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

[Bill Sloman]

On Sunday, September 29, 2019 at 11:20:27 PM UTC+10, Whoey Louie wrote:

On Friday, September 27, 2019 at 4:03:42 PM UTC-4, Rick C 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. 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?

This thread has morphed.

As can be seen from the subject line

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

It was a pretty silly question from John Doe, who didn't like the answers he got - he rarely does.

DL's original proposal was to use banks of storage
batteries to heat water for restrooms in commercial facilities, claiming
that they use electric on-demand water heaters and the batteries would be
charged at night to take advantage of lower rate electricity.

If he actually worked some numbers, I think he's see there is no big
savings.

Trader4 doesn't seem to have ever "worked a number" in his life, and he's certainly not shown his working here. When people ask where he gets his "facts" from, he tells them to use google - not being willing to revel the partisan nature of his sources.

> Storage battery systems aren't cheap

<snipped the usual hand-waving>

I'd bet that you could buy a mighty fine solar collector for less than the
cost of the battery bank and related gear.

Not a good bet, and not all that relevant, if you haven't got a handy outside wall or roof to support your solar collector where the sun can shine on it.

--
Bill Sloman, Sydney

 

Whoey Louie <trader4@optonline.net> wrote in news:2cbd4b68-19d0-4bd4-
a8ed-e35f31294d30@googlegroups.com:

The energy needed to heat hot water from batteries and the battery
capacity required don't depend on whether it's lead acid or not,
they are just the energy required, not how you get it.

The reply was about your "EV" battery, dipshit. It was about *YOUR*
imagined choices.

I know what is required.

And to coin a phrase... It is not how *you* get it, child.

 

Robert Baer <robertbaer@localnet.com> wrote in
news:LGWjF.2843$eW2.1907@fx25.iad:

krw@notreal.com wrote:
On Fri, 27 Sep 2019 18:07:59 +0300, upsidedown@downunder.com
wrote:

On Fri, 27 Sep 2019 12:57:52 +0000 (UTC),
DecadentLinuxUserNumeroUno@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.

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.

Also, it is well known that tank accumulate bio-contaminants.
That
is one reason why a lot of companies went to HWOD.

The bio-contaminents are the reason to keep the hot water pipe
temperatures above 55-65 C.

Colder water in pipes isn't a problem, where it's regularly
flushed out. Warm water in storage tanks is a breeding ground
for all sorts of nasty stuff.

(pant pant ...) could we have a X-ray-ted microscope movie of
them
critters?

<https://www.imdb.com/title/tt0062168/>

 

[Whoey Louie]

On Friday, September 27, 2019 at 9:30:22 PM UTC-4, Rick C wrote:

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?

--

I haven't changed what I said. Let's review. Someone claimed that Germany
is no longer subsidizing solar electric. I provided a cite that shows that
not true, Germany recently reduced their subsidy so that now it's ~11 cents a kwh. I pointed out that in the NYC area, that can be your rate for electric
today, it's the ENTIRE cost! It's what I'm paying. You even posted where
you showed a rate from LI that was similar. If you don't like the NYC area, take most of the USA,
look at their rates for electric and it makes Germany look really, really
bad. The rate most Americans are paying, is just Germany has to subsidize
solar to make it competitive. So, boy those Germans are really fucked.

 

[Whoey Louie]

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.

Why drill so deep? Here they just go 20 to 30M, deep enough to get
good water volume. I can't imagine any slight increase in temperature
by going that deep ever pays back the cost of all the extra depth.

 

[Whoey Louie]

On Saturday, September 28, 2019 at 10:22:16 AM UTC-4, DecadentLinux...@decadence.org wrote:

Whoey Louie <trader4@optonline.net> wrote in news:ec1b1512-ced1-46ae-
b847-723f49a5f68f@googlegroups.com:

and available, space inside restrooms for
a battery bank, not so much.

You're a goddamned retard.

Nobody said anything about batteries in restrooms.

Well, you have to put them somewhere, space doesn't come free, and
existing bathrooms won't have any space. Also makes little sense with
electric solar steadily increasing, which will negate any rate advantage
at night in coming years.

