Renewables: "talking 'bout my generation"

[Deleted User]

Just 2% off my June target, think i'll make in the next 5 days :think:

Oscargrouch

tunnel wrote: »

I assume you'll be hoping the sun comes out today to wash your dirty bedclothes if your posting at those ungodly hours:rotfl:

Give me a break, did not get home from work until 01:30 Tues; started at 08:00 Mon. Needed time to chill..which is more than the red wine needed....:beer:

KevinG

jeepjunkie wrote: »

Just 2% off my June target, think i'll make in the next 5 days

Still 27% off mine. The last week has been awful for June.

[Deleted User]

KevinG wrote: »

Still 27% off mine. The last week has been awful for June.

27% Ouch !

Today is looking good tho

legoman62

Only 1.8 O's yesterday:(
Today is looking a lot better...1.5 O's already:D

mickyduck

KevinG wrote: »

Still 27% off mine. The last week has been awful for June.

Im 20 % off and not even beaten last Junes awful weather despite having a very good first week.

legoman62

EricMears wrote: »

Have just broken through the pvgis forecast under 'old' rules or need 3 more kWh under new rules.

What are the "old" and "new" rules?
I seem to have missed them:D

EricMears

legoman62 wrote: »

What are the "old" and "new" rules?
I seem to have missed them:D

If you get an estimate from the pvgis website today, it will be slightly different to that issued a year or two ago.

Kernel_Sanders

k66 wrote: »

Ha ha....... it was night time rate at about 6p a unit. Off on hols now :j

So, he made three errors (emboldened) in this one post:

Oscargrouch wrote: »

Still trying to work out 5 sec usage of 2kWh. Assuming 12p per kWh, must have a cost of £0.002p.

Yet there has been no acknowledgement at all from him that my calculation was as correct as Zeupeter's later offering. People reading this without the time to waste examining the errors of the inept might may well think that his flippant reply was ridiculing my input.
And talking about input to the thread, is there any reason why this post was deemed unworthy of comment (from anyone)?

Kernel_Sanders wrote: »

Is the IH not drawing the same no. of amps, which equals watts divided by volts? If so, why isn't your IH consuming nearly 1500W? Please don't tell me the transformer itself consumes 700+W (unless this is mostly expended by heat......hmm, builders' transformer warming the bathroom....)

EricMears

Kernel_Sanders wrote: »

Is the IH not drawing the same no. of amps, which equals watts divided by volts? If so, why isn't your IH consuming nearly 1500W? Please don't tell me the transformer itself consumes 700+W (unless this is mostly expended by heat......hmm, builders' transformer warming the bathroom....)

Sorry, I overlooked this posting until it was remarked upon later.

No, the IH does not draw same current !

The parameter about the IH that is fixed is its resistance.

Current drawn is calculated from Voltage divided by Resistance (thanks Herr Ohm)

Power used is calculated from Voltage multiplied by current.

Simple algebra dictates that power is therefore given by voltage-squared divided by resistance and it therefore follows that halving voltage will quarter the power consumption (but plus a small allowance for transformer losses).