OT: Why is Germany so (apparently) stupid to give up nuclear

[Rick C]

On Friday, September 27, 2019 at 2:13:29 PM UTC-4, upsid...@downunder.com wrote:

On Fri, 27 Sep 2019 11:03:37 -0700 (PDT), Rick C
gnuarm.deletethisbit@gmail.com> wrote:

On Friday, September 27, 2019 at 1:39:32 PM UTC-4, upsid...@downunder.com wrote:
On Fri, 27 Sep 2019 16:37:17 +0000 (UTC),
DecadentLinuxUserNumeroUno@decadence.org wrote:

upsidedown@downunder.com wrote in
news:6j8soe9pajlkktrh7rb702k8tvtp8d3ekv@4ax.com:

Storing electricity in batteries to be used several hours later to
heat water doesn't make any sense.

It makes a lot of sense, dumbass. Daytime electric costs more.
Firing this need from batteries means the meter does not spin during
the day from it. The only thing gained is a bit lower electric bill.
That is all the goal was.

USING electricity FROM batteries during the day on the HWOD units,
and THEN charging the batteries at night when the electric is cheaper..
Pretty fucking simple math there.

Damn. If you cannot even follow a simple idea, you have no chance
with anything complex.

Take a 1000 liter water tank, heat it to 95 C and then take out heat,
until the average temperature drops to 55 C, the temperature drop is
40 C or the energy stored and extracted is 40 C x 4 kJ/kg/C x 1000 kg
or 160000 kJ or 44 kWh. That is about the typical EV battery capacity.
How much does such batteries cost ? An insulated water tank is
definitively less than that.

Why are you heating water to 95°C???

To get as big delta-T as possible. The low limit is limited by the
reduced usability of only mild warm water.

Of course, I could heat to 120 or even 200 C, but that would require a
pressurized tank to avoid boiling the water.There are all kinds of
inspections for pressure vessels.

1000 liters is a big tank. I thought we were talking about domestic hot water use. At this point I have no idea what you are talking about.

--

Rick C.

+--+ Get 2,000 miles of free Supercharging
+--+ Tesla referral code - https://ts.la/richard11209

 

Whoey Louie <trader4@optonline.net> wrote in news:338c7d3c-175d-4a50-
8155-7dbf2c877749@googlegroups.com:

Yes, let's make it way more complicated than necessary.

Fuck off, you retarded fuck!

HOAD, boy!

 

upsidedown@downunder.com wrote in
news:gkhsoet3hq857svlsb89d94mgrmqh68h87@4ax.com:

On Fri, 27 Sep 2019 16:37:17 +0000 (UTC),
DecadentLinuxUserNumeroUno@decadence.org wrote:

upsidedown@downunder.com wrote in
news:6j8soe9pajlkktrh7rb702k8tvtp8d3ekv@4ax.com:

Storing electricity in batteries to be used several hours later
to heat water doesn't make any sense.

It makes a lot of sense, dumbass. Daytime electric costs more.
Firing this need from batteries means the meter does not spin
during the day from it. The only thing gained is a bit lower
electric bill. That is all the goal was.

USING electricity FROM batteries during the day on the HWOD
units,
and THEN charging the batteries at night when the electric is
cheaper. Pretty fucking simple math there.

Damn. If you cannot even follow a simple idea, you have no
chance
with anything complex.

Take a 1000 liter water tank, heat it to 95 C and then take out
heat, until the average temperature drops to 55 C, the
temperature drop is 40 C or the energy stored and extracted is 40
C x 4 kJ/kg/C x 1000 kg or 160000 kJ or 44 kWh. That is about the
typical EV battery capacity. How much does such batteries cost ?
An insulated water tank is definitively less than that.

Except this is about those companies with HWOD already installed.
GODDAMN BOY open your fucking eyes and READ.

I already KNOW and have stated that a tank is better. I use a
tank. They come from the factory high efficiency and well insulated.
An additional blanket would make that even more efficient.

And you are jacking off at the mouth about your imagined battery
needs and capacities. You have no clue. This is not some lame lead
acid car battery.

Then you spout off about a fucking tank.. Get back on topic,
dipshit.

The claim is that a comapny using HWOD could save money by powering
them with DC and charging the battery up on night rates. Real
fucking simple.

It was not a discussion on what the best solution is at ANY
location. We ALL already know that tanks fed by preheated water do
the best job when set up right. That is NOT what this is about.

 

[Rick C]

On Friday, September 27, 2019 at 2:21:58 PM UTC-4, DecadentLinux...@decadence.org wrote:

Rick C <gnuarm.deletethisbit@gmail.com> wrote in
news:fd56a9ba-08d8-4397-9158-5c3c11b83890@googlegroups.com:

That sounds like a made up statistic. Most residences don't even
have gas.


It is all region dependent. Nearly all of greater Cincinnati is
gas at every residential location with the exception being newer codo
multi-unit builds. Even those get fed gas if desired by the
developer.

Nearly all of central Michigan as well.

I would suggest that you are devoid of factual statistic, whereas
my general claim would likely ring true over much of the east and
midwestern states. the south and west I don't know.

I did not make up a statistic, I made an educated supposition.
Wheras your crack makes your claim exactly what you said... a
fucking made up statistic.

Had you not made your special crack, little boy... your words
would have been *you* making an educated supposition. But since you
made the crack, your subsequent claim, which we all know is NOT a
true statistic, was expounded by you as if to be so.

Man, when karma smacks you in the face, it hurts, eh?

It is so funny when you call people names, like "little boy". You sound like a 10 year old on the playground. Tee, hee.

--

Rick C.

+--- Get 2,000 miles of free Supercharging
+--- Tesla referral code - https://ts.la/richard11209

 

Rick C <gnuarm.deletethisbit@gmail.com> wrote in
news:fd56a9ba-08d8-4397-9158-5c3c11b83890@googlegroups.com:

That sounds like a made up statistic. Most residences don't even
have gas.

It is all region dependent. Nearly all of greater Cincinnati is
gas at every residential location with the exception being newer codo
multi-unit builds. Even those get fed gas if desired by the
developer.

Nearly all of central Michigan as well.

I would suggest that you are devoid of factual statistic, whereas
my general claim would likely ring true over much of the east and
midwestern states. the south and west I don't know.

I did not make up a statistic, I made an educated supposition.
Wheras your crack makes your claim exactly what you said... a
fucking made up statistic.

Had you not made your special crack, little boy... your words
would have been *you* making an educated supposition. But since you
made the crack, your subsequent claim, which we all know is NOT a
true statistic, was expounded by you as if to be so.

Man, when karma smacks you in the face, it hurts, eh?