 

[Whoey Louie]

On Saturday, September 28, 2019 at 10:15:45 AM UTC-4, DecadentLinux...@decadence.org wrote:

Rick C <gnuarm.deletethisbit@gmail.com> wrote in news:c38199fc-79b0-
457e-ad0d-9d9b20ddbbee@googlegroups.com:

That is the most expensive and least efficient.

Least efficient?

The heater is INSIDE the water.

With gas, the external coupling of the heat generated by the gas
flame heats it. A lot runs up the sides and out the flue.

Both are quite efficient. But other than cost/price, I would say
that electric wins by better coupling alone.

Not as bad as an ICE on efficiency, but a gas water heater has
quite a bit of heat going up and out that flue.

I am aware of a 'jailhouse boiler' used to make water for coffee.
Two tablespoons separated by rubber bands attached to the 120 VAC,
and inserted into a glass full of water will heat that sucker up
pretty dang fast.

Yes, you probably do have experience with that.

 

Martin Brown <'''newspam'''@nezumi.demon.co.uk> wrote in
news:qmqi8r$128a$1@gioia.aioe.org:

Space and water heating are both more cost effective using gas.

No one argued that. EVER.

I was talking about saving a company money where they already have
under sink POU (POINT OF USE) HWOD units. Those are ALL electrically
fired, and yes, a properly configured unit CAN deliver hot water with
only 1200 watts.

Do you stand there oblivious to the speaker and his words when in a
face to face conversation as well?

Damn! And you are "a teacher"? !???

 

[Martin Brown]

On 27/09/2019 14:14, DecadentLinuxUserNumeroUno@decadence.org wrote:

Martin Brown <'''newspam'''@nezumi.demon.co.uk> wrote in news:qmkv9u
$1qap$1@gioia.aioe.org:


You are nearly an order of magnitude wide of the mark.

No. You, however, seem to think that all HWOD systems are like
those you are familiar with.

Yes. Ones which heats *enough* water to wash hands at a useful
temperature. There is no way that 1.2kW will cut the mustard other than
in one of those tacky little under sink badly lagged tins.

With delta_T = 50 and you get a dribble of 60ml/s in HWOD.

Even a 6kW system only gives you 300ml/s which isn't much.

It takes around 6kW *minimum* to get cold mains water from 10C to a
suitable temperature for a hot water tap.

Heat capacity of water is 4.2kJ/kg and you have to get it from mains
water 10C to 60C so that requires 210kJ/kg for a 1L handwash.

Here... we have huge gas or electric tanks OR small HWOD systems
in place.

I do not see any gas fired HWOD systems here, but that does not
mean I am unaware of them or that they do not exist.

I was talking about locations where electrical means are what they
use. I was talking about saving THEM money.

You talking about gas is what is wide off the mark, bub.

I know they could save electrical costs by using gas. That was not
the discusssion.

Space and water heating are both more cost effective using gas.

--
Regards,
Martin Brown

 

Bill Sloman <bill.sloman@ieee.org> wrote in
news:330d030e-eca7-4e22-b4c3-928bc572f3d4@googlegroups.com:

Not a good bet, and not all that relevant, if you haven't got a
handy outside wall or roof to support your solar collector where
the sun can shine on it.

One building, six restrooms (two genders so 12) and two shower
rooms each, up 24/7/365.

A full roof panel would not provide enough even for the sinks
alone, much less the showers.

Remember. no tank. So 1200 Watt POU units firing off every few
seconds at up to 70 sinks, and a couple showers.

Dat's a lotta juice.

And solar setups with such huge up and down swing as loads nearly
always requires a battery bank for a buffer.

 

<TraitorTard4@optonline.net> wrote in
news:baf8c251-f9bb-42b3-b318-6bf63c0ad652@googlegroups.com:

On Saturday, September 28, 2019 at 10:15:45 AM UTC-4,
DecadentLinux...@decadence.org wrote:
Rick C <gnuarm.deletethisbit@gmail.com> wrote in
news:c38199fc-79b0- 457e-ad0d-9d9b20ddbbee@googlegroups.com:

That is the most expensive and least efficient.

