AuthorTopic: The Dimming Bulb  (Read 15505 times)

Offline RE

  • Administrator
  • Chief Cook & Bottlewasher
  • *****
  • Posts: 38901
    • View Profile
Re: 💡 Californians Learning That Solar Panels Don’t Work in Blackouts
« Reply #90 on: October 12, 2019, 07:17:33 AM »
if you had a tesla with a cheap inverter you can run limited loads through the accessory battery. Roughly 800 watts continuous. The main traction battery will keep it charged up... it's a popular hack. Good for fridges devices and maybe a wall mount air con...

According to Google, Teslas operate on either 350V or 375V batts.  Couldn't you use a step-down transformer to bring it down to 12V and then use say a 2000W Inverter with that?

RE
you dont need a step down transformer the car has it built in. It charges up the 12 volt accessory battery off of the 375v traction battery. Its limited to about 800 watts continuous which sounds low but you can do surges off of the 12 volt for starting things. The leaf, bolt, and volt all do the same thing. If you have a small internal combustion car idling it in the driveway is a perfect standby generator using the same tech. Inverter to the 12 volt, idle the car to keep it topped up. Modern car emissions are much lower then portable generators...cheap and it can keep you going for a few days at least

I ran a 2000W inverter off my truck batt.  Why are you limited to 800W off the Tesla batt?

RE
Save As Many As You Can

Offline Nearingsfault

  • Sous Chef
  • ****
  • Posts: 1031
    • View Profile
Re: The Dimming Bulb
« Reply #91 on: October 12, 2019, 07:46:43 AM »
800 watts continuous due to the size of the transformer. Peak power whatever the inverter can handle. For an internal combustion car whatever the alternator is rated for is your continuous...
If its important then try something, fail, disect, learn from it, try again, and again and again until it kills you or you succeed.

Offline RE

  • Administrator
  • Chief Cook & Bottlewasher
  • *****
  • Posts: 38901
    • View Profile
Re: The Dimming Bulb
« Reply #92 on: October 12, 2019, 10:20:11 AM »
800 watts continuous due to the size of the transformer. Peak power whatever the inverter can handle. For an internal combustion car whatever the alternator is rated for is your continuous...

Couldn't you buy a bigger transformer?

RE
Save As Many As You Can

Offline RE

  • Administrator
  • Chief Cook & Bottlewasher
  • *****
  • Posts: 38901
    • View Profile
https://qz.com/1725991/californias-power-outages-show-climate-change-is-coming-for-everyone/

FOR WHOM THE BELL TOLLS
California’s massive power outages show climate change is coming for everyone, even the rich
By Michael J. CorenOctober 12, 2019


Climate-driven disasters are reshaping our world. This week, we’ve seen a preview of what’s coming.

In California, Pacific Gas and Electric (PG&E) cut off power to 500,000 homes in 20 counties (with more to come). More than 2 million people could ultimately be left in the dark. PG&E is testing a new strategy to avoid last year’s killer wildfires, which left 1.8 million acres scorched and more than 100 dead, after its errant power lines touched off massive infernos, the worst toll in state history.

Now, the utility is shutting off the power.

PG&E, accused of neglecting its infrastructure and the flammable vegetation near its power lines, faces forests left tinder-dry by a series of brutal droughts in the past decade. As the climate dries out the West, wildfires are burning hotter, longer, and bigger than before. Overwhelmed, the utility has decided its only strategy is to stop delivery of its essential service to millions.

So far, the urban core of Silicon Valley and San Francisco hasn’t been severely affected (the high-voltage power lines serving tech’s corporate campuses aren’t as likely to start fires), but many areas where the tech elite live—such as Marin, Napa, Sonoma, Santa Clara, and Contra Costa counties—are in the dark.
Screenshot / PG&E / SFGate
PG&E map of expected outage areas (Oct 9).

This week’s move may avoid a fire (and another bankruptcy), but it endangers a huge number of people who will need power to stay cool, preserve medications, refrigerate food, charge phones, or access gas pumps or ATMs, says Irwin Redlener, the director of the National Center for Disaster Preparedness at Columbia University. “If your remedy is cutting off power…you do that at a cost,” he says. “You’re [creating] a significant risk for a large number of people.”