 

On Fri, 27 Sep 2019 11:03:37 -0700 (PDT), Rick C
<gnuarm.deletethisbit@gmail.com> wrote:

On Friday, September 27, 2019 at 1:39:32 PM UTC-4, upsid...@downunder.com wrote:
On Fri, 27 Sep 2019 16:37:17 +0000 (UTC),
DecadentLinuxUserNumeroUno@decadence.org wrote:

upsidedown@downunder.com wrote in
news:6j8soe9pajlkktrh7rb702k8tvtp8d3ekv@4ax.com:

Storing electricity in batteries to be used several hours later to
heat water doesn't make any sense.

It makes a lot of sense, dumbass. Daytime electric costs more.
Firing this need from batteries means the meter does not spin during
the day from it. The only thing gained is a bit lower electric bill.
That is all the goal was.

USING electricity FROM batteries during the day on the HWOD units,
and THEN charging the batteries at night when the electric is cheaper.
Pretty fucking simple math there.

Damn. If you cannot even follow a simple idea, you have no chance
with anything complex.

Take a 1000 liter water tank, heat it to 95 C and then take out heat,
until the average temperature drops to 55 C, the temperature drop is
40 C or the energy stored and extracted is 40 C x 4 kJ/kg/C x 1000 kg
or 160000 kJ or 44 kWh. That is about the typical EV battery capacity.
How much does such batteries cost ? An insulated water tank is
definitively less than that.

Why are you heating water to 95°C???

To get as big delta-T as possible. The low limit is limited by the
reduced usability of only mild warm water.

Of course, I could heat to 120 or even 200 C, but that would require a
pressurized tank to avoid boiling the water.There are all kinds of
inspections for pressure vessels.

 

[Rick C]

On Friday, September 27, 2019 at 1:39:32 PM UTC-4, upsid...@downunder.com wrote:

On Fri, 27 Sep 2019 16:37:17 +0000 (UTC),
DecadentLinuxUserNumeroUno@decadence.org wrote:

upsidedown@downunder.com wrote in
news:6j8soe9pajlkktrh7rb702k8tvtp8d3ekv@4ax.com:

Storing electricity in batteries to be used several hours later to
heat water doesn't make any sense.

It makes a lot of sense, dumbass. Daytime electric costs more.
Firing this need from batteries means the meter does not spin during
the day from it. The only thing gained is a bit lower electric bill.
That is all the goal was.

USING electricity FROM batteries during the day on the HWOD units,
and THEN charging the batteries at night when the electric is cheaper.
Pretty fucking simple math there.

Damn. If you cannot even follow a simple idea, you have no chance
with anything complex.

Take a 1000 liter water tank, heat it to 95 C and then take out heat,
until the average temperature drops to 55 C, the temperature drop is
40 C or the energy stored and extracted is 40 C x 4 kJ/kg/C x 1000 kg
or 160000 kJ or 44 kWh. That is about the typical EV battery capacity.
How much does such batteries cost ? An insulated water tank is
definitively less than that.

Why are you heating water to 95°C???

--

Rick C.

-+++ Get 2,000 miles of free Supercharging
-+++ Tesla referral code - https://ts.la/richard11209

 

[Rick C]

On Friday, September 27, 2019 at 1:12:04 PM UTC-4, upsid...@downunder.com wrote:

On Fri, 27 Sep 2019 08:47:21 -0700 (PDT), Rick C
gnuarm.deletethisbit@gmail.com> wrote:

What makes more sense depends on the details. Time shifting electrical loads is a useful thing in general. If this is done via batteries on a per home basis, it will get used for whatever is needed. HWOD is useful because it reduces the thermal losses of storing heat in a water tank.

The specific heat for water is 4 kJ/kg/C, so if water is heated from
20 C to 40 C, 80 kJ/kg is needed. With only 1.2 kW heating power, you
can heat 0.015 kg/s of water or 1.5 cl/s, suitable for making a warm
drink. If you wait one minute after turning on the heat, you get
nearly 1 kg or 1 liter of water, sufficient for washing your hands,
but hardly sufficient for a shower .

Why are you limited to 1.2 kW? A typical shower uses 7.9 lpm or 0.13 l/s. That would require around 20 kW, slightly more than the typical hot water storage tank power.

If it uses electricity from the battery, the total losses need to be compared to be able to say which is better.

How well does the middle east approach work for morning showers?

The coldest time during the day was during sun rise (25 C) so the
conductive losses weren't that bad during the night. After sun rise,
the solar radiation started to heat the tank. For an office worker
with work starting at 8 or 9, the water was sufficiently warm. Of
course, if you had go to work at 6 or 7 the situation might have been
different, then you better take the shower in the evening.

So the shower is the last thing done before leaving? Eat, dress, shower?

--

Rick C.

-++- Get 2,000 miles of free Supercharging
-++- Tesla referral code - https://ts.la/richard11209

 

Rick C <gnuarm.deletethisbit@gmail.com> wrote in
news:295b7431-5d08-4b79-af93-2ecf1a5d07a9@googlegroups.com:

It is so funny when you call people names, like "little boy". You
sound like a 10 year old on the playground. Tee, hee.

--

It is exactly the same as your crack, finishing with lol.

I know you are too much of a mental midget to get it, however.

Caused you to miss the entire truth of the post.

You are a true mental midget.

 

On Fri, 27 Sep 2019 11:28:18 -0700 (PDT), Rick C
<gnuarm.deletethisbit@gmail.com> wrote:

On Friday, September 27, 2019 at 2:13:29 PM UTC-4, upsid...@downunder.com wrote:
On Fri, 27 Sep 2019 11:03:37 -0700 (PDT), Rick C
gnuarm.deletethisbit@gmail.com> wrote:

On Friday, September 27, 2019 at 1:39:32 PM UTC-4, upsid...@downunder.com wrote:
On Fri, 27 Sep 2019 16:37:17 +0000 (UTC),
DecadentLinuxUserNumeroUno@decadence.org wrote:

upsidedown@downunder.com wrote in
news:6j8soe9pajlkktrh7rb702k8tvtp8d3ekv@4ax.com:

Storing electricity in batteries to be used several hours later to
heat water doesn't make any sense.

It makes a lot of sense, dumbass. Daytime electric costs more.
Firing this need from batteries means the meter does not spin during
the day from it. The only thing gained is a bit lower electric bill.
That is all the goal was.

USING electricity FROM batteries during the day on the HWOD units,
and THEN charging the batteries at night when the electric is cheaper.
Pretty fucking simple math there.

Damn. If you cannot even follow a simple idea, you have no chance
with anything complex.

Take a 1000 liter water tank, heat it to 95 C and then take out heat,
until the average temperature drops to 55 C, the temperature drop is
40 C or the energy stored and extracted is 40 C x 4 kJ/kg/C x 1000 kg
or 160000 kJ or 44 kWh. That is about the typical EV battery capacity.
How much does such batteries cost ? An insulated water tank is
definitively less than that.

