Re: OT: Why is Germany so (apparently) stupid to give up nuclear power?

That may be so, but it's still the reason Germany suddenly changed course. Public opinion is finicky, you know?

Jeroen Belleman

Where did the overwhelming number of ships, aircraft, trucks, bombs, fuel, food, etc come from? We even supplied those Russkie commie bastards, and of course they welched and never paid us back. Who paid to rebuild Western Europe? Yes, it was an allied effort, but we could have won without Australia or Belgium. If Belgium and all the European countries had proper defense, there never would have been a war, or it would have been over in short order without a total conflagration. Today, Europe is doing the same thing, Europe with a couple exceptions, refuses to spend even 2% on defense, refuses to meet their NATO committments.

Whoey Louie wrote in news: snipped-for-privacy@googlegroups.com:

I never said it was a balanced effort. We did do the most and continue to, and we never got paid back (enough).

That is why I am so against China's rise. The commie bastards are not putting anything back, all the while the US and their allies share every medical advance, and every infrastructure advance and hardware too. And we provide monitary and other major assistance to many nations around the world.

Whereas China and Russia want to steal IP and stomp around with their missile parades as if we are all enemies. If we treated them as they treat us and the rest of the world, we would have been at war decades ago.

The trigger for all this was a long time ago. Back when Putin gained office. He was the one that turned the entire Russian governement BACK into "the old ways", and that is when they again stepped back from democracy, all the while reaping the fruits of playing the rest of the world into thinking they were on the right path. Putin screwed it all up. Biggest criminal ever in recent times. The buy/sell moves he made would have him in prison in any of the free nations of the world.

wrote in news: snipped-for-privacy@googlegroups.com:

You are a goddamned idiot.

The hundreds of dollars per month saved would be as big as switching to HWOD was to start with. Nice idea, but HWOD is flawed as well, because folks stand there with it on for half a minute before it even produces hot water, if ever. The HWOD device needs to be closer to the point of use, and the lines need to be insulated.

But still, a properly installed DC night charge HWOD system would absolutely pay for itself and save that company money.

Again, child... you are a goddamned idiot.

You are too stupid to have any grip on any of the logistic particulars of such a change. HOAD, dumbshit.

You are a retarded, crybaby punk wanting to place barriers to progress and the folks whom would suggest or implement it. You take stupid to an all new low. You sit right at the bottom of that totem pole.

Stalls do not utilize hot water, you retarded piece of shit.

Your sig fits you perfectly.

Ships apart, most of them came from Russian factories behind the Urals.

They liked the trucks they got, but American tanks struck them as rubbish.

The stuff that did get shipped to Russia was welcome, but it wasn't exactly war-winning.

The Marshall Plan was good idea, but it was more aimed at minimising Russian influence than rebuilding Europe.

The allies might have been able to win without Australia or Belgium, but they'd have been in deep trouble without Russia.

At the time, "proper defenses" looked like the Maginot Line

and we all know how well that worked, largely because it was too expensive to the job properly. Belgium and the Netherlands didn't have that kind of money.

The US spends a ridiculous amount of money with defense contractors, who spend equally ridiculous amount of money buttering up the politicians who authorise the extravagance.

Mary Kaldor nailed it back in 1981 with her book, "The Baroque Arsenal"

Complaining that Europe isn't making the same mistake works for people like Trump, who don't have to pay attention to the real world.

Historically, the top dog spent as much on defense as it's two closest rivals.

America spends as much as the next ten countries down the pecking order added together.

This isn't about defense but rather represents corporate welfare.

--
Bill Sloman, Sydney

Show evidence that a typical restroom would save hundreds of dollars a month on electric used to heat hot water from your alleged difference in energy cost at night and that any difference wouldn'be be negated by the cost of battery storage. Most restrooms probably don't have a total hot water bill of hundreds of dollars a month. For that matter, most restrooms are likely using nat gas to heat the water because that's far cheaper to begin with. And with the rise of solar, daytime capacity is increasing, which should diminish any difference in cost between day and night generation costs. Also, at night we'd be burning fossil fuels, which is dooming the planet you know. Factor all that in, the cost of batteries, of rewiring, screwing around, having to find a place to put storage batteries and it's a non-starter.

If it's such a great idea, why don't you start a company to do it, show the great cost savings and make a lot of money?

That's another stupid commie lib lie.

Typical. The commies get stuff for free and yet you complain.

I'd say we all sort of existentially fear a future where the "political situation" is 10 billion people living in poverty and destitution on a planet of slums while 0.00001% of humanity lives as Gods in cloud cities bloated from a continual diet of human flesh harvested by drone from the poor wretches below.

There's differences of opinion on whether it's the socialists, feminists, and greens or Wal-Mart, Monsanto and the military-industrial complex/"deep state" that's going to push things in that direction.

John Doe wrote in news:qmkeva$r7k$4@dont- email.me:

Yes... some new (morphed species as well). But pretty much back to normal (for nature). I do not know if there is any residual elements around that were iradiated. (besides those new species parents).

