Running chainsaws (and other twostrokes) on E85

[Bill G]

FFS!!! this thread got HiJacked!!......Saws running on E85 to Electricity generation and power grid transmission?????

anyhow....my contribution to the current Convo.

A power grid map detailing the the individual power grids and how much energy is flowed between them.

Pretty much supports what I have said. Power generated close to the end user. It DOES NOT travel 4000 miles on a mythical highway. It is generated any a huge amount of locations and can be fed in a 360 degree area based on demand. It cannot all be generated in a barren desert and travel 3000 miles away. It surely is not generated on a house roof in PA and sent to IL. Is it sent to a local grid OF COURSE but not long distance

 

[MattGPT]

Pretty much supports what I have said. Power generated close to the end user. It DOES NOT travel 4000 miles on a mythical highway. It is generated any a huge amount of locations and can be fed in a 360 degree area based on demand. It cannot all be generated in a barren desert and travel 3000 miles away. It surely is not generated on a house roof in PA and sent to IL. Is it sent to a local grid OF COURSE but not long distance

There might be a bit more complexity, but this is purely theoretical, not sure in practice.

If you have three power stations East, Central, and West, all independent grids, so East only supplies to East consumers etc.

Then you run HV transmission lines to connect the three grids. Now, if roof top solar in East grid frees up capacity, it is sent to Central, where it gets used to free up capacity in Central and gets sent to West. So, power created on the roof in East never really gets to West, but overall, power is able to move from East to West because the roof top solar freed up the capacity?

Likely not 3000mi away, but 1000mi is do-able? Depends how many generators are daisy-chained together?

 

[Bill G]

Ha ha, yeah, well, on the nuclear thing we haven’t been the “Best and Brightest”. We do have plenty of things that creep and eat although tends to be over-dramatised a little. A few venomous critters here and there.

Nuclear has issues...and it can be dangerous, but burning coal is dangerous too. Modern nuclear power plants are a long way removed from Three Mile Is. and Chernobyl. That Bhopal one was some chemical plant I think, or was there a nuclear issue? Oh, is that what you meant...’other things’. Yeah, what was that HUGE explosion in the shipping storage not so long ago. Yikes. EDIT: Beirut.

Batteries, solar, wind, natural gas, these all have a place, and the technology is still coming along. Most houses and factories should probably have some solar on the roof, it’s just good economics.

I have a battery at home...and it isn’t really good economy. I mis-judged that.

Hydro is excellent...if you have a decent dam nearby.

But nuclear, in the bigger picture, is safer, and cleaner, than almost anything else. Right now, I see it as the best alternative. Coal, oil, and gas WILL run out. And before then, will get VERY expensive. Nuclear is good for a few hundred years or more. And gives us time to develop better tech.

I’d love to see the end to burning coal...or at least a massive reduction where it’s possible. Make what we have left last longer.

I will try to go through this part by part,

You say .... We do have plenty of things that creep and eat although tends to be over-dramatised a little. A few venomous critters here and there.... Well I can assure you the the folks down there and in other areas have a lot more to worry about than we do up here. We have a 4 manin venomous snakes that rarely kill anyone, We have some large carnivores that kill some. I know some will argue with me but I am betting more folks die in the USA each year from deer accidents than any other wildlife. As I understand it that is similar to your kangaroo issues


You ask ...That Bhopal one was some chemical plant I think, or was there a nuclear issue? .... I believe it was a chemical issue with a release of cyanide gas. I was not trying to indicate it was nuclear thing just that it was a huge industrial accident. If I misspoke then I am sorry

 

[Bill G]

Likely not 3000mi away, but 1000mi is do-able? Depends how many generators are daisy-chained together?

Are you confusing generators with transformers?

 

[MattGPT]

Are you confusing generators with transformers?

Might be, and re-reading what you wrote, I might be off track. I agree, you cannot have one central generator and supply power over thousands of miles (or kilometres). No matter what you use to make the power, it’s the transport that’s hard.

There ARE advantages to linking different grids together, but even then, as per my example, you aren’t sending power thousands of kilometres. But that wasn’t the point you were making, me thinks.

 

[Bill G]

The simple fact is that electricity is a science that is easy to understand. The most basic thing is Ohms law. No matter how much we argue back and forth science and Ohms law will rule. Power cannot be generated in one location and transmitted huge distances without huge losses. That cannot be overcome. I am not sure how much more clear I can be or what example I can give to make it more clear. Maybe this will help. Take a voltmeter and check an outlet in your house. Now grab every single drop cord you have and plug them all together. Now check the voltage at the end. Is it different. Chances are not if all you have is a few cords . If you are like me with 2000 ft of cord I will assure you that the voltmeter will show line-loss. It is science. It is Ohms law , Increase resistance and power(watts/amperage) and speed (voltage) will decrease. I am sorry but there is no way to argue with that

 

[MattGPT]

Roll over Ohm, ya slowing us down. I only read about this today, interesting.

https://phys.org/news/2014-05-longest-superconducting-cable-worldwide.html
But agree, can’t argue with Physics.

 

[Bill G]

Roll over Ohm, ya slowing us down. I only read about this today, interesting.

https://phys.org/news/2014-05-longest-superconducting-cable-worldwide.html
But agree, can’t argue with Physics.

