Dirty Electricity

[Phil Allison]

"fritz"
"Phil Allison"

So all those people with older CF globes that consume a lot of reactive
power ..

** CFLs have NO no reactive power component.


Actually they do.

** Fraid you are wrong.

I thought they had fixed the low PF problem with modern
CFL designs, but this doesn't seem to be the case.
Here is a link with some actual CFL PF measurements.
http://www.leonardo-energy.org/reactive-power-due-cfl-lighting

** Got nothing to do with the fact there is no REACTIVE component in the
load presented by modern CFLs.

The item you quoted actually CONTRADICTS you.

The poor PF of typical CFLs is not due to any phase angle existing between
the AC supply voltage and current and as a result cannot be helped by adding
a capacitor across the AC supply.



...... Phil

 

[no one]

ummmmmmmm theres a afwul lot of THEORY,, floating around here on
that device , has any one actually tried it ?? any body knows that what
happens in THEORY DOESNT ALWAYS HAPPEN AS ITS SUPPOSED TO..



"Phil Allison" <phil_a@tpg.com.au> wrote in message
news:8qsng1F34uU1@mid.individual.net...

"kreed"

If it does reduce the current used by an appliance, it will also
reduce its efficiency at what it does,

** Simple capacitor based PFC correction has NO effect on the current
flowing in the actual device - how can it since the device is still
connected directly to the AC supply ??

Think about it.



.... Phil

 

[fritz]

"Phil Allison" <phil_a@tpg.com.au> wrote in message news:8qu3ehFl5kU1@mid.individual.net...

"fritz"
"Phil Allison"

So all those people with older CF globes that consume a lot of reactive power ..

** CFLs have NO no reactive power component.


Actually they do.

** Fraid you are wrong.

I thought they had fixed the low PF problem with modern
CFL designs, but this doesn't seem to be the case.
Here is a link with some actual CFL PF measurements.
http://www.leonardo-energy.org/reactive-power-due-cfl-lighting


** Got nothing to do with the fact there is no REACTIVE component in the load presented by modern CFLs.

The item you quoted actually CONTRADICTS you.

I don't think so. Read it again and please quote the parts from the link that contradict me.
http://www.leonardo-energy.org/reactive-power-due-cfl-lighting
Are you trying to claim that 'harmonic reactive power' is not 'reactive power' ?

Apparent power is the vector sum of real power and reactive power.
If the PF is not unity, there must be a reactive power component, by definition.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/AC_power

The poor PF of typical CFLs is not due to any phase angle existing between the AC supply voltage and current and as a result
cannot be helped by adding a capacitor across the AC supply.

If the PF is not unity a phase angle MUST exist between V and I, by definition of PF.

 

[fritz]

"Phil Allison" <phil_a@tpg.com.au> wrote in message news:8qu3ehFl5kU1@mid.individual.net...

"fritz"
"Phil Allison"

So all those people with older CF globes that consume a lot of reactive power ..

** CFLs have NO no reactive power component.


Actually they do.

** Fraid you are wrong.

Check this link....
http://cemalighting.com/contents/view/learning/lighting_technology/compact_fluorescent_lamps/high_power_factor_cfl

 

[Sylvia Else]

On 3/02/2011 12:17 AM, fritz wrote:

"Sylvia Else"<sylvia@not.here.invalid> wrote in message news:8qt1j4F7a0U1@mid.individual.net...
On 2/02/2011 11:08 PM, fritz wrote:

"Sylvia Else"<sylvia@not.here.invalid> wrote in message news:8qstbuFalmU1@mid.individual.net...
On 2/02/2011 9:16 PM, fritz wrote:

"Sylvia Else"<sylvia@not.here.invalid> wrote in message news:8qrpfmFkt8U1@mid.individual.net...
On 2/02/2011 11:01 AM, TonyS wrote:
Today Tonight has done it again.
Last night they promoted this Earthwise device which apparently saves up
to 35% electricity:
http://www.earthwisepowersavers.com.au/

"Independent testing so far shows promising results. Electrical Engineer
Greg Paxton has worked with the CSIRO and federal and state governments,
which are interested in the Power Saver's potential.

