[ale] [OT][Way OT] Industrial Power Question

Sat Feb 7 09:24:56 EST 2009

Last Chrysler product I had was a Dodge minivan. It has a horrid
design flaw fostered by the beancounters. The 6 cylinder engine and
transmission was the same as the LeBaron which weighed much less. Thus
the tranny burned up every 60k miles (~ $2k per rebuild).

Add to it Chrysler has been one the strongest lobby groups pushing to
gut emissions standards and fight increases in fleet fuel economy
standards.

I have 2 Saturns and an antique Porsche. I like the Saturns but they
are weak performers in fuel economy for their size (OK. The Vue isn't
too bad but it's only because I got the 4 cylinder manual tranny
version) compared to Japanese makers of similar year and style of
cars.

The Porsche is just for fun. And it is.
When it runs. :-)
28 year old German sports cars are a parts challenge.

On Sat, Feb 7, 2009 at 9:07 AM, tom <tfreeman at intel.digichem.net> wrote:
> On Fri, 6 Feb 2009, Jeff Hubbs wrote:
>
>> Yes - dunno where you got yours but Carmax is doing a mighty fine job of
>> selling *new* Chrysler products...that 0% financing is *factory*
>> financing, by the way.
>
> I really shouldn't tag in here. But a couple of random points. The last
> Chrysler product I owned (only really) pretty much died of old age well
> under 100K, and drank fuel like a pig. Ok it was a minivan so I really
> should give it a little break on that. Back in the late '80s.
>
> I'm on my second Mazda, after getting 260,000 out of the first. Both have
> been US assembled cars, so don't tell me US labor can't produce high
> quality vehicles. Both cars have been 5 overweight passenger vehicles (bit
> of a squish tho) with better than 30mpg hwy, and 24mpg city by
> measurement. I'd like better milage, but may need to wait a while for
> that.
>
> With respect (below) to the allegation that SUV's have been knocked from
> their sales position, I have mixed feelings. I've got too many neighbors
> who all but worship their SUV, and a mightily upset with the gas companies
> for making gas available at a higher price. Two of them have multiple
> behemoths and drive longish distances daily. I'd like to have their
> income, but not their wasteful habits.
>
> One of my students loves her large Jeep because she can get it moving in
> all conditions. I'm waiting for her to figure out that the ability to get
> moving does not guarentee getting stopped voluntarily and under control.
> Fortunately sanity is not in the sylabus I have to teach...
>
>>
>> Jeff Lightner wrote:
>>> A huge portion of our population learned that SUV stands for "Sucks Up
>>> Valuables" during the past couple of years.   It's a big reason you can
>>> buy them dirt cheap now (even more so than most autos).
>>>
>>> Speaking of which, I just got a great deal on a new Chrysler (not an
>>> SUV).   The price on the one I was looking at went down by more than
>>> $2000 AND I got 0% financing without having to give back the rebates.
>>>
>>>
>>> -----Original Message-----
>>> From: ale-bounces at ale.org [mailto:ale-bounces at ale.org] On Behalf Of
>>> Thompson Freeman
>>> Sent: Friday, February 06, 2009 2:32 PM
>>> To: ale at ale.org
>>> Subject: Re: [ale] [OT][Way OT] Industrial Power Question
>>>
>>> On 02/06/2009 12:10:00 PM, Jim Kinney wrote:
>>>
>>>> On Fri, Feb 6, 2009 at 11:27 AM, Thompson Freeman
>>>> <tfreeman at intel.digichem.net> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> My apologies to those who really don't want to see this.
>>>>> Unfortunately ALE is one place where I can consistently
>>>>> find intelligent technically informed people, so on the
>>>>> chance ...
>>>>>
>>>>> During the era of $4/gallon fuel, I got to blue sky
>>>>> thinking about solar power and transportation.
>>>>> Specifically, rail and/or light rail.
>>>>>
>>>>> If my back-of-the-envelop calculations are anywhere near
>>>>> correct, it is now technically feasible to run a rail
>>>>> transportation system (say like MARTA for instance)
>>>>> entirely from solar power collected from the right of
>>>>>
>>>> way
>>>>
>>>>> of the tracks and the roofs of the stations.
>>>>>
>>>>> I have recently seen a short article claiming a thermal
>>>>> solar conversion system is economically competitive with
>>>>> more traditional electric generation schemes.
>>>>>
>>>>> For the back of the envelope stuff...
>>>>>
>>>>> My understanding is that current solar collection runs
>>>>> about 1 watt/sq ft of collection area.
