#101
|
|||
|
|||
Basso Loto [OT]
On 11/14/2019 2:14 PM, David Scheidt wrote:
AMuzi wrote: :On 11/14/2019 11:38 AM, David Scheidt wrote: : Frank Krygowski wrote: : :On 11/13/2019 9:21 PM, Ralph Barone wrote: : : jbeattie wrote: : : : : : : Don't you guys have NG? : : https://energykinetics.com/savingshe...elcomparisons/ NG beats every : : other fuel in terms of cost per therm and low levels of pollutants. : : : : -- Jay Beattie. : : : : : : In the Pacific Northwest, electrically powered heat pumps rate better than : : in New England, due to cheaper electricity rates, higher SEER due to higher : : ambient temperatures, and zero emissions from hydroelectric dams. : : :That seems to make sense. I was surprised to read, several years ago, : :that Ontario was heavily promoting heat pumps. They're not very : :efficient at low air temperatures. : : There are lots of units that have an efficency of greater than 100% : down to -14F. : : :https://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/new-b...neer-1.4024786 : : I'd have to see his numbers, but I expect he's under calculating the : efficency of the heat pump. : :?? oes 'efficency of greater than 100%' mean you get more :energy out than you put in? Yes. That's how heat pumps work. They pump heat from where you don't want it to where you do, which is more effecicent that making the heat. In the case of an air source heat pump used for heat, that's the outside to the inside. used for cooling, it's the other way around. Instead of describing it as efficiency greater than 100%, it's normally called the Coefficient of Performance. See https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Coeffi...of_performance But for heat pumps COP is highly dependent on outside temperature. The colder it gets outside, the worse the COP. It's analogous to pumping water up a higher distance. It takes more work. Heat pumps can be a good deal, especially where winters are mild and summers are hot enough to need AC. You're paying for AC hardware (compressor, a couple of heat exchangers, etc.) to pump heat out in summer, so why not add a few valves to pump heat in during the winter? I remain surprised it makes sense in a chillier place like Ontario, where AC is much less a necessity. Seems payback period on that hardware would be a lot longer, especially compared to inexpensive natural gas. Not to mention tactics like super-insulation. IIRC Carl Fogel had a heat pump and was pretty dissatisfied with it. I don't remember why, though. -- - Frank Krygowski |
Ads |
#102
|
|||
|
|||
Basso Loto [OT]
Frank Krygowski wrote:
:On 11/14/2019 2:14 PM, David Scheidt wrote: : AMuzi wrote: : :On 11/14/2019 11:38 AM, David Scheidt wrote: : : Frank Krygowski wrote: : : :On 11/13/2019 9:21 PM, Ralph Barone wrote: : : : jbeattie wrote: : : : : : : : : : Don't you guys have NG? : : : https://energykinetics.com/savingshe...elcomparisons/ NG beats every : : : other fuel in terms of cost per therm and low levels of pollutants. : : : : : : -- Jay Beattie. : : : : : : : : : In the Pacific Northwest, electrically powered heat pumps rate better than : : : in New England, due to cheaper electricity rates, higher SEER due to higher : : : ambient temperatures, and zero emissions from hydroelectric dams. : : : : :That seems to make sense. I was surprised to read, several years ago, : : :that Ontario was heavily promoting heat pumps. They're not very : : :efficient at low air temperatures. : : : : There are lots of units that have an efficency of greater than 100% : : down to -14F. : : : : :https://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/new-b...neer-1.4024786 : : : : I'd have to see his numbers, but I expect he's under calculating the : : efficency of the heat pump. : : : : :?? : oes 'efficency of greater than 100%' mean you get more : :energy out than you put in? : : Yes. That's how heat pumps work. They pump heat from where you don't : want it to where you do, which is more effecicent that making the heat. : In the case of an air source heat pump used for heat, that's the outside : to the inside. used for cooling, it's the other way around. :Instead of describing it as efficiency greater than 100%, it's normally :called the Coefficient of Performance. See :https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Coeffi...of_performance But for heat umps COP is highly dependent on outside temperature. The colder it gets utside, the worse the COP. It's analogous to pumping water up a higher :distance. It takes more work. :Heat pumps can be a good deal, especially where winters are mild and :summers are hot enough to need AC. You're paying for AC hardware compressor, a couple of heat exchangers, etc.) to pump heat out in :summer, so why not add a few valves to pump heat in during the winter? You need to catch up. Heating with a heat pump makes sense economically in quite a lot of the US. The COP of high end heat pumps is over 2 at -14F. It's over 4 at freezing. Gas is cheap these days, but very few places is it twice as cheap as elecricity. And in much of Candada, there is no gas, and houses are heated with resistive electric heaters. The pay back is pretty fast. -- sig 56 |