It certainly has the potential to reduce the need to increase transmission capacity, and the need to build power factor
correction
infrastructure,

PF correction at residential consumers will not reduce the transmission
capacity requirement to any significant degree, even if every home had
one of these rip-offs plugged in. The peak load requirement comes
from things like ovens and water heaters which are unity PF. Other large
domestic inductive loads usually already have PF correction - e.g airconditioners.

My airconditioner is a good way off unity power factor,

Have you actually measured the PF of your A/C ? How did you do it ? What was it ?

I notice you have not answered this question, now have you measured the PF of
your A/C or not ?

The figures for continuous (not startup) current and power on the label
attached to it imply a non-unity PF.

READ THE LINK
http://powerelectronics.com/power_management/motor_power_management/705PET23.pdf
Check out the savings for an A/C with perfect PF correction (not the hit-or-miss scam box)

and it's not as if people turn of their low PF appliances at times of peak demand.

You are missing the point - the large current consuming devices determine the peak transmission
current capacity. Low PF low current appliances do not add significantly to the peak currents required by
the main loads like hotplates, ovens, radiators etc.

I question that they do not add significantly. They are not a large proportion, but they still have to be handled. Do power factor
correction in the home, and you can delay the next transmission line, switching station and transformer upgrade. Delaying an
upgrade is worth money.

Bullshit.
There is no need for PF correction in the home. Transmission lines terminate in sub-stations that have
PF correction anyway.

I visited one of the snowy mountain hydroelectric stations once (can't
remember which one). They run, or ran, public tours. As we were looking
at the turbine hall, the guide commented that one of the turbines had
just been switched from generating to power-factor correction.

PF correction is best done at each load anyway, designed for the impedance of that load, not with
a scam box that cannot possibly cope with a range of reactive loads.





You cannot use a single fixed-value passive device (e.g. capacitor) to correct
PF unless it is matched to the actual reactive load. For example, a washing machine
motor will draw a wide range of reactive current depending on whether it is agitating,
spin-drying etc. You need different PF correction for each load, not a one-size-fits-all
rip-off box at the power point.

Where is it stated that the device in question is passive?

Sigh..Quoted from 'How It Works' at the Earthwank Power Scammer website
# This is achieved by supplying electricity locally at the load by the use of specially designed capacitor.
# This advanced capacitor stores the additional electricity needed for stabilizing electric current within an inductive load.
# Earthwise Power Saver does not consume electricity itself ...

They can still be switched in and out.

FFS
Then why did they say CAPACITOR not CAPACITORS, Einstein ? These scammers wouldn't miss a chance to
claim the expensive box had MULTIPLE capacitors if it really did, would they ?

Who knows how a scammer reasons?

Now, Einstein, put these claims together and you get a capacitor, a passive device even if it as advanced one (chuckle),
all active devices consume electricity so the Earthwank Power Scammer cannot be an active device by their own admission.

I could happily put down the no-power consumption claim to simply being a lie, or they'll argue that they meant no-net power
consumption (i.e. it saves more than it uses, despite not actually saving any). They don't seem overly bothered by such things.
The box looks like it's designed to enhance heat dissipation.

For fucks sake Sylvia, if the pricks are going to lie about something as basic as power consumption they are going to
lie about everything else - if they are not lying outright, then they are just completely technically ignorant and/or STUPID -
either way
THEY HAVE NO CREDIBILITY !
Oh - did it ever occur to you that they build the box to look expensive - looks like a car-amp case to me - so the suckers might
think it
actually works ?

It would be nice to see inside one. But unlike many other things claimed
by scammers, power factor correction is at least possible, and it's
notable that their demonstration video concentrates on current, which
power factor correction would reduce, not on power, which it doesn't,
even though power saving is the claim they're trying to support.

Whether this box actually does power factor correction is ultimately not
something that can be determined by discussion in a newsgroup.

Sylvia.

 

[Sylvia Else]

On 3/02/2011 9:28 AM, no one wrote:

ummmmmmmm theres a afwul lot of THEORY,, floating around here on
that device , has any one actually tried it ?? any body knows that what
happens in THEORY DOESNT ALWAYS HAPPEN AS ITS SUPPOSED TO..

It's true that sometimes factors that one had overlooked, or considered
negligible, turn out to impact on the outcome. In that sense the
particular theoretical model applied didn't predict the outcome as it
was expected.

