|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 3,469 Likes: 70
Hall of Famer
|
Hall of Famer
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 3,469 Likes: 70 |
I think this is an interesting idea -- so I'm not trying to criticize here...
I would guess the big drawback is that this is unlikely to be universal? So businesses will either need to sell two versions of the device, or they will need to sell devices that have AC/DC capabilities.
The second drawback I can think of (which, again, isn't to say it is a bad idea), is that the wall voltage is unlikely to be stable enough for many electronics. It should be fine for charging phones, batteries, etc -- but the margins on the voltage requirements of semi-conductors are pretty tight -- so even to just do a DC/DC conversion to power a computer will require a fairly advanced power-supply to make sure that the 12V/5V voltage lines are very stable.
~Lyuokdea
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 3,469 Likes: 70
Hall of Famer
|
|
Hall of Famer
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 3,469 Likes: 70 |
On the other hand -- maybe if we start to advance battery technologies (and manage to produce cheap energy storage inside the house) -- then this would be a big enough impetus to power houses on DC.
A revolution in battery technology would be a huge deal for renewable power.
~Lyuokdea
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 27,963 Likes: 769
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 27,963 Likes: 769 |
Actually, existing power supply technology makes it simpler, I'd think.
Most AC power is so dirty and uneven it is kinda ridiculous. Quality power supplies and their use of induction coils and many layers of capacitors to even out incoming power is the entire reason a high end computer can function on a crappy rural grid. So, taking that same circuitry, but being able to eliminate the rectifiers at the input side actually makes it an easier build, I'd think.
Many products are already DC only... their power cords are those little AC adapters and it is just a round DC plug that goes into the device. I see no reason that a computer, TV, etc power supply couldn't have the second connector and have it auto-switch between 12/24/48v input. The circuit would actually be quite simple... you're just stepping down anything above 12v, and you're doing it in even multiples, so a basic voltage divider is all ya need. 12v is what the computer is going to use anyway, so designing your inputs to take any of the three seems easy. Then, you just need one of the main industry associations (homebuilders) to help get folks like GE, Leviton, Seimens, etc.. to not only decide on which voltage to standardize on, but then maybe offer hybrid panels for load distribution.
Browns is the Browns
... there goes Joe Thomas, the best there ever was in this game.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 27,963 Likes: 769
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 27,963 Likes: 769 |
On the other hand -- maybe if we start to advance battery technologies (and manage to produce cheap energy storage inside the house) -- then this would be a big enough impetus to power houses on DC.
A revolution in battery technology would be a huge deal for renewable power. That's what got me thinking this way. Tesla already has their home battery, and if you run a solar or wind system in your home, it stores all power in 24v or 48v battery systems. It seems silly to lose energy coming back out just to convert it to AC only for your devices to then rectify that power and use it as DC, anyway.
Browns is the Browns
... there goes Joe Thomas, the best there ever was in this game.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Mar 2013
Posts: 55,499 Likes: 906
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Mar 2013
Posts: 55,499 Likes: 906 |
This is probably a kiss of death, but I think you are one of the most level-headed, reasonable posters on this board. You don't come across as biased like other posters do. You appear to be an independent and fair thinker. I respect that.
Of course, since I said that.........you will probably soon make a post about either burning down all our cities or shooting all protestors. LOL
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Jul 2007
Posts: 3,960 Likes: 3
Hall of Famer
|
|
OP
Hall of Famer
Joined: Jul 2007
Posts: 3,960 Likes: 3 |
I think the unaccountable forcing factor, is the methane being released from the permafrost in high latitudes. Methane has 200x the impact on the greenhouse effect, compared to CO2.
It’s a positive feedback on the climate, just like albedo and losing the ice sheets. The climate is accelerating faster than many species can adapt to.
We are on the precipice of mass biodiversity loss.
President - Fort Collins Browns Backers
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Mar 2013
Posts: 15,079 Likes: 118
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Mar 2013
Posts: 15,079 Likes: 118 |
I have a wind turbine about 400 yards from my house. No, it's not mine. I don't recall its capacity, but it's been there for 10+ years. It still hasn't paid for itself, let alone saved anyone any money, with the breakdowns, the tri annual "routine maintenance" etc.
But it's cool. About half of it was paid for with tax rebates. I don't mind one bit sitting on my covered patio, drinking coffee, a beer, doing a crossword, whatever, and watching it. In fact, I rather enjoy it at times.  10+ years ago? That thing is ancient in the terms of wind generated turbine design technology.
