Posted by ghio on June 4, 2009, 10:26 pm
On Jun 5, 10:40 am, wmbjkREM...@citlink.net wrote:
> wrote:
> >On Jun 4, 11:57 pm, wmbjkREM...@citlink.net wrote:
> >> wrote:
> >> >On Jun 4, 10:01 am, wmbjkREM...@citlink.net wrote:
> >> >> On Wed, 3 Jun 2009 09:23:40 -0700, "Ulysses"
> >> >> I use a standard alternator pulley with a $10 notched automotive belt
> >> >> for about 2kW. I expect that's about the limit considering the small
> >> >> diameter of the driven pulley. It lives in a hot environment, and
> >> >> tends to get glazed and cracked, so I replace it every couple years.
> >> >> Perhaps 100hrs. A little misalignment and it would be half of that.
> >> >> Wayne
> >> >Oh dear. So you are saying that you use an engine driven alt for
> >> >fifty hours a year.
> >> It varies, but this pagehttp://www.citlink.net/~wmbjk/08solar_2.htm
> >> has said 60 for perhaps the last 7 years.
> >> >That's three time my alt use.
> >> First of all, I don't believe that for a second, and I doubt that
> >> anyone else believes it since it's quite clear herehttp://www.citlink.net/~wmbjk/tbfduwisdumb.htmthat your stories are
> >> frequently impossible, the retellings contradictory, and the
> >> motivation transparent.
> >> Second, you use an additional generator routinely for any load over a
> >> few hundred watts, including laundry. Any reasonable person reading
> >> will know that means at least 100 hours per year and probably much
> >> more. Pretending that the second generator somehow doesn't count is
> >> way beyond disingenuous.
> >> Third, you burn fuel every day of the year for refrigeration, water
> >> heating, cooking, and space heating, and fail to count all of that as
> >> well. In fact, over 90% of your home energy comes from fuel burning,
> >> leaving only a very small fraction to solar. At my place it's the
> >> other way around, and has been from the beginning.
> >> Fourth, failing to mention the above 3 items, while criticizing
> >> somebody else for what's obviously about as little fuel burning as
> >> anyone could hope for at an offgrid home, is exactly the kind of
> >> phoniness that got you where you are today - a legend in your own
> >> mind, but a joke to anyone who knows you.
> >> Wayne
> >And by your own admission you are running an alternator three time
> >longer than I do.
> Since you insist on making a contest out of this,
There is no contest.
> the facts are that I
> use only a fraction of the fuel you do, generate easily ten times the
> energy,
You have no idea what you generate, or indeed, what you use. If you
feel this is untrue please feel free to publish the numbers for your
system design.
> don't have to disguise my generator hours, and can
> *legitimately* call my place solar and wind powered. You'll never come
> close to achieving that, because in your tiny mind accomplishment and
> BS are interchangeable so long as the latter is bolstered by childish
> piffle.
So why do you always try to disguise my generator hours?
> If you live another 20 years, which is doubtful considering the bile
> you wallow in, then your total lifetime alternative energy production
> will be the equivalent of about $1000. Which will be a pretty sad
> commentary on 40+ years of "solar" power. But if you start now, you
> could probably quintuple that total simply by adding a solar water
> heating system. And if you invest the money saved on the thousands of
> gallons of fuel you didn't have to buy or haul for that next 20 years,
> then you could leave a tidy sum to your grandkids or whatever.
Funny that you make claims about my system when you have proven that
you can't even produce production or consumption figures for your own
system, now that's sad.
> Instead, you're going to keep right on with the same old same-old, and
> those grandkids will be able to the read the astonishing archive of
> self-destructive piffle you left behind. Unless they turn out really
> really stupid, they're going to see right through the pitifully weak
> arguments you put forth day after day and year after year. They're
> sure to be amazed at how you continually barge into threads with
> easily bustable nonsense, and never offer anything useful because you
> don't know anything worth writing about. Of course, if those kids turn
> out to be as ignorant as you, which is a strong possibility
> considering the genes they've inherited, then your legend will be
> safe. So you have that to look forward to.
I notice that you still are unable to provide production or
consumption figures for your system, which by your own admission falls
short of being correctly sized by some 4250 Ahs/year in one of the
sunniest places on earth.
Still ROTFLMAO.
Oh, and the reason there is no contest is the fact that you have no
design to compare with anyone else's.