#103
|
|||
|
|||
Basso Loto [OT]
On Thu, 14 Nov 2019 12:38:08 -0800, Joerg
wrote: On 2019-11-13 17:45, John B. wrote: On Wed, 13 Nov 2019 15:23:24 -0800, Joerg wrote: On 2019-11-13 14:49, John B. wrote: On Wed, 13 Nov 2019 07:31:27 -0800, Joerg wrote: On 2019-11-12 17:00, John B. wrote: On Tue, 12 Nov 2019 16:39:34 -0800, Joerg wrote: On 2019-11-12 14:43, John B. wrote: On Tue, 12 Nov 2019 07:03:29 -0800, Joerg wrote: On 2019-11-11 20:29, John B. wrote: On Mon, 11 Nov 2019 06:58:31 -0800, Joerg wrote: On 2019-11-09 14:57, John B. wrote: [...] In fact I can't remember any house having it's chimney cleaned so it must not have been a common happening. That is like with safety belts, grandpa's car didn't have them and he lived well into his 90's. Yet we won't drive without. I'm not saying that they don't happen, just that I never saw it happen and we lived in one neighborhood and my grandparents lived about a mile away and I think that if a chimney fire had happened in either neighborhood it would have been BIG NEWS all up an down the street so I think I would have heard about it. But I would winder about why a chimney fire occurred twice within a reasonable length of time. Not setting their stove correctly, i.e., burning too rich a mixture and generating too much "soot"? The usual, making a fire in the stove and dampering it down too much. That results in a hardcore creosote layer. They had smoke crawling out of the chimney all the time. Even after those fires they did not learn. Most people do not learn this, for whatever reason. Problem is that the incompetence on the part of people with wood stoves also results in a lot of wood burning bans that hit people who are competent in that domain. Probably a defect in the modern educational system. Nobody seems to be educated regarding how to manage wood fires any more. :-) To my surprise the vast majority of "smoky burners" are old people. They are also very resistant to learning anything knew about it, proclaiming to be experts. One woman had the chimney smoking so bad that people walking farther up the street started coughing. She usually threw one lone log into the stove with just a few burning embers in there and didn't even bother to open the air intakes. Upon suggesting to do it a little differently she respomnded "Well, that's how my late husband always did it and he knew!" Loyalty! I just love it :-) But both the "damper" in the pipe and the air inlets on the stove work together to control the fire and improper adjustment have a major effect on both the heat generated and the amount of wood burned. Modern stoves like ours only have inlet controls. Primary air jets for the initial phase (on/off control) and then a secondary air control with vernier. The trick is to adjust that secondary so you have a sustained hot burn above the wood (it mostly burns the wood gas) but no less air. The result is a wood burn with no smoke and no smell as it should be. ... If you have to cut and split your own firewood you will learn to be frugal :-) I just split another half cord of oak, by hand. Yet I'd never pollute the neighborhood with smoke. Smoke crawling out of the chimney means lots of unburnt particles in there so dampering a fire down too much is actually a wasteful use of firewood. This is the key fact that most self-proclaimed "experienced" wood stove users do not understand. Perhaps, today. But when I was a boy wood fires were apparently much better understood although no one worried about smoke in the sense of contaminating the atmosphere but certainly in the sense that they weren't burning the wood efficiently and therefore "wasting" wood... I remember the not so good old days when as a cyclist I came through small valleys or villages during winter and had to cough. There are undoubtedly lots of people who lived there and needlessly and