Save Energy

[WillowTheWhisp]

There are probably loads of lights left on all over the country by kids who switch them on when they go into a room but never switch them off again when they come out. That's a waste, at least floodlighting Buckinghm Place has some purpose.

[jambutty]

Tourist spend money and create jobs

So it’s OK for Joe Public to cut down on his energy use just so that businesses in London can make extra profit steeljack. The god of money has spoken.

No reason for most folks to be out after midnight unless you are up to no good

Agreed but what about those who do have a legitimate reason for being out after midnight. Are they to trudge around in the dark and be vulnerable to the ne’er do wells. Burglars and other criminals would just love dark streets.

Do you have any proof that 25% of generated power is lost?
What do you mean by 'transit' and where is 25% of the electricty going?

Ask Jeeves to do a search for “Transformer losses” Neil and it will explain all.

That National Grid (those huge pylons striding across the countryside with wires slung between them) is the means of transporting the generated electricity to where it is required and in some cases the voltage is as high as 132,000 volts AC.

As Billcat has explained that all conductors offer some resistance to electrical current (unless the conductor is at absolute zero) but that is not all. There is the back EMF and transformer losses. Just think how hot your mobile phone charger gets and then try to imagine how hot a huge power transformer in a sub station would get although they are artificially cooled because otherwise they would get too hot.

When the power station generates the power it does not generate it at such high voltages for a variety of reason not least of which is insulation and safety. So the voltage has to be transformed up to that level for transportation and that is where there are power losses. It is more efficient to transport an electrical current at a very high voltage than the domestic 230v or industrial 440 volts three phase. Then that high voltage has to be transformed down to a useable value and there are even more losses. Depending on how many times the generated power is transformed to a higher value and then back down to a lower useable value will depend on the overall losses that can be up to 25%. Then there is the loss of when all the generated power is not used although to be fair the power stations are very good at maintaining a level of generated power that equates pretty closely to the demand but it is nearly always more.

The power losses are in the heat generated in the transformation from one voltage to another.

Now where did I say anything about “office hours viewing” Busman747? Nor did I mention anything about enforcing power saving by law.

It would help your view if you didn’t misquote people in some crass attempt to give that view credence.

I do my bit not to waste energy and if I want to run my PC, watch TV, run a washing machine etc it has got nothing to do with you. So stick your nose out!

[Less]

The Electrified railways are Jambutty's pet hate and bio-fuel his pet alternative, as was discussed earlier in the year,


Use Less Electrical Energy.

I have a personal dislike of electrified railways but only from the point of view that all the overhead cabling looks untidy (but that is nothing to do with efficiency), Somehow 25% energy loss seems an extreme, as has already been mentioned all power supplies and cables suffer losses, but I suspect that the savings by having a few centralised generators would be of greater efficiency both in terms of power output and reduction of emissions than a system where each train is being pulled by an individual engine, perhaps if the 'bio-fuel' was used to power the generator plants, at least that would prevent the whole railway system from smelling like a chip shop?

[Less]

If the Queen was a member of this site and she had seen the starting post of this thread would she have made a comment such as:-

"We do our bit not to waste energy and if we want to run our Floodlights to illuminate ones Palace it has got nothing to do with you. So stick ones nose out!"

If we all, 'stick our noses out', none of these threads are going to get very far are they?

Jambutty=I do my bit not to waste energy and if I want to run my PC, watch TV, run a washing machine etc it has got nothing to do with you. So stick your nose out!

[jambutty]

Much obliged for bringing to the fore, as you put it but I don’t, my pet hate and pet alternative Less. I’ve just read through that post again and I stand by what I wrote one hundred percent.

Without a doubt we are racing towards an energy crisis and the time to take action is now and not when it happens. We need to be self sufficient in energy production and not rely on foreign imports. Mineral oil is a finite commodity, as is natural gas and sooner or later there will not be any more. Unless some way can be found to use coal without the atmospheric pollution that burning coal produces it is a non-starter. Wind farms are OK whilst a wind blows. Solar panels are only useful in daylight hours. All other ways of generating electricity apart from hydro-electric schemes and nuclear are in their infancy and unless there is a major break through will never meet our needs.

