination of fan and buzz from the suppression chokes, also of you have them all in one place there are more opportunities to leverage load diversity, I can have 200kW of lamps on a 100kVA feed because not everything is on in any one scene. Also, dimmers were not always exactly what you would call compact.At the small venue end I remember one place that had a big ammeter on the front wall of the control room, scaled in amps up to 60, and minutes/seconds above that (Hand written scale), as long as you did not exceed the 60 amp rating of the incoming supply fuse for more then the number of seconds indicated on the meter everything was fine....Seriously, no squint is down on LED, we use them, they are a great tool for the right job, but they are NOT even close to being a sub for TH in this application.regards, Dan.

author: dmills
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: April 14, 2018, 09:53:23 pm
content: Quote from: The Soulman on April 14, 2018, 09:00:59 pmI would suggest that obtaining some class D that does not suck may be indicated!Sure supply efficiency goes to pot at low output, but that should not really matter because you are by definition producing nearly now power down there.I clocked my Camco V6s at idle at less then 100W, at which point I stopped worrying about it.Actually the real win for audio is better speakers, the good stuff can be 10dB or so better then the rubbish and that lets you make the same noise with 1/10th the amplifier size.Regards, Dan.

author: b_force
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: April 14, 2018, 10:12:46 pm
content: Quote from: james_s on April 14, 2018, 09:44:12 pmLike I said, that really depends what type of venue or show we are talking about.At home you don't need more than 100W, maybe for active powered subs, but audiophools don't like these anyway.So even with a Class-A amp, you piss away around around the same amount for a pair of KT88 (give or take).Just two or three plain old light bulbs do that easily.A decent concert of theater show has a few more than just three.On top of that they always need to run all the AC units to the max to get rid of the heat againDOH!Btw, there are Class-D power design that control the voltage rail in idle mode.The point is that with a Class-AB amp you're using even more.

author: apis
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: April 14, 2018, 10:24:35 pm
content: Quote from: Bud on April 14, 2018, 03:33:37 pmGreenhouses, sports arenas, stadiums and many road lights use HID lamps which are as efficient as LEDs (if not more efficient), or sometimes fluorescent lamps or LEDs. LEDs are still best for low power applications like domestic lighting.

author: Zero999
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: April 15, 2018, 08:59:23 am
content: Quote from: The Soulman on April 14, 2018, 09:00:59 pmThat's one of the main advantages of class D vs class AB: they maintain greater efficiency, at lower output levels. The theoretical maximum efficiency of a class AB amplifier, with a 10V supply at 1VRMS output is just 10%, whilst a class D amplifier it's 100%. Of course real life amplifiers don't achieve anywhere near these figures.Quote from: wraper on April 14, 2018, 09:39:05 pmYou messed up the quoting: I didn't say that!

author: dmills
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: April 15, 2018, 04:11:42 pm
content: Quote from: b_force on April 14, 2018, 10:12:46 pmThe aircon is actually often the elephant in the room, and the electrical input has comparatively little to do with the need for it.On average a person at rest generates about 100W, of which 30% or so is latent heat gain (Water vapour) at typical auditorium temperatures.Put a thousand people in the auditorium and you will have to run the aircon plant to reject that 100kW of waste heat, and to maintain the humidity at a comfortable level, and that load is constant of the two hours or so of the show.The last build I did we tried very hard to get a gas fired CHP plant using the waste heat to drive a lithium bromide cycle chiller, turned out the local gov would give us grants for solar but not for something that actually made sense!Regards, Dan.

author: NiHaoMike
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: April 15, 2018, 04:52:41 pm
content: Quote from: dmills on April 15, 2018, 04:11:42 pmThat depends on the weather. If the outdoor temperature is below 70F or so, you just need some fans.

author: apis
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: April 15, 2018, 06:19:50 pm
content: To me it seems like someone is trying to make a hen out of a feather:Is there really such a proposal? All I see is a petition (which is something any fool can make). It's like the fake news before the brexit referendum that EU was planing on banning high power electric kettles, which turned out to be completely bogus.If they where to remove the exemption for stage lights it would only apply to newly purchased lights. It's not like they would force a theatre to replace their existing working tungsten lighting solution. New stage lights would have to be more efficient though (i.e. use LED or HID lamps). There is also no reason to believe they would not allow theatres to continue purchasing replacement tungsten bulbs for their existing installations.For newly produced light modules I can think of only advantages of using LEDs or HID lights. I don't understand the love for tungsten lights? Sure there are some very niche applications, like light spectroscopy instruments, where tungsten is the best option, but for the most part it's antiquated 19th century technology.