gruesomely died of lung cancer because residents didn't know how to properly operate a wood stove. When I was a boy growing up in a northern New England town everyone heated their house with either wood or coal, some people, my paternal grandmother for example, were still cooking with wood, and I can't remember any fumes floating around. Granted that 50 or 60 year old memory is perhaps not so acute, but still, I think if the town had been covered with a choking cloud of smoke I would have remembered it. It's not the memory, it that you were used to it. Just like we all were used to the fumes of car traffic while nowadays I can immediately smell if a vintage car passing me had a stock engine or a modern one. You just wrote, " I came through small valleys or villages during winter and had to cough". Perhaps I should have been more explicate and said that I don't remember ever having to ca ugh when I walked down town. As for your idea that it was because we were used to it, I think that you are wrong. We lived about a mile outside the built up area of the town and I walked to school and coming from the "country" with two houses in a half a mile to a built up area with a house every 50 yards I can't remember notice any bad smells. I think that you are exaggerating. remember that in a northern New England climate where things certainly do freeze that what's in the woodshed has to last until spring as the snow is too deep to get to the woods to cut more. My grandfather used to spend a month a year cutting trees in his "wood lot", cutting to length, splitting and hauling back to town in order to heat his house for the winter. We have become decadent and now buy 3-4 cords/year. I add about a cord each year from our yard and from splitting rounds that neighbors didn't want. Four cords of wood is about 512 cubic feet of wood. My grand dad's "wood shed" was a building about (from memory) 25 ft long 10 ft wide and probably 12 feet high. He packed it, literally, to the rafters by late September or maybe October and burned it all by spring. NE is a very cold area of the country in winter. We and neighbors used to get by with two cords. Then global warming ... didn't happen and now it has crept up to about four cords. Just fired it up again. -- cheers, John B. |
#104
|
|||
|
|||
Basso Loto [OT]
On Thu, 14 Nov 2019 16:48:08 -0500, Frank Krygowski
wrote: On 11/14/2019 2:14 PM, David Scheidt wrote: AMuzi wrote: :On 11/14/2019 11:38 AM, David Scheidt wrote: : Frank Krygowski wrote: : :On 11/13/2019 9:21 PM, Ralph Barone wrote: : : jbeattie wrote: : : : : : : Don't you guys have NG? : : https://energykinetics.com/savingshe...elcomparisons/ NG beats every : : other fuel in terms of cost per therm and low levels of pollutants. : : : : -- Jay Beattie. : : : : : : In the Pacific Northwest, electrically powered heat pumps rate better than : : in New England, due to cheaper electricity rates, higher SEER due to higher : : ambient temperatures, and zero emissions from hydroelectric dams. : : :That seems to make sense. I was surprised to read, several years ago, : :that Ontario was heavily promoting heat pumps. They're not very : :efficient at low air temperatures. : : There are lots of units that have an efficency of greater than 100% : down to -14F. : : :https://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/new-b...neer-1.4024786 : : I'd have to see his numbers, but I expect he's under calculating the : efficency of the heat pump. : :?? oes 'efficency of greater than 100%' mean you get more :energy out than you put in? Yes. That's how heat pumps work. They pump heat from where you don't want it to where you do, which is more effecicent that making the heat. In the case of an air source heat pump used for heat, that's the outside to the inside. used for cooling, it's the other way around. Instead of describing it as efficiency greater than 100%, it's normally called the Coefficient of Performance. See https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Coeffi...of_performance But for heat pumps COP is highly dependent on outside temperature. The colder it gets outside, the worse the COP. It's analogous to pumping water up a higher distance. It takes more work. Heat pumps can be a good deal, especially where winters are mild and summers are hot enough to need AC. You're paying for AC hardware (compressor, a couple of heat exchangers, etc.) to pump heat out in summer, so why not add a few valves to pump heat in during the winter? I remain surprised it makes sense in a chillier place like Ontario, where AC is much less a necessity. Seems payback period on that hardware would be a lot longer, especially compared to inexpensive natural gas. Not to mention tactics like super-insulation. IIRC Carl Fogel had a heat pump and was pretty dissatisfied with it. I don't remember why, though. I wonder about the effectiveness of a heat pump in, oh say, Bangor, Maine, where the temperature got so low some nights that kerosene wouldn't flow in a pipe from the outside tank to the space heater? -- cheers, John B. |