A life is not important except in the impact it has on other lives.
– Jackie Robinson
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 5,991
Hall of Famer
|
|
Hall of Famer
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 5,991 |
Actually, I just got lazy and didn't look it up. Now to continue. Please check Michael Manns hockey stick graph again. It conveniently leaves out the Romans warm period, the dark ages cool period, the medieval warm period (which was warmer than now) and the little ice age. I'm fairly sure the Romans and middle ages europeans didn't have access to factories that emitted carbon. What caused the warming? That brings us right back to solar output. Any warming and cooling is natural.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 5,991
Hall of Famer
|
|
Hall of Famer
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 5,991 |
The carbon dioxide levels over the last few decades are very different from anything we've ever seen. We are currently just North of 410 ppm. We can use Ice Core measurements from Antarctica to go back 800,000 years, and we've never seen a value above 300 ppm: https://climate.nasa.gov/system/content_pages/main_images/203_co2-graph-061219.jpgAnd we can ask the question, can humans have produced 200 ppm of Carbon dioxide over the last 100 years? Let's just look at the raw amount of power that has been produced by burning fuels. To date, that is about 136,000 TWh: blob:https://ourworldindata.org/e32c9a4e-20d4-479d-b119-46346951f3bf The amount of C02 for each fuel is slightly different, but you get very close to the right answer by using the value for coal: C + O2 = CO2 which releases 33940 KJ/kg of Coal. Technically, for Gasoline/Oil you want to use C8H18 + 12.5 O2 -> 8 C02 + 9 * H20, but this is not a huge difference. 1 Wh = 3600J, so 136000*10^12 Wh = 5 * 10^20 J, which corresponds to 1.5e13 kg of coal. The answer is actually a bit higher (around 5 * 10^13 kg of coal -- because power plants aren't super efficient at producing power from burning fuel). climate.gov puts it at 3.5e13 kg ( https://www.climate.gov/news-features/cl...uman-activities) C weights 12 AU (by definition), and C02 weighs ~44 AU, so 1.5e16 kg of coal is around 44/12 * 5e13 kg = 1.5 * 10^14 kg of C02 that humans have released into the atmosphere. Almost there! Now we just need to calculate the change in the C02 concentration in the atmosphere, if we add 1.5*10^14 kg of C02 to it. The total atmosphere weighs around 5 * 10^18 kg, we are adding 1.5 * 10^14 kg of C02, so you would expect a mass fraction of around 0.03% (if none of the Carbon ever cycled). C02 is ~3x heavier than N2, so you get an answer that is very nicely 100 ppm of C02. It's not a perfect calculation (and there are a lot of sources and sinks to worry about) including the ability of oceans and permafrost to remove some of the carbon we emit. However, you can see that the rise in C02 very closely echos what is coming out of our factories and cars. This is my favorite arguement ever. "Here is tons of scientific data and the math behind it, broken down in great detai." "But here is a bunch of random websites that say otherwise." It would be more accurate to say, "websites with an opposing view", as that is what they are. Maybe I should just use those sites that already have the "approved" group think of the agm liberal that wants us all to abandon fossil fuels?
![[Linked Image from s2.excoboard.com]](http://s2.excoboard.com/forums/25521/user/302752/484538.gif)
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 3,469 Likes: 70
Hall of Famer
|
|
Hall of Famer
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 3,469 Likes: 70 |
Please check Michael Manns hockey stick graph again. It conveniently leaves out the Romans warm period, the dark ages cool period, the medieval warm period (which was warmer than now) and the little ice age.
Here is the graph, which took all of 30 seconds to find (NASA.gov, adapted from Mann 2008 -- which is not the only Mann et al. paper).  It starts in 500 AD, which is probably why it doesn't include the Romans. It does not leave out the dark ages (which do not look particularly warm or cool). The Medieval warm period (maybe 950AD?) is not warmer than the temperature today. It does not leave out the Little Ice Age (which is pretty clear around 1500 AD, though of course, the feature is very small compared to the current warming trend). Three strikes and you're out?
Last edited by Lyuokdea; 08/23/20 03:23 PM.
~Lyuokdea
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 3,469 Likes: 70
Hall of Famer
|
|
Hall of Famer
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 3,469 Likes: 70 |
Actually, I just got lazy and didn't look it up.