Ohms law is still in effect and nothing there has any effect on it. That entire article gives little detail but it is all about the material of the CONDUCTOR. It is about reducing the physical size of the conductor thus allowing a conductor of the same physical size to carry a higher voltage. To make this a bit more clear traditional wiring is either aluminum or copper with copper being the most widely used due to it's amperage carrying capacity versus physical size. Aluminum is used in overhead wiring because it is lighter in physical weight but to carry the same amperage that copper does requires a larger physical size. If a new "superconductor" material can be created it will allow the line to carry more amperage at a higher voltage im a smaller diameter wire. Ohms law is still in effect

 

[MattGPT]

Ohms law is still in effect and nothing there has any effect on it. That entire article gives little detail but it is all about the material of the CONDUCTOR. It is about reducing the physical size of the conductor thus allowing a conductor of the same physical size to carry a higher voltage. To make this a bit more clear traditional wiring is either aluminum or copper with copper being the most widely used due to it's amperage carrying capacity versus physical size. Aluminum is used in overhead wiring because it is lighter in physical weight but to carry the same amperage that copper does requires a larger physical size

Yes, but it’s a bit more than that. I haven’t got to the numbers yet, just an interesting starting point. Ohms law might not apply in superconductive materials, at least, not in the same way. They seem to have an effective resistance of zero.

To make the cooling worthwhile, the increase in capacity and decreases in losses would have to be significant or it wouldn’t make sense.

Like I said, only read it today, you know as much as I do now...but it is interesting I thought.

 

[Bill G]

They seem to have an effective resistance of zero.

I will not get in a huge debate but simply that is not possible. Actual zero resistance is not possible on earth

 

[MattGPT]

I will not get in a huge debate but simply that is not possible. Actual zero resistance is not possible on earth

Probably? I mean, actual zero resistance likely can’t be measured. But effective zero resistance seems to be verified experimentally.

Hey, once they start throwing quantum terms around, I know I’m out of my depth. But,

http://www.supraconductivite.fr/en/index.php?p=supra-resistance-supra

 

[Hermio]

Ok I will make it more clear as you did miss the point. What was your coal fired power plant price per KW ? What was your cost to buy and install the solar system 100% turn key no touch

the price is per kw-h, not per kw

 

[Bill G]

the price is per kw-h, not per kw

Yes KW hour. I thought most understood that but I guess not. When you ask what someone is paying per kilowatt is is generally understood that it is actually kilowatt-hour, It is like if you ask what someone paid for gasoline and the say $4.11. It is actually $4.119. Pretty common and easy to get , at least for most

 

[HansFranz]

Increase resistance and power(watts/amperage) and speed (voltage) will decrease.

Not to nitpick, but voltage is more analogous to pressure in a pipe, and amperage (or the ampacity of the wire) could be compared to the diameter of the pipe. The higher the "pressure" (voltage) in a line, the more liquid/electrons you can put through a given wire/pipe diameter in a given amount of time. And the larger the wire or pipe is in diameter, the more electrons/liquid you can put through it at a given pressure/voltage in a given length of time.

The speed of the electricity doesn't really change, I don't think -- it's something approaching the speed of light IIRC (electromagnetic waves are a form of light, kinda)...

 

[ValleyForge]

Not to nitpick, but voltage is more analogous to pressure in a pipe, and amperage (or the ampacity of the wire) could be compared to the diameter of the pipe. The higher the "pressure" (voltage) in a line, the more liquid/electrons you can put through a given wire/pipe diameter in a given amount of time. And the larger the wire or pipe is in diameter, the more electrons/liquid you can put through it at a given pressure/voltage in a given length of time.

The speed of the electricity doesn't really change, I don't think -- it's something approaching the speed of light IIRC (electromagnetic waves are a form of light, kinda)...

very true…only amperage is equivalent to flow in a pipe…

we used to model drinking water systems using the analogy by Stringing wires between nodes and supplying a voltage to the system then read the voltage (loss) at the nodes while flowing amperage at them.. Although water is a non-linear flow/loss equation, it was a rather good approximation for the time.

 

[Bill G]

Not to nitpick, but voltage is more analogous to pressure in a pipe, and amperage (or the ampacity of the wire) could be compared to the diameter of the pipe. The higher the "pressure" (voltage) in a line, the more liquid/electrons you can put through a given wire/pipe diameter in a given amount of time. And the larger the wire or pipe is in diameter, the more electrons/liquid you can put through it at a given pressure/voltage in a given length of time.

The speed of the electricity doesn't really change, I don't think -- it's something approaching the speed of light IIRC (electromagnetic waves are a form of light, kinda)...

None of what you said is incorrect.

 

[Bill G]

I agree and was starting to clarify what I said when my computer died. I did not explain it as well as you and speed was not the right term to use

 

[Smitty Smithsonite]

Here in MA, the kWh is a small part of the overall bill. Transmission fees, then the mandatory "green energy" fees, (Green subsidies I shouldn't be paying for) end up more than 50% of the bill. Right now it's about 14.5 cents / kWh ... but my electric bill is far north of $100 for just 450 kWh's this time of year.

Here's a snapshot of the fees from summer 2016:


Now here's a bill from April - they're forcing US to pay for this green b/s! Not right!!

 

[MattGPT]

Here in MA, the kWh is a small part of the overall bill. Transmission fees, then the mandatory "green energy" fees, (Green subsidies I shouldn't be paying for) end up more than 50% of the bill. Right now it's about 14.5 cents / kWh ... but my electric bill is far north of $100 for just 450 kWh's this time of year.

Here's a snapshot of the fees from last summer:

View attachment 997223

What am I missing? I see 3.5c (then 4.2c over 600kWh) + .2c + 2.1c + .9c gets me something like 7c or 8c per kWh.

Is my maths that bad? I don’t get to 14.5c per kWh.

 

[MattGPT]

We pay about (in Aussie dollars)
22c per kWh
75c per day to be connected
And they generously give us 5c per kWh for solar power we give them back, lol.
That’s why I thought...better to charge a battery. But damn, those batteries are expensive, and only store 13kWh, about $2 worth of electricity I save and use each day. That will take many years to pay for the battery, lol.