#105
|
|||
|
|||
Basso Loto [OT]
On 2019-11-14 14:48, John B. wrote:
On Thu, 14 Nov 2019 12:38:08 -0800, Joerg wrote: On 2019-11-13 17:45, John B. wrote: On Wed, 13 Nov 2019 15:23:24 -0800, Joerg wrote: On 2019-11-13 14:49, John B. wrote: [...] Perhaps, today. But when I was a boy wood fires were apparently much better understood although no one worried about smoke in the sense of contaminating the atmosphere but certainly in the sense that they weren't burning the wood efficiently and therefore "wasting" wood... I remember the not so good old days when as a cyclist I came through small valleys or villages during winter and had to cough. There are undoubtedly lots of people who lived there and needlessly and gruesomely died of lung cancer because residents didn't know how to properly operate a wood stove. When I was a boy growing up in a northern New England town everyone heated their house with either wood or coal, some people, my paternal grandmother for example, were still cooking with wood, and I can't remember any fumes floating around. Granted that 50 or 60 year old memory is perhaps not so acute, but still, I think if the town had been covered with a choking cloud of smoke I would have remembered it. It's not the memory, it that you were used to it. Just like we all were used to the fumes of car traffic while nowadays I can immediately smell if a vintage car passing me had a stock engine or a modern one. You just wrote, " I came through small valleys or villages during winter and had to cough". Perhaps I should have been more explicate and said that I don't remember ever having to ca ugh when I walked down town. That is because I am sensitive to exhaust byproducts. When I come back via a county road during rush hour on my road bike I start coughing, especially when a lot of Diesels pass by. That clears up a few minutes after leaving that road. One of the many reasons why I prefer well-segregated bike paths and even more so MTB trails. As for your idea that it was because we were used to it, I think that you are wrong. We lived about a mile outside the built up area of the town and I walked to school and coming from the "country" with two houses in a half a mile to a built up area with a house every 50 yards I can't remember notice any bad smells. I think that you are exaggerating. No, that has been proven. People who were outdoors a lot in the 60's and 70's thought they were living in a clean environment. One generally only notices how bad it is when being transported from A to B quickly and in a contained environment such as an aircraft cabin or very fast train. I had that reset happen after working in Scotland and on a North Sea oil rig. Super clean air. When I flew back and stepped out of the aircraft at the Cologne/Bonn airport in Germany I thought I'd stepped into a stinky mess and that wasn't even during heavy traffic. I grew up there and had never noticed until then. This is also a reason why people who never smoked get lung cancer. It just happened to a friend of ours. She lived and jogged in Los Angeles in the 70's. [...] -- Regards, Joerg http://www.analogconsultants.com/ |
#106
|
|||
|
|||
Basso Loto [OT]
On Thu, 14 Nov 2019 21:55:18 +0000, David Scheidt wrote:
:Heat pumps can be a good deal, especially where winters are mild and :summers are hot enough to need AC. You're paying for AC hardware compressor, a couple of heat exchangers, etc.) to pump heat out in :summer, so why not add a few valves to pump heat in during the winter? You need to catch up. Heating with a heat pump makes sense economically in quite a lot of the US. Weirldy you describe the local situation, but many people here either keep or add additional heating capacity to reverse cycle air-con installations. It is the economics here. Electricvity as a heater is the most expensive form and only used by the uneducated. |
#107
|
|||
|
|||
Basso Loto [OT]
On Thu, 14 Nov 2019 15:20:45 -0800, Joerg wrote:
