Connect with us

The Off-Grid Cabin

Discussion in 'Photovoltaics' started by Steve Spence, Jul 26, 2007.

Scroll to continue with content
  1. Steve Spence

    Steve Spence Guest

    We just finished designing a off-grid solar power system for a friend
    of ours that lives in an off-grid cabin. Designed to power two ceiling
    fans, two compact fluorescent lights, a boombox, portable dvd player
    and a 12v water pump (rainfed cistern) without any generator or fuel
    usage. With an additional panel and battery, a LCD tv & satellite box
    or laptop computer could also be powered. A small wind turbine could
    easily be added as an additional charging source. Check out the design
    at http://www.green-trust.org
     
  2. Steve Spence

    Steve Spence Guest

    The loads are listed below. Run times are based on this particular users
    usage patterns, <40 ah daily. As the user currently lives without
    electricity, and the weather patterns usually run to sunny days without
    extended bad weather, one day storage was all the user required at this
    time. A second battery will be purchased eventually. User has kerosene
    lanterns and gravity fed water as backup.
     
  3. Guest

    On Fri, 27 Jul 2007 19:33:11 -0400, "Steve Spence"

    Steve, do you think that's Ghio posting under a new "curse the
    archives" username? Or is it a bot cleverly <snorf> designed to ask
    Ghio-like questions? :)

    Wayne
     
  4. Steve Spence

    Steve Spence Guest

    It's george, which he has publicly admitted after I unmasked him. I
    recognized his un-style. He's trying to escape all the kill filters
    reasonable folks have set up for him. No worries, I've added this nym as
    well.
     
  5. Steve Spence

    Steve Spence Guest

    She has ordered her setup from http://www.backwoodssolar.com

    It ships to Anguilla at the end of August. Her brother, an electrician from
    France, will be there to hook it all up with our diagram and instructions.
    The most difficult piece will be the programming of the trimetric, as I
    don't speak or write in French, so Francoise will have to translate for him.
    Pictures will eventually arrive, but will take some time considering the
    location. The roof (15'x20') is large enough to collect enough water for her
    and her guests. The cistern is underneath the dwelling.
     
  6. Vaughn Simon

    Vaughn Simon Guest

    Give it up, nobody cares.

    Vaughn
     
  7. Guest

    On Sun, 29 Jul 2007 01:49:16 -0000, wrote:

    <Spence wrote about a daily load of <40Ah, but nitwit Judge Ghio
    refused to accept it and decided to make up his own numbers>
    Typical Ghinius fault invention, obviously you've never measured the
    consumption of a ceiling fan. What makes you imagine they're 100W? I
    have 6 ceiling fans ranging in size from 30" to 60". The smaller ones
    use about 30W on low, and I can imagine someone on a strict energy
    diet using them judiciously. Say, 4 hours total, 60Wh per day, which
    is 10% of what you invented.
    Those things run off C or D cells or tiny wall warts, so your 30W
    guess is ridiculous. Here's a typical model I found in 10 seconds -
    12W.
    http://www.amazon.com/Aiwa-Cassette-Boombox-Digital-CSD-TD901/dp/B000065CE0
    What kind of "consultant" fails to do a simple Google search,
    preferring instead to post yet another bungled number? The rest of
    your idiotic post is just more of the same-old blundering Ghioisms.
    No, it only adds up to that in your bile-addled mind. You're the one
    guessing here, combining your appalling lack of experience with
    exaggerated numbers to reach a BS conclusion.
    No, conclusion #1 is that it's no surprise you couldn't make a living
    in the solar biz. #2 is that somebody who can't help advertising his
    helplessness with words like "Porper", ought to set his occupational
    goals a little lower than "editor". Babysitter perhaps...

    Wayne
     
  8. Guest

    Oops... make that 120Wh, and 20%.

    Wayne
     
  9. Guest

    Hear, hear!
    What he *really* wants is respect, to establish some credibility, and
    to regain his dignity (assuming he ever had any). But he seems bound
    and determined to use his riter scils to guarantee that he gets mocked
    instead. http://www.citlink.net/~wmbjk/tbfduwisdumb.htm
    Goodgawd. Now he's going to try to hypnotize us with his "20 liters
    per fortnight/week" thing again. You bastard! :)

    I submit that it's well proven that he doesn't deserve to be taken at
    his word. So please don't invite him to post numbers unless and until
    he's willing to *prove* that what he writes is credible. What if he
    were to say "OK, sorry about the exaggeration, it's per week"? How
    would we know that version was any more true than the original? It's
    not like his BS is limited to solar, in his "editing" career he only
    got 3 words into his ad before telling his first fib. Short of sending
    someone trusted to his place to take measurements and photos, I can't
    imagine why anyone would believe a word he says about his own project
    or any he claims to have worked on.