Very occasionally, the laws of physics as presently understood turn out
to be not quite right, and have to be tweaked. It's been a while since
that happened, and it would be truly amazing if the tweaking had any
measurable effect in a domestic environment.

It's also true that the proof of the pudding is in the eating, but we
know that there are any number of people out there who are willing to
relieve naive consumers off their hard earned money in exchange for
misrepresented junk. Absent a theoretical model (which the purveyors of
this device haven't provided) which predicts a power saving, there's
really little point in putting it to the test, because we know what the
outcome will be.

Sylvia.

"Phil Allison"<phil_a@tpg.com.au> wrote in message
news:8qsng1F34uU1@mid.individual.net...

"kreed"

If it does reduce the current used by an appliance, it will also
reduce its efficiency at what it does,

** Simple capacitor based PFC correction has NO effect on the current
flowing in the actual device - how can it since the device is still
connected directly to the AC supply ??

Think about it.



.... Phil

 

[fritz]

"Sylvia Else" <sylvia@not.here.invalid> wrote in message news:8qu7fdFfkaU1@mid.individual.net...

On 3/02/2011 12:17 AM, fritz wrote:

"Sylvia Else"<sylvia@not.here.invalid> wrote in message news:8qt1j4F7a0U1@mid.individual.net...
On 2/02/2011 11:08 PM, fritz wrote:

"Sylvia Else"<sylvia@not.here.invalid> wrote in message news:8qstbuFalmU1@mid.individual.net...
On 2/02/2011 9:16 PM, fritz wrote:

"Sylvia Else"<sylvia@not.here.invalid> wrote in message news:8qrpfmFkt8U1@mid.individual.net...
On 2/02/2011 11:01 AM, TonyS wrote:
Today Tonight has done it again.
Last night they promoted this Earthwise device which apparently saves up
to 35% electricity:
http://www.earthwisepowersavers.com.au/

"Independent testing so far shows promising results. Electrical Engineer
Greg Paxton has worked with the CSIRO and federal and state governments,
which are interested in the Power Saver's potential.

It certainly has the potential to reduce the need to increase transmission capacity, and the need to build power factor
correction
infrastructure,

PF correction at residential consumers will not reduce the transmission
capacity requirement to any significant degree, even if every home had
one of these rip-offs plugged in. The peak load requirement comes
from things like ovens and water heaters which are unity PF. Other large
domestic inductive loads usually already have PF correction - e.g airconditioners.

My airconditioner is a good way off unity power factor,

Have you actually measured the PF of your A/C ? How did you do it ? What was it ?

I notice you have not answered this question, now have you measured the PF of
your A/C or not ?

The figures for continuous (not startup) current and power on the label attached to it imply a non-unity PF.

Really ? So you haven't actually measured it all, have you ?
What is the brand and model ? What are the figures on the label, perhaps you have
misinterpreted them ?

This might interest you.

"The manufacturers of power factor devices frequently claim that air conditioners have
low power factors. During development we measured the power factor of some units.
At least the ones we have tested were already compensated internally very well.
So no improvement potential here. Even our cheap Hitachi window unit has a power
factor of 1.0 with maximum deviations to 0.99 inductive and 0.99 capactitive."
http://www.aircosaver.com/support_techniques.php

 

[Phil Allison]

"fritz"

** Oh dear - here we go again for what must be the hundredth time -
explaining what PF is to someone who damn well ought to know already.

** CFLs have NO no reactive power component.

Actually they do.

** Fraid you are wrong.

I thought they had fixed the low PF problem with modern
CFL designs, but this doesn't seem to be the case.
Here is a link with some actual CFL PF measurements.
http://www.leonardo-energy.org/reactive-power-due-cfl-lighting


** Got nothing to do with the fact there is no REACTIVE component in the
load presented by modern CFLs.

The item you quoted actually CONTRADICTS you.

I don't think so.

** It does all over the place - but you are too blind to see it.

Are you trying to claim that 'harmonic reactive power' is not 'reactive
power' ?

** Fraid there is no such animal as "harmonic reactive power".

Apparent power is the vector sum of real power and reactive power.
If the PF is not unity, there must be a reactive power component, by
definition.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/AC_power

** The definition of PF given in that article is:

"The ratio between real power and apparent power in a circuit is called the
power factor."

The definition of "apparent power" is:

" Apparent power is conventionally expressed in volt-amperes (VA) since it
is the product of rms voltage and rms current."