That seems to be a theme here...
~Lyuokdea
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 5,991
Hall of Famer
|
|
Hall of Famer
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 5,991 |
Please check Michael Manns hockey stick graph again. It conveniently leaves out the Romans warm period, the dark ages cool period, the medieval warm period (which was warmer than now) and the little ice age.
Here is the graph, which took all of 30 seconds to find (NASA.gov, adapted from Mann 2008 -- which is not the only Mann et al. paper). It starts in 500 AD, which is probably why it doesn't include the Romans. It does not leave out the dark ages (which do not look particularly warm or cool). The Medieval warm period (maybe 950AD?) is not warmer than the temperature today. It does not leave out the Little Ice Age (which is pretty clear around 1500 AD, though of course, the feature is very small compared to the current warming trend). Three strikes and you're out? Adapted from Mann in 2005? His original came out in 1998. Try this one, nonbeliever. https://notalotofpeopleknowthat.wordpress.com/2020/06/14/tree-rings-michael-manns-hockey-stick/
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 3,469 Likes: 70
Hall of Famer
|
|
Hall of Famer
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 3,469 Likes: 70 |
Why would I not use the most recent version of the Mann analysis? Especially as you mentioned cooling in the dark ages, which only appear in the 2008 paper? Either way - you are still wrong. Here is the 1998 paper: http://www.geo.umass.edu/faculty/bradley/mann1998.pdfIt starts in 1400, so by definition, doesn't include many of the effects you are talking about. The Little Ice Age definitely exists in the plot -- it is the dip on the left hand side -- though maybe harder to discern since there isn't a lot support from data pre-1400?  Mann 1999 was the paper used in the IPCC report, which goes back to 1000. http://www.meteo.psu.edu/holocene/public_html/shared/articles/MBH1999.pdf(See Figure 3a). Here, the Little Ice Age is very easy to see - the warming trend over the last 100 years looks nothing like the very small variations before it. But I'm sure the people at "notalotofpeopleknowthat.wordpress.com" are better informed.
Last edited by Lyuokdea; 08/23/20 04:22 PM.
~Lyuokdea
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Jun 2010
Posts: 9,433 Likes: 11
Hall of Famer
|
|
Hall of Famer
Joined: Jun 2010
Posts: 9,433 Likes: 11 |
You have more stamina than I do.
Kudos to you for trying.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 5,991
Hall of Famer
|
|
Hall of Famer
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 5,991 |
Why would I not use the most recent version of the Mann analysis? Especially as you mentioned cooling in the dark ages, which only appear in the 2008 paper? Either way - you are still wrong. Here is the 1998 paper: http://www.geo.umass.edu/faculty/bradley/mann1998.pdfIt starts in 1400, so by definition, doesn't include many of the effects you are talking about. The Little Ice Age definitely exists in the plot -- it is the dip on the left hand side -- though maybe harder to discern since there isn't a lot support from data pre-1400? Mann 1999 was the paper used in the IPCC report, which goes back to 1000. http://www.meteo.psu.edu/holocene/public_html/shared/articles/MBH1999.pdf(See Figure 3a). Here, the Little Ice Age is very easy to see - the warming trend over the last 100 years looks nothing like the very small variations before it. But I'm sure the people at "notalotofpeopleknowthat.wordpress.com" are better informed. And that is why I get bored and lazy with these arguments. The name of the site I picked is not up to your made up qualifications, because it's not sponsored by nasa, the ipcc, cnn, etc. You have gotten all your ideas from a single source. You will always believe what the mainstream tells you even when they're wrong. Here's another one for you. https://cei.org/blog/wrong-again-50-years-failed-eco-pocalyptic-predictions
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 3,469 Likes: 70
Hall of Famer
|
|
Hall of Famer
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 3,469 Likes: 70 |
because it's not sponsored by nasa, the ipcc, cnn, etc. You have gotten all your ideas from a single source You just named 3 sources? Also - yes, I trust NASA and the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change more than I trust a wordpress website run by a retired accountant -- and in general more than I'd trust any individual, regardless of their qualifications.
Last edited by Lyuokdea; 08/23/20 05:06 PM.
~Lyuokdea
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Jun 2010
Posts: 9,433 Likes: 11
Hall of Famer
|
|
Hall of Famer
Joined: Jun 2010
Posts: 9,433 Likes: 11 |
Fox News is mainstream media and they claim manmade climate change isn't real or has consequences on the planet.