No, that has been proven. People who were outdoors a lot in the 60's and 70's thought they were living in a clean environment. One generally only notices how bad it is when being transported from A to B quickly and in a contained environment such as an aircraft cabin or very fast train. I had that reset happen after working in Scotland and on a North Sea oil rig. Super clean air. When I flew back and stepped out of the aircraft at the Cologne/Bonn airport in Germany I thought I'd stepped into a stinky mess and that wasn't even during heavy traffic. I grew up there and had never noticed until then. Sound is the same. Until you have a few weeks in a really quiet place, you might never realise how noisy your local environment is. A fact exploited by the hearing aid industry. This is also a reason why people who never smoked get lung cancer. It just happened to a friend of ours. She lived and jogged in Los Angeles in the 70's. If "have you ever smoke" is the only question from a doctor, immediately seek another. |
#108
|
|||
|
|||
Basso Loto [OT]
On 11/14/2019 4:55 PM, David Scheidt wrote:
Frank Krygowski wrote: :Heat pumps can be a good deal, especially where winters are mild and :summers are hot enough to need AC. You're paying for AC hardware compressor, a couple of heat exchangers, etc.) to pump heat out in :summer, so why not add a few valves to pump heat in during the winter? You need to catch up. Heating with a heat pump makes sense economically in quite a lot of the US. The COP of high end heat pumps is over 2 at -14F. It's over 4 at freezing. Gas is cheap these days, but very few places is it twice as cheap as elecricity. And in much of Candada, there is no gas, and houses are heated with resistive electric heaters. The pay back is pretty fast. I'm not convinced I need to "catch up." The first four or five sites I examined seem to agree with me. For example, https://www.homeadvisor.com/r/heat-pump-vs-furnace/ and https://www.trane.com/residential/en...right-for-you/ and https://www.pickhvac.com/faq/furnace...-vs-dual-fuel/ It's not just the COP. It's the life cycle cost of a gas system vs. a heat pump, including installation costs, maintenance costs, expected life, energy input costs, whether you need AC, etc. And some people have claimed less personal comfort with a heat pump, probably based on lower temperature of the circulating air. I agree, though, it would be no contest if it were a heat pump vs. electrical resistance heating. If gas is unavailable in much of Ontario, that would explain government promotion of heat pumps. -- - Frank Krygowski |
#109
|
|||
|
|||
Basso Loto [OT]
On Thu, 14 Nov 2019 15:20:45 -0800, Joerg
wrote: On 2019-11-14 14:48, John B. wrote: On Thu, 14 Nov 2019 12:38:08 -0800, Joerg wrote: On 2019-11-13 17:45, John B. wrote: On Wed, 13 Nov 2019 15:23:24 -0800, Joerg wrote: On 2019-11-13 14:49, John B. wrote: [...] Perhaps, today. But when I was a boy wood fires were apparently much better understood although no one worried about smoke in the sense of contaminating the atmosphere but certainly in the sense that they weren't burning the wood efficiently and therefore "wasting" wood... I remember the not so good old days when as a cyclist I came through small valleys or villages during winter and had to cough. There are undoubtedly lots of people who lived there and needlessly and gruesomely died of lung cancer because residents didn't know how to properly operate a wood stove. When I was a boy growing up in a northern New England town everyone heated their house with either wood or coal, some people, my paternal grandmother for example, were still cooking with wood, and I can't remember any fumes floating around. Granted that 50 or 60 year old memory is perhaps not so acute, but still, I think if the town had been covered with a choking cloud of smoke I would have remembered it. It's not the memory, it that you were used to it. Just like we all were used to the fumes of car traffic while nowadays I can immediately smell if a vintage car passing me had a stock engine or a modern one. You just wrote, " I came through small valleys or villages during winter and had to cough". Perhaps I should have been more explicate and said that I don't remember ever having to ca ugh when I walked down town. That is because I am sensitive to exhaust byproducts. When I come back via a county road during rush hour on my road bike I start coughing, especially when a lot of Diesels pass by. That clears up a few minutes after leaving that road. One