So, the definition of PF is:

Real power / VA ( where V and A are both in rms values. )

Notice - there is no sign of " cos phi " in sight !!!!

Means there is no need for a phase angle to exist for the PF to be low.

All it takes is that the current wave have a higher ratio of RMS to average
( rectified ) value than a sine wave does.

For a sine wave, the RMS to average ratio is 1.11 - this is the correction
factor built into most AC volt meters so they show the RMS value for sine
waves accurately ( but nothing else ).

For the sort of spiky wave a CFL draws, the ratio is about 2.0.

Hence the PF is around 0.55.


...... Phil

 

[Phil Allison]

"Stupider than Anyone ELSE on the Planet"

** Burn the Witch !!

Whether this box actually does power factor correction is ultimately not
something that can be determined by discussion in a newsgroup.

** But is shown in the damn video !!!!

The display on the meter shows PF in the corner - it changes from 0.68 to
0.97.

The voice over describes the unit as:

"... a capacitor based, residential power conditioner. "

It could not be any CLEARER - you fucking mad Witch !!


BTW:

To get the PF of that ( unloaded ) motor up to 0.97 is not possible without
prior knowledge of exactly what capacitance is needed and then using that
exact amount for the test.

The test is a complete crock.


..... Phil

 

[fritz]

"Phil Allison" <phil_a@tpg.com.au> wrote in message news:8qu8ouFnbeU1@mid.individual.net...

"fritz"

** Oh dear - here we go again for what must be the hundredth time - explaining what PF is to someone who damn well ought to
know already.

Or the other way round.

** CFLs have NO no reactive power component.

Actually they do.

** Fraid you are wrong.

I thought they had fixed the low PF problem with modern
CFL designs, but this doesn't seem to be the case.
Here is a link with some actual CFL PF measurements.
http://www.leonardo-energy.org/reactive-power-due-cfl-lighting


** Got nothing to do with the fact there is no REACTIVE component in the load presented by modern CFLs.

The item you quoted actually CONTRADICTS you.

I don't think so.

** It does all over the place - but you are too blind to see it.

Really ? Then perhaps you could actually quote something from the link
that contradicts me ?
http://www.leonardo-energy.org/reactive-power-due-cfl-lighting

Are you trying to claim that 'harmonic reactive power' is not 'reactive power' ?


** Fraid there is no such animal as "harmonic reactive power".

It is used in some circles to describe the effect harmonic currents
have on PF. Like the link which I am waiting for a quote that
contradicts me.
http://www.leonardo-energy.org/reactive-power-due-cfl-lighting

Make it relevant to "** CFLs have NO no reactive power component"

Apparent power is the vector sum of real power and reactive power.
If the PF is not unity, there must be a reactive power component, by definition.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/AC_power

** The definition of PF given in that article is:

"The ratio between real power and apparent power in a circuit is called the power factor."

The definition of "apparent power" is:

" Apparent power is conventionally expressed in volt-amperes (VA) since it is the product of rms voltage and rms current."

So, the definition of PF is:

Real power / VA ( where V and A are both in rms values. )

Notice - there is no sign of " cos phi " in sight !!!!

Yeah, so why do you bring it up ? I didn't.

But there are plenty of 'reactive power' mentions, remember what you said ;
"** CFLs have NO no reactive power component."
Now, getting back to the point, CFLs MUST have a reactive power component
because real power is less than VA.

Means there is no need for a phase angle to exist for the PF to be low.

The instantaneous phase angle MUST be different or the PF would be unity.

Perhaps you don't know anything about calculus - when you deal with
complex waveforms you need to use higher mathematics -you calculate
the instantaneous values and sum them.

All it takes is that the current wave have a higher ratio of RMS to average
( rectified ) value than a sine wave does.

It requires the current wave to have a different shape to the voltage wave.
It doesn't matter if it is a phase difference or an envelope difference or both
- the PF will not be unity unless the voltage and current are in phase and have
the same envelope.

 

[Phil Allison]

"fritz"

** Oh dear - here we go again for what must be the hundredth time -
explaining what PF is to someone who damn well ought to know already.

Or the other way round.

** Fuck you - shithead.

** CFLs have NO no reactive power component.

Actually they do.