To conserve what we have we need to use electricity to power things only where some other alternative cannot be used. Such as electrical appliances and lighting. There is a viable alternative to electrified railways if not quite as fast. Does it really matter if it takes half an hour longer to get from “A” to “B” by a non-electric train than it does by an electric train?

It has been proven that bio fuels powering a Diesel engine can take the place of fossil fuels, but the will is not there to go down that road. The oil and gas companies are too powerful. A Diesel engine can provide motive power direct to the wheels as in a car, bus, lorry etc or can drive a generator producing electricity. A locomotive uses a Diesel engine directly coupled to an electricity generator and it is the electric power that drives the motors that turn the locomotive wheels.

Once upon a time we did have local power stations, as the Huncoat power station and the one at the Accrington/Blackburn border for Blackburn will testify to, except they are not there anymore. They supplied their own towns and any surplus was siphoned off to the National Grid and when the town demand was above the town’s supply the National Grid supplied the shortfall. Thus the electricity transportation losses were minimal. But the god of profit stepped in.

You may consider that 25% losses to be extreme Less but have another read of my post #17. It explains how and why such losses can and do occur.

Which reminds me. Before anyone asks I think that I had better explain back EMF.

When a Direct Current is passed along a wire it creates a magnetic field around it. If another wire is passed through that magnetic field a current is induced in that wire. The same applies to an Alternating Current except that the magnetic field also alternates in that in one instant there is no magnetic field and one two hundredth of a second later it rise exponentially to maximum and in the next two hundredth of a second it falls exponentially back to no magnetic field and continues thus.

Whether the wire is moved through a magnetic field or the magnetic field is moved through the wire makes no difference, a current of lower value is still generated in that wire but it is 180 degrees out of phase with the original. However the wire carrying the initial current is also subject to the changing magnetic field and an opposite polarity current is generated in it. This current opposes and cancels out some of the original current.

So as an example, and please don’t take these figures literally, it is just an example to establish the principle. If a wire is carrying an alternating current of say 10 amps and it has a back EMF of 1 amp induced in it the overall effect is that only 9 amps flow. So to ensure that there are 10 amps available something like 11 amps would need to be generated at source. Thus the back EMF creates losses.

[Less]

Originally Posted by jambutty

Which reminds me. Before anyone asks I think that I had better explain back EMF.

When a Direct Current is passed along a wire it creates a magnetic field around it. If another wire is passed through that magnetic field a current is induced in that wire. The same applies to an Alternating Current except that the magnetic field also alternates in that in one instant there is no magnetic field and one two hundredth of a second later it rise exponentially to maximum and in the next two hundredth of a second it falls exponentially back to no magnetic field and continues thus.

Whether the wire is moved through a magnetic field or the magnetic field is moved through the wire makes no difference, a current of lower value is still generated in that wire but it is 180 degrees out of phase with the original. However the wire carrying the initial current is also subject to the changing magnetic field and an opposite polarity current is generated in it. This current opposes and cancels out some of the original current.

So as an example, and please don’t take these figures literally, it is just an example to establish the principle. If a wire is carrying an alternating current of say 10 amps and it has a back EMF of 1 amp induced in it the overall effect is that only 9 amps flow. So to ensure that there are 10 amps available something like 11 amps would need to be generated at source. Thus the back EMF creates losses.

I don't think anyone would have asked.

You forgot to mention eddy currents (higher losses due to them which is why a solid iron core isn't used in A.F. and power transformers) ,
Off the top of my head I seem to remember that if the current was at 180 degrees it would actually cancel itself out therefore transformers would be of no practical use at all, but before we get bogged down in techno waffle and have to talk about phase shifts and vectors, that is only going to confuse and should not be used to baffle but always on a non technichal site such as this be put in it's simplest of terms.

