Interesting findings on the internet

[BU508A]

David Savery Electrical Services is dealing with a customer aka angry Karen.
Beware, the video is two hours long but it is divided into chapters (see the comment of the video).

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=d939Io0Flp0

[Specmaster]

David Savery Electrical Services is dealing with a customer aka angry Karen.
Beware, the video is two hours long but it is divided into chapters (see the comment of the video).

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=d939Io0Flp0

Wow, I have seen many of his videos but not this one, that really is the customer from hell, I don't know how he kept his cool with her. It was a good job that so many neighbours also phoned the police, otherwise I doubt any police would have turned up at all.

[BU508A]

10 MHz distribution amplifier for the lab. Part 1.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PEcD3T43syY

[AVGresponding]

David Savery Electrical Services is dealing with a customer aka angry Karen.
Beware, the video is two hours long but it is divided into chapters (see the comment of the video).

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=d939Io0Flp0

Wow, I have seen many of his videos but not this one, that really is the customer from hell, I don't know how he kept his cool with her. It was a good job that so many neighbours also phoned the police, otherwise I doubt any police would have turned up at all.

As I've pointed out in the comments for the video and in the EEVBlog forum where it's linked, this poor woman has serious learning difficulties. She is not a "Karen".

[BU508A]

David Savery Electrical Services is dealing with a customer aka angry Karen.
Beware, the video is two hours long but it is divided into chapters (see the comment of the video).

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=d939Io0Flp0

Wow, I have seen many of his videos but not this one, that really is the customer from hell, I don't know how he kept his cool with her. It was a good job that so many neighbours also phoned the police, otherwise I doubt any police would have turned up at all.

As I've pointed out in the comments for the video and in the EEVBlog forum where it's linked, this poor woman has serious learning difficulties. She is not a "Karen".

My remark was related to the video title "The Impossible Angry Karen" but personally I think, you are probably right.

[AVGresponding]

Wow, I have seen many of his videos but not this one, that really is the customer from hell, I don't know how he kept his cool with her. It was a good job that so many neighbours also phoned the police, otherwise I doubt any police would have turned up at all.

As I've pointed out in the comments for the video and in the EEVBlog forum where it's linked, this poor woman has serious learning difficulties. She is not a "Karen".

My remark was related to the video title "The Impossible Angry Karen" but personally I think, you are probably right.

My remark was directed mainly towards Graham, since we had already discussed the matter elsewhere.

[Specmaster]

Just stumbled upon this spotless railway in France, so clean in fact that it is a clean room and is used to connect 2 other clean rooms on opposite side of a road way, very interesting.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=b5Oy29TEVOE

[Specmaster]

Now this is a good use for solar power, just a shame it can't be used in other locations.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6Y4QGFte3T8

[Specmaster]

Could these turbines possibly be the future of power generation and reduce these stupidly high costs, and assist with the EV charging infrastructure?

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=83FqqfODmmg

[Specmaster]

Hmm, this is fascinating indeed, the concept of introducing digital speedos in cars was to prevent unscrupulous sellers/dealers removing miles from the car's history? It seems Police forces are openly breaking the law and also turning a blind eye to the now widespread practise of winding the mileage back, especially on emergency vehicles as they don't get MOT'd whole they are in service, that is only a requirement in the civilian world. Does the same practise go in the armed forces I wonder, it needs stamping out and if the presenter of this video is to be believed, and I think he should as he has clear evidence of this, it also shows that the main stream media is also biased.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YEryJeBcg-8

[tggzzz]

Could these turbines possibly be the future of power generation and reduce these stupidly high costs, and assist with the EV charging infrastructure?

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=83FqqfODmmg

No more nor less than smaller wind turbines. Large turbines are primarily an "economy of scale" issue.

Large turbines don't alter the dispatchability of wind power generation; the CDF is unchanged. The rule of thumb from a year's GridWatch stats are that the peak UK-wide generated power will be X% of the peak power for X% of the time. Hence for 1 week/year the power will be less than 2% of peak.

That's a problem when a blocking high pressure zone sits over the UK for days/weeks at a time.

[mnementh]

Yeah, I expect the popularity of these ever-taller windmills has much less to do with the numbers than it has to do with the whole "peen" thing. Let's put these monstrosities in context, the same way one of the biggest manufacturers sells them; compared against other monuments to someone's manhood built over the ages.

Keep in mind that those 18MW sea-buoy designs are supposed to be even taller; somewhere between the height of the Empire State Building and that of the Eiffel Tower.