>>>>>
>>>> I am seeing 10W/sq ft on most current PV installations.
>>>>
>>>
>>> I was working from memory. That said, 10W/sq ft sounds
>>> reasonable.
>>>
>>>>  To allow for clouds
>>>>
>>>>> etc, take that to 0.5 watt/sq ft. Lets use a figure of 1
>>>>> horsepower=1kw, which is some 20% high, but keeps the
>>>>> number simple and turns on a light also. The Charlotte
>>>>>
>>>> Lynx
>>>>
>>>>> system runs vehicles of 780 rated horsepower,
>>>>>
>>>> Reasonable. The modern diesel/electric is 2200 HP. People
>>>> haulers like
>>>> MARTA use bi-directional push-me/pull-me trains. So a
>>>> "short train" (2
>>>> car) is likely around 800 HP (12-15 seconds to 50 mph
>>>> thumnail
>>>> estimate). Let's call it 1kHP for easy round number and
>>>> 1hp=1kw again
>>>> for easy.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>  which means
>>>>
>>>>> that MARTA may be up to a thousand?? In any event,
>>>>>
>>>> 780x2000
>>>>
>>>>> suggests Charlotte would need to dedicate 1.5
>>>>>
>>>> million >sq ft of collection per running vehicle for full
>>>> power   > usage.
>>>>
>>>
>>> Ok, making the correction puts Charlotte &/or Atlanta in
>>> the 150,000 - 200,000 sq ft range of collectors per
>>> operating unit. Which is more better doable.
>>>
>>>
>>>> And MARTA would need 200k sq ft/train car pair
>>>> (1000hp/pair x 1000W/hp
>>>> = 1,000,000 W/train pair; divide by a 50% collection ratio
>>>> of 5W/ft sq
>>>> = 200,000 ft sq.)
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>> Since the vehicles are under full power for only short
>>>>> periods of time that 1.5 million figure is probably a
>>>>> multiple of the required power needs, but I don't have
>>>>>
>>>> the
>>>>
>>>>> background to make the adjustment. In any event, that
>>>>> figure is approximately a strip 14 miles long by 20 ft
>>>>> wide, or the right of way available to one track of the
>>>>> Lynx line here.
>>>>>
>>>>> The question I have for the bright people here is "Can
>>>>>
>>>> you
>>>>
>>>>> refine these figures/guesses to something a little more
>>>>> defensible?"
>>>>>
>>>>> I probably should offer to purchase a round of virtual
>>>>>
>>>> beer
>>>>
>>>>> for the participants...
>>>>>
>>>>> Thanks for the use of bandwidth, and the opportunity to
>>>>> scratch a nagging itch.
>>>>>
>>>> I have always wondered why PV has not been mandated for
>>>> rooftops. It
>>>> just keeps getting better and better.
>>>> The more that is in use, the more research that gets done
>>>> to make it better.
>>>>
>>>> <tinfoil beanie> of course Exxon, BP, Ford and GM are
>>>> secretly
>>>> assassinating photovoltaic researchers
>>>> worldwide..</tinfoil beanie>
>>>>
>>>
>>> You can take the tinfoil beanie off on this one. Exxon et
>>> al are not going to really push solar because solar doesn't
>>> show up even as a rounding error on their business models.
>>> The bosses are charged with making their 10% profit without
>>> a whole lot of risk. Risky profit is going to take a much
>>> higher level of profit to be worthwhile, and most solar
>>> schemes that I've heard of are going to take 10 years to
>>> turn their profit. Not exactly a deal maker. Plus a huge
>>> percentage of our population really really wants to show
>>> off with a SUV...
>>>
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> Ale mailing list
>>> Ale at ale.org
>>> http://mail.ale.org/mailman/listinfo/ale
>>>
>>> Please consider our environment before printing this e-mail or attachments.
>>> ----------------------------------
>>> CONFIDENTIALITY NOTICE: This e-mail may contain privileged or confidential information and is for the sole use of the intended recipient(s). If you are not the intended recipient, any disclosure, copying, distribution, or use of the contents of this information is prohibited and may be unlawful. If you have received this electronic transmission in error, please reply immediately to the sender that you have received the message in error, and delete it. Thank you.
>>> ----------------------------------
>>>
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> Ale mailing list
>>> Ale at ale.org
>>> http://mail.ale.org/mailman/listinfo/ale
>>>
>>>
>>
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> Ale mailing list
>> Ale at ale.org
>> http://mail.ale.org/mailman/listinfo/ale
>>
> _______________________________________________
> Ale mailing list
> Ale at ale.org
> http://mail.ale.org/mailman/listinfo/ale
>

-- 
-- 
James P. Kinney III