Least efficient?

The heater is INSIDE the water.

With gas, the external coupling of the heat generated by the
gas
flame heats it. A lot runs up the sides and out the flue.

Both are quite efficient. But other than cost/price, I would
say
that electric wins by better coupling alone.

Not as bad as an ICE on efficiency, but a gas water heater has
quite a bit of heat going up and out that flue.

I am aware of a 'jailhouse boiler' used to make water for
coffee.
Two tablespoons separated by rubber bands attached to the 120
VAC, and inserted into a glass full of water will heat that
sucker up pretty dang fast.

Yes, you probably do have experience with that.

No, as it was related to me by a friend, however, I would love to
shove one up your ass and energize it from my Dryer outlet.

Go update your lits, punk.

 

Whoey Louie <trader4@optonline.net> wrote in
news:2e88c1bd-e693-4c61-b59e-64b22b2867d0@googlegroups.com:

If the system lasts long enough. There is a trend in everything
heat pump related that I see, from dehumidifiers (the worst), to
fridges and AC units. In the past they used to last 30 years.
Now you're lucky if you get half of that. With dehumdifiers, they
frequently last just a few years.

WWWWHHHHAAAAAAAAAH!!!

GKY
HOAD
GTFUCYMMWTUC

 

<TraitorTard4@optonline.net> wrote in news:02967b50-b9bc-49e2-82ea-
5c992b488daa@googlegroups.com:

Whoopty Do.

Damn. I got a lead pipe laying around here somewhere.

 

Whoey Louie <trader4@optonline.net> wrote in
news:02967b50-b9bc-49e2-82ea-5c992b488daa@googlegroups.com:

I suppose I should go get one
of those HWOD ones for about $1200 for the unit. Then I can pay a
plumber $2000 to run a new, larger gas line to support it. And
when that heater fails in say 15 years, I can spend another $1200
replacing it, instead of $450. Fortunately I can do math.

Certainly not that much for a POU electric unit. And most certainly
not that much to install it.

Seems you enjoy working with incomplete data sets.

 

Whoey Louie <trader4@optonline.net> wrote in news:d43bd8e0-c344-4a39-
b8d1-f4b06193e543@googlegroups.com:

> IDK where you put a battery bank in a restroom, etc.

YOU are the RETARDED fuck spouting off that as the location for them!
You are a RETARD, motherfucker!

Your head should be shoved into the toilet in a restroom, you
brainless fuck!

 

Whoey Louie <trader4@optonline.net> wrote in
news:3a5bfe2e-0787-47b6-8a24-14390074cb83@googlegroups.com:

Or you could put in solar panels, use that to heat
the water and the electric bill doesn't go to the night rate
electric, it can go to zero.

You were already told. Solar panels cannot provide the need to "go
to zero". You are fucking deluded, BOY.

So the only thing the solar panels could juice at the rate they
produce at would be to add to the BATTERY PACK.

And your problem is that you do not know how to grow the fuck up.

 

[Whoey Louie]

On Sunday, September 29, 2019 at 10:35:19 AM UTC-4, DecadentLinux...@decadence.org wrote:

Whoey Louie <trader4@optonline.net> wrote in news:2cbd4b68-19d0-4bd4-
a8ed-e35f31294d30@googlegroups.com:

Still waiting for any numbers that show any savings after you pay
for all the batteries and installation, maintenance cost.

No, dipshit. What you are doing is still mumbling.

And
that's assuming you have space at a restroom facility

Restroom facility? You are obviously clueless how large corporate
research lab campus building are built, much less plumbed.

They don't have restrooms? What do they have, outhouses?

to house a
battery bank.....

Restrooms house paper towels and toilet tissue. There was no
mention of any bettery banks. Nice try though.

Now you're lying. You proposed using batteries to heat water used
in restrooms. That requires a battery bank and it has to go somewhere....

If you have room for that, you have room
for a tank....

Installation and maintainence... hmmm. First thing to go on a
24/7/365 daily use gas fired tank? The thermocouple and gas line
switch. How often? Pretty friggin often.