The other thing to be mindful of is that these things are massive mechanical devices, and a technology that (thanks to half a century of being strangled by the current big energy paradigm) is literally still in it infancy, and these monsters are failing at an alarming rate. Just think aboot the environmental impact of all that heavy industry, then it going to waste from a failure after a year or two, then the necessary cleanup after failure.

This article (stolen wholecloth from behind a paywall - hopefully they jump our shit) on Bloomberg is likely just the tip of the peen... err, iceberg.

https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles ... wing-pains

Wind Turbines Taller Than the Statue of Liberty Are Falling Over

Breakdowns of towers and blades have bedeviled manufacturers in the US and Europe.



A Vestas megawatt turbine, missing its nose cone, at Portland General Electric’s Biglow Canyon wind farm in Wasco County, Oregon, last year.
Photographer: Dave Killen/The Oregonian

On a calm, sunny day last June, Mike Willey was feeding his cattle when he got a call from the local sheriff’s dispatcher. A motorist had reported that one of the huge turbines at a nearby wind farm had collapsed in dramatic fashion. Willey, chief of the volunteer fire department in Ames, 90 miles northwest of Oklahoma City, set out to survey the scene.

The steel tower, which once stood hundreds of feet tall, was buckled in half, and the turbine blades, whose rotation took the machine higher than the Statue of Liberty, were splayed across the wheat field below. The turbine, made by General Electric Co., had been in operation less than a year. “It fell pretty much right on top of itself,” Willey says.

Another GE turbine of the same model collapsed in Colorado a few days later. That wind farm’s owner-operator, NextEra Energy Inc., later attributed it to a blade flaw and said it and GE had taken steps to prevent future mishaps. A spokesperson for GE declined to say what went wrong in both cases in a statement to Bloomberg.

The instances are part of a rash of recent wind turbine malfunctions across the US and Europe, ranging from failures of key components to full collapses. Some industry veterans say they’re happening more often, even if the events are occurring at only a small fraction of installed machines. The problems have added hundreds of millions of dollars in costs for the three largest Western turbine makers, GE, Vestas Wind Systems and Siemens Energy’s Siemens Gamesa unit; and they could result in more expensive insurance policies—a potential setback for the push to abandon fossil fuels and fight climate change.

The race to add production lines for ever-bigger turbines is cited as a major culprit by people in the industry. “We’re seeing these failures happening in a shorter time frame on the newer turbines, and that’s quite concerning,” says Fraser McLachlan, chief executive officer of London-based GCube Underwriting Ltd., which insures about $3.5 billion in wind assets in 38 countries. If the failure rate keeps climbing, he says, insurance premiums could increase or new coverage limits could be imposed.


Damaged blades hang from a wind turbine near Guymon, Oklahoma, in 2021. Photographer: Chris Landsberger/The Oklahoman
(This one certainly seems an appropriate metaphor for that "peen" argument, doesn't it?) - mnem

Vestas, GE and Siemens Gamesa have confirmed in statements to Bloomberg and in recent calls with analysts that the push to rapidly develop more powerful turbines has led to challenges. The companies say they are focusing on improving manufacturing operations and have acknowledged that it’s time to tap the brakes on the introduction of designs. “Rapid innovation strains manufacturing and the broader supply chain,” GE CEO Larry Culp said on an earnings call in October. “It takes time to stabilize production and quality on these new products.”

There’s no publicly available industrywide data on turbine failures, making it tough to paint a complete picture of changes in their performance over time. But Vestas and GE have said the shares of their machines in the field that are unable to produce power are elevated, even if it’s still a small proportion of their installed fleets. Siemens Energy revised its earnings outlook for 2023 downward this month, citing higher-than-expected costs caused by flaws in Siemens Gamesa’s installed turbines.

Because wind farms often generate power from scores of turbines across a site, they can continue to produce electricity even if one or more machines go down, limiting the fallout. Still, examples of the machines going awry have garnered public attention. A massive 784-foot-tall turbine in Germany collapsed in September 2021. A big new turbine in Lithuania fell in March 2022. And a blade partially detached on one in Sweden last July.

Orsted A/S, the world’s largest developer of offshore wind farms, asked authorities in April to stop maritime traffic near some of its sites after blades fell from one of its turbines off the coast of Denmark. Shares of Siemens Gamesa, the manufacturer, tumbled on the news.

Larger turbines have helped propel a global expansion that’s seen the installed wind generation capacity surpass 840 gigawatts in 2021, up from less than 100 gigawatts in 2007, according to BloombergNEF data. With builders designing blades as long as a football field to capture more wind energy, developers can install fewer turbines to generate the same amount of power. That’s helped keep project costs down, which is a big reason the price of wind electricity has fallen dramatically in the past decade.