author: james_s
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: April 15, 2018, 07:15:22 pm
content: It's already been covered here, nothing else matches the smooth continuous spectrum of tungsten lamps, allowing filter gels to color the light to any hue imaginable as well as the smooth dimming all the way down to zero with no snap at the end.

author: apis
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: April 15, 2018, 07:48:09 pm
content: Quote from: james_s on April 15, 2018, 07:15:22 pmIs there a technical reason why you can't smoothly dim LEDs all the way to zero?Why do you need a perfectly smooth continuous spectrum? There are LEDs that have almost perfect CRI now.With RGB LED spotlights you get a super simple way of making almost any color light you might want. If the spectrum of such a lamp isn't good enough you could use filtered white LEDs (or if you need high power: xenon arc lamps).

author: Zero999
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: April 15, 2018, 08:46:15 pm
content: Quote from: apis on April 15, 2018, 07:48:09 pm1) Yes, LED should be able to be dimmed to zero.2) CRI means nothing, especially when it's going to be filmed.3a) Filtering white LEDs won't produce wavelengths which aren't there in the first place.3b) xenon arc lamps can't be dimmed to zero.Quote from: apis on April 15, 2018, 06:19:50 pmI agree. I've not seen any independent evidence for the allegedly proposed legislation, that it would forbid lamp replacement and yes LED and HID lights are generally superior to tungsten lamps. I think it's possible there are still a handful of applications in studios where tungsten would be preferred, over modern alternatives.I also still don't believe they've banned incandescent lamps, even in the domestic setting. The legislation just sets minimum efficiency standards for lighting, which can't be met withtraditiona incandescent lamps. Some halogen lamps meet the requirements, but I believe they will be tightened in future and even then, some future development in incandescent lighting may make it meet the standards again: such as the discovery of new material, which is very transparent to visible radiation and a near perfect reflector of infrared: apply it to the inside of an incandescent lamp and it becomes as efficient as an LED!My comment about forbidding all other power audio amplifiers, than class D was initially tongue in cheek (on reflection, I should have added the appropriate smilie) but come to think of it, I don't think it would be a bad idea. It would certainly be more worthwhile than removing the tungsten exemption for stage lighting. Like the vacuum cleaner legislation, it should include minimum performance specifications. I'd like to put an end to lots of the marketing BS, such as only specifying peak power, to all channels, when the output is so distorted it's a squarewave. Manufactures should be forced to specify power output at under 1% THD. Of course there should be no specific ban on everything but class D, just that the efficiency specification would be impossible to meet using any other topology, than class D.

author: apis
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: April 15, 2018, 10:28:34 pm
content: Quote from: Hero999 on April 15, 2018, 08:46:15 pm2) Filming might cause problem, that is a good point. I know for a fact that many TV-studios use white LED lights though (also big ones like the BBC.)3a) True, but you should be able to maintain a mix that still produce an acceptable CRI. You might have to use filters tailored specially for LEDs if you are really picky. The potential problem with cameras remains though.3b) Even if you can't dim the light itself couldn't you use shutters and/or filters for dimming. One could object that defeats the purpose of saving energy, but since LED and xenon uses less than a fifth of the power of Tungsten you would probably still save a lot of power.Quote from: apis on April 15, 2018, 06:19:50 pmYou might be right, I don't pretend to know enough about stage lighting, just seems a bit odd to me that incandescent lights would be so important.Quote from: Hero999 on April 15, 2018, 08:46:15 pmYes, I also believe they require a certain minimum level of efficiency. At the moment you can even get halogen lamps mounted inside a traditional light bulb enclosure for example.Quote from: Hero999 on April 15, 2018, 08:46:15 pmThe audiophools going berserk would just be an added bonus.

author: mikeselectricstuff
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: April 16, 2018, 12:10:29 pm
content: The audiophool thing would be an easy fix - simply call it a room heater with additional audio functionality

author: james_s
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: April 16, 2018, 04:09:16 pm
content: I would bet that using discharge lamps with shutters would result in considerably higher energy consumption than using tungsten lamps. Consider you might have 100 fixtures, of which maybe 8-20 of them would be on at any given time. You'd have to be way more than 5 times as efficient to come out ahead having all 100 of them burning at once with shutters closed on the lights you don't need. On top of that, HID theatrical lighting is very expensive, and the specialized lamps themselves are also very expensive and have limited life.There are very good reasons that tungsten lamps have remained popular in this niche application. If you want to save energy there is still a lot of low hanging fruit elsewhere.

