The energy solution for South Africa is DC power.

[Seriously]

There you go again. Instead of rectifying and acknowledging your fallacies you just troll on as if they are valid somehow incapable of realising what a fallacy is. Besides for that you still have an overinflated sense of how many people are on your side.

No one was on my side. I represented my own information, facts and views and so did all the others you so easily believe you wiped your ass with. If you cannot comprehend what someone typed just stop as you are making a bigger tool of yourself (Just like in PD). There were no fallacies in this thread apart from and except the thumbsuck BS you posted and then changed your mind and moved goalposts as you tagged along when it was shown and proven to you how much incorrect BS information you posted.

Now come again with the special SWA science, explain those special theories as I am sure many readers want to know and understand the science and would want you to justify your BS claims. It could be of national interest to know how you get the claimed 12V DC @ 30Amps through a 2.5mm2 copper wire AND with no voltage drop at that assuming your infinite source? You did nonchalantly claim that did you not?

 

[itareanlnotani]

Duh, superconductors

 

[konfab]

Duh, superconductors

Of course, you can use the extra liquid helium to cool your house during summer.

 

[itareanlnotani]

The newer stuff goes far higher in the temperature range, you can even use liquid nitrogen
The latest bleeding edge stuff measures at 190 Kelvin!

https://medium.com/the-physics-arxi...ecord-smashed-by-sulphur-hydride-c853795079bb

Most of the work is on the cuprates though, slightly lower temperatures, but easier to work with.
http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2015/03/150319150751.htm
http://phys.org/news/2015-01-scientists-china-latest-discoveries-iron-based.html#nRlv

 

[Swa]

Hopeless, just hopeless...

 

[Seriously]

Hopeless, just hopeless...

I agree as we will never ever get a retraction from you to acknowledge you posted absolute garbage as valid information misleading many readers. Explain again to clear up the confusion the double DC amps at 30A12VDC and the infinite power source to drive the 30 Amp through the 2.5mm2 wire without any volt drop.

 

[Swa]

You are really hilarious you know. I hope you like beating straw men as that is all you do. Instead of seeing that though like any reasonable person would you simply continue on. So not only don't you know anything about the subject you claim to you also seem to know nothing about debate philosophy that's centuries old. You can't even take a default. Probably because you know it would be an empty "victory" so you just continue to argue on for argument's sake.

Since you are so interested in arguing though this is how it went down. You keep claiming you showed DC unviable (better warn those consortiums what are investing in it then ) with your comments on high power devices where it only applies to low voltage DC. Err... it wasn't proposed for high power or as a single solution where high voltage DC is more than viable. So as your straw man here has been obliterated with DC being viable let's move to the other points.

You post a random article on DC transmission and act like it has any relevance to the home environment. Your own article says it doesn't. Something you've never acknowledged. You haven't acknowledged your inverter step-up step-down solution to be less efficient than a direct DC powered one even after your testing on two of your own units showed this to be the case. Then there are the inaccuracies posted by your friend lsheed_cn which not only you don't recognise but seemingly agree to.

As someone posted here he could probably dig up inaccuracies from both sides but you fail to realise that. All I have left is

*shrug*

 

[P924]

I remember this post:

Ah still going by the "I'm feeling lucky" result in google I see. Here's a proper calculator to help you out. What is ludicrous is your one track mind. I see you're also trying to stack the deck by deliberately using a thinner wire. From 2.5mm down to only 2mm. The standard gauge wire in use is closer to 3.3mm or AWG12 and not AWG14. For a 40m run of wire at 30A the voltage drop is nearer to 6V. If you feel that is your case you can run at 18V to compensate ...

Okay, most compliant houses in SA have 2.5mm wire running to the plugs, and 1.5 for lighting, but lets go with your figures in order not to "stack the deck"

6V at 30A hmmm, 180W loss to transmit 360W. Tell me again how inverters are inefficient?

What is this about a straw man?

 

[Swa]

I remember this post:



Okay, most compliant houses in SA have 2.5mm wire running to the plugs, and 1.5 for lighting, but lets go with your figures in order not to "stack the deck"

6V at 30A hmmm, 180W loss to transmit 360W. Tell me again how inverters are inefficient?

What is this about a straw man?

Have you looked at the real world figures? Most have an efficiency of ~80%. Couple that with a 80% efficiency for stepping down again and you have a realistic efficiency of 60%. Efficiencies actually drop the more power you use. So even my worse case example not much different. The difference is mainly where it's lost.

 

[Seriously]

Have you looked at the real world figures? Most have an efficiency of ~80%. Couple that with a 80% efficiency for stepping down again and you have a realistic efficiency of 60%. Efficiencies actually drop the more power you use. So even my worse case example not much different. The difference is mainly where it's lost.

As usual someone shows you up talking BS then you blabber many useless words which does not support your case. Suddenly you thumb suck an 60% efficiency. Wake the **** up and look how stupid it sounds.