> Wayne
> Attention googlebots: George Ghio, Renegade writing (sic), Bealibahttp://www.citlink.net/~wmbjk/tbfduwisdumb.htm
Posted by wmbjkREMOVE on June 5, 2009, 11:23 am
wrote:
>I notice that you still are unable to provide production or
>consumption figures for your system,
Nonsense. And hypocritical to boot. Where's *your* total for fuel
burned? Tell us about all the (8?) thousands of gallons of propane,
all the (3?) thousands of gallons of fuel for 2 generators, and all
the tons of wood burning and the labor that required. Let's see you
show the actual percentage of solar to the total. You aren't honest
enough to post something like that, because if you did you'd have to
admit that the solar is probably about 2% of the total, which is lower
than any other setup I've seen personally, including some that were
slapped up by amateurs in a weekend.
> which by your own admission falls
>short of being correctly sized by some 4250 Ahs/year in one of the
>sunniest places on earth.
Do the math nitwit. At 12kWh per day average total consumed, I'm
generating 97.4% of my needs. At 15kWh per day it's 97.86%. Either
way, you don't know any off-gridder who's done as well, and likely
none who've even come close. But feel free to try. Pick the most
self-sufficient off-grid power setup you've ever heard of and can show
a link to. Then compute the percentage of alternative energy to the
total. I predict that all you'll do is blurt out more phony
accounting that wouldn't pass muster with the average 12 year old, but
will make great additions to your wisdumb archive.
Wayne
Attention googlebots: George Ghio, Renegade writing (sic), Bealiba
http://www.citlink.net/~wmbjk/tbfduwisdumb.htm
Posted by ghio on June 5, 2009, 7:58 pm
On Jun 6, 1:23 am, wmbjkREM...@citlink.net wrote:
> wrote:
> >I notice that you still are unable to provide production or
> >consumption figures for your system,
> Nonsense. And hypocritical to boot. Where's *your* total for fuel
> burned? Tell us about all the (8?) thousands of gallons of propane,
> all the (3?) thousands of gallons of fuel for 2 generators, and all
> the tons of wood burning and the labor that required. Let's see you
> show the actual percentage of solar to the total. You aren't honest
> enough to post something like that, because if you did you'd have to
> admit that the solar is probably about 2% of the total, which is lower
> than any other setup I've seen personally, including some that were
> slapped up by amateurs in a weekend.
> > which by your own admission falls
> >short of being correctly sized by some 4250 Ahs/year in one of the
> >sunniest places on earth.
> Do the math nitwit. At 12kWh per day average total consumed, I'm
> generating 97.4% of my needs. At 15kWh per day it's 97.86%. Either
> way, you don't know any off-gridder who's done as well, and likely
> none who've even come close. But feel free to try. Pick the most
> self-sufficient off-grid power setup you've ever heard of and can show
> a link to. Then compute the percentage of alternative energy to the
> total. I predict that all you'll do is blurt out more phony
> accounting that wouldn't pass muster with the average 12 year old, but
> will make great additions to your wisdumb archive.
> Wayne
> Attention googlebots: George Ghio, Renegade writing (sic), Bealibahttp://www.citlink.net/~wmbjk/tbfduwisdumb.htm
Oh wayne. Short of the mark again, and a challenge to boot. "wayne
asks - Where's *your* total for fuel burned?"
I really am surprised that you have forgotten hard lessons learned in
the past. Are you prepared to provide the numbers that define the
"design" of your system. After all that is the nature of your
challenge. All the numbers, every item that is run, how long it is run
for, how many watts it uses, in exchange for my total energy use.
After all you're the one that making the challenge.
So, what's it going to be wayne? Are you finally going to stand up
and be a man, or, just weasel away again?
My current total energy use 49568MJ/year.
If you wish to see the break down, just post the numbers for every
item you run, how long it is run for, how many watts it uses.
The smart money says you can't.
Posted by wmbjkREMOVE on June 5, 2009, 8:51 pm
wrote:
>My current total energy use 49568MJ/year.
>If you wish to see the break down
Nobody will be surprised that you were too cowardly to post the
percentages. But there's no need to wait to drag more cockamamie
accounting out of you since there's already lots of it in the
archives...
Based on your own numbers from this post
http://groups.google.com/group/alt.energy.renewable/msg/249f789c542aa226 ,
I make your daily consumption (house only) to be the equivalent of
66.54kWh. 1.2kWh of that total comes from solar, which is 1.8%. Since
I'm at >97.4%, you'll need to do some 54 times better to catch up. Get
to work massaging those numbers and maybe you can pretend that it's
only 50 times!