author: Cyberdragon
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: April 16, 2018, 06:29:40 pm
content: Audiophools aren't the only tube guys you know.A lot of us just like tube because reasons. You also blatantly ignore guitar amplifiers, a lot of which are still tube.Also, lets ban gas powered vehicles too! And portable gas generators and make people use expensive and crappy fuel cell ones!

author: BrianHG
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: April 16, 2018, 08:23:29 pm
content: You want the true full spectrum, efficiency and over 80% brightness at over 50k hours use, you should go with LUXIM's light emitting plasma fixtures, all 40k lumens coming out of a tiny spot the size of a flattened pea:http://luxim.resilient.lighting/Models exist designed for dimming at the expense of a little efficiency.

author: Zero999
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: April 16, 2018, 08:24:20 pm
content: Quote from: Cyberdragon on April 16, 2018, 06:29:40 pmNo problem. Nowadays DSP can emulate glassware quite effectively. Another possibility is a very low powered glassware input stage for the nice distortion, followed by a class D output stage to drive the load. As long as the input stage distorts the signal, long before the output stage does, there won't be any nasty clipping.

author: james_s
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: April 16, 2018, 08:39:20 pm
content: Quote from: Hero999 on April 16, 2018, 08:24:20 pmI'm not going to argue that there's anything particularly unique about the tube sound, but tubes certainly are neat.

author: Zero999
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: April 16, 2018, 09:59:34 pm
content: Quote from: james_s on April 16, 2018, 08:39:20 pmSo are steam trains, along with many other things which belong in the past.

author: dmills
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: April 16, 2018, 10:36:46 pm
content: But they are still building NEW steam locomotives!A1 Steam with the Tornado build proved that a new mainline steam locomotive could be built and certified, and I believe there are now a few more on the blocks.Horribly inefficient of course, but I cannot help but feel that the world is a better place for the existence of people who do these insane things.I would like to see someone try a new one using MODERN engineering and materials, but ironically that would as I understand it be more difficult to certify then what is basically a copy of a 1950s engine.Regards, Dan.

author: John B
author_rank: Frequent Contributor
timestamp: April 16, 2018, 10:58:52 pm
content: Quote from: mikeselectricstuff on April 16, 2018, 12:10:29 pmThat's true though! Who says heat generated is always wasted energy?

author: james_s
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: April 16, 2018, 11:03:06 pm
content: Steam trains are still around, it's too bad more of them were not preserved. Still it's not like everyone is using them, like tube audio it's a nostalgic and/or enthusiast thing, not really a problem in the grand scheme of things. Nobody is arguing that mass production consumer gear should switch back to tubes.

author: Astrodev
author_rank: Regular Contributor
timestamp: April 17, 2018, 02:00:28 am
content: Has anyone considered that all this is based on a false premise, because if you take into account that the so called efficient lighting has a much higher peak current draw in cycle due to the way the power supply works.This means that using current methods to measure and charge for electricity usage they are "more efficient" but I can see that using a more advanced integrating method of measuring power usage will come as the technology already exists now to do this.And all of a sudden a large proportion of the saving goes out of the window, it is not as though something like this has happened before! Oh wait we were encouraged to use Diesel because it was more efficient and now all those that took the advice and went down that road are being penalised.If you really want to consider a bad move on energy usage, we have this thing called the internet which has over the past years resulted in the increase in size of data centres that serve all this low cost cloud infrastructure, why has no one stopped to consider how much energy these are consuming, which in a lot of cases is similar to a small town and makes street lighting seem fairly insignificant.

author: james_s
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: April 17, 2018, 05:16:35 am
content: What are you talking about? Equipment to measure true power consumption has been around for decades and your utility meters already measure true power. Cheaper CFL and LED lamps are often low power factor but they generally won't have an unusually high crest factor. No matter how you measure it, a fluorescent or LED lamp will use far less energy than an incandescent lamp, there's no debate there. Do I really need to hook up some lamps and capture some current waveforms on a scope for you?