Nonsense. And even if you have to replace a thermocouple, they cost
$15. What does a battery bank sufficient to heat water for restrooms
cost?

My system? Plug it in... turn it on.

ROFL. Sure, just plug it in. We're talking about commercial restrooms,
yes? A typical one has many sinks, it's not going to be served with a
plug in tankless, more likely it's going to be served by a tankless that's
direct wired on an appropriate amperage circuit. And after you just "plug
it in", where does your battery bank, of sufficient size to heat water
during the daytime go?

 

[Whoey Louie]

On Sunday, September 29, 2019 at 10:44:14 AM UTC-4, DecadentLinux...@decadence.org wrote:

Whoey Louie <trader4@optonline.net> wrote in news:3a5bfe2e-0787-47b6-
8a24-14390074cb83@googlegroups.com:

solar collectors can certainly
deliver that most of the time, greatly reducing the electric used
for
water heating.

Learn to read, you retarded fuck.

*I* said that it can supplement. You said it would be the sole
source.

No, I said solar water heating would be a more rational solution for supplying
hot water to restrooms than your bank of batteries, which can also only
reduce electric usage cost, not eliminate it.

That is all it can do in some regions, in others, it can bring
one's water closer to the full, needed (near boiling) temp.

You really need to look at modern solar collector technology. And
why would you need "near boiling" temp water for rest rooms? I've
never seen anything anywhere near that come out of a restroom faucet,
for obvious reasons. Above about 130F you can be scalded in seconds.

Wrong, always wrong.



In

others, but not often, it can actually boil the water. With optical
amplification, it can most certain do so and can be used for cooking
as well. Whoopie the fuck doo, boy.

We are not talking about all possibilities here. We are talking
about quick and dirty, guaranteed savings AND the entire nation's
grid segments can relax a bit if everyone got on board, thereby
allowing for the granting of incentives to do so.

The grid impact of your idea would be negligible.

You are talking about replumbing the entire building.

Nice try, punk.

Where does that battery bank go?

 

[Whoey Louie]

On Sunday, September 29, 2019 at 10:46:40 AM UTC-4, DecadentLinux...@decadence.org wrote:

Whoey Louie <trader4@optonline.net> wrote in
news:3a5bfe2e-0787-47b6-8a24-14390074cb83@googlegroups.com:

Or you could put in solar panels, use that to heat
the water and the electric bill doesn't go to the night rate
electric, it can go to zero.


You were already told. Solar panels cannot provide the need to "go
to zero". You are fucking deluded, BOY.

What "go to zero" need? Your batteries are not zero or even close
to zero. Solar could generate all the energy needed for heating water
in rest rooms. It could actually do it realtime most days with the
right size system. And it could do it with zero net with a much
smaller system, by putting the excess to use elsewhere in the building
or putting it into the grid.

So the only thing the solar panels could juice at the rate they
produce at would be to add to the BATTERY PACK.

Say what? A 10KW, 20KW solar array can't supply hot water to wash
your hands for sinks in a restroom? And the beauty of solar, as opposed
to your battery bank, (how big is that sucker and where does it go),
is that then the electric is FREE, not just at the night rate and the
excess is constantly
powering other things in the facility or going into the grid where you
typically get paid for it. It makes the restroom electric bill ZERO.

 

[Whoey Louie]

On Sunday, September 29, 2019 at 10:36:35 AM UTC-4, DecadentLinux...@decadence.org wrote:

Whoey Louie <trader4@optonline.net> wrote in news:3a5bfe2e-0787-47b6-
8a24-14390074cb83@googlegroups.com:

You just need water that's at
comfortable hand washing temperature,

Your fucked in the head opinion. What makes you think that lukewarm
water is sanitary? Much less the system it is drawn from.

What makes you think that water for hand washing has to be at temperatures
capable of sanitizing? That temp would scald your hands, stupid. The purpose
of hand washing is to wash off dirt and bacteria, not sterilize your hands.
People just want it at a comfortable temperature and a warm temp helps
a lot with getting grease off.