Why are you heating water to 95°C???

To get as big delta-T as possible. The low limit is limited by the
reduced usability of only mild warm water.

Of course, I could heat to 120 or even 200 C, but that would require a
pressurized tank to avoid boiling the water.There are all kinds of
inspections for pressure vessels.

1000 liters is a big tank. I thought we were talking about domestic hot water use. At this point I have no idea what you are talking about.

1000 liters is about right size to keep a house warm during a winter
day after being charged with cheaper night electricity.

 

Rick C <gnuarm.deletethisbit@gmail.com> wrote in news:7e80362d-4b24-
47df-8204-7f96019932e9@googlegroups.com:

> At this point I have no idea what you are talking about.

Trust me... the point you mention was reached by you way back when
you first thought you were actually intelligent.

You cannot even follow a fucking Usenet thread without mixing it all
up, like a fucking child, then chime in with 'lol' and other immature
stupid shit spouted along with your non-points.

We were talking about hot water systems, and you, ya fuckin' punk
fuck, jack off at the mouth about BTTF and your retarded 'lol' baby
bullshit.

 

[Rick C]

On Friday, September 27, 2019 at 3:30:50 PM UTC-4, upsid...@downunder.com wrote:

On Fri, 27 Sep 2019 11:28:18 -0700 (PDT), Rick C
gnuarm.deletethisbit@gmail.com> wrote:

On Friday, September 27, 2019 at 2:13:29 PM UTC-4, upsid...@downunder.com wrote:
On Fri, 27 Sep 2019 11:03:37 -0700 (PDT), Rick C
gnuarm.deletethisbit@gmail.com> wrote:

On Friday, September 27, 2019 at 1:39:32 PM UTC-4, upsid...@downunder..com wrote:
On Fri, 27 Sep 2019 16:37:17 +0000 (UTC),
DecadentLinuxUserNumeroUno@decadence.org wrote:

upsidedown@downunder.com wrote in
news:6j8soe9pajlkktrh7rb702k8tvtp8d3ekv@4ax.com:

Storing electricity in batteries to be used several hours later to
heat water doesn't make any sense.

It makes a lot of sense, dumbass. Daytime electric costs more.
Firing this need from batteries means the meter does not spin during
the day from it. The only thing gained is a bit lower electric bill.
That is all the goal was.

USING electricity FROM batteries during the day on the HWOD units,
and THEN charging the batteries at night when the electric is cheaper.
Pretty fucking simple math there.

Damn. If you cannot even follow a simple idea, you have no chance
with anything complex.

Take a 1000 liter water tank, heat it to 95 C and then take out heat,
until the average temperature drops to 55 C, the temperature drop is
40 C or the energy stored and extracted is 40 C x 4 kJ/kg/C x 1000 kg
or 160000 kJ or 44 kWh. That is about the typical EV battery capacity.
How much does such batteries cost ? An insulated water tank is
definitively less than that.

Why are you heating water to 95°C???

To get as big delta-T as possible. The low limit is limited by the
reduced usability of only mild warm water.

Of course, I could heat to 120 or even 200 C, but that would require a
pressurized tank to avoid boiling the water.There are all kinds of
inspections for pressure vessels.

1000 liters is a big tank. I thought we were talking about domestic hot water use. At this point I have no idea what you are talking about.

1000 liters is about right size to keep a house warm during a winter
day after being charged with cheaper night electricity.

Why would anyone want to heat with straight electricity? That is the most expensive and least efficient. Heat pump are much more practical in many areas. A 1000 liter tank would use a significant floor space in a home which is not by any means cheap.

There is a reason why this is not popular. It's a bad idea. Did you come up with this on your own?

--

Rick C.

+-+- Get 2,000 miles of free Supercharging
+-+- Tesla referral code - https://ts.la/richard11209

 

On Fri, 27 Sep 2019 13:03:37 -0700 (PDT), Rick C
<gnuarm.deletethisbit@gmail.com> wrote:

On Friday, September 27, 2019 at 3:30:50 PM UTC-4, upsid...@downunder.com wrote:
On Fri, 27 Sep 2019 11:28:18 -0700 (PDT), Rick C
gnuarm.deletethisbit@gmail.com> wrote:

On Friday, September 27, 2019 at 2:13:29 PM UTC-4, upsid...@downunder.com wrote:
On Fri, 27 Sep 2019 11:03:37 -0700 (PDT), Rick C
gnuarm.deletethisbit@gmail.com> wrote:

On Friday, September 27, 2019 at 1:39:32 PM UTC-4, upsid...@downunder.com wrote:
On Fri, 27 Sep 2019 16:37:17 +0000 (UTC),
DecadentLinuxUserNumeroUno@decadence.org wrote:

upsidedown@downunder.com wrote in
news:6j8soe9pajlkktrh7rb702k8tvtp8d3ekv@4ax.com:

Storing electricity in batteries to be used several hours later to
heat water doesn't make any sense.

It makes a lot of sense, dumbass. Daytime electric costs more.
Firing this need from batteries means the meter does not spin during
the day from it. The only thing gained is a bit lower electric bill.
That is all the goal was.

USING electricity FROM batteries during the day on the HWOD units,
and THEN charging the batteries at night when the electric is cheaper.
Pretty fucking simple math there.

Damn. If you cannot even follow a simple idea, you have no chance
with anything complex.

Take a 1000 liter water tank, heat it to 95 C and then take out heat,
until the average temperature drops to 55 C, the temperature drop is
40 C or the energy stored and extracted is 40 C x 4 kJ/kg/C x 1000 kg
or 160000 kJ or 44 kWh. That is about the typical EV battery capacity.
How much does such batteries cost ? An insulated water tank is
definitively less than that.

Why are you heating water to 95°C???

To get as big delta-T as possible. The low limit is limited by the
reduced usability of only mild warm water.

Of course, I could heat to 120 or even 200 C, but that would require a
pressurized tank to avoid boiling the water.There are all kinds of
inspections for pressure vessels.

1000 liters is a big tank. I thought we were talking about domestic hot water use. At this point I have no idea what you are talking about.

1000 liters is about right size to keep a house warm during a winter
day after being charged with cheaper night electricity.

Why would anyone want to heat with straight electricity? That is the most expensive and least efficient.

Depends on country and production mix, which defines the electric
price. In Norway with lots of hydro production, direct heating is
popular. In Finland in the 1970's, when there was some nuclear
overproduction, the night tariffs were very cheap, Charging a big
water tank during the night made a lot sense.

> Heat pump are much more practical in many areas.

These have become more popular recently.