This 784-foot-tall wind turbine in Haltern, Germany, collapsed in 2021. Photographer: TF-Images/Getty Images

But soaring material costs and supply-chain woes have recently squeezed the balance sheets at leading manufacturers, threatening to slow investment and potentially hobbling the development of the US offshore wind industry before it really gets going. The quality stumbles add to the turbine makers’ challenges.

Siemens Gamesa encountered issues that led to design changes and delays while ramping up production of its largest onshore wind machine, known as the 5.X. In a statement, Siemens Gamesa said it’s addressing the quality and reliability of its products in order to “improve the value proposition to customers.”

Vestas Wind Systems A/S saw annual warranty provisions jump from roughly €600 million in 2019 to almost €1.2 billion in 2020 and 2021. The Danish company says the supply chain wasn’t ready to handle the pace of product introductions by manufacturers, which has contributed to project delays, cost increases and quality challenges. “We need a profitable and scalable wind industry to create a net-zero future, and this requires we continue to mature the entire value chain of renewables,” the company said in a statement.

GE, which reports fourth-quarter earnings on Jan. 24, took a $500 million charge in the third quarter to cover warranty costs and repairs on its turbines. The company has installed turbines capable of producing 40 gigawatts of wind power since 2017, introducing several more powerful machines along the way.

These days manufacturers are focused on producing machines with better reliability, at scale. In an interview this month, Henrik Andersen, the Vestas CEO, said that turbines are big enough for now, and that increasing production will be the key challenge of the next decade. Siemens Gamesa’s CEO Jochen Eickholt has told investors the company is working to increase standardization among its products, to prune a portfolio that had become too broad. GE’s Culp said in the October earnings call that his company is likewise shifting to “workhorse products, so we and our suppliers can implement more repeatable manufacturing processes.”

The pressure to invest in green projects is so intense that breakdown fears haven’t yet slowed the flood of money into wind farms, says Oliver Metcalfe, head of wind research at BloombergNEF. The failure issue has become a concern for bankers and other creditors, however, who may begin to demand higher interest rates, he says. “There’s a hesitancy among insurers and lenders about these big models that haven’t been tested yet,” Metcalfe says. “The technology alarm bells are ringing.”

But there's a BIG problem with wind... one that nobody's even talking aboot:

By its nature, wind power is not "free". It ultimately derives its energy from the gravitic interactions of the earth with the sun and moon, which cause the rotation of the planet and moon. It is also a form of solar energy, just like geothermal. But unlike photovoltaic, every gigawatt of energy derived from a turbine ultimately causes an equal and opposite reaction in the rotation of the earth.

There is a finite amount of wind generation we can deploy before we start to slow that rotation in a dangerous manner; and there is already mounting scientific evidence that our existence on the planet and the structures & energy we expend have already slowed that rotation by a tiny but measurable percentage just in the time we've been measuring and accounting such things. And we have no idea so far just how much is too much, or how much environmental damage we've already done in the aspect of our existence, because we simply haven't studied the question in any material manner.

The short version: Don't look for Wind Power to be the magic bullet that saves us all. It is much likelier to be the last nail in our coffin. MAYBE even worse overall than nuclear energy.

mnem

[tggzzz]

By its nature, wind power is not "free". It ultimately derives its energy from the gravitic interactions of the earth with the sun and moon, which cause the rotation of the planet and moon. It is also a form of solar energy, just like geothermal. But unlike photovoltaic, every gigawatt of energy derived from a turbine ultimately causes an equal and opposite reaction in the rotation of the earth.

There is a finite amount of wind generation we can deploy before we start to slow that rotation in a dangerous manner; and there is already mounting scientific evidence that our existence on the planet and the structures & energy we expend have already slowed that rotation by a tiny but measurable percentage just in the time we've been measuring and accounting such things. And we have no idea so far just how much is too much, or how much environmental damage we've already done in the aspect of our existence, because we simply haven't studied the question in any material manner.

Don't believe it. Sounds like "The LHC will create a mini-black hole", "5G makes us sick", "if you go faster than 40mph all the air will be sucked out the railway carriage", and similar.

But convince me otherwise: numbers and derivations please, but no adjectives.

Compare and contrast the numbers with the understood and demonstrated effects of plate tectonics and tidal friction between the earth and the moon.

[Specmaster]

One thing is very evident, things will and do go wrong and when they do, with these wind generators, you certainly do not want to be in their vicinity when they do. There is a lot of mass up there a top of those towers and when they start to fall apart, its a long way down and will anybody or anything in its way a good arse kicking.