Martin Brown wrote in news:qmkv9u$1qap$ snipped-for-privacy@gioia.aioe.org:

Exactly. And standing there with it running waiting for it to heat up the pipe, etc. makes it worse. All tyhe more reason to offset the consumption.

There are no tanks on those I saw. They were strictly in-line time of use devices.

Small, sink-side tanks as those you mention would make the hand washing experience proper though )and more sanitary). No sense providing it when the user never sees it, yet the watts still get burned and they do 'provide'. Many just seem unaware that they are mostly ineffectual, just like TraitorTard4... ineffectual.

Martin Brown wrote in news:qmkv9u$1qap$ snipped-for-privacy@gioia.aioe.org:

Anywhere long daylight sunlit hours are available, a hot water pre- heat depository would also be wise. That is another thing they should do but don't.

My uncle heated his pool water and pre-heated his household hot water way back in the '70s in Florida. He was a very early adopter.

He also worked at the IBM facility there and developed the first ATM machine. It was huge 5 ft wide by 4 ft deep by 7 ft tall. I was in my early teens and had some of the fake money and one of the test debit cards. I wish I had kept it. IBM collectables and such.

Martin Brown wrote in news:qmkv9u $1qap$ snipped-for-privacy@gioia.aioe.org:

No. You, however, seem to think that all HWOD systems are like those you are familiar with.

Here... we have huge gas or electric tanks OR small HWOD systems in place.

I do not see any gas fired HWOD systems here, but that does not mean I am unaware of them or that they do not exist.

I was talking about locations where electrical means are what they use. I was talking about saving THEM money.

You talking about gas is what is wide off the mark, bub.

I know they could save electrical costs by using gas. That was not the discusssion.

Storing electricity in batteries to be used several hours later to heat water doesn't make any sense. Much cheaper is to use an insulated water tank, heat the water during cheap electricity and use the warm water when needed.

Even better, use vacuum solar collectors to heat up the water during a sunny day, even if the outdoor temperature is below zero degrees. In Middle East they have even a simpler system, they just put white plastic tanks on the roofs and the water temperature is suitable for taking a shower in the evening.

Battery storage makes sense for electric use in electronics and lighting, not for heating water due to the low total efficiency.

What makes more sense depends on the details. Time shifting electrical loa ds is a useful thing in general. If this is done via batteries on a per ho me basis, it will get used for whatever is needed. HWOD is useful because it reduces the thermal losses of storing heat in a water tank. If it uses electricity from the battery, the total losses need to be compared to be ab le to say which is better.

How well does the middle east approach work for morning showers?

--

  Rick C. 

  --++ Get 2,000 miles of free Supercharging 
  --++ Tesla referral code - https://ts.la/richard11209

snipped-for-privacy@downunder.com wrote in news: snipped-for-privacy@4ax.com:

In places where they are using a tank, yes. My idea was for those places that opted to install point of use HWOD units. I made that pretty clear.

But yes. I agree. Where there is a tank, my idea would also save money. But most tank installed locations use gas to fire it.

The specific heat for water is 4 kJ/kg/C, so if water is heated from

20 C to 40 C, 80 kJ/kg is needed. With only 1.2 kW heating power, you can heat 0.015 kg/s of water or 1.5 cl/s, suitable for making a warm drink. If you wait one minute after turning on the heat, you get nearly 1 kg or 1 liter of water, sufficient for washing your hands, but hardly sufficient for a shower :-).

The coldest time during the day was during sun rise (25 C) so the conductive losses weren't that bad during the night. After sun rise, the solar radiation started to heat the tank. For an office worker with work starting at 8 or 9, the water was sufficiently warm. Of course, if you had go to work at 6 or 7 the situation might have been different, then you better take the shower in the evening.

Even at higher latitudes, those tubular vacuum solar collectors can generate quite high temperatures (well above 100 C). These concentrate sun light on a central tubing. Even in spring with outdoor temperatures below 0 C, quite high temperatures can still be generated during a sunny day. Thanks to the vacuum, there is very little conductivity heat losses.

That sounds like a made up statistic. Most residences don't even have gas.

--

  Rick C. 

  -+-+ Get 2,000 miles of free Supercharging 
  -+-+ Tesla referral code - https://ts.la/richard11209

On Friday, September 27, 2019 at 1:12:04 PM UTC-4, snipped-for-privacy@downunder.com w rote:

loads is a useful thing in general. If this is done via batteries on a per home basis, it will get used for whatever is needed. HWOD is useful becau se it reduces the thermal losses of storing heat in a water tank.

Why are you limited to 1.2 kW? A typical shower uses 7.9 lpm or 0.13 l/s. That would require around 20 kW, slightly more than the typical hot water storage tank power.

mpared to be able to say which is better.

So the shower is the last thing done before leaving? Eat, dress, shower?

--

  Rick C. 

  -++- Get 2,000 miles of free Supercharging 
  -++- Tesla referral code - https://ts.la/richard11209

Rick C wrote in news: snipped-for-privacy@googlegroups.com:

It is exactly the same as your crack, finishing with lol.

I know you are too much of a mental midget to get it, however.

Caused you to miss the entire truth of the post.

You are a true mental midget.