We’re entering a climate era when there are no total solutions. There are only tradeoffs. Disaster relief is becoming less about rebuilding or fixing infrastructure, and more a way to buy time or retreat from the hardest-hit areas. In low-lying and fire-prone areas, communities are already beginning to abandon their homes,  from Alaska to Louisiana. As the cost of defense and rebuilding after climate-driven disasters becomes too costly, exceeding the ability of even insurers and governments to absorb, this will become the new normal. Just defending coastal cities against storm surge with seawalls will cost at least $42 billion by 2040, according to environmental group the Center for Climate Integrity, and as much as $400 billion if including communities with less than 25,000 people.

Poor cities are the most vulnerable to climate change and the least prepared to counter it, according to a climate-impact study of the largest 100 US cities. But the climate crisis won’t spare the wealthy, either, says Redlener. “People with limited means are always going to do worse in initial impacts and also have a much more difficult time in the aftermath,” he notes. “But these [impacts] are essentially inevitable and affect the multimillionaires on Fisher Island [Florida’s richest zip code] and the poor people in Little Havana. There will be some equalization of impact.”

Since 1980, US weather-related disasters have incurred $1.7 trillion in damages. Every year, the average cost has grown. At least 10 weather and climate disaster events costing a billion dollars (or more) have hit the US for five consecutive years, an unprecedented amount. Over this time, the frequency of severe events has nearly tripled, with 3.75 severe events per year on average through the 1980s and 1990s, and rising to 11.6 events annually over the last five years.
NOAA

California is on the front lines. While some people with means will buy batteries and solar panels to endure power outages, or expand the defensive perimeter against fire for their luxury homes, those measures will not stave off what is eventually coming. That story will be repeated across the hardest-hit areas in the West, South Florida, Texas, the mid-Atlantic, New Orleans, or the Mississippi River Valley.
Save As Many As You Can

Offline RE

  • Administrator
  • Chief Cook & Bottlewasher
  • *****
  • Posts: 38901
    • View Profile
💡 PG&E faces sanctions, demands for refunds in wake of planned blackouts
« Reply #94 on: October 15, 2019, 12:48:01 AM »
$250 is a joke.  ::)

RE

https://www.mercurynews.com/2019/10/14/pge-must-pay-for-the-intentional-power-blackouts-gov-newsom/

PG&E faces sanctions, demands for refunds in wake of planned blackouts
Governor rips utility in new letter, says rebates are needed


1 of 14

Without electricity the marquee of the Orinda Theatre remains dark as vehicles make their way down Moraga Way in Orinda, Calif., on Thursday, Oct. 10, 2019. Business continue to be closed due to the recent PG&E shutdown. PG&E began restoring power to Bay Area residents Thursday, taking the first steps in what could be a days-long process to end an outage that left more than 700,000 homes and businesses in the dark. (Jose Carlos Fajardo/Bay Area News Group)
By George Avalos | gavalos@bayareanewsgroup.com | Bay Area News Group
PUBLISHED: October 14, 2019 at 2:28 pm | UPDATED: October 14, 2019 at 9:33 pm

Click here if you’re unable to view the photo gallery on your mobile device.

State officials blasted Pacific Gas & Electric on Monday, with regulators suggesting sanctions and Gov. Gavin Newsom demanding that the disgraced utility pay rebates to customers who lost power during last week’s planned shutdowns, which affected more than 700,000 customers across Northern California and the Bay Area.

“Californians should not pay the price for decades of PG&E’s greed and neglect,” Newson said in a letter to PG&E’s chief executive officer Monday. Calling the utility’s handling of last week’s shutdowns “unacceptable,” Newsom said that the company should provide rebates of $100 to residential customers and $250 to business customers affected by the power outages.

Separately, the California Public Utilities Commission issued a harshly worded letter to PG&E and summoned the CEO, Bill Johnson, and other top executives to an emergency meeting of the regulatory panel that is scheduled for Friday.
Top articles
1/5
READ MORE
As Bay Area recovers from PG&E power shutoff, many
ask: ‘Was this necessary’?