** Fraid you are wrong.

I thought they had fixed the low PF problem with modern
CFL designs, but this doesn't seem to be the case.
Here is a link with some actual CFL PF measurements.
http://www.leonardo-energy.org/reactive-power-due-cfl-lighting


** Got nothing to do with the fact there is no REACTIVE component in
the load presented by modern CFLs.

The item you quoted actually CONTRADICTS you.

I don't think so.

** It does all over the place - but you are too blind to see it.

Really ? Then perhaps you could actually quote something from the link
that contradicts me ?

** The first lines of the first post do - but you are blind to it.

http://www.leonardo-energy.org/reactive-power-due-cfl-lighting


Are you trying to claim that 'harmonic reactive power' is not 'reactive
power' ?


** Fraid there is no such animal as "harmonic reactive power".

It is used in some circles..

** Fuckheads on web forums do not count.

Apparent power is the vector sum of real power and reactive power.
If the PF is not unity, there must be a reactive power component, by
definition.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/AC_power

** The definition of PF given in that article is:

"The ratio between real power and apparent power in a circuit is called
the power factor."

The definition of "apparent power" is:

" Apparent power is conventionally expressed in volt-amperes (VA) since
it is the product of rms voltage and rms current."

So, the definition of PF is:

Real power / VA ( where V and A are both in rms values. )

Notice - there is no sign of " cos phi " in sight !!!!

Yeah, so why do you bring it up ?

** Cos it shows that phase angle is not part of the definition of PF.

Fuckhead.

Means there is no need for a phase angle to exist for the PF to be low.

The instantaneous phase angle MUST be different or the PF would be unity.

** Another nonsense - phase angles are continuous things.

How about you FUCKING read the explanation I supplied ??

Fuckhead.

All it takes is that the current wave have a higher ratio of RMS to
average
( rectified ) value than a sine wave does.

It requires the current wave to have a different shape to the voltage
wave.
It doesn't matter if it is a phase difference or an envelope difference or
both
- the PF will not be unity unless the voltage and current are in phase and
have
the same envelope.

** So if the current wave is in-phase ( peak voltage and peak current are
virtually simultaneous ) but with a very different envelope, the PF is gonna
be lower than unity. See, that was not so hard was it ?

Having a true RMS current value is the crucial thing in coming up with
actual numbers - that is HOW one calculates VA !!

For a sine wave, the RMS to average ratio is 1.11 - this is the correction
factor built into most AC volt meters so they show the RMS value for sine
waves accurately ( but nothing else ).

For the sort of spiky wave a CFL draws, the ratio is about 2.0.

So the VA is almost double that for an in-phase, sine wave load of the same
real power.

Hence the PF is around 0.55.

Adding capacitance ( or inductance ) across the AC supply will have NO
effect on this figure.



...... Phil

 

[kreed]

On Feb 2, 11:12 pm, "Phil Allison" <phi...@tpg.com.au> wrote:

"kreed"

"Over $80 billion dollars of electricity is unusable energy, but
billable in the U.S"

If you take 80 billion dollars, and to make it easy assume 3 people
per billed premises,

** That is way high.

 The correct figure is more like 1.5 persons.

The nation must be dying out at that rate, but it is more accurate.

The only places that I can think of that they could be talking about
would be distribution losses
such as resistance in power lines, arcing from HT lines into the air
and across dirty insulators, transformer losses etc.
Unused off peak power etc.

** Ditto.

The figure is an absurd fiction derived very likely by subtracting the total
kWh estimated to be generated by all the alternators connected to the grid
in the USA and subtracting from that the billed kWh for the whole country  -
and THEN applying the domestic kWh rate to the difference.

That is the only way I can think of that they would come up with that
figure.

Only a brain dead, Green retard would even bother.

Fraid there are far too many of them.

True. Very true. I wish they would make the "ultimate sacrifice for
the planet" and leave the rest of us alone.

The brain dead things I hear about electricity on other forums with
non-technical people astound me, and
they refuse to listen to fact.