author: Cyberdragon
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: April 17, 2018, 05:31:11 am
content: The whole energy saving movement is a bandaid solution. The more technologically advanced the world becomes, the more techology you have, plus the whole gas to electric stuff, the more electricity the world will use. You can't stop progress, so we need to stop with this "eww, old inefficient tech!" because it hardly matters what's using the electricity when tons of things that use electricity are created every day.So keep in mind that for every "old, inefficient incandescent bulb" you change for an LED...five kids just got iPhones that need charging constantly becuase they're addicted to Candy Crush.Yes, effiecient tech helps stem the growth a bit, but it should be a choice whether to use it or not, since energy use will keep increasing anyway. Let people use whatever the hell technology they want, when it's not going to matter. We need to focus on alternative energy first.I mean, if we ever get fusion power, it probably won't matter how effiecent things are when you have that amount of power.

author: james_s
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: April 17, 2018, 05:43:26 am
content: But we're going to get all this new tech regardless, so if I add 1kW of power consumption to my house and I don't upgrade inefficient stuff I'm going to have the new draw on top of the old. Changes like changing out all of my incandescent lighting (which I did 20 years ago) more than offset any additions in my own household. Incandescent to LED household illumination is a nearly 10:1 reduction, that's pretty substantial. Modern refrigerators use far less power than those from 30+ years ago, cars now getting 35-50mpg vs 8-14mpg in the 70s, that's very significant even if overall consumption goes up due to more cars on the road it would be WAY up if not for the improved efficiency. Other improvements have been more incremental.We do need to focus on alternative energy but that is in addition to improving efficiency wherever we reasonably can. It can be said that alternative energy is a bandaid too, like adding more lanes to a highway it generates demand. We're never going to have more energy generated than we can manage to use.

author: Zero999
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: April 17, 2018, 09:45:35 am
content: Quote from: dmills on April 16, 2018, 10:36:46 pmSteam in itself isn't bad, it's just solid fuel is impractical for a locomotive. It makes more sense to convert it to electricity, quite often through steam, although gasification is also used, then transmit that, rather than the bulky fuel. I imagine a modern steam locomotive would be an electric one with a steam turbine electric generator bolted on.Quote from: Astrodev on April 17, 2018, 02:00:28 amIt's also saved energy and CO2emissions. For example, it takes less energy to send an email, than to print it on a piece of paper and send it across the world.

author: dmills
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: April 17, 2018, 10:48:56 am
content: And then with have the whole blockchain bullshit thing where the security model basically amounts to "We can throw more power at verifying this thing then you can throw at faking it"Some orders of magnitude of asymmetry in that relationship would be nice.We still very much live in the steam age (And probably will for as long as thermal power plants are a thing), they are just turbines rather then piston plants, and they spin magnets rather then working the loads directly.Regards, Dan.

author: Astrodev
author_rank: Regular Contributor
timestamp: April 17, 2018, 04:21:09 pm
content: Quote from: james_s on April 17, 2018, 05:16:35 amThe problem is that present usage measurment (metering) and so billing is still based on average current and not integrated instantanious current but as things shift in the way we impact on the current requirement and so the infrastructure required to deliver the power, the way it is metered will inevitably have to change.I am quite aware of the effect these types of lighting have on the current waveform as I have to take a lot of this into account when looking at the degree of derating required for large lighting setups, as we routinely use power quality analysis to ensure that the switchgear and cableing will not be overloaded.I can't find hte white paper from Fluke that covers the impact of lighting changes on the power delivery requirements for a building, but the following article from them does give some of the information it is based on:http://media.fluke.com/documents/4141155_6003_ENG_A_W.PDF?_ga=2.46222503.1607972234.1523981019-1404776471.1522260634

author: Cyberdragon
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: April 17, 2018, 07:03:34 pm
content: Quote from: dmills on April 17, 2018, 10:48:56 amActually, high efficiency piston engines (uniflow) can actually compete with turbines up to about half a megawatt. It would be pointless for continuous operation, but for small backup steam generators or local plants, reciprocating steam would work. You can also computer control reciprocating steam, it has been done in certain countries that still have a lot of reciprocating steam. You can also compound a uniflow, which would probably be even easier with electronic valves.