[tggzzz]

One thing is very evident, things will and do go wrong and when they do, with these wind generators, you certainly do not want to be in their vicinity when they do. There is a lot of mass up there a top of those towers and when they start to fall apart, its a long way down and will anybody or anything in its way a good arse kicking.

All large rotating machinery contains a lot of kinetic energy.

ISTR that, a few decades ago, when a conventional plant generator rotorcame off its bearings, it left a cartoon cutout hole in the power station wall, and ended up a mile away.

Flywheels have been proposed as an energy store, but they can't store too much energy, and the damage can't be contained within the site when rapid disassembly occurs.

[AVGresponding]

Flywheels have been proposed as an energy store, but they can't store too much energy, and the damage can't be contained within the site when rapid disassembly occurs.

Best bet for that is subterranean vertical axis flywheels. Still, it's not how I'd choose to do it. Still further, when you're storing a large amount of energy, whatever the storage method, if something goes wrong it's going to be spectacular and newsworthy.

[Specmaster]

In another thread we are discussing the future of mankind if we fail to stop the burning of fossil fuel and go full on EV vehicles mode. Which quite frankly seems to rather futile when you compare the probability of the impact when you accept that fact we know for certain that the planet has had cyclic warming and cooling phases during its history. We already have considerably far bigger issues that have the immediate potential to end all life on the planet unless we manage that threat very carefully indeed, and I'm not talking about the nuclear threat, let Tom Scott do the explaining, its all brought about humans greed.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=E4nZDSLdIiM

[mnementh]

By its nature, wind power is not "free". It ultimately derives its energy from the gravitic interactions of the earth with the sun and moon, which cause the rotation of the planet and moon. It is also a form of solar energy, just like geothermal. But unlike photovoltaic, every gigawatt of energy derived from a turbine ultimately causes an equal and opposite reaction in the rotation of the earth.

There is a finite amount of wind generation we can deploy before we start to slow that rotation in a dangerous manner; and there is already mounting scientific evidence that our existence on the planet and the structures & energy we expend have already slowed that rotation by a tiny but measurable percentage just in the time we've been measuring and accounting such things. And we have no idea so far just how much is too much, or how much environmental damage we've already done in the aspect of our existence, because we simply haven't studied the question in any material manner.

Don't believe it. Sounds like "The LHC will create a mini-black hole", "5G makes us sick", "if you go faster than 40mph all the air will be sucked out the railway carriage", and similar.

But convince me otherwise: numbers and derivations please, but no adjectives.

Compare and contrast the numbers with the understood and demonstrated effects of plate tectonics and tidal friction between the earth and the moon.

Your argument sounds like all the usual head-in-the-sand that brought us to this point; we're all smart enough here to realize that the laws of thermodynamics don't give a flying fuck if we believe in them. The fact we haven't studied this in any material manner is the problem; not whether or not what I've just described is really happening. By definition it has to be. The question is just one of how much damage are we doing.

I mean, unless you're really going to argue that Newtonian physics don't apply just because the conversation is inconvenient.

mnem
*toddles off to nuke a chook for dinner*

[tggzzz]

By its nature, wind power is not "free". It ultimately derives its energy from the gravitic interactions of the earth with the sun and moon, which cause the rotation of the planet and moon. It is also a form of solar energy, just like geothermal. But unlike photovoltaic, every gigawatt of energy derived from a turbine ultimately causes an equal and opposite reaction in the rotation of the earth.

There is a finite amount of wind generation we can deploy before we start to slow that rotation in a dangerous manner; and there is already mounting scientific evidence that our existence on the planet and the structures & energy we expend have already slowed that rotation by a tiny but measurable percentage just in the time we've been measuring and accounting such things. And we have no idea so far just how much is too much, or how much environmental damage we've already done in the aspect of our existence, because we simply haven't studied the question in any material manner.

Don't believe it. Sounds like "The LHC will create a mini-black hole", "5G makes us sick", "if you go faster than 40mph all the air will be sucked out the railway carriage", and similar.

But convince me otherwise: numbers and derivations please, but no adjectives.

Compare and contrast the numbers with the understood and demonstrated effects of plate tectonics and tidal friction between the earth and the moon.

Your argument sounds like all the usual head-in-the-sand that brought us to this point; we're all smart enough here to realize that the laws of thermodynamics don't give a flying fuck if we believe in them. The fact we haven't studied this in any material manner is the problem; not whether or not what I've just described is really happening. By definition it has to be. The question is just one of how much damage are we doing.

I mean, unless you're really going to argue that Newtonian physics don't apply just because the conversation is inconvenient.

