Dirty Electricity

capacity, and the need to build power factor correction

PF correction at residential consumers will not reduce the transmission capacity requirement to any significant degree, even if every home had one of these rip-offs plugged in. The peak load requirement comes from things like ovens and water heaters which are unity PF. Other large domestic inductive loads usually already have PF correction - e.g airconditioners.

You cannot use a single fixed-value passive device (e.g. capacitor) to correct PF unless it is matched to the actual reactive load. For example, a washing machine motor will draw a wide range of reactive current depending on whether it is agitating, spin-drying etc. You need different PF correction for each load, not a one-size-fits-all rip-off box at the power point. This article explains it well...

particularly if consumers can be duped into paying for

electricity bills.

They are probably just having a good laugh, and getting paid for it.

the U.S"

Sounds like a load of bullshit invented by the scammers.

"saving electricity" mean? The current is reduced, for

bill each month". (What does "up to X or more"

output from the Earthwise device, with the result

leading to the device.

If you have nothing but pure reactive loads you will not be doing anything useful, so what is the point of connecting them to the supply anyway ?

capacity, and the need to build power factor correction

airconditioners.

My airconditioner is a good way off unity power factor, and it's not as if people turn of their low PF appliances at times of peak demand.

machine

agitating,

one-size-fits-all

Where is it stated that the device in question is passive?

the U.S"

The more so when one notes that the same phrase appears in web sites for multiple "power saving" devices, except that there seems disagreement about whether the number is $80 or $16.

But more than likely, if such a comment was made at all, it was made in a context that is not relevant to the claims made for the device.

"saving electricity" mean? The current is reduced, for

electric bill each month". (What does "up to X or more"

output from the Earthwise device, with the result

leading to the device.

Dunno - to justify a 35% saving claim, perhaps. I did suggest it was an unrealistic scenario.

Sylvia.

capacity, and the need to build power factor

airconditioners.

Have you actually measured the PF of your A/C ? How did you do it ? What was it ?

READ THE LINK

demand.

You are missing the point - the large current consuming devices determine the peak transmission current capacity. Low PF low current appliances do not add significantly to the peak currents required by the main loads like hotplates, ovens, radiators etc.

machine

agitating,

one-size-fits-all

Sigh..Quoted from 'How It Works' at the Earthwank Power Scammer website # This is achieved by supplying electricity locally at the load by the use of specially designed capacitor. # This advanced capacitor stores the additional electricity needed for stabilizing electric current within an inductive load. # Earthwise Power Saver does not consume electricity itself ...

Now, Einstein, put these claims together and you get a capacitor, a passive device even if it as advanced one (chuckle), all active devices consume electricity so the Earthwank Power Scammer cannot be an active device by their own admission.

It looks a more expensively packaged version of the boxes described in Silicon Chip Nov. 2007 and May 2008.

Interesting article and I believe also factually correct, except that it talks about actual savings in domestic wiring, which are, even at 110V, ridiculously low. This could give a slither of dignity and credibility to the claims of the tricksters, to a numerically challenged reader.

Hi all, there is already power factor correction "infrastructure" or capital works in every terminal station. These are capacitor banks used to correct for the mainly inductive loads of industry. The caps are switched in as needed.

From what I saw on the today tonight show I also assume it was a PFC device, it's the only consclusion I could come to and on that basis saw the following outcomes for people using the device.

1) If the user has an old mechanical meter their power bill will most likely actually increase as these meters do not measure reactive (imaginary) power only real power, so putting a PFC after the meter will increase the power consumption observed by the meter. So all those people with older CF globes that consume a lot of reactive power and don't have much of a PFC in them will see their power bills go back up.

2) If the user has a new "smart" meter, they will observe no change in their power bill as these meters charge for the reactive power.

Most if not all devices these days are equired to have PFC built in now anyway to get the PF to at least 80% (think that's the number, it may be higher) or more. I'm sure there is legislation or australian standards such as AS/NZ 3823.2.2009 (that one covers air con ) that cover most appliance types these days. So even less requirment for a consumer PFC.

The claims on EMI...hmmmm... not sure I got that at all, made no sense

Of course it may just be a box of nothing but a few pass through copper buss bars

Greg

capacity, and the need to build power factor

airconditioners.

it ?

demand.

peak transmission

the peak currents required by

I question that they do not add significantly. They are not a large proportion, but they still have to be handled. Do power factor correction in the home, and you can delay the next transmission line, switching station and transformer upgrade. Delaying an upgrade is worth money.

correct

machine

agitating,

one-size-fits-all

specially designed capacitor.

stabilizing electric current within an inductive load.

They can still be switched in and out.

device even if it as advanced one (chuckle),

be an active device by their own admission.

I could happily put down the no-power consumption claim to simply being a lie, or they'll argue that they meant no-net power consumption (i.e. it saves more than it uses, despite not actually saving any). They don't seem overly bothered by such things. The box looks like it's designed to enhance heat dissipation.

Sylvia.

It won't even save those if it's mounted at the switch board. To provide saving in the domestic wiring any PFC correction has to be done at the appliance, which implies multiple devices.

I note that the suppliers of these devices have not done the obvious and potentially convincing, test - power meter -> device -> another power meter -> domestic wiring. Presumably they know that the result wouldn't be advantageous to them.

Sylvia.

about actual savings in domestic wiring, which are,

For the numerically-challenged, TonyS is saying that while the losses at 110V are ridiculously low, the losses at 220/240V are even lower ! (coz the current is halved)

tricksters, to a numerically challenged reader.