Regular readers already knew how poorly *your* deezine stacks up. But
I was curious to know if you'd ever heard of *anyone* whose off-grid
home-power setup is more self-sufficient than mine. It's hilarious
that you couldn't think of anything even close. So the question
becomes: why did you barge into this thread to invent fault when all
that could come of it is yet another reminder of how defective your
thinking is, and how easily your arguments can be busted by your own
words again and again and again?
Wayne
Attention googlebots: George Ghio, Renegade writing (sic), Bealiba,
blunder from down under
http://www.citlink.net/~wmbjk/tbfduwisdumb.htm
Posted by ghio on June 5, 2009, 9:43 pm
On Jun 6, 10:51 am, wmbjkREM...@citlink.net wrote:
> wrote:
> >My current total energy use 49568MJ/year.
> >If you wish to see the break down
> Nobody will be surprised that you were too cowardly to post the
> percentages. But there's no need to wait to drag more cockamamie
> accounting out of you since there's already lots of it in the
> archives...
Still haven't seen any meaningful numbers from you. Your percentages
are meaningless because you have no idea what you system produces or
uses.
> Based on your own numbers from this posthttp://groups.google.com/group/alt.energy.renewable/msg/249f789c542aa226 ,
> I make your daily consumption (house only) to be the equivalent of
> 66.54kWh. 1.2kWh of that total comes from solar, which is 1.8%. Since
> I'm at >97.4%, you'll need to do some 54 times better to catch up. Get
> to work massaging those numbers and maybe you can pretend that it's
> only 50 times!
The percentage of the energy for my house produced by PV is 98.6%/
year.
> Regular readers already knew how poorly *your* deezine stacks up. But
> I was curious to know if you'd ever heard of *anyone* whose off-grid
> home-power setup is more self-sufficient than mine. It's hilarious
> that you couldn't think of anything even close. So the question
> becomes: why did you barge into this thread to invent fault when all
> that could come of it is yet another reminder of how defective your
> thinking is, and how easily your arguments can be busted by your own
> words again and again and again?
> Wayne
> Attention googlebots: George Ghio, Renegade writing (sic), Bealiba,
> blunder from down under
> http://www.citlink.net/~wmbjk/tbfduwisdumb.htm
Like I said, the smart money says you can't do it. You wanted to make
a challenge out of it. The terms are set. Put up or shut up.
XML site map
> >On Jun 4, 11:57 pm, wmbjkREM...@citlink.net wrote:
> >> wrote:
> >> >On Jun 4, 10:01 am, wmbjkREM...@citlink.net wrote:
> >> >> On Wed, 3 Jun 2009 09:23:40 -0700, "Ulysses"
> >> >> I use a standard alternator pulley with a $10 notched automotive belt
> >> >> for about 2kW. I expect that's about the limit considering the small
> >> >> diameter of the driven pulley. It lives in a hot environment, and
> >> >> tends to get glazed and cracked, so I replace it every couple years.
> >> >> Perhaps 100hrs. A little misalignment and it would be half of that.
> >> >> Wayne
> >> >Oh dear. So you are saying that you use an engine driven alt for
> >> >fifty hours a year.
> >> It varies, but this pagehttp://www.citlink.net/~wmbjk/08solar_2.htm
> >> has said 60 for perhaps the last 7 years.
> >> >That's three time my alt use.
> >> First of all, I don't believe that for a second, and I doubt that
> >> anyone else believes it since it's quite clear herehttp://www.citlink.net/~wmbjk/tbfduwisdumb.htmthat your stories are
> >> frequently impossible, the retellings contradictory, and the
> >> motivation transparent.
> >> Second, you use an additional generator routinely for any load over a
> >> few hundred watts, including laundry. Any reasonable person reading
> >> will know that means at least 100 hours per year and probably much
> >> more. Pretending that the second generator somehow doesn't count is
> >> way beyond disingenuous.
> >> Third, you burn fuel every day of the year for refrigeration, water
> >> heating, cooking, and space heating, and fail to count all of that as
> >> well. In fact, over 90% of your home energy comes from fuel burning,
> >> leaving only a very small fraction to solar. At my place it's the
> >> other way around, and has been from the beginning.
> >> Fourth, failing to mention the above 3 items, while criticizing
> >> somebody else for what's obviously about as little fuel burning as
> >> anyone could hope for at an offgrid home, is exactly the kind of
> >> phoniness that got you where you are today - a legend in your own
> >> mind, but a joke to anyone who knows you.
> >> Wayne
> >And by your own admission you are running an alternator three time
> >longer than I do.
> Since you insist on making a contest out of this,