I rather use a 220V inverter with 60% efficiency than rewiring my home with copper busbars just because some idiot said it's possible and I must do so. After all solar is free so a bigger panel will compensate for the inefficiency. Want to thumbsuck some more? Just go for it! We all laugh at your "virtual" BS thumbsucked non existing science..

Now explain again how do we get 12V or now 18V at 30Amps DC through the standard 2.5mm2 domestic wiring with no volt drop. remember the volt drop is due to the weak source and not due to the wire resistance as you stated.

Iseed have a working and running solar system. How are your 12VDc solar lighting system doing? Sorry? you have none only a torch? I thought so. Shame.

 

[Swa]

/snip

Take a look at the real figures. 80% + 80% is ~60%. There's no thumbsuck there. The only thumbsuck again is your straw man of busbars for low voltage high power. But hey, you won't know that as you demonstrably don't know what a straw man is. So now you are advocating a bigger panel over efficiency where before when I suggested a bigger panel your stance was that the little extra efficiency of a 600V system over say a 300V one justifies the far greater expensive of compatible equipment and special wiring. It's not just a bigger panel brightspark but also more storage in the form of much more expensive batteries.

Are you going to stay consistent or continue to flip-flop between ideas like a fish out of water?

 

[P924]

Have you looked at the real world figures? Most have an efficiency of ~80%. Couple that with a 80% efficiency for stepping down again and you have a realistic efficiency of 60%. Efficiencies actually drop the more power you use. So even my worse case example not much different. The difference is mainly where it's lost.

No, that is utter BS, showing you know nothing of the subject. Most grid tied inverters are ~96% efficient - check the specs yourself.
http://files.sma.de/dl/15330/SB5000TL-21-DEN134924W.pdf
http://microcare.co.za/products/grid-tied-inverters/3kw-grid-tied-inverter/
Here is even a 300W unit (95.5%):
http://www.omnik-solar.com/products/omniksol-m248

Now, if you want a stable 12V for a PC, from a ~12V bus, you need to have a buck, or buck-boost inverter topology (for the DC-DC part, depending on whether you are all right with inverting the voltage to -12V). Now you are already looking at max 85-90% efficiency excluding the copper conduction losses.

 

[Swa]

No, that is utter BS, showing you know nothing of the subject. Most grid tied inverters are ~96% efficient - check the specs yourself.
http://files.sma.de/dl/15330/SB5000TL-21-DEN134924W.pdf
http://microcare.co.za/products/grid-tied-inverters/3kw-grid-tied-inverter/
Here is even a 300W unit (95.5%):
http://www.omnik-solar.com/products/omniksol-m248

Now, if you want a stable 12V for a PC, from a ~12V bus, you need to have a buck, or buck-boost inverter topology (for the DC-DC part, depending on whether you are all right with inverting the voltage to -12V). Now you are already looking at max 85-90% efficiency excluding the copper conduction losses.

Going by manufacturer claims as well are we? You are also committing the classic fallacy. You also ignored what I said about the efficiency decreasing with higher load.

That last one actually lists 95.5% as the max efficiency.

 

[P924]

Going by manufacturer claims as well are we? You are also committing the classic fallacy. You also ignored what I said about the efficiency decreasing with higher load.

That last one actually lists 95.5% as the max efficiency.

You are quite special, aren't you? I did state the last on is 95.5% which is ~96%. I can also show you academic papers showing those efficiency figures and higher for the new SiC tech. Besides that, even if these were only 66% efficient, it will still be superior to your case, since the last step down/regulation to the PC will have about the same efficiency in either case (I am assuming you read my whole post?).

You do know what euro efficiency is, right?
http://www.solarchoice.net.au/blog/types-of-solar-inverter-efficiency/

 

[Swa]

You are quite special, aren't you? I did state the last on is 95.5% which is ~96%. I can also show you academic papers showing those efficiency figures and higher for the new SiC tech. Besides that, even if these were only 66% efficient, it will still be superior to your case, since the last step down/regulation to the PC will have about the same efficiency in either case (I am assuming you read my whole post?).

You do know what euro efficiency is, right?
http://www.solarchoice.net.au/blog/types-of-solar-inverter-efficiency/

You don't get my point do you? I know you stated it's 95.5%. What you didn't state however is that it's best case scenario meaning not a lot of load. Seen those adverts in everything that always state the best case scenario because stating worst case scenario doesn't bring sales? Then there's the issue I highlighted earlier that efficiency doesn't come without a premium.

Also no, it wouldn't be superior to my case. You seem to forget that I stated worst case scenario where further step down isn't required. If you go for a higher voltage source directly from battery there's only the last stage of step down/regulation.