Air heat pumps are useless below -15 C needing auxiliary direct
heating. Installing a lot of tubing in the ground will destroy your
garden. Drilling 100-200 m deep heat wells are the best option, but
quite expensive.

With any heat pumps, one should try to minimize the temperature
difference so the hot side temperature should be as low as possible.
The best option would be using floor heating, but not very practical
for retrofit installations.

>A 1000 liter tank would use a significant floor space in a home which is not by any means cheap.

1000 liters is one cubic meter, so with insulation 1 m x 1 m floor
space is required if the tank is about 2 m high.

>There is a reason why this is not popular. It's a bad idea.

Depends on local conditions.

>Did you come up with this on your own?

No, just observed hundreds or thousands installations all around.

 

[Rick C]

On Friday, September 27, 2019 at 4:52:34 PM UTC-4, upsid...@downunder.com wrote:

On Fri, 27 Sep 2019 13:03:37 -0700 (PDT), Rick C
gnuarm.deletethisbit@gmail.com> wrote:

On Friday, September 27, 2019 at 3:30:50 PM UTC-4, upsid...@downunder.com wrote:
On Fri, 27 Sep 2019 11:28:18 -0700 (PDT), Rick C
gnuarm.deletethisbit@gmail.com> wrote:

On Friday, September 27, 2019 at 2:13:29 PM UTC-4, upsid...@downunder..com wrote:
On Fri, 27 Sep 2019 11:03:37 -0700 (PDT), Rick C
gnuarm.deletethisbit@gmail.com> wrote:

On Friday, September 27, 2019 at 1:39:32 PM UTC-4, upsid...@downunder.com wrote:
On Fri, 27 Sep 2019 16:37:17 +0000 (UTC),
DecadentLinuxUserNumeroUno@decadence.org wrote:

upsidedown@downunder.com wrote in
news:6j8soe9pajlkktrh7rb702k8tvtp8d3ekv@4ax.com:

Storing electricity in batteries to be used several hours later to
heat water doesn't make any sense.

It makes a lot of sense, dumbass. Daytime electric costs more.
Firing this need from batteries means the meter does not spin during
the day from it. The only thing gained is a bit lower electric bill.
That is all the goal was.

USING electricity FROM batteries during the day on the HWOD units,
and THEN charging the batteries at night when the electric is cheaper.
Pretty fucking simple math there.

Damn. If you cannot even follow a simple idea, you have no chance
with anything complex.

Take a 1000 liter water tank, heat it to 95 C and then take out heat,
until the average temperature drops to 55 C, the temperature drop is
40 C or the energy stored and extracted is 40 C x 4 kJ/kg/C x 1000 kg
or 160000 kJ or 44 kWh. That is about the typical EV battery capacity.
How much does such batteries cost ? An insulated water tank is
definitively less than that.

Why are you heating water to 95°C???

To get as big delta-T as possible. The low limit is limited by the
reduced usability of only mild warm water.

Of course, I could heat to 120 or even 200 C, but that would require a
pressurized tank to avoid boiling the water.There are all kinds of
inspections for pressure vessels.

1000 liters is a big tank. I thought we were talking about domestic hot water use. At this point I have no idea what you are talking about.

1000 liters is about right size to keep a house warm during a winter
day after being charged with cheaper night electricity.

Why would anyone want to heat with straight electricity? That is the most expensive and least efficient.

Depends on country and production mix, which defines the electric
price. In Norway with lots of hydro production, direct heating is
popular. In Finland in the 1970's, when there was some nuclear
overproduction, the night tariffs were very cheap, Charging a big
water tank during the night made a lot sense.

Heat pump are much more practical in many areas.

These have become more popular recently.

Air heat pumps are useless below -15 C needing auxiliary direct
heating. Installing a lot of tubing in the ground will destroy your
garden. Drilling 100-200 m deep heat wells are the best option, but
quite expensive.

With any heat pumps, one should try to minimize the temperature
difference so the hot side temperature should be as low as possible.
The best option would be using floor heating, but not very practical
for retrofit installations.

A 1000 liter tank would use a significant floor space in a home which is not by any means cheap.

1000 liters is one cubic meter, so with insulation 1 m x 1 m floor
space is required if the tank is about 2 m high.

There is a reason why this is not popular. It's a bad idea.

Depends on local conditions.

Did you come up with this on your own?

No, just observed hundreds or thousands installations all around.

As you indicate, things like night prices for electricity are transient. It seems like a bad idea to dedicate floor space to something that may not be a very good idea in a very few years as usage stabilizes. If a country is using electrical heat at night, it seems that would do a lot to even out the costs. Here many areas use heat pumps so that does not use all the cut back from businesses at night. If residential heating were done without heatpumps we very likely would see much less difference in day/night electrical usage. On cold nights my heat pump uses 3 or 4 kW. Straight electric heat would be 12 kW or more.

I suppose different parts of the world are different. But I especially find humorous your comment about ruining the garden. lol

--

Rick C.

+-++ Get 2,000 miles of free Supercharging
+-++ Tesla referral code - https://ts.la/richard11209

 

[Whoey Louie]

On Friday, September 27, 2019 at 1:26:29 PM UTC-4, Rick C wrote:

On Friday, September 27, 2019 at 12:07:09 PM UTC-4, Whoey Louie wrote:
On Friday, September 27, 2019 at 11:45:31 AM UTC-4, Bill Sloman wrote:
On Friday, September 27, 2019 at 5:39:42 PM UTC+10, John Doe wrote:
whit3rd <whit3rd@gmail.com> wrote:

Whoey Louie <trader4@optonline.net> wrote

Of course no solar company has never "failed us".....

The complete list of faltering or bankrupt green-energy
companies...
Evergreen Solar ($25 million)*
SpectraWatt ($500,000)*
Solyndra ($535 million)*
Beacon Power ($43 million)*
Nevada Geothermal ($98.5 million)
SunPower ($1.2 billion)
First Solar ($1.46 billion)
Babcock and Brown ($178 million)
EnerDel’s subsidiary Ener1 ($118.5 million)*
Amonix ($5.9 million)
Fisker Automotive ($529 million)
Abound Solar ($400 million)*
A123 Systems ($279 million)*
Willard and Kelsey Solar Group ($700,981)*
Johnson Controls ($299 million)
Brightsource ($1.6 billion)
ECOtality ($126.2 million)
Raser Technologies ($33 million)*
Energy Conversion Devices ($13.3 million)*
Mountain Plaza, Inc. ($2 million)*
Olsen’s Crop Service and Olsen’s Mills...($10 million)*
Range Fuels ($80 million)*
Thompson River Power ($6.5 million)*
Stirling Energy Systems ($7 million)*
Azure Dynamics ($5.4 million)*
GreenVolts ($500,000)
Vestas ($50 million)
LG Chem’s subsidiary Compact Power ($151 million)
Nordic Windpower ($16 million)*
Navistar ($39 million)
Satcon ($3 million)*
Konarka Technologies Inc. ($20 million)*
Mascoma Corp. ($100 million)

*Denotes companies that have filed for bankruptcy.