In that vein, please justify your contention by using classic physics to show how the momentum of the planet is changing, including estimating the magnitude of the changes. Compare and contrast with the measured consequences of large earthquakes. I will listen. As per the reasons/examples below, "numbers, not adjectives".

Here's examples of how to do that, by (very) reputable scientists...

A useful general-purpose motto is the tagline of the justly famous site/book which is lauded by all "sides", from "big energy" to "hardcore greens". Numbers, not adjectives. https://withouthotair.com/ which has quaint æsthetics but superb content.

Here's another example of someone knowledgeable applying numbers to classic physics. They make the assumptions, equations and numbers explicit, and come to some disquieting conclusions. https://dothemath.ucsd.edu/ "Using physics and estimation to assess energy, growth, options".

My favourite is how he demolishes economists usual unstated presumption that growth should and can continue indefinitely. Since modern growth is closely associated with growth in energy consumption, he projects the historic energy growth into the future to see what would happen. Treating the earth as a black-body radiator. Both those starting points are valid and justified. The consequence in 400 years time is implausible, therefore the economists' presumptions have to be implausible "Exponential Economist Meets Finite Physicist" https://dothemath.ucsd.edu/2012/04/econ ... physicist/

And right up our street is his (new) textbook "Energy and Human Ambitions on a Finite Planet; Assessing and Adapting to Planetary Limits" https://escholarship.org/uc/item/9js5291m

Looks like I have found some new fireside/bedtime reading; excellent

[AVGresponding]

Jeebus fecking Crisplets, I never expected to be reading bollocks like this in here.

Here's an explanation for the ones that count with their fingers: https://www.quora.com/Do-wind-turbines- ... uniformly.

[mnementh]

Thanks. I stand corrected. While I still find it hard to believe we can actually be sortof getting something for nothing given all the mechanical losses involved, I'll accept that answer.

mnem

*toddles off to do something anniversary-ily*

[mnementh]

You know, now that I'm done being embarrassed... just a friendly reminder @AVGResponding : No need to be an unconscionable dick about it. This is exactly the kind of BS I was talking aboot the last time I said you were being a dick. Nobody in here wants to hear that kind of unmitigated vitriol.

mnem

[tggzzz]

Thanks. I stand corrected. While I still find it hard to believe we can actually be sortof getting something for nothing given ...

We aren't, of course.

Neither are we when we have heat pumps that are more than 100% efficient.

Nor are when, as implemented in 1238AD and patented over 200 years ago, a stream of water at one hydraulic pressure (i.e. head) can be used output water at a higher hydraulic pressure - i.e. effectively water flowing uphill. Apparently there were 3 such devices in use about 5 miles from me, until mains water arrived in 1958 - and a farm continued to use theirs for livestock well into the 60s.

There was even a variant that managed to achieve that with no moving parts, raising water 110ft for irrigation.
https://npgallery.nps.gov/NRHP/GetAsset ... 00631_text

[Cerebus]

Thanks. I stand corrected. While I still find it hard to believe we can actually be sortof getting something for nothing given ...

We aren't, of course.

Neither are we when we have heat pumps that are more than 100% efficient.

Nor are when, as implemented in 1238AD and patented over 200 years ago, a stream of water at one hydraulic pressure (i.e. head) can be used output water at a higher hydraulic pressure - i.e. effectively water flowing uphill. Apparently there were 3 such devices in use about 5 miles from me, until mains water arrived in 1958 - and a farm continued to use theirs for livestock well into the 60s.

There was even a variant that managed to achieve that with no moving parts, raising water 110ft for irrigation.
https://npgallery.nps.gov/NRHP/GetAsset ... 00631_text

I am indirectly reminded of one of my favourite "something for nothing" machines - the Kelvin water dropper electrostatic generator.



If I had a natural source of constant running water in my garden I think I'd build one, perhaps run a little electric fence off it complete with warning spark discharges.

[Zenith]

I have a friend who had a project to make a hydraulic ram pump. He gathered the parts but never got round to it. He said there was one on his grandad's farm. I looked at it and came to the conclusion it would be like designing a working two stroke engine - lots of non-linear effects and critically dimensioned parts. To get it to work well would take a lot of trial and error. He said the one on the farm would click away. When it was silent they'd have to give it a kick to start it again.

Not quite something for nothing but getting a lot for your money is The Oxford Bell, which has been been going on the same battery since 1840.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UtQGYz4 ... l=TomScott

I came across a clock in a book on horology which never needed winding. The weights were raised by a ratchet arrangement and a mercury barometer. There were iron weights floating on the mercury which were raised and lowered with changes in atmospheric pressure and worked the ratchet.