[jambutty]

You are quite correct Less transformers do not use a solid iron core but I never said they did. They use a laminated soft iron core or the soft iron is powdered and (for want of a better expression) glued together to form a solid block. But there are different grades of soft iron and the better the grade the fewer eddie currents and thus fewer losses, with “MuMetal” being the best and most expensive. I spent some 20 years of my working life at Dynamo & Electrical Services making the darned things from little itty bitty ones less than one inch cube in size to huge beasts weighing in at several hundredweight.

The induced current in a wire is never anywhere near the value of the source current so cancellation is small but it is still evident. And that applies equally to transformers.

The bottom line is that up to 25% of the generated electricity is lost depending on how many times it is transformed from one voltage to another between the generator and the user. At around 5% per transformer and the same for transmission line losses it would only need two transformations from source up to the National Grid level and two down to user level to incur 25% losses.

[Mick]

I think these explain it better

[WillowTheWhisp]

Originally Posted by jambutty

I do my bit not to waste energy and if I want to run my PC, watch TV, run a washing machine etc it has got nothing to do with you. So stick your nose out!

Originally Posted by Less

If the Queen was a member of this site and she had seen the starting post of this thread would she have made a comment such as:-

"We do our bit not to waste energy and if we want to run our Floodlights to illuminate ones Palace it has got nothing to do with you. So stick ones nose out!"

Nice one Less. What's sauce for the Jambuttys of this world must also be sauce for the Queens surely.

[Busman747]

Dear jambutty,

In reference to your initial post, you are complaining that Buck Palace is being flood-lit between Dusk and Midnight. Am I correct so far?

Dusk to Midnight is presently around 6 hours. Is this also correct?

Office hours are generally accepted to be between 9am and 5 pm. Am I wrong so far jambutty?

So it would be fair to say that your complaint is that Buck Palace is using electricity outside of office hours and for an approx period of six hours in the evening.

Your complaint that I quoted you of using the words "office hours" is totally unfounded as it was my way of describing what I interpreted from your post.

- - - and to tell an Accywebber to "stick your nose out" on a forum that is there to discuss opposing views is just a tad rude do you not think?


BTW. "Stick your nose out" Is that a northern insult - or have you got the wording wrong? or maybe I have misquoted you on that

[jambutty]

In reference to your initial post, you are complaining that Buck Palace is being flood-lit between Dusk and Midnight. Am I correct so far?
Not quite Busman747. My complaint is that Buckingham Palace is floodlighting the building whilst the government is asking us to conserve energy.
Dusk to Midnight is presently around 6 hours. Is this also correct?
Yep!
So it would be fair to say that your complaint is that Buck Palace is using electricity outside of office hours and for an approx period of six hours in the evening.
No! That is not what I stated. My complaint is that Buckingham Palace is floodlighting the building whilst the government is asking us to conserve energy. It has nothing to do with when it happens.
Your complaint that I quoted you of using the words "office hours" is totally unfounded as it was my way of describing what I interpreted from your post.
Now if you read what I wrote instead of interpreting it, you might have grasped what I was stating.
- - - and to tell an Accywebber to "stick your nose out" on a forum that is there to discuss opposing views is just a tad rude do you not think?
Yup! But so was your If you feel so strongly about wasting electricity, why are you running your PC?

“Stick your nose out” is the opposite to “stick your nose in”. I have no idea where it originated and quite frankly I don’t care.

Now if you want to continue to split hairs, be my guest but as far as I’m concerned you will be talking to yourself.

[Bazf]

Ah busman you will probably lose karma if you are percived to be wrong or if you attempt to have a different point of view then our Ex pert.

[garinda]

Originally Posted by Bazf

Ah busman you will probably lose karma if you are percived to be wrong or if you attempt to have a different point of view then our Ex
pert.

Has he been demoted, to an ex-pert?

[WillowTheWhisp]

Was he ever a pert?

[jambutty]

What’s a ‘pert’?

If I was ever a ‘pert’ I am still a ‘pert’ therefore cannot be an ‘ex-pert.’

Thanks to the anonymous coward for the negative Karma and the message, “You can stick your nose out of this you rude little man.”

What’s the matter anonymous? Do you not have the courage to put your name to your comment?