> .... Phil

 

[Swanny]

On 2/02/2011 2:10 PM, David L. Jones wrote:

On Feb 2, 11:01 am, TonyS <nos...@mymail.com> wrote:
Today Tonight has done it again.
Last night they promoted this Earthwise device which apparently saves up
to 35% electricity:http://www.earthwisepowersavers.com.au/

"Independent testing so far shows promising results. Electrical Engineer
Greg Paxton has worked with the CSIRO and federal and state governments,
which are interested in the Power Saver's potential. Greg's very
optimistic. "I've seen the clear evidence that it actually does work.
Anyone can see that it reduces the current used by the apparatus that is
consuming the power", he said."

The device is said to have the blessing of Panacea University
(http://www.panaceauniversity.org/index.htm)

Quote:
"Welcome to Panacea University and the faculty section of the main
Panacea-BOCAF website. Here you will find, via free access, the most
current versions of educational semi-textbooks and reports of
experiments having to do with

"alternative engineering that are not currently taught in the accepted
universities. "

Oh no! They aren't letting on about those secret orgones are they! There
goes all the free energy


Our aims are to protect

and provide studies and archives of information dealing with, for
instance, free energy technology, suppressed energy technology,
mileage boosting, lowering emissions, alternative fuels, interesting
motor modifications and studies in rotors and magnets—sometimes called
experimental magnetic motors or experimental magnetic generators."

It's just a PF correction cap in a fancy case for $1300
What a hoot.

Dave.
www.eevblog.com

 

[kreed]

On Feb 3, 10:08 am, "Phil Allison" <phi...@tpg.com.au> wrote:

"Stupider than Anyone ELSE on the Planet"

** Burn the Witch  !!

Whether this box actually does power factor correction is ultimately not
something that can be determined by discussion in a newsgroup.

** But is shown in the damn video  !!!!

The display on the meter shows PF in the corner  -  it changes from 0..68 to
0.97.

The voice over describes the unit as:

"... a capacitor based, residential power conditioner. "

It could not be any CLEARER  -  you fucking mad Witch !!

BTW:

To get the PF of that ( unloaded ) motor up to 0.97 is not possible without
prior knowledge of exactly what capacitance is needed and then using that
exact amount for the test.

The test is a complete crock.

.... Phil

I saw it on TT, after the missus brought it to my attention, but I
must have missed that part about the PF correction.

Also SC did a test on a domestic "power saver" device - that turned
out just to be a simple capacitor based PFC circuit and published
their results. While it did substantially improve the PF of the bar
fridge they tested it on, it actually increased the metered amount of
power - and while it did a "good" thing by correcting the PF, it
increased your bill in the process - based on the type of meter they
used.


As for the other poster, they do have PF correction caps at
substations anyway. I have pics of a bank of them in a 330kv
substation in QLD, (including a sign saying they are a capacitor bank,
and the discharging procedure).

and I have seen similar units in local 66kv - 11kv substations also
while driving past.

 

[John Tserkezis]

no one wrote:

your just a faggot hilthy phil , your just one of these people that
think they are right ALL THE TIME .

YOU NEVER ADMIT YOUR WRONG , LOOK AT ALL YOUR POSTS , YOUR ALWAYS ABUSING
PEOPLE , CAUSE YOU ALWAYS WANT TO PUSH YOUR WRONG POINT OF VIEW ALL THE
TIME.

WE ALL KNOW THAT YOUR A FAN OF J EDGAR HOOVER YOU CROSS DRESSER.
HEY ALL YOUS IMAGINE THIS :"

PHIL IS A FAT BALDING TRANSVESTITE , SITTING AT HIS COMPUTER , WITH A
CIGARETT HANGING OUT HIS MOUTH , TROLLING THE NET TO ABUSE PEOPLE BESIDES
ABUSING HIMSELF, AND HE`S ALSO WEARING A FILTH DIRTY NEGLIGE HE STOLE
FROM HIS TRANSVESTIVE EX, ( JILTED ) LOVER ..

Although the accuracy of your claim is not disputed, I still think you
should lay off this much coffee this early in the morning...
--
ORG.ASM Not Found. Wife not happy!

 

[no one]

your just a faggot hilthy phil , your just one of these people that
think they are right ALL THE TIME .

YOU NEVER ADMIT YOUR WRONG , LOOK AT ALL YOUR POSTS , YOUR ALWAYS ABUSING
PEOPLE , CAUSE YOU ALWAYS WANT TO PUSH YOUR WRONG POINT OF VIEW ALL THE
TIME.