 

[P924]

You don't get my point do you? I know you stated it's 95.5%. What you didn't state however is that it's best case scenario meaning not a lot of load. Seen those adverts in everything that always state the best case scenario because stating worst case scenario doesn't bring sales? Then there's the issue I highlighted earlier that efficiency doesn't come without a premium.

You seem to not get logic? Euro efficiency is measured at different load points, not peak, or ideal and it is still around 95% for all the cases I linked. It is also easily verified, in fact, if you calculate the dissipation capacity of the heatsink of one of the larger inverters (3kW), you will see that at peak load, it cannot be much lower than indicated, because then the die temperatures of the IGBTs will severely decrease life expectancy and increase failures.

Also no, it wouldn't be superior to my case. You seem to forget that I stated worst case scenario where further step down isn't required.

Yes it would, you definitely need regulation for a PC if you are using 12V-18V over 30m, which would need to be buck or buck boost yielding poorer efficiency than my PC's power supply from mains. You CANNOT power a PC from a battery without a PSU to regulate the voltage. And even less so if you have 30m of 2.5mm^2 copper between the PC and the battery.

If you go for a higher voltage source directly from battery there's only the last stage of step down/regulation.

What are you even trying to say? Is this the example again where you want an 18V source to supply 12V to the PC to compensate for copper losses? You definitely need regulation at the PC, because it is a dynamic load, sometimes it will draw only 75W, meaning you will get a much higher voltage at the PC than 12V.

 

[Swa]

You seem to not get logic? Euro efficiency is measured at different load points, not peak, or ideal and it is still around 95% for all the cases I linked. It is also easily verified, in fact, if you calculate the dissipation capacity of the heatsink of one of the larger inverters (3kW), you will see that at peak load, it cannot be much lower than indicated, because then the die temperatures of the IGBTs will severely decrease life expectancy and increase failures.

And you are really one to insult when you yourself don't seem to get the logic. The units you mentioned don't make reference to euro efficiency and only maximum efficiency. I specifically said earlier you may get ~95% efficiency but you'll pay a premium for it. You continue to just ignore that.

The last one is a micro inverter in any case. They were mentioned earlier.

Yes it would, you definitely need regulation for a PC if you are using 12V-18V over 30m, which would need to be buck or buck boost yielding poorer efficiency than my PC's power supply from mains. You CANNOT power a PC from a battery without a PSU to regulate the voltage. And even less so if you have 30m of 2.5mm^2 copper between the PC and the battery.

Which doesn't prove what you say. Most PC supplies off AC are around the 80% efficiency mark. Or are you again using a premium supply which you'll pay a premium for thereby negating the benefit.

What are you even trying to say? Is this the example again where you want an 18V source to supply 12V to the PC to compensate for copper losses? You definitely need regulation at the PC, because it is a dynamic load, sometimes it will draw only 75W, meaning you will get a much higher voltage at the PC than 12V.

Where in either case you won't lose more than 33% if using 18V. So again how is a two stage system with less overall efficiency better?

 

[Seriously]

Where in either case you won't lose more than 33% if using 18V. So again how is a two stage system with less overall efficiency better?

More thumb suck BS? Show us this commercial 18V system or must the scientists still develop such an thing. Will your consortium do it? While you are at it show us where it is used in a practical application where it works!

 

[Seriously]

You are quite special, aren't you? I did state the last on is 95.5% which is ~96%. I can also show you academic papers showing those efficiency figures and higher for the new SiC tech. Besides that, even if these were only 66% efficient, it will still be superior to your case, since the last step down/regulation to the PC will have about the same efficiency in either case (I am assuming you read my whole post?).

You do know what euro efficiency is, right?
http://www.solarchoice.net.au/blog/types-of-solar-inverter-efficiency/

NO! He knows nothing but at least tries hard to impress others that do not know better.

 

[P924]

And you are really one to insult when you yourself don't seem to get the logic. The units you mentioned don't make reference to euro efficiency and only maximum efficiency. I specifically said earlier you may get ~95% efficiency but you'll pay a premium for it. You continue to just ignore that.

Seems you cannot read either, only the microcare does not rate euro efficiency.
You will also pay a premium for superconductors and cooling. Your point is? Relatively cheap modified sine wave inverters also have high efficiencies, much higher than your thumbsucked 80%...

The last one is a micro inverter in any case. They were mentioned earlier.

That is a pointless comment. I was showing efficiency.

Which doesn't prove what you say. Most PC supplies off AC are around the 80% efficiency mark. Or are you again using a premium supply which you'll pay a premium for thereby negating the benefit.

Actually, it does, well at least to someone who can understand what I wrote and can think.
But anyway, then lets go with 80%, it is still better than your proposed solution - which you also do not seem to grasp.
(0.95*0.8>0.66*0.9)

Where in either case you won't lose more than 33% if using 18V. So again how is a two stage system with less overall efficiency better?

No, you really do not understand how this works, do you? You cannot feed a PC with poorly regulated 18V.