Measuring AC supply frequency

On Wednesday, 10 March 2021 at 01:01:26 UTC-8, snipped-for-privacy@gmail.com wrote: ...

...

Most EVs can travel about 3-4 miles using 1kWh of energy.

That is ~35,000 miles per year.

The average car does about 12-15,000 miles per year.

Snag is that they are mostly going to want to charge them overnight so you are more like 3kW for 8 hours. Some workplaces have a couple of chargers in their carparks but they are still thin on the ground.

That is higher than my pre-Covid annual mileage but not by much.

Mid winter there is near zero margin on UK mains power generation at a level where they pay big industrial consumers to drop off grid to keep homes supplied in cold snaps. They don't have capacity to charge many more EVs than are already present in the country.

They don't have any coherent plan. Delays to long promised new nuclear and ageing plant going offline doesn't help the situation either.

That was a very old paper from times before "high temperature" superconductors were invented.

Liquid hydrogen boils at 20 K, while liquid nitrogen at 77 K, thus a much better thermal insulation is required to keep external heat away from the fluid and/or more cooling power is required.

On Wednesday, 10 March 2021 at 09:42:04 UTC-8, Martin Brown wrote: ...

You are an outlier then, the UK average is only 7,500 miles per year according to this:

Maybe, but there is a lull in the middle of the night where much charging can occur (ignoring energy storage issues).

I agree there will be a lot of issues in updating infrastructure; particularly for older countries such as the UK.

kw

Bill Slowbrain bullshitted:

====================---

F*****ts like Demented Bill need to be locked up.

..... Phil

snipped-for-privacy@kjwdesigns.com wrote: ======================

EVs are bullshit.

.....Phil

On Wednesday, 10 March 2021 at 15:34:46 UTC-8, snipped-for-privacy@gmail.com wrote: ...

No - that's the average over all types of real-world driving including heating and A/C.

The average for my Tesla Model 3 is 239Wh/mile over ~12,000 miles.

Many other cars are similar, some slightly more.

Because EVs all have regeneration to recoup kinetic energy when braking there is less of a penalty for heavier cars. Even the much larger Tesla Model S only requires 300-320Wh/mile

Cruising at 60mph only requires 12-15kW.

We are discussing the energy requirements, that doesn't mean we are limited to 1kW charge rate, just that we must not average more than 1kW.

In your opinion. For many people, they are very practical and even preferred over conventional vehicles.

snipped-for-privacy@kjwdesigns.com wrote: ======================

EVs are only sold to wankers, like you.

...... Phil

On Wednesday, 10 March 2021 at 16:41:23 UTC-8, snipped-for-privacy@gmail.com wrote: ...

Since we are discussing the average of many millions of vehicles the average is what is needed, not the worst case.

And it is not a BS average, it is a real-world average from my vehicle. It is slightly more than I see many other people getting.

The wind is just as likely to be in the other direction.

So are the hills, for every hill that goes up there's another that goes down.

Again because of regeneration I don't see much difference in consumption when going over hilly roads. There is a 2000 foot mountain 10 miles away from me that I frequently travel over.

In you opinion

There's a lot of us around.

-----------------------------------------------

Fools, fakes and flakes like YOU are a dime dozen.

..... Phil

But it doesn't seem to have done your brain much good.

Politicians win election to get control. They collect taxes to pay for the services that are provided by the state. If the population wasn't scared of getting invaded by foreign armies, they wouldn't be paying for the army, which provides one of those services.

But producing rather fewer healthy offspring than you'd see in a cleaner environment.

Not strictly true.

And has been for as long as I can remember.

You do chose to be ignorant about the problem.

Milankovich worked out his cycles on the basis of correlation. It took another fifty years to work out how the tiny changes in the amount of solar radiation being absorbed by the earth could flip it between ice ages and interglacials.

What the ice core data told us was was the atmospheric CO2 level sat at about 180 ppm during ice ages and went up to 270 ppm during interglacials. That - on it's own - wouldn't have done the job. "the oceans are warmer during interglacials, so there's more water vapour in the atmosphere, and it is a more potent greenhouse gas than CO2.

When you thrown in the extra solar radiation absorbed by the land in in the northern parts of the northern hemisphere when they aren't covered by ice sheets you can get the books to balance.

Which is the chicken and which is the egg? We wouldn't get the oscillation between ice ages and interglacials if water and CO2 weren't greenhouse gases.

Solar power will work just fine, even in an ice age.

That probably needs nuclear fusion, rather than nuclear fission, There;s a lot more hydrogen around than there is uranium or thorium.

The universe is mostly hydrogen, and has been since the big bang. Uranium and thorium are produced in tiny quantities in supernova.

Nice, but it may take a while to work out how to make the solitons - and it may turn out to be impossible anyway. Even if we can make the kind solitons imagined, there's no guarantee we can survive being close enough to them to hitch a ride.

They aren't typical. The 95% is an average figure.

There's probably a stronger argument for looking up people like Phil who make idiotic assertions, and try to back them up by claiming that anybody who disagrees with them is not only wrong but insane. It's the fake news problem. Fake news sources tell Phil what he wants to hear,and he proceeds to assume that the more reliable sources that actually get it right are really selling him fake news. Cursitor Doom has the same problem.

Actually it is Phil's big dumb error, but he's no more likely to realise that he is wrong than Fred Bloggs is.

Phil hasn't worked out what regenerative braking means.

Phil is convinced that all his opinions are good, which is a trifle unrealistic.

People who are as persistently and as grossly wrong as Phil are rarer. We do have a few others. Curistor Doom, Flyguy and John Doe are just as bad. John Larkin comes close on a number of subjects - climate change denial and the idea that Donald Trump did a good job come to mind, but he can be as sensible about electronics as Phil has been about audio electronics.

Haha, Phil lives in some sort of M C Escher world!

Bill Sloman wrote: ==============

I am sensible about everything. I am known as " Mr Sensible" to the point of being annoying.

Damn fools and Google Monkeys are now all around us. Like a giant pack of Zombies.

Get the hint ?

..... Phil

Or think you are.

People are careful not to press your buttons, and you are too far up yourself to notice that you are being handled carefully.

Google is a useful tool, if you aren't looking exclusively for right wing nonsense. They don't seem to offer a right-wing lunacy filter but there's clearly a market for one, to give Phil and Cursitor Doom only the kind of misinformation they like.

Phil is brain-dead, but won't lie down.

A hint is supposed to be subtle. Subtlety takes work and Phil's brain doesn't work that well.

Plus a nearly-complete loss of disaster recovery capability--once all those batteries go flat, there's nothing left to restart the power plants.

Some years ago, when Gaza was cut off from the local grid, in order to restart their only power station, the (very resourceful) engineers went round and collected a metric buttload of lead-acid car batteries, wired them in series-parallel, and used them to restart the plant.

Not the sort of thing you want to do very often, especially in colder parts of the world.

Cheers

Phil Hobbs

Wind turbines and solar cells don't need restarting.

If there had been enough roof-top solar cells that linked into the grid, they wouldn't have had to bother.

The military is famous for designing it's armies and weapons to fight the most recent war, rather than the war war most likely to break out in the future.

Phil Hobbs seems to have fallen into the same kind of error, which comes as a bit of a surprise.

Ideally you should have a hydroelectric plant with water available all year round. It can then be used to bootstrap a failed network,