    Wayne
     
  10. Vaughn Simon

    Vaughn Simon Guest

    I think I was pretty clear.

    Vaughn
     
  11. Guest

    No, nitwit. An audit is where you *measure* everything. What you do is
    make an estimate and exaggerate its importance by tarting up the name,
    just as you do by using the words "consultant", "designer",
    "specialize", etc.
    D'oh, guess you forgot that you previously wrote that your computer
    used 59W. Must be some kind of big monitor attached...
    http://groups.google.com/group/alt.energy.homepower/msg/9d92fe840802b541
    "The computer, well, used for word processing it uses 59 Watts
    (measured)."

    Anyway, how the hell can you spend 5 hours per day on the computer and
    yet remain so dim? Perhaps you're a whiz at solitaire?
    It's too *large*!? Well, sure, so long as you don't mind starting a
    generator for everything above 600W. Which leads to the obvious
    question - which <snorf> of these previous claims of yours is correct?

    1. "my petrol use is, as it has been for many years, an average of
    twenty liters per fortnight. The bulk of this is for the motorcycle
    which is used for transport to and from school (280 KM a week). The
    rest is used to run the tractor, chainsaw and of course the
    generator."
    http://groups.google.com/group/alt.energy.homepower/msg/15fc1693a2893b42

    2. "There is no spin. Average 20 Litres per week."
    http://groups.google.com/group/alt.energy.homepower/msg/2272764fbfccc27a

    And, which is more important - A. mindlessly exaggerating the need to
    list each and every tiny load, or B. knowing, and being honest about,
    how much fuel it takes to cover the solar system's shortfall?
    Ah yes, the 840Ah bank that can be charged at C/28, and go from low to
    full in three hours. If you refuse to admit and correct BS like that,
    then why bother to hope that readers will believe anything else you
    ever write?
    No. It *was* a PL series. But after you oddly "subverted" its
    multi-stage features, it's not exactly a PL anymore, is it?
    LOL So your "audit" provides for a single AC load - the computer.
    Every other AC is ignored, but must be run off the generator on one of
    5-8 days per year. That's a long time between clothes washings Goober!
    Why wouldn't your laundry (and every other AC load) be part of your
    home's energy "audit"? And no power tools or the frequent welding
    you've claimed on 360 days of the year? Priceless. You've got one hell
    of a nerve criticizing anyone for not providing complete information.
    Your word on any of it isn't worth diddly squat. It's obvious that you
    make up numbers and deceptively leave out details in order to suit
    whatever point you're trying to make at the time.

    Wayne
     
  12. Guest

    It's good that you try, but friendly persuasion has never worked with
    George. He's too dim to recognize good advice, and too pigheaded to
    take advice at all. Of course nothing else works either, but at least
    those who've been ghioed get some satisfaction out of ridiculing him,
    which also serves the purpose of helping novices understand why they
    shouldn't act on Ghio's idiotic recommendations. For example, we
    certainly don't want the newbs disconnecting their batteries for 12
    hours to take hydrometer readings, or disabling their multi-stage
    chargers, or setting float voltage at 2.5V per cell, or using
    appliance labels instead of KaWs, or forgoing wind power because it
    requires a 160' tower, or trying to eliminate pumps in favor of
    solar-suction, or shopping for 300k wire, etc., etc.