Cost for solar (and wind) generation was driven down to
where coal-fired major power facilities are uncompetitive, which
was an entirely worthwhile goal.

Tell that to Germans. Their dirty coal use has skyrocketed since
giving up nuclear, even though they have massively subsidized
solar and windmills.

They used to subsidise solar and windmills, but don't have to any more.


BS!

https://www.reuters.com/article/us-germany-energy/germany-to-increase-wind-and-solar-power-production-idUSKCN1NZ252

The new plan includes also cutting the subsidy for solar energy production from 11.09 euro cents ($0.1256) per kWh to 8.9 euro cents.


That's 11 cents a kwh SUBSIDY! The total cost here in the NYC area for
electric energy is just ~6 cents, which is typical for much of the USA,
so that Germany has to SUBSIDIZE solar to the tune of 11 cents is a freaking disaster.

Wrong, mostly wrong.

Yes, your facts seem to be mostly wrong.

"(Uniondale, NY—May 31, 2018) - PSEG Long Island today released the Power Supply Charge for June. Effective Friday, the Power Supply Charge will be 10.3085 cents per kilowatt-hour (kWh)."

"in the New York-Newark-Jersey City area in May 2018, the U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics reported"... "Electricity prices averaged 21.0 cents per kilowatt hour (kWh), up from the 20.2 cents per kWh paid in May 2017"

"Residential electricity rates in NY [1]

Residential electricity rates in New York average 17.62¢/kWh, which ranks the state 3rd in the nation."

"The approximate range of residential electricity rates in the U.S. is 8.37¢/kWh to 37.34¢/kWh."

The BS detector is going off and it's pretty loud this time.

I'm confused. It seems like you are the one who is "always wrong".

No, you're the one who doesn't know WTF you're talking about. You tried
to tell us that your $15 monthly charge, which sounds like a meter charge,
covers the cost of energy distribution, ie the grid. Now you're trying
to tell us that electric rates are high. I'm a First Energy
customer in NJ and my latest bill, that I just looked at for you,
shows a rate of 11.6 cents per kwh. That's the total charge, for the
energy and for distribution. I have the bill.

And you just posted:

> "(Uniondale, NY—May 31, 2018) - PSEG Long Island today released the Power Supply Charge for June. Effective Friday, the Power Supply Charge will be 10.3085 cents per kilowatt-hour (kWh)."

Which is slightly lower. You also posted this:


' Residential electricity rates in New York average 17.62¢/kWh, which ranks the state 3rd in the nation."


IDK what area that BLS data covers, maybe it's just NYC, run by that
commie, I would not be surprised they are getting screwed.


> "

And Gernmany is going to lower the solar subsidy to only 11 cents a kwh.
That still looks really, really bad when per your own posting NY
averages just 17 cents a kwh right now total cost of energy and delivery.
And it's third highest in the nation to boot!
So, what was your point again? It's obvious Bill was full of BS,
Germany is still heavily subsidizing solar.

Next!

 

[Whoey Louie]

On Friday, September 27, 2019 at 12:47:18 PM UTC-4, DecadentLinux...@decadence.org wrote:

Whoey Louie <trader4@optonline.net> wrote in news:cd5895e6-0032-4bd3-
9719-fa182276c383@googlegroups.com:

Great, so start your storage batteries for rest rooms company.
Meanwhile, people with sense will use cheap nat gas instead or put
a solar water heater on the roof, where the collected energy is
free, the water is heated directly. End of battery story.



It was about EXISTING installations, you retarded piece of shit.
No gas in the building. Grow the fuck up.

Nice snip of that info too, lardass.

 

[Rick C]

On Friday, September 27, 2019 at 9:19:48 PM UTC-4, Robert Baer wrote:

Whoey Louie wrote:
On Friday, September 27, 2019 at 12:32:32 PM UTC-4, DecadentLinux...@decadence.org wrote:
TraitorTard4@optonline.net> wrote in
news:156d6937-3d22-4aba-be52-6a3e74187351@googlegroups.com:

On Friday, September 27, 2019 at 8:57:58 AM UTC-4,
DecadentLinux...@decadence.org wrote:
TraitorTard4@optonline.net> wrote in
news:1fb5fabb-e2e2-4fa4-9ddf-233cd61e372c@googlegroups.com:

If you want lower cost
hot water, just use natural gas, which I bet most rest rooms
are already doing.

You are thick skulled, boy. No room in there for actual brain
matter.

You were already told. Most use HWOD.

And they can also use nat gas, stupid. In fact, for on demand, a
lot more use nat gas than use electric, for obvious reasons.

Nope. Most use installations of ELECTRIC HWOD units PROXIMAL to
the point of use.

Gas fired HWOD units are further removed from the use point and are
only in those locations that had gas included in their build. Not
all commercial buildings do, even in areas where it is available.
And many of those still use tank systems.

For obvious reasons? Our campus was three buildings when I got
there. They built 6 more since then and despite it being a fully gas
serviced and entrenched region, they made all of them all electric.

With nat gas available to use electric to heat water is stupid, if you
have enough usage that the bills are an issue. Stupid is as stupid does.
And if the bills are not an issue, because there just isn't that much
usage, then installing your battery to save a little bit on lower night
electric rates makes no sense either. If it's significant energy usage,
use nat gas.





All it is is you making shit up again. You stink, boy.



It's
a lot easier to get the required amount of energy from gas than it
is from electric and gas is cheaper.


No shit, you retarded fuck. My solution was for those currently
using electric HWOD systems. Get a clue and grow the fuck up.

but you just said your example facility has nat gas available.
Use nat gas, that's what I do. But then I'm not a dummy.





Go take a look at Home
Depot.

Home depot is not an indutrial facility supplier, dumbfuck.

They carry a variety of on-demand water heaters, both electric
and gas in capacities suitable for small to large restrooms.
It was restrooms you were talking about..... In any even, I suggested
you take a look, because you claimed that nat gas ones don't exist.






I would use a tank as I feel that hot water should be VERY hot,
and
the USER at the tap dials in the temp wanted.


Make up your mind, first you talk about on-demand systems, now you
say you want a tank.

I would use a tank at my home. My suggestion, since you are so
fucking retarded that you cannot even keep up, was about industrial
facilities. Learn to read.

Then why are you switching to talking about home? Why not put a
battery bank in your house too and enjoy those lower night rates
for electric?





And let's add more complexity and scald
people too.

You really are a retarded little piece of shit.

You are not adult enough to ever gain a spot in any facility I
would run. An idiot too stupid to heed being informed that the HOT
water IS HOT has no business working for me.