author: IanMacdonald
author_rank: Frequent Contributor
timestamp: April 17, 2018, 07:36:02 pm
content: These regulations spawn from the combination of Green party pipedreams about how windmills will replace fossil fuels, and the One Size Fits All bureaucratic mania of the EU.Currently, the world spends something like $1.5 trillion a year on this nonsense. It's been going on for more than 20 years, and progress so far is to replace a few percent of fossil fuel usage. Climate change advocate or no, any rational person ought to be saying by now, 'This ain't gonna work, so let's try something else.'The something else could be fusion, LENR or thorium. The cost of testing out these options would be tiny compared to that $1.5 trillion a year, and as well as answering any concerns over climate change, success with any of these would be a landmark in human progress akin to the invention of the wheel, or powered flight. It would have the potential to transform living standards in third world countries. It would also get a few dangerously unstable regimes currently supplying us with fossil fuels off our backs for once and for all. Basically, all positive results, and for a fraction of the cost.-and if the attempt fails, well at least we tried. If we don't try, then sitting huddled in our freezing house by the intermittent light of one wind-powered LED, we shall always wonder if itcouldhave worked.

author: Zero999
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: April 17, 2018, 07:40:44 pm
content: Quote from: Cyberdragon on April 17, 2018, 07:03:34 pmReciprocating engines have a wider power band, than turbines, but is a reciprocating steam engine any more efficient, than an internal combustion engine? I don't have the figures, but I suspect an internal combustion engine is more efficient, than a steam engine. An internal combustion engine can be run from producer gas (mostly CO & H2with a little CH4) which can be easily made from coal, or any reasonably dry, solid organic material, such as wood, using gasification. The question is whether fuel => producer gas => internal combustion engine, is more efficient than fuel => steam => reciprocating steam engine? I don't know.

author: Cyberdragon
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: April 17, 2018, 07:50:14 pm
content: You can run steam off geothermal, solar, or any other source of heat, thus producing no emissions. I'm talking about stationary engines of course and not vehicles.

author: BrianHG
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: April 17, 2018, 07:50:34 pm
content: Though there is room for better and more deployment in the solar and wind power harvesting, were eventually screwed until realistic semi-compact fusion becomes viable and cheaply available. Eventually, this will create a new problem, but for that to happen, we will need to grow our population by 10x and we are lacking in many other areas, like current agriculture's super wasteful beef production to make it that far and current goals of certain individuals who are in control aren't compatible with making a world where we can exist with such a population, nor would they ever allow it.Though, there is still hope...

author: NiHaoMike
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: April 18, 2018, 12:58:27 am
content: Quote from: dmills on April 17, 2018, 10:48:56 amThere are ways to run a blockchain vastly more efficient than the way Bitcoin does it. There are altcoins that are less compute intensive, altcoins that rely on storage rather than compute power, and altcoins that do useful work outside the blockchain system. My entire mining setup uses about 200W of which 180W or so is a GPU mining Curecoin/Foldingcoin (plus the rest of the PC being used for other purposes), the remaining 20W or so are a bunch of small miners for energy efficient altcoins.

author: james_s
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: April 18, 2018, 01:56:51 am
content: Quote from: Hero999 on April 17, 2018, 07:40:44 pmI would actually be interested in seeing the data just out of my own curiosity. I suspect that steam is competitive in large to very large sizes when the engine is run at or near full power most of the time and run for very long periods without being shut down. Internal combustion has the obvious advantage of being easy to control, you can just start one up in a matter of seconds rather than getting a fire going and waiting hours to build up a head of steam and then when you shut it down you have a lot of heat energy remaining in the boiler that goes to waste.Obviously it's going to depend on available fuel too. If you have a lot of coal or wood it takes a lot of extra effort to convert the fuel to a form useful for internal combustion.

author: Distelzombie
author_rank: Frequent Contributor
timestamp: April 18, 2018, 02:06:50 am
content: Why is this a bad thing? Ever stood on a stage with the lights burning your skin while you have to keep a clear head? You'd fucking sell your grandmas kidneys to gift that stage owner LED lighting.

author: james_s
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: April 18, 2018, 02:18:31 am
content: Quote from: Distelzombie on April 18, 2018, 02:06:50 amDid you even read the thread? It has been hashed out multiple times why LED lighting is not particularly suitable for the task.