Take a consistent position, Erik.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Jun 2010
Posts: 9,433 Likes: 11
Hall of Famer
|
|
Hall of Famer
Joined: Jun 2010
Posts: 9,433 Likes: 11 |
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 5,991
Hall of Famer
|
|
Hall of Famer
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 5,991 |
Someone else that won't read a site because his masters have told him not too. It only lists failed predictions of climate alarmists for the past 50 years.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 3,469 Likes: 70
Hall of Famer
|
|
Hall of Famer
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 3,469 Likes: 70 |
Fox News is mainstream media and they claim manmade climate change isn't real or has consequences on the planet.
Take a consistent position, Erik. I feel like Fox News is pretty 50/50 on this? Their news division mostly posts "Climate change is real" articles -- but they publish a lot of opinion articles from skeptics...
~Lyuokdea
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Jun 2010
Posts: 9,433 Likes: 11
Hall of Famer
|
|
Hall of Famer
Joined: Jun 2010
Posts: 9,433 Likes: 11 |
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 3,469 Likes: 70
Hall of Famer
|
|
Hall of Famer
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 3,469 Likes: 70 |
I just want to know who these masters are?
~Lyuokdea
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Jun 2010
Posts: 9,433 Likes: 11
Hall of Famer
|
|
Hall of Famer
Joined: Jun 2010
Posts: 9,433 Likes: 11 |
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 5,991
Hall of Famer
|
|
Hall of Famer
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 5,991 |
I just want to know who these masters are? I'd say the liberal left. I see most of you buying into everything they say. I just posted a list of complete failures in climate predictions for the past 50 years. Instead of reading it, I get told the website is too extreme. That implies willful ignorance, as I see it. I read the theories from both sides before I made my mind up. I researched them both. I'd like to see more people do the same.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Mar 2013
Posts: 12,641 Likes: 592
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Mar 2013
Posts: 12,641 Likes: 592 |
I just want to know who these masters are? I'd say the liberal left. I see most of you buying into everything they say. I just posted a list of complete failures in climate predictions for the past 50 years. Instead of reading it, I get told the website is too extreme. That implies willful ignorance, as I see it. I read the theories from both sides before I made my mind up. I researched them both. I'd like to see more people do the same. Maybe if you took the time to respond to the detailed, specific and lengthy posts from Lyuokdea .... you'd have some room to make that criticism. As it is, in the middle of the previous back and forth, a whole slew of information was shared and we got crickets. Now your back with a new tact / topic and we have to dance to your tune while you avoid responding to the former? And you throw insults in there for good measure? No thanks.
The more things change the more they stay the same.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 5,991
Hall of Famer
|
|
Hall of Famer
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 5,991 |
I just want to know who these masters are? I'd say the liberal left. I see most of you buying into everything they say. I just posted a list of complete failures in climate predictions for the past 50 years. Instead of reading it, I get told the website is too extreme. That implies willful ignorance, as I see it. I read the theories from both sides before I made my mind up. I researched them both. I'd like to see more people do the same. Maybe if you took the time to respond to the detailed, specific and lengthy posts from Lyuokdea .... you'd have some room to make that criticism. As it is, in the middle of the previous back and forth, a whole slew of information was shared and we got crickets. Now your back with a new tact / topic and we have to dance to your tune while you avoid responding to the former? And you throw insults in there for good measure? No thanks. Oh please. He showed me stats, I showed him opposing stats. I get told my websites aren't official enough. There's tons of climate data that shows co2 does not force increase in temps. It's not on the "official" sites because they are pushing an agenda. I live 3 blocks from the beach in a house build in the 80s. The water should be lapping at my living room windows 10 years ago according to the experts. The ice caps are not gone, we still have polar bears and their population is growing, some glaciers grow while some recede, there are no global famines, etc, etc. The climate changes. It will be hot, it will be cold. We're not making the weather worse. This is nature, and it's always been this way.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 30,440 Likes: 450
Legend
|
Legend
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 30,440 Likes: 450 |
It's weird. The earth has warmed and cooled since forever - according to science. Even before the industrial revolution................even back when..........well, it doesn't matter.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 5,991
Hall of Famer
|
|
Hall of Famer
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 5,991 |
It's weird. The earth has warmed and cooled since forever - according to science. Even before the industrial revolution................even back when..........well, it doesn't matter.