A very hot water tank is less efficient than one at a
more reasonable temperature,

No, it is not.

Of course it is, the heat loss is proportional to the temperature
difference between the water and the environment. Why do you think
the govt has been telling people to lower their temp, when possible,
to save energy?



The thermal mass is there. Once heated, takes no
more to upkeep than a smaller tank or a lower heat tank.

Wrong, the heat loss is proportional to the temperature difference.
This is just silly. It's like saying it takes as much energy to
maintain a pot of water at 200F as it does at 100F.




The tanks
are quite efficient at that. The thermal mass also means that usage
'shocks' the remainder in the tank less with the colder refill
stream.

I know you have trouble with math, so I'll stop there, since that
singular point alone defeats your bullshit claim 100%.


it's one simple thing people can do
to lower their bills,

You are truly clueless. A family, especially one with children
need VERY hot water to insure sanitization of clothing, dishes,
surfaces, etc.

Oh, BS.

https://www.energy.gov/energysaver/services/do-it-yourself-energy-savings-projects/savings-project-lower-water-heating

Although some manufacturers set water heater thermostats at 140ºF, most households usually only require them to be set at 120ºF, which also slows mineral buildup and corrosion in your water heater and pipes. Water heated at 140ºF also poses a safety hazard—scalding."


I would set it a bit higher, ~130F to reduce chances of legionaires
Disease, but that isn't what I'd call very hot. But feel free to
waste energy and risk scalding.




All they need to is be mindful of it. easy peasy.
Also, less is used at the tap when mixed down that some lame full
tilt lukewarm feed, no cold side required.

Without cold side and with very hot water, you'd get scalded, stupid.





Again, it is a simple caloric math thing. If they are going to
simply supply their houshold with lukewarm water, the the entire
expenditure is a waste.

If all you want, need and use is lukewarm water, then lukewarm water
from the water heater will use the least energy.




You cannot win this. It IS "cheaper, sure.

And just prior you said if you have it set to lukewarm water, then
the entire expenditure is a waste.....




But it is also no longer "hot water". The degrees thing is basic
math too... so get to that remedial course, dipshit.

which I thought was your objective.

HWOD systems provide actual hot water. Firing them from DC is max
efficient,

DC is no more or less efficient than using AC, stupid.




and charging that source at night is cheaper than paying
it out on day rates. Again... math... child.

A bit cheaper, yes. But not enough to make it worthwhile when you
have to pay for the cost of batteries, which don't last forever,
all the install cost. If you want cheaper how water, use nat gas.





Now you
want batteries to heat a tank of water to high temperature.

You seem to have gotten lost. The tank thing is how I would set up
my house, because *I* would not use HWOD if you paid me to. The HWOD
idea is STILL POU installations that would not change. Only how they
get powered and by what means.

Homes use tanks because they take showers, make baths... etc.
Things not done in commercial factory settings.

You can do all that with an on-demand heaters in a house too,
you just have to size them or it correctly. Which is another reason
nat gas is the more popular choice.

Mmmmm.... I understand that in some countries in Europe, hot water
for a shower is not done with a (wasteful) tank source.
It is done with a HWOD system that seems far more efficient than
those doozies being foisted off to US dummies.
The system puts the heater as a part of the pipe almost immediately
before the shower head.

Whether HWOD is more efficient depends on other variables. For example a friend bought a water heater with a heat pump. Yup. So for every nickle you spend heating water with an HWOD system, he is paying around a penny or two. He paid more for the system but will save money in the long run.

--

Rick C.

++-+ Get 2,000 miles of free Supercharging
++-+ Tesla referral code - https://ts.la/richard11209

 

[Rick C]

On Friday, September 27, 2019 at 8:51:43 PM UTC-4, Whoey Louie wrote:

On Friday, September 27, 2019 at 1:26:29 PM UTC-4, Rick C wrote:
On Friday, September 27, 2019 at 12:07:09 PM UTC-4, Whoey Louie wrote:
On Friday, September 27, 2019 at 11:45:31 AM UTC-4, Bill Sloman wrote:
On Friday, September 27, 2019 at 5:39:42 PM UTC+10, John Doe wrote:
whit3rd <whit3rd@gmail.com> wrote:

Whoey Louie <trader4@optonline.net> wrote

Of course no solar company has never "failed us".....

The complete list of faltering or bankrupt green-energy
companies...
Evergreen Solar ($25 million)*
SpectraWatt ($500,000)*
Solyndra ($535 million)*
Beacon Power ($43 million)*
Nevada Geothermal ($98.5 million)
SunPower ($1.2 billion)
First Solar ($1.46 billion)
Babcock and Brown ($178 million)
EnerDel’s subsidiary Ener1 ($118.5 million)*
Amonix ($5.9 million)
Fisker Automotive ($529 million)
Abound Solar ($400 million)*
A123 Systems ($279 million)*
Willard and Kelsey Solar Group ($700,981)*
Johnson Controls ($299 million)
Brightsource ($1.6 billion)
ECOtality ($126.2 million)
Raser Technologies ($33 million)*
Energy Conversion Devices ($13.3 million)*
Mountain Plaza, Inc. ($2 million)*
Olsen’s Crop Service and Olsen’s Mills...($10 million)*
Range Fuels ($80 million)*
Thompson River Power ($6.5 million)*
Stirling Energy Systems ($7 million)*
Azure Dynamics ($5.4 million)*
GreenVolts ($500,000)
Vestas ($50 million)
LG Chem’s subsidiary Compact Power ($151 million)
Nordic Windpower ($16 million)*
Navistar ($39 million)
Satcon ($3 million)*
Konarka Technologies Inc. ($20 million)*
Mascoma Corp. ($100 million)

*Denotes companies that have filed for bankruptcy.

Cost for solar (and wind) generation was driven down to
where coal-fired major power facilities are uncompetitive, which
was an entirely worthwhile goal.

Tell that to Germans. Their dirty coal use has skyrocketed since
giving up nuclear, even though they have massively subsidized
solar and windmills.

They used to subsidise solar and windmills, but don't have to any more.


BS!

https://www.reuters.com/article/us-germany-energy/germany-to-increase-wind-and-solar-power-production-idUSKCN1NZ252

The new plan includes also cutting the subsidy for solar energy production from 11.09 euro cents ($0.1256) per kWh to 8.9 euro cents.


That's 11 cents a kwh SUBSIDY! The total cost here in the NYC area for
electric energy is just ~6 cents, which is typical for much of the USA,
so that Germany has to SUBSIDIZE solar to the tune of 11 cents is a freaking disaster.

Wrong, mostly wrong.

Yes, your facts seem to be mostly wrong.