WE ALL KNOW THAT YOUR A FAN OF J EDGAR HOOVER YOU CROSS DRESSER.
HEY ALL YOUS IMAGINE THIS :"

PHIL IS A FAT BALDING TRANSVESTITE , SITTING AT HIS COMPUTER , WITH A
CIGARETT HANGING OUT HIS MOUTH , TROLLING THE NET TO ABUSE PEOPLE BESIDES
ABUSING HIMSELF, AND HE`S ALSO WEARING A FILTH DIRTY NEGLIGE HE STOLE
FROM HIS TRANSVESTIVE EX, ( JILTED ) LOVER ..



"Phil Allison" <phil_a@tpg.com.au> wrote in message
news:8qstqrFdnnU1@mid.individual.net...

"Stupider than anyone ELSE on earth "



Where is it stated that the device in question is passive?


** ROTFLMAO !!!

This lunatic, ASD fucked itch needs burning at the stake.




.... Phil

 

[Bruce Varley]

"kreed" <kenreed1999@gmail.com> wrote in message
news:302e45d9-67f7-4b9b-a34d-64b6bf56245f@x13g2000vbe.googlegroups.com...
On Feb 3, 10:08 am, "Phil Allison" <phi...@tpg.com.au> wrote:

"Stupider than Anyone ELSE on the Planet"

** Burn the Witch !!

Whether this box actually does power factor correction is ultimately not
something that can be determined by discussion in a newsgroup.

** But is shown in the damn video !!!!

The display on the meter shows PF in the corner - it changes from 0.68 to
0.97.

The voice over describes the unit as:

"... a capacitor based, residential power conditioner. "

It could not be any CLEARER - you fucking mad Witch !!

BTW:

To get the PF of that ( unloaded ) motor up to 0.97 is not possible
without
prior knowledge of exactly what capacitance is needed and then using that
exact amount for the test.

The test is a complete crock.

.... Phil

I saw it on TT, after the missus brought it to my attention, but I
must have missed that part about the PF correction.

Also SC did a test on a domestic "power saver" device - that turned
out just to be a simple capacitor based PFC circuit and published
their results. While it did substantially improve the PF of the bar
fridge they tested it on, it actually increased the metered amount of
power - and while it did a "good" thing by correcting the PF, it
increased your bill in the process - based on the type of meter they
used.


As for the other poster, they do have PF correction caps at
substations anyway. I have pics of a bank of them in a 330kv
substation in QLD, (including a sign saying they are a capacitor bank,
and the discharging procedure).

and I have seen similar units in local 66kv - 11kv substations also
while driving past.

Yep, PF correction is routinely practised with power networks, it's part of
ensuring stability of the network. Capacitors are one way, but large
synchronous drives, such as many industries operate, can also be set up to
run with a leading power factor, acting as a PF corrector.

 

[Phil Allison]

"fritz"

# Earthwise Power Saver does not consume electricity itself ...

** Small point - but if the above is literally true, the device is
dangerous.

PF correction capacitors fitted to the incoming AC supply ( no matter which
side of the demarcation line) need to have a means of discharging the cap
if the supply becomes disconnected.

Usually, bleed resistors are fitted across the cap bank to discharge it to a
safe value in second or so at most. Means the box should dissipate about 5
to 10 watts continuously per phase or circuit.

Another issue is the large spike of current any bank of caps will draw when
switched onto the AC supply ( most times ) needs to be kept down to a value
that will not immediately trip a domestic breaker - even with a other loads
connected.

Probably means using no more than 30 to 40uF = enough to PF correct one
decent size fridge.

BTW:

WES will sell you a 40uF, mains rated polyprop cap for $12.50.

A nice metal box will cost more.


....... Phil

 

[TonyS]

On 2/02/2011 9:19 AM, Sylvia Else wrote:

On 2/02/2011 11:54 AM, Trevor Wilson wrote:
TonyS wrote:
Today Tonight has done it again.
Last night they promoted this Earthwise device which apparently saves
up to 35% electricity:
http://www.earthwisepowersavers.com.au/


**It's from Queensland, right?

Kinda says it all really.

What an absolute load of crap. I hope the ACCC crucifies these bastards.


You may hope, but don't hold your breath. I've sent off a complaint, but
I expect it'll be filed in the "too hard" basket. Some of the technical
statements are completely untrue, and some are half-truths, but the
claims about monetary savings contain weasel words.