    George has missed his calling anyway. Why is he here insisting that a
    project will fail without the posting of a detailed breakdown of a
    half kWh consumption, when he could be benefiting the entire world by
    convincing NASA to loft some ghio-stationary polar-orbit satellites?
    The mind boggles. http://www.citlink.net/~wmbjk/tbfduwisdumb.htm

    Wayne
     
  13. Guest

    LOL So a "power consultant/editor's" professional "audit" multiplies
    the *peak* power by the total hours of use, even though most of the
    time the "dwaw" is far less? Or are you trying to claim that you burn
    DVDs 5 hours per day? No wonder you refuse to recommend Kill-a-Watts,
    since any amateur can use one to measure a computer's consumption
    properly, instead of making a faulty estimate like an idiot
    "consultant".
    Who do you expect to believe that your only AC load is a computer?
    You've already mentioned that you have a washing machine, and that you
    use a generator to run it, despite also claiming that your batteries
    are full most days before noon. If you had a larger inverter, you
    could use that wasted energy for laundry, and could run other normal
    loads without starting a generator.
    No, you already admitted the obvious here
    http://groups.google.com/group/alt.energy.homepower/msg/a6eef1ff9d2015b5
    - that 20 liters per fortnight, which is apparently your idea of ISO
    units <snorf> wasn't even enough for the motorcycle much less anything
    else, and that the total didn't include the fuel you were adding at
    the gas station. What's the point of trying to deceive people, but
    bungling it so badly that the prevarication is undeniable?
    Priceless. They can't both be true, and you've already admitted that
    one was wrong. Same-old ghinius logic.

    No, you're short all the time. The "system" generates <1% of your
    home's energy needs. You need a generator for any load over 600W, all
    of which you forgot to mention in a thread where you're mindlessly
    criticizing someone for posting incomplete information. Can you spell
    hypocrite?
    Perhaps it's true, making it the quintessential needle in a haystack.
    But how can we be sure?
    No, you claimed that the batteries were so low that you ran the
    generator in order to watch some TV, and that after adding a charge of
    <10%, and resting overnight, the batteries were at 12.8V.
    http://groups.google.com/group/alt.energy.homepower/msg/b86dd954d030eb32
    Considering your oft-mentioned 5 days autonomy, a reasonable reader
    might assume that you wouldn't start the generator unless the
    batteries were down to say, 35%. Which means that achieving the full
    charge you described would take about 18 hours at 30A, not 3 hours.
    It's painfully obvious that you exaggerate your stories by adding
    undeniably phony details like the 12.8 rested voltage.
    No, the maker built a 3-stage unit, and charged you for that
    functionality. It would have been a lot simpler and cheaper to make it
    single-stage if they thought that would be as good or better. But your
    battery maker doesn't want you to use a single-stage unit,
    particularly if you "float" at 2.5V per cell, and especially if you do
    that for several hours most days as you've claimed.
    Exactly. Your washer and power tools and every other AC load you
    neglected to "audit", run off a second generator that's MIA from your
    "audit", just like the third one used for welding. I'm sure you'll say
    that since everything other than the computer doesn't run off the
    solar setup, then those loads needn't be included in the audit. Too
    bad you've made a point of previously exaggerating the need to include
    chainsaw consumption etc. in your "audits". But let's extend your
    latest theerie to a home that runs entirely off a generator... its
    "audit" would be one line - zero loads at zero Watts for zero hours.

    Wayne http://www.citlink.net/~wmbjk/tbfduwisdumb.htm
     
  14. Guest

    No, according to my argument you're incompetent, because using peak
    power to measure a computer's energy consumption doesn't make a lick
    of sense. And according to my argument, you're a BS artist for making
    up numbers to suit your position. For example, when the discussion was
    about low-energy computers, yours was only 59W. Now it's 150W "when
    burning DVDs", which apparently makes your 5V optical drive 18A.
    As any one could have guessed, you read the label on the power supply,
    a classic beginner's error. Intelligent folks measure the *energy*
    consumption over a week or whatever, and use those results to plan
    their setup. But that strategy isn't available to a Ghinius who can't
    afford a Whr meter. Aren't you embarrassed to read day in and day out
    about novices using $20 KillAWatts, making them better equipped than a
    "power consultant"?
    LOL The more you write, the more readers will realize how much you do
    without. Do you even have any AC outlets in this "work of art" house?
    Or do you plug the computer into the inverter or an extension cord as
    someone on a camping trip might?
    No kidding? Why do your "audits" frequently mention irrelevant details
    like chainsaw and motorcycle fuel consumption, but neglect to include
    normal household appliances, and the generator time and fuel it takes
    to power them?
    I've always known that 20 liters wasn't the total of your fuel use,
    that you've been making up those numbers, and that one hour of
    generator time and one gallon of fuel would make more energy in a week
    than your "design".
    Yes, I remember the washing machine and power tools are in the 20 year
    old "temporary" shed/workshop, yada yada. Dissemble all you like, but
    most of us consider *all* of our electrical loads when planning a
    power setup, and wouldn't be bragging on a "design" that shifts
    easily-powered loads onto a generator.
    Non-responsive as always. What a weasel.
    If it's "within" parameters, then why did you say that you'd
    "subverted" it, Mr. Riter?
    http://groups.google.com/group/alt.solar.photovoltaic/msg/f04f7370573c583f
    Show us in the manual where it recommends "subverting" the multi-stage
    process. Show us where the battery maker advises a single stage
    process and a 2.5V per cell float voltage.
    You claimed that your batteries are fully charged most days before
    noon. If that were true (not that I believe it for a second), then
    you're "floating" (more like equalizing) your batteries for hours each
    day. I expect you're actually running short most days, that you've set
    the voltage high to avoid losing energy when the controller would
    normally be regulating during absorption, and that the high float
    setting therefore doesn't hurt much except to reveal your helplessness
    on Usenet.
    Most people consider their clothes washing part of their house load.
    Only a "power consultant" would think to leave routine loads out of
    his "audit".
    What you want, and what would generally be considered proper planning,
    are apparently mutually exclusive at Casa Nitwit.