“The scope, scale, complexity, and overall impact to people’s lives, businesses, and the economy of this action cannot be understated,” PUC President Marybel Batjer said in a letter sent to Johnson on Monday. “Failures in execution, combined with the magnitude of this power shutoff event, created an unacceptable situation that should never be repeated.”

The agency issued a series of actions for PG&E, including dramatically shortening the amount of time that people are left without electricity during preemptive shutdowns to 12 hours, down from the utility’s current goal of restoring power within 48 hours after a planned outage.

“At a minimum, this should be the goal for utility-caused outages, such as a planned power shutoff,” Batjer wrote.

In addition, the PUC said PG&E must try harder to avoid large-scale outages, improve communication with the public and local officials, develop a better system for distributing outage maps and work with emergency personnel to make sure PG&E staff are adequately trained.

Roughly 738,000 PG&E customers in 34 counties — including every Bay Area county except San Francisco — were forced to endure intentional outages ordered by the utility last week as a precautionary measure aimed at preventing wildfires amid high winds and dry weather conditions. Because a utility “customer” can include multi-unit dwellings and other places where people share power service, the number of people affected is estimated to reach into the millions.

The decision to preemptively cut off power for such a vast swath of the state followed state investigators’ findings that PG&E equipment caused more than a dozen wildfires in California in 2017 and 2018, including the deadly Camp Fire last October that left 85 people and effectively destroyed the town of Paradise. Confronted with wildfire-related claims in the range of $30 billion, along with numerous other debts, PG&E filed for a $51.69 billion bankruptcy in January, seeking to reorganize its shattered finances.

Amid the unprecedented preemptive shutdowns, executives with PG&E last week acknowledged they had not been “adequately prepared” for the power outages and apologized for the company’s failure to communicate information about the shutdown. Faced with an 800% increase in traffic, the utility’s website buckled and crashed as the shutdowns began last Tuesday, leaving customers and others without a means of determining whether their neighborhoods would be plunged into darkness.

“PG&E’s lack of preparation and poor performance is particularly alarming given that, prior to the event, top executives responded to the scrutiny and questioning of state and local agencies that PG&E could handle a public safety shutoff event,” the governor stated in his letter to Johnson.

In a statement Monday, Johnson said that the company had “received the Governor’s letter and appreciate its intent: to help make the state and all of us safer.” He added that PG&E would issue a formal response to the demands outlined by Newsom and the PUC.

The utilities commission had demanded that PG&E file a formal response by the end of the day on Wednesday to the several demands from the state agency.

“It is critical that PG&E, and all the other utilities in the state, learn from this event and take steps now to ensure that mistakes and operational gaps are not repeated,” Batjer wrote Monday.

Michael Dawson, a Lafayette resident and member of a grassroots group opposing PG&E’s tree removal plans in the town, suggested Monday that the governor’s rebate proposal did not go far enough.

“The rebate seems like a clumsy slap on the wrist,” Dawson said. “Would this rebate apply to people who bought generators and extra supplies but weren’t ultimately turned off by PG&E? Does this come close to reimbursing small businesses?”

In the Montclair neighborhood of Oakland, where residents and businesses were without electricity for more than 24 hours, Montclair Sports owner Tom Revelli said he appreciated the governor’s proposal but reckoned the effort will fall far short.

“In my business, $250 barely covers a part-time staffer and three hours of electricity,” Revelli said.

Ann Kakham, manager of Daughter Thai Kitchen, also located in the Montclair neighborhood, estimated that the restaurant lost out on $20,000 in business, in addition to the cost of spoiled perishables, as a result of the 24-hour power outage.

“I would say $250 would be in the spirit of PG&E, and comparing that to what we lost, it’s nothing,” Kakham said.

In an interview recently with this news organization, former PUC Commissioner Catherine Sandoval issued several harsh grades to PG&E for how the utility handled the planned power shutoffs.

“I would give PG&E an F for communication,” said Sandoval, who also assigned the utility a D-minus for planning and a D for how it has carried out its plans so far in 2019 to mitigate wildfire risks.

Staff writers Rex Crum and Jon Kawamoto contributed to this story.
Save As Many As You Can

 

Related Topics

  Subject / Started by Replies Last post
5 Replies
1340 Views
Last post June 26, 2016, 03:26:29 PM
by K-Dog