of the many reasons why I prefer well-segregated bike paths and even more so MTB trails. As for your idea that it was because we were used to it, I think that you are wrong. We lived about a mile outside the built up area of the town and I walked to school and coming from the "country" with two houses in a half a mile to a built up area with a house every 50 yards I can't remember notice any bad smells. I think that you are exaggerating. No, that has been proven. People who were outdoors a lot in the 60's and 70's thought they were living in a clean environment. One generally only notices how bad it is when being transported from A to B quickly and in a contained environment such as an aircraft cabin or very fast train. I had that reset happen after working in Scotland and on a North Sea oil rig. Super clean air. When I flew back and stepped out of the aircraft at the Cologne/Bonn airport in Germany I thought I'd stepped into a stinky mess and that wasn't even during heavy traffic. I grew up there and had never noticed until then. Again I suggest that you exaggerate. I mentioned walking to school from an environment of two houses in a half a mile to houses side by side and never noticing anything, and you say that it was because the change was made slowly. But yet, walking by the city block size Woolen Mills further into town the smell was very noticeable as you walked past. This is also a reason why people who never smoked get lung cancer. It just happened to a friend of ours. She lived and jogged in Los Angeles in the 70's. Again I believe that you exaggerate, or at least medical science says that you do. The Mayo Clinic, for example, says that "... lung cancer also occurs in people who never smoked and in those who never had prolonged exposure to secondhand smoke. In these cases, there may be no clear cause of lung cancer." -- cheers, John B. |
#110
|
|||
|
|||
Basso Loto [OT]
On Fri, 15 Nov 2019 08:05:38 +0700, John B. wrote:
As for your idea that it was because we were used to it, I think that you are wrong. We lived about a mile outside the built up area of the town and I walked to school and coming from the "country" with two houses in a half a mile to a built up area with a house every 50 yards I can't remember notice any bad smells. I think that you are exaggerating. Naah, differnet noses. I'm crash hot on locating operating bakeries. some people can not even detect the biscuit factory when they are outside the door. No, that has been proven. People who were outdoors a lot in the 60's and 70's thought they were living in a clean environment. One generally only notices how bad it is when being transported from A to B quickly and in a contained environment such as an aircraft cabin or very fast train. I had that reset happen after working in Scotland and on a North Sea oil rig. Super clean air. When I flew back and stepped out of the aircraft at the Cologne/Bonn airport in Germany I thought I'd stepped into a stinky mess and that wasn't even during heavy traffic. I grew up there and had never noticed until then. Again I suggest that you exaggerate. I mentioned walking to school from an environment of two houses in a half a mile to houses side by side and never noticing anything, and you say that it was because the change was made slowly. But yet, walking by the city block size Woolen Mills further into town the smell was very noticeable as you walked past. This is also a reason why people who never smoked get lung cancer. It just happened to a friend of ours. She lived and jogged in Los Angeles in the 70's. Again I believe that you exaggerate, or at least medical science says that you do. The Mayo Clinic, for example, says that "... lung cancer also occurs in people who never smoked and in those who never had prolonged exposure to secondhand smoke. In these cases, there may be no clear cause of lung cancer." You've just added the random disease factor, which doesn't disprove his argument. Do you have a source of attributed causes of lung cancer? Of course, that is only as valid as the rigourness of the data collectors. |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
62 cm Basso | Tom Kunich | Marketplace | 2 | March 2nd 12 11:24 PM |
Basso all 3?? | Lee Golding | Racing | 4 | May 20th 06 09:42 AM |
Basso vs. Armstrong, where did Basso lose his time? | Chris M | Racing | 10 | July 22nd 05 05:43 PM |
Basso is out... | Keith | Racing | 0 | July 12th 05 04:04 PM |
said Basso | Thomas Lund | Racing | 0 | May 27th 05 10:34 PM |