If someone reads that info and still goes and buys a scam-box, then they deserve to be ripped off.

p r ,

If you take 80 billion dollars, and to make it easy assume 3 people per billed premises, with a population of 300 million (USA) then that means $800 per billed premises (per year? - it does not specify)

The only places that I can think of that they could be talking about would be distribution losses such as resistance in power lines, arcing from HT lines into the air and across dirty insulators, transformer losses etc. Unused off peak power etc.

This all has to be passed on to the consumer in the form of higher cost per KWH as it is an actual cost, even though it is "unusable power"

You could also talk about standby power - but this is still being used for a purpose and can be stopped by turning off the device when not in use (if possible).

It is bollocks. Where I live, domestic users are billed for real watts used. The power factor doesn't cost you more. However, industrial users do get penalties for low power factors.

--
Posted at www.usenet.com.au

"kreed"

If you take 80 billion dollars, and to make it easy assume 3 people per billed premises,

** That is way high.

The correct figure is more like 1.5 persons.

The only places that I can think of that they could be talking about would be distribution losses such as resistance in power lines, arcing from HT lines into the air and across dirty insulators, transformer losses etc. Unused off peak power etc.

** Ditto.

The figure is an absurd fiction derived very likely by subtracting the total kWh estimated to be generated by all the alternators connected to the grid in the USA and subtracting from that the billed kWh for the whole country - and THEN applying the domestic kWh rate to the difference.

Only a brain dead, Green retard would even bother.

Fraid there are far too many of them.

.... Phil

it's the only consclusion I could come to and on

actually increase as these meters do not measure

consumer in Aussie in concerned.

identical thing with the same claims has recently been

by the meter.

line.

..

Actually they do. I thought they had fixed the low PF problem with modern CFL designs, but this doesn't seem to be the case. Here is a link with some actual CFL PF measurements.

And here the subject is mentioned in Mailbag, Silicon Chip Issue 226 Extract: "One point you do not mention ? as far as I can work out, CFLs typically have a power factor of about 0.5 compared with a PF of 1.0 for incandescents." SC replied: "We did not mention power factor because we erroneously thought that this was no longer a problem in more recent CFLs. This is quite wrong and it can be a serious problem if large numbers of CFLs are used on one phase of the 240VAC mains supply."

"fritz" "Phil Allison"

** Fraid you are wrong.

** Got nothing to do with the fact there is no REACTIVE component in the load presented by modern CFLs.

The item you quoted actually CONTRADICTS you.

The poor PF of typical CFLs is not due to any phase angle existing between the AC supply voltage and current and as a result cannot be helped by adding a capacitor across the AC supply.

..... Phil

ummmmmmmm theres a afwul lot of THEORY,, floating around here on that device , has any one actually tried it ?? any body knows that what happens in THEORY DOESNT ALWAYS HAPPEN AS ITS SUPPOSED TO..

power ..

presented by modern CFLs.

I don't think so. Read it again and please quote the parts from the link that contradict me.

Are you trying to claim that 'harmonic reactive power' is not 'reactive power' ?

Apparent power is the vector sum of real power and reactive power. If the PF is not unity, there must be a reactive power component, by definition.

AC supply voltage and current and as a result

If the PF is not unity a phase angle MUST exist between V and I, by definition of PF.

power ..

Check this link....

It's true that sometimes factors that one had overlooked, or considered negligible, turn out to impact on the outcome. In that sense the particular theoretical model applied didn't predict the outcome as it was expected.

Very occasionally, the laws of physics as presently understood turn out to be not quite right, and have to be tweaked. It's been a while since that happened, and it would be truly amazing if the tweaking had any measurable effect in a domestic environment.

It's also true that the proof of the pudding is in the eating, but we know that there are any number of people out there who are willing to relieve naive consumers off their hard earned money in exchange for misrepresented junk. Absent a theoretical model (which the purveyors of this device haven't provided) which predicts a power saving, there's really little point in putting it to the test, because we know what the outcome will be.

Sylvia.

transmission capacity, and the need to build power factor

airconditioners.

was it ?

attached to it imply a non-unity PF.

Really ? So you haven't actually measured it all, have you ? What is the brand and model ? What are the figures on the label, perhaps you have misinterpreted them ?

This might interest you.

"The manufacturers of power factor devices frequently claim that air conditioners have low power factors. During development we measured the power factor of some units. At least the ones we have tested were already compensated internally very well. So no improvement potential here. Even our cheap Hitachi window unit has a power factor of 1.0 with maximum deviations to 0.99 inductive and 0.99 capactitive."

"fritz"

** Oh dear - here we go again for what must be the hundredth time - explaining what PF is to someone who damn well ought to know already.

** It does all over the place - but you are too blind to see it. ** Fraid there is no such animal as "harmonic reactive power".

** The definition of PF given in that article is:

"The ratio between real power and apparent power in a circuit is called the power factor."

The definition of "apparent power" is:

" Apparent power is conventionally expressed in volt-amperes (VA) since it is the product of rms voltage and rms current."

So, the definition of PF is:

Real power / VA ( where V and A are both in rms values. )

Notice - there is no sign of " cos phi " in sight !!!!

Means there is no need for a phase angle to exist for the PF to be low.

All it takes is that the current wave have a higher ratio of RMS to average ( rectified ) value than a sine wave does.

For a sine wave, the RMS to average ratio is 1.11 - this is the correction factor built into most AC volt meters so they show the RMS value for sine waves accurately ( but nothing else ).

For the sort of spiky wave a CFL draws, the ratio is about 2.0.

Hence the PF is around 0.55.

..... Phil