Sylvia.

Today I got a response for my complaint to the ACCC, not bad after 1
week. It goes like this:

(if you don't want to read through all of this, the essence is that my
complaint has been recorded and the details of my complaint will be used
in the context of the ACCC’s ongoing monitoring to determine whether
there is a pattern of behaviour by Earthwise PowerSaver or a pattern
within their industry that may raise broader concerns)

Tony

/*---------------------------
"Thank you for your email of 4 February 2011 to the Australian
Competition and Consumer Commission (ACCC) regarding Earthwise PowerSaver.



The ACCC is responsible for administering the Competition and Consumer
Act 2010 which incorporates the Australian Consumer Law (ACL) in
Schedule 2 of that Act. The ACL is a single national law which aims to
protect consumers and ensure fair trading in Australia. Under the ACL,
consumers have the same protections, and businesses have the same
obligations and responsibilities across Australia.



The ACL provides a range of provisions that protect consumers when they
purchase goods or services. Under section 29 of the ACL a person must
not, in trade or commerce, make false or misleading representations in
connection with the supply or possible supply of goods or services or in
connection with the promotion by any means of the supply or use of goods
or services. This includes misrepresentations concerning representations
that goods or services have sponsorship, approval, performance
characteristics, accessories, uses or benefits. Additionally section 18
of the ACL prohibits a person, in trade or commerce, engaging in conduct
which is misleading or deceptive, or which is likely to mislead or deceive.



As the conduct you have described may raise concerns under this
provision the details of your matter have been recorded in the ACCC’s
national database.



It should be noted that the ACCC cannot pursue all the complaints it
receives. While all complaints are carefully considered, the ACCC must
exercise its discretion to direct resources to the investigation and
resolution of matters that provide the greatest overall benefit for
consumers and businesses. The ACCC’s Compliance and Enforcement policy
describes in more detail how this discretion is exercised. This policy,
which is available on the ACCC’s website [www.accc.gov.au], lists a
number of factors that are weighed including whether conduct raises
national or international issues, involves significant consumer
detriment or a blatant disregard of the law.



In this instance the details of your complaint will be used in the
context of the ACCC’s ongoing monitoring to determine whether there is a
pattern of behaviour by Earthwise PowerSaver or a pattern within their
industry that may raise broader concerns.



It must be emphasised that, ultimately, it is a matter for the Courts to
determine whether the alleged conduct breaches the ACL and a private
right of action is available to anyone who suffers loss or damage as a
consequence of a contravention of this legislation. In any event, your
private rights of action will not be affected should the ACCC pursue
this matter.



Please note that your matter is important to the ACCC as it assists in
determining whether issues with national or wider public interest
implications exist. The ACCC closely studies the patterns of complaints
that it receives to ensure that its enforcement and education actions
are focused on the areas of greatest concern to Australian consumers.



Thank you for contacting the ACCC with your concerns. I hope this
information is of some assistance.



Yours sincerely"
---------------------------------*/

 

[Sylvia Else]

On 11/02/2011 5:24 PM, TonyS wrote:

On 2/02/2011 9:19 AM, Sylvia Else wrote:
On 2/02/2011 11:54 AM, Trevor Wilson wrote:
TonyS wrote:
Today Tonight has done it again.
Last night they promoted this Earthwise device which apparently saves
up to 35% electricity:
http://www.earthwisepowersavers.com.au/


**It's from Queensland, right?

Kinda says it all really.

What an absolute load of crap. I hope the ACCC crucifies these bastards.


You may hope, but don't hold your breath. I've sent off a complaint, but
I expect it'll be filed in the "too hard" basket. Some of the technical
statements are completely untrue, and some are half-truths, but the
claims about monetary savings contain weasel words.

Sylvia.

Today I got a response for my complaint to the ACCC, not bad after 1
week. It goes like this:

(if you don't want to read through all of this, the essence is that my
complaint has been recorded and the details of my complaint will be used
in the context of the ACCC’s ongoing monitoring to determine whether
there is a pattern of behaviour by Earthwise PowerSaver or a pattern
within their industry that may raise broader concerns)

It's identical to the one I just got, and is along the same lines as
replies I've received regarding other complaints. Essentially, it's a
statement that they're not actually going to do anything about it.

Sylvia.