Unfortunately, I will most likely not live until the next glacial age. It would be nice to see I'm right.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Mar 2013
Posts: 15,079 Likes: 118
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Mar 2013
Posts: 15,079 Likes: 118 |
Someone else that won't read a site because his masters have told him not too. It only lists failed predictions of climate alarmists for the past 50 years. Says the guy who just claimed to be too lazy to look some things up. at trump supporters.all day long
A life is not important except in the impact it has on other lives.
– Jackie Robinson
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Mar 2013
Posts: 15,079 Likes: 118
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Mar 2013
Posts: 15,079 Likes: 118 |
It's weird. The earth has warmed and cooled since forever - according to science. Even before the industrial revolution................even back when..........well, it doesn't matter.
Unfortunately, I will most likely not live until the next glacial age. It would be nice to see I'm right. Right. And hell won’t freeze over either.
A life is not important except in the impact it has on other lives.
– Jackie Robinson
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 68,346 Likes: 1370
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 68,346 Likes: 1370 |
Well they're your masters. He follows his masters and acts like it isn't the same thing.
Only his masters have pretty weak credentials.
Intoducing for The Cleveland Browns, Quarterback Deshawn "The Predator" Watson. He will also be the one to choose your next head coach.
#gmstrong
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 5,991
Hall of Famer
|
|
Hall of Famer
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 5,991 |
Well they're your masters. He follows his masters and acts like it isn't the same thing.
Only his masters have pretty weak credentials. You are always wrong about me. When the global warming crap started, I did my research then, and made my mind up. That was pre-internet. I've known it was garbage for over 30 years.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 68,346 Likes: 1370
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 68,346 Likes: 1370 |
And I have known it's factual for just as long by using the same methods you came to in making your determination. It's odd how you think you're the only one smart enough to do your own research. I just used sources that were more qualified to reach those determinations and with the credentials to take them seriously.
Intoducing for The Cleveland Browns, Quarterback Deshawn "The Predator" Watson. He will also be the one to choose your next head coach.
#gmstrong
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Mar 2013
Posts: 51,494 Likes: 728
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Mar 2013
Posts: 51,494 Likes: 728 |
Bro do you hear yourself?
You’re set in your opinion for the last 30 years and refuse to adapt regardless of new information.
That’s freaking sad. I can’t even laugh at that because I can’t imagine somebody with that sort of mentality raising kids.
Holy crap.
“To announce that there must be no criticism of the President, or that we are to stand by the President, right or wrong, is not only unpatriotic and servile, but is morally treasonable to the American public.”
- Theodore Roosevelt
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 5,991
Hall of Famer
|
|
Hall of Famer
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 5,991 |
Bro do you hear yourself?
You’re set in your opinion for the last 30 years and refuse to adapt regardless of new information.
That’s freaking sad. I can’t even laugh at that because I can’t imagine somebody with that sort of mentality raising kids.
Holy crap. New information? You mean that which you ignore? We're still above water where I live. There's still glaciers growing. There's still ice in the Arctic and antarctic. We still see snow every year. Every damn prediction of the global alarmist has failed, yet still you blindly believe. Btw, I taught my kids better when their "science teachers" were trying to fill their heads with this garbage, and I made them research it as well. They're smart enough to find truth for themselves now.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 3,469 Likes: 70
Hall of Famer
|
|
Hall of Famer
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 3,469 Likes: 70 |
Nice visualization that just appeared in my newsfeed
~Lyuokdea
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Mar 2013
Posts: 51,494 Likes: 728
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Mar 2013
Posts: 51,494 Likes: 728 |
But that’s fake according to Erik.
“To announce that there must be no criticism of the President, or that we are to stand by the President, right or wrong, is not only unpatriotic and servile, but is morally treasonable to the American public.”
- Theodore Roosevelt
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 3,469 Likes: 70
Hall of Famer
|
|
Hall of Famer
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 3,469 Likes: 70 |
That's why i didn't respond to him...
~Lyuokdea
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Mar 2013
Posts: 12,641 Likes: 592
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Mar 2013
Posts: 12,641 Likes: 592 |
Nice visualization that just appeared in my newsfeed
Rate of change. Nutshell. But hey - it's still snowing so apparently all's well!
The more things change the more they stay the same.
|
|
|
DawgTalkers.net
Forums DawgTalk Palus Politicus The world is still burning
|
|
