|
C-P-User-3 wrote: Can these systems truly power the common residence today ?
Depends on what you mean.
Often solar installs exist in two ways.
1. To provide some power to house when light is available
2. To provide all power to the house and sells the excess back to the utility when light is available.
In both cases the utility still provides power to the house either during the day or definitely at night.
For your long list the house would be drawing power from the utility. But the usage would be, on average, outside of daylight business hours because business uses along with just more people doing things at day use the most power during the day. But even so most of the time you would not be using all of those.
The third install type is more complex, costs more to install and maintain and often only exists in locations without utilities. Those installs require both solar and batteries. Solar charges the batteries during the day and batteries provide the power for the rest of the time.
Any system would of course be sized to the house and with the last option one choose as a lifestyle to make certain trades offs to lower costs. Such as limiting when laundry is done (turning off other appliances completely when running the washing machine.)
Obviously for any of the above additional back up power supplies could be in use such as gasoline/diesel powered generators.
C-P-User-3 wrote: Now then, if we can get 85 Lumens per watt from these new fangled bulbs, and if we can get a solar system that delivers lower voltage (e.g. 12 volts; whatever)
Lights are not the biggest power users in a normal house. However they are not normally trivial either. But on average I suspect load estimates for an install would not change substantially if all bulbs were the most effective possible.
|
|
|
|
|
Ok fair warning, I got my rose-colored glasses on right now. It's that positive music link below I tell you. It's getting to me...
Can't...
Resist...
The Smiley...
See!?
It seems to me life is amazing stuff. Yeah we got ups and downs, but all-in-all it's a wonderful experience. Especially since the alternative is death. I think when it starts to really suck is when we neglect certain basic human needs. Like when we sit way too much behind a computer or playing video games instead of chatting with someone you like. Or perhaps spend too much in the soapbox. Ok, that's not amazing. But still, life...
What's the point of this post? None! Except to say it's good time to smile when being the holidays and all.
Jeremy Falcon
modified 5-Dec-17 1:56am.
|
|
|
|
|
Pass whatever you're having. I could use it.
|
|
|
|
|
Sure thing man... (takes a puff) Here ya go...
Jeremy Falcon
|
|
|
|
|
What ever you are smoking, pass it over to me.
|
|
|
|
|
I look forward to moving back to a country that does not throw you in jail for smoking that stuff.
Never underestimate the power of human stupidity
RAH
|
|
|
|
|
There's no law against smoking your socks!
(Sorry Jeremy - I'll get my coat.)
Get me coffee and no one gets hurt!
modified 5-Dec-17 6:46am.
|
|
|
|
|
Jeremy Falcon
|
|
|
|
|
There will always some sort of substance that's controlled. If it's not weed, it's something else. We as humans need stuff to argue about... saves us from being bored and actually having to study apparently. People need an escape... whether it's entertainment, weed, booze, pr0n, cocaine, TV, or whatever. Some people need this escape so bad that all rational conversation is left out of it in my experience.
That being said, regardless of the taboo du jour, I do think a natural high is the best one. Substances are a pale comparison to doing life correctly and living on a natural high. And by natural I mean a hormonally induced, internal high.
Jeremy Falcon
|
|
|
|
|
Jeremy Falcon wrote: Especially since the alternative is death. Have you tried it ? What if it turned out to be the ultimate smile ?
«While I complain of being able to see only a shadow of the past, I may be insensitive to reality as it is now, since I'm not at a stage of development where I'm capable of seeing it.» Claude Levi-Strauss (Tristes Tropiques, 1955)
|
|
|
|
|
You might be on to something. I've never heard of anyone actually coming back and complaining about it.
|
|
|
|
|
Ha. And while this may be true, I'm in no hurry to find out. Besides, we have all our deaths to be dead. May as well enjoy the ride to get there.
Jeremy Falcon
|
|
|
|
|
Something in the Lounge worth reading. Well done.
There are two kinds of people in the world: those who can extrapolate from incomplete data.
There are only 10 types of people in the world, those who understand binary and those who don't.
|
|
|
|
|
Thanks man. And of course... Happy Festivus!
Jeremy Falcon
|
|
|
|
|
I always knew that the CRLF came from Carriage Return and Line Feed from the days of the electronic typewriters ... but never really thought about it logically until today...
In the days of electronic typewriters a Line Feed would be followed by a Carriage Return to move the line down and the return the carriage to the start of the line I have [B]never[/B] seen a typewriter do it the other way around... so why is this reversed in computing?? ... even the enter character symbol ↵ implies that the Line Feed should be done first!...
I even looked up YouTube videos to double check ... and sure enough the LineFeed is done first
Any thoughts ?? ... Do people agree that logically it should be done the other way around (although I would be against that since I have been conditioned to do it the other way)??
Kris
|
|
|
|
|
And?
(Later...)
As we're talking about computing history, also consider FORTRAN -- what did it use? As I recall the first character (or was it two?) on a line indicated what to do after the Carriage Return.
The discussions always allude to which system you're on, but then only mention Windows, Apple, and UNIX -- which leaves out OpenVMS, which is like totally flexible!
You want CR? You got it.
You want LF? You got it.
You want Fortran? You got it.
You want Fixed format? What size?
Also, in one of the posts someone pointed to, I saw this:
Someone wrote: it was often the "style" to have normal print lines begin with Line Feed and end with Carriage Return
That's how I prefer to read "lines" from text files -- so I know I got the whole thing.
modified 4-Dec-17 21:19pm.
|
|
|
|
|
PIEBALDconsult wrote: As I recall the first character (or was it two?) on a line indicated what to do after the Carriage Return.
As I recall...
Punch cards probably varied but the first 6 chars were for the line number. Then the continuation character in the 7th position. And it was on the line that was continuing, not on the first line.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Having cut my teeth on teleprinters (Yes, I have stripped an ASR-33[^] and reassembled it from a bucket of sheet metal stampings ) I can tell you that CRLF is right, LFCR is wrong.
The reason for this is that the carriage return is SLOW. But it can be overlapped with the paper feed.
Back in the day, most software would output "CR LF PAD PAD" to be safe.
It took a bit of tuning of the dashpot to get an ASR-33 carriage to have finished bouncing with just CR LF <first character="" on="" the="" new="" line="">, but it could be done.
The Siemens equivalent (which made a sexy purring noise, unlike the skeletons-copulating-on-a-tin-roof of the model 33) needed the pads, otherwise the first character of the next line would print "somewhere", generally blurred as the carriage was moving.
Cheers,
Peter
Software rusts. Simon Stephenson, ca 1994. So does this signature. me, 2012
|
|
|
|
|
Peter_in_2780 wrote: unlike the skeletons-copulating-on-a-tin-roof I play clash of clans (skeletons are one of the participants) and I am not going to be able to get that image out of my head. Hordes of skeletons racing at each other and start shagging AAaaaaaahhhhhhh
Never underestimate the power of human stupidity
RAH
|
|
|
|
|
|
I never knew that boning had such a literal meaning.
|
|
|
|
|
Groan...
Never underestimate the power of human stupidity
RAH
|
|
|
|
|
A whole new meaning to the term "boning"
|
|
|
|
|
Thanks for this excellent explanation!
"Go forth into the source" - Neal Morse
|
|
|
|