author: Distelzombie
author_rank: Frequent Contributor
timestamp: April 18, 2018, 02:21:32 am
content: Quote from: james_s on April 18, 2018, 02:18:31 amMmmmmmmm... there are four pages and I just have this one question.TLDREdit: Oh, it's on the first page. XD

author: apis
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: April 18, 2018, 12:46:55 pm
content: Seems like many white LED lights have more than acceptable spectrum also for filming (but you need to know what you are doing):http://www.gtc.org.uk/members-area/tlci-results/current-tlci-results.aspx

author: apis
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: April 18, 2018, 01:29:21 pm
content: Quote from: BrianHG on April 17, 2018, 07:50:34 pmFusion isn't anywhere near production ready. They can't even get sustained fusion nor produce more energy than they put in to get the reaction started. And if they finally manage that they don't have any materials that can withstand the intense neutron radiation to be viable in a commercial reactor (i.e. the tokamak cracks/burns up after a while). Even if we keep pouring billions into fusion research (like the scientists say they need to continue) there is no telling when they will get useful results (if ever), except that it won't be within then next 50 years.Nuclear power would have been great, but it's even less popular today after the tsunami wrecked the Fukushima power plant, and even if all countries begin replacing coal with nuclear there isn't nearly enough production capacity to do it fast enough (you need highly specialised competence to build nuclear reactors safely). And we should already have stopped using coal yesterday. Meanwhile, what countries are actually doing is replacing nuclear with coal and gas (which they buy from Putin).That leaves solar and wind power. Wind has lots of downsides but at least it is proven existing technology. Solar is awesome but doesn't work far north like here in Scandinavia. You could produce enough solar energy in the Sahara and export it north to Europe, but the political situation right now isn't exactly making that attractive. Solar also only produce electricity when the sun is shining which means you need to store power for use during the night, another technology that doesn't exist yet.The last option is to try and reduce power consumption, which no one likes since it means changing our habits. You don't win elections by telling people they shouldn't drive as much as they want to (or use whatever antiquated lighting technology they want to).

author: Distelzombie
author_rank: Frequent Contributor
timestamp: April 18, 2018, 01:47:31 pm
content: If you want a fusion reactor today (That is totally possible right now!) and don't want to wait, build a deep cavern in hard rock, fill it with water and then throw a Hydrogen fusion bomb in it. Collect steam. Profit.There are obviously some negative aspects to it.Edit: This is no joke. Electric output will be huge.

author: Nauris
author_rank: Regular Contributor
timestamp: April 18, 2018, 05:26:30 pm
content: Quote from: james_s on April 18, 2018, 01:56:51 amGas engines have typically efficiency of around 50%, diesel little lower at 45%. Standby to full power is like two minutes for a 10MW engine, so not seconds but fast still.

author: apis
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: April 19, 2018, 01:41:38 pm
content: Quote from: Nauris on April 18, 2018, 05:26:30 pmHmm, that is not what I have been told, and if you look at wikipedia:Quote from: WikipediaAnd the big ship diesels can have efficiencies better than 50%.https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Diesel_engineDiesel engines generate more pollutants that are detrimental to peoples health though, so not ideal to use near human habitation.

author: Nauris
author_rank: Regular Contributor
timestamp: April 19, 2018, 09:17:06 pm
content: Quote from: apis on April 19, 2018, 01:41:38 pmSorry I meant gas like natural gas not gasoline. What wikipedia says is true for small engines like in automotives but for big engines situation is different. It is also true that really big ship diesels can achieve over 50% efficiency but power stations usually use multiple smaller engines of 10...20MW size in parallel.

author: Zero999
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: April 20, 2018, 11:22:53 pm
content: Diesel engines are generally more efficient than gas (methane, propane, syngas etc. not gasoline) engines.https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gas_engine#Thermal_efficiencyThe question I asked was about reciprocating steam vs gas engines: I can't find any reliable data on modern reciprocating steam engine efficiency. The Wikipedia article talks about an efficiency of 30%, but that was back in 1849: perhaps that could be improved with modern technology?https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Engine_efficiency#Steam_engineAs mentioned above diesel is more dirty than gas, but gas can easily be made from organic waste, though biogas or gasification, so it has the potential to be carbon neutral.

author: Rerouter
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: April 21, 2018, 12:19:19 am
content: ... The most well proven bulk energy storage method on a state scale is pumped hydro, have 2 lakes, 1 far higher than the other, but ideally close to the other, when in surplus, pump water up, when in demand, let it flow through some turbines down.Pumps and water turbines are remarkably efficient at large scales.

author: james_s
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: April 21, 2018, 07:03:56 am
content: Quote from: Rerouter on April 21, 2018, 12:19:19 amThere's a system like that at the Grande Coulee dam, I toured it several years ago, pretty impressive installation.