"(Uniondale, NY—May 31, 2018) - PSEG Long Island today released the Power Supply Charge for June. Effective Friday, the Power Supply Charge will be 10.3085 cents per kilowatt-hour (kWh)."

"in the New York-Newark-Jersey City area in May 2018, the U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics reported"... "Electricity prices averaged 21.0 cents per kilowatt hour (kWh), up from the 20.2 cents per kWh paid in May 2017"

"Residential electricity rates in NY [1]

Residential electricity rates in New York average 17.62¢/kWh, which ranks the state 3rd in the nation."

"The approximate range of residential electricity rates in the U.S. is 8.37¢/kWh to 37.34¢/kWh."

The BS detector is going off and it's pretty loud this time.

I'm confused. It seems like you are the one who is "always wrong".


No, you're the one who doesn't know WTF you're talking about. You tried
to tell us that your $15 monthly charge, which sounds like a meter charge,
covers the cost of energy distribution, ie the grid. Now you're trying
to tell us that electric rates are high. I'm a First Energy
customer in NJ and my latest bill, that I just looked at for you,
shows a rate of 11.6 cents per kwh. That's the total charge, for the
energy and for distribution. I have the bill.

I don't know what to tell you. You seem to be changing your numbers and it looks like you are very confused about what you are paying. Perhaps a neighbor can help you figure it out. Often retirees can help others who have trouble reading their bills. Have you asked anyone for help?

--

Rick C.

++-- Get 2,000 miles of free Supercharging
++-- Tesla referral code - https://ts.la/richard11209

 

[Robert Baer]

Whoey Louie wrote:

On Friday, September 27, 2019 at 12:32:32 PM UTC-4, DecadentLinux...@decadence.org wrote:
TraitorTard4@optonline.net> wrote in
news:156d6937-3d22-4aba-be52-6a3e74187351@googlegroups.com:

On Friday, September 27, 2019 at 8:57:58 AM UTC-4,
DecadentLinux...@decadence.org wrote:
TraitorTard4@optonline.net> wrote in
news:1fb5fabb-e2e2-4fa4-9ddf-233cd61e372c@googlegroups.com:

If you want lower cost
hot water, just use natural gas, which I bet most rest rooms
are already doing.

You are thick skulled, boy. No room in there for actual brain
matter.

You were already told. Most use HWOD.

And they can also use nat gas, stupid. In fact, for on demand, a
lot more use nat gas than use electric, for obvious reasons.

Nope. Most use installations of ELECTRIC HWOD units PROXIMAL to
the point of use.

Gas fired HWOD units are further removed from the use point and are
only in those locations that had gas included in their build. Not
all commercial buildings do, even in areas where it is available.
And many of those still use tank systems.

For obvious reasons? Our campus was three buildings when I got
there. They built 6 more since then and despite it being a fully gas
serviced and entrenched region, they made all of them all electric.

With nat gas available to use electric to heat water is stupid, if you
have enough usage that the bills are an issue. Stupid is as stupid does.
And if the bills are not an issue, because there just isn't that much
usage, then installing your battery to save a little bit on lower night
electric rates makes no sense either. If it's significant energy usage,
use nat gas.





All it is is you making shit up again. You stink, boy.



It's
a lot easier to get the required amount of energy from gas than it
is from electric and gas is cheaper.


No shit, you retarded fuck. My solution was for those currently
using electric HWOD systems. Get a clue and grow the fuck up.

but you just said your example facility has nat gas available.
Use nat gas, that's what I do. But then I'm not a dummy.





Go take a look at Home
Depot.

Home depot is not an indutrial facility supplier, dumbfuck.

They carry a variety of on-demand water heaters, both electric
and gas in capacities suitable for small to large restrooms.
It was restrooms you were talking about..... In any even, I suggested
you take a look, because you claimed that nat gas ones don't exist.






I would use a tank as I feel that hot water should be VERY hot,
and
the USER at the tap dials in the temp wanted.


Make up your mind, first you talk about on-demand systems, now you
say you want a tank.

I would use a tank at my home. My suggestion, since you are so
fucking retarded that you cannot even keep up, was about industrial
facilities. Learn to read.

Then why are you switching to talking about home? Why not put a
battery bank in your house too and enjoy those lower night rates
for electric?





And let's add more complexity and scald
people too.

You really are a retarded little piece of shit.

You are not adult enough to ever gain a spot in any facility I
would run. An idiot too stupid to heed being informed that the HOT
water IS HOT has no business working for me.

A very hot water tank is less efficient than one at a
more reasonable temperature,

No, it is not.

Of course it is, the heat loss is proportional to the temperature
difference between the water and the environment. Why do you think
the govt has been telling people to lower their temp, when possible,
to save energy?



The thermal mass is there. Once heated, takes no
more to upkeep than a smaller tank or a lower heat tank.

Wrong, the heat loss is proportional to the temperature difference.
This is just silly. It's like saying it takes as much energy to
maintain a pot of water at 200F as it does at 100F.




The tanks
are quite efficient at that. The thermal mass also means that usage
'shocks' the remainder in the tank less with the colder refill
stream.

I know you have trouble with math, so I'll stop there, since that
singular point alone defeats your bullshit claim 100%.


it's one simple thing people can do
to lower their bills,

You are truly clueless. A family, especially one with children
need VERY hot water to insure sanitization of clothing, dishes,
surfaces, etc.

Oh, BS.

https://www.energy.gov/energysaver/services/do-it-yourself-energy-savings-projects/savings-project-lower-water-heating

Although some manufacturers set water heater thermostats at 140ºF, most households usually only require them to be set at 120ºF, which also slows mineral buildup and corrosion in your water heater and pipes. Water heated at 140ºF also poses a safety hazard—scalding."


I would set it a bit higher, ~130F to reduce chances of legionaires
Disease, but that isn't what I'd call very hot. But feel free to
waste energy and risk scalding.




All they need to is be mindful of it. easy peasy.
Also, less is used at the tap when mixed down that some lame full
tilt lukewarm feed, no cold side required.

Without cold side and with very hot water, you'd get scalded, stupid.





Again, it is a simple caloric math thing. If they are going to
simply supply their houshold with lukewarm water, the the entire
expenditure is a waste.

If all you want, need and use is lukewarm water, then lukewarm water
from the water heater will use the least energy.




You cannot win this. It IS "cheaper, sure.

And just prior you said if you have it set to lukewarm water, then
the entire expenditure is a waste.....




But it is also no longer "hot water". The degrees thing is basic
math too... so get to that remedial course, dipshit.

which I thought was your objective.

HWOD systems provide actual hot water. Firing them from DC is max
efficient,

DC is no more or less efficient than using AC, stupid.




and charging that source at night is cheaper than paying
it out on day rates. Again... math... child.

A bit cheaper, yes. But not enough to make it worthwhile when you
have to pay for the cost of batteries, which don't last forever,
all the install cost. If you want cheaper how water, use nat gas.





Now you
want batteries to heat a tank of water to high temperature.

You seem to have gotten lost. The tank thing is how I would set up
my house, because *I* would not use HWOD if you paid me to. The HWOD
idea is STILL POU installations that would not change. Only how they
get powered and by what means.

Homes use tanks because they take showers, make baths... etc.
Things not done in commercial factory settings.

You can do all that with an on-demand heaters in a house too,
you just have to size them or it correctly. Which is another reason
nat gas is the more popular choice.

Mmmmm.... I understand that in some countries in Europe, hot water
for a shower is not done with a (wasteful) tank source.
It is done with a HWOD system that seems far more efficient than
those doozies being foisted off to US dummies.
The system puts the heater as a part of the pipe almost immediately
before the shower head.

 

[Whoey Louie]

On Friday, September 27, 2019 at 12:32:32 PM UTC-4, DecadentLinux...@decadence.org wrote:

TraitorTard4@optonline.net> wrote in
news:156d6937-3d22-4aba-be52-6a3e74187351@googlegroups.com:

On Friday, September 27, 2019 at 8:57:58 AM UTC-4,
DecadentLinux...@decadence.org wrote:
TraitorTard4@optonline.net> wrote in
news:1fb5fabb-e2e2-4fa4-9ddf-233cd61e372c@googlegroups.com:

If you want lower cost
hot water, just use natural gas, which I bet most rest rooms
are already doing.

You are thick skulled, boy. No room in there for actual brain
matter.

You were already told. Most use HWOD.

And they can also use nat gas, stupid. In fact, for on demand, a
lot more use nat gas than use electric, for obvious reasons.

Nope. Most use installations of ELECTRIC HWOD units PROXIMAL to
the point of use.

Gas fired HWOD units are further removed from the use point and are
only in those locations that had gas included in their build. Not
all commercial buildings do, even in areas where it is available.
And many of those still use tank systems.

For obvious reasons? Our campus was three buildings when I got
there. They built 6 more since then and despite it being a fully gas
serviced and entrenched region, they made all of them all electric.

With nat gas available to use electric to heat water is stupid, if you
have enough usage that the bills are an issue. Stupid is as stupid does.
And if the bills are not an issue, because there just isn't that much
usage, then installing your battery to save a little bit on lower night
electric rates makes no sense either. If it's significant energy usage,
use nat gas.

All it is is you making shit up again. You stink, boy.



It's
a lot easier to get the required amount of energy from gas than it
is from electric and gas is cheaper.


No shit, you retarded fuck. My solution was for those currently
using electric HWOD systems. Get a clue and grow the fuck up.

but you just said your example facility has nat gas available.
Use nat gas, that's what I do. But then I'm not a dummy.

Go take a look at Home
Depot.

Home depot is not an indutrial facility supplier, dumbfuck.

They carry a variety of on-demand water heaters, both electric
and gas in capacities suitable for small to large restrooms.
It was restrooms you were talking about..... In any even, I suggested
you take a look, because you claimed that nat gas ones don't exist.

I would use a tank as I feel that hot water should be VERY hot,
and
the USER at the tap dials in the temp wanted.


Make up your mind, first you talk about on-demand systems, now you
say you want a tank.

I would use a tank at my home. My suggestion, since you are so
fucking retarded that you cannot even keep up, was about industrial
facilities. Learn to read.

Then why are you switching to talking about home? Why not put a
battery bank in your house too and enjoy those lower night rates
for electric?

And let's add more complexity and scald
people too.

You really are a retarded little piece of shit.

You are not adult enough to ever gain a spot in any facility I
would run. An idiot too stupid to heed being informed that the HOT
water IS HOT has no business working for me.

A very hot water tank is less efficient than one at a
more reasonable temperature,

No, it is not.

Of course it is, the heat loss is proportional to the temperature
difference between the water and the environment. Why do you think
the govt has been telling people to lower their temp, when possible,
to save energy?



The thermal mass is there. Once heated, takes no
> more to upkeep than a smaller tank or a lower heat tank.

Wrong, the heat loss is proportional to the temperature difference.
This is just silly. It's like saying it takes as much energy to
maintain a pot of water at 200F as it does at 100F.




The tanks

are quite efficient at that. The thermal mass also means that usage
'shocks' the remainder in the tank less with the colder refill
stream.

I know you have trouble with math, so I'll stop there, since that
singular point alone defeats your bullshit claim 100%.


it's one simple thing people can do
to lower their bills,

You are truly clueless. A family, especially one with children
need VERY hot water to insure sanitization of clothing, dishes,
surfaces, etc.

Oh, BS.

https://www.energy.gov/energysaver/services/do-it-yourself-energy-savings-projects/savings-project-lower-water-heating

Although some manufacturers set water heater thermostats at 140ºF, most households usually only require them to be set at 120ºF, which also slows mineral buildup and corrosion in your water heater and pipes. Water heated at 140ºF also poses a safety hazard—scalding."


I would set it a bit higher, ~130F to reduce chances of legionaires
Disease, but that isn't what I'd call very hot. But feel free to
waste energy and risk scalding.




All they need to is be mindful of it. easy peasy.

Also, less is used at the tap when mixed down that some lame full
tilt lukewarm feed, no cold side required.

Without cold side and with very hot water, you'd get scalded, stupid.

Again, it is a simple caloric math thing. If they are going to
simply supply their houshold with lukewarm water, the the entire
expenditure is a waste.

If all you want, need and use is lukewarm water, then lukewarm water
from the water heater will use the least energy.




>You cannot win this. It IS "cheaper, sure.

And just prior you said if you have it set to lukewarm water, then
the entire expenditure is a waste.....

But it is also no longer "hot water". The degrees thing is basic
math too... so get to that remedial course, dipshit.

which I thought was your objective.

HWOD systems provide actual hot water. Firing them from DC is max
efficient,

DC is no more or less efficient than using AC, stupid.




and charging that source at night is cheaper than paying
> it out on day rates. Again... math... child.

A bit cheaper, yes. But not enough to make it worthwhile when you
have to pay for the cost of batteries, which don't last forever,
all the install cost. If you want cheaper how water, use nat gas.

Now you
want batteries to heat a tank of water to high temperature.

You seem to have gotten lost. The tank thing is how I would set up
my house, because *I* would not use HWOD if you paid me to. The HWOD
idea is STILL POU installations that would not change. Only how they
get powered and by what means.

Homes use tanks because they take showers, make baths... etc.
Things not done in commercial factory settings.

You can do all that with an on-demand heaters in a house too,
you just have to size them or it correctly. Which is another reason
nat gas is the more popular choice.