    Wayne
     
  15. Guest

    Notice a pattern? Everyone who responds to your nonsense has a
    negative opinion. Seems like you might save time by summing up the
    list as "everybody". Unless you believe there are reticent Ghinius
    cargo-cult members? Might be time to send them emails asking them to
    pipe up for a change. Let's see, there's gymmybob, johnpbengi,
    solarflare...

    Wayne
     
  16. Guest

    Here's a web site which should help you understand who George
    (Ghinius) Ghio is.
    http://www.citlink.net/~wmbjk/tbfduwisdumb.htm

    George is the inventor of solar-suction, the ghio-stationary
    polar-orbit satellite, and the 300k wire and 150A rheostat methods of
    alternator field control, to name just a few. After posting in these
    newsgroups for some seven years, he appears to know less with each
    passing day, and never fails to impress readers with the thickness of
    his skull.
    Yup, you sure sound like you could be the first member of George's
    cargo cult. It's been a long time coming, congratulations George!

    Now, Mike, please read Anthony's explanation of what a design
    includes, and why Steve's qualifies. If you disagree with Anthony then
    I'm sure somebody here will be happy to set you straight and you'll
    only be a little worse for wear.

    Wayne
     
  17. Guest

    I guess you're not going to say if you have any AC outlets, which I
    take as a "no".
    Sure, and either audit contains different numbers each time you post
    it. One day it's 20 liters per week, the next it's 20 liters per ISO
    fortnight. One day a load is 59W, the next it's 150W. One day you have
    No, your battery maker clearly recommends a float voltage between 13.2
    and 13.44 (pg 10)
    http://www.batteryenergy.com.au/downloads/3.5.6.00 Suncycle Operation and Maintenance Manual.pdf
    15-13.44=.5 .... on Planet Nitwit.
    Agreed, and you've clearly chosen to be an ignorant prevaricator.

    Wayne
     
  18. Guest

    On Thu, 02 Aug 2007 10:54:40 -0000, wrote:

    <a bunch of irrelevant distraction>

    You've written that your batteries are *fully-charged most days before
    noon*. Once a battery is fully-charged, there's no need to discuss
    bulk, absorption, etc. One need only consider float voltage, which
    leads us to - you've also written that you "float" charge your
    batteries at 15V so that "they bubble quite well". Your battery and
    charge controller makers both recommend that once your batteries are
    fully-charged, voltage should be reduced to float at a little over
    13V.

    It was always obvious that you've exaggerated how often and how soon
    your batteries are fully-charged. It's equally obvious that your setup
    suffers from a not-uncommon ailment - days, perhaps weeks without a
    full-recharge while trying to recover a deficit accumulated over
    several days. It's the classic case - relatively large discharge, and
    a system without MPPT dragged down to a lower voltage, thereby
    decreasing production efficiency and further delaying recharge.
    No. If we were talking about bulk or absorption, *then* 15V would only
    be a little high (depending on temperature).
    George Ghio, Apr.18/2006 - "I float my 840Ah batteries at 15 volts".
    http://groups.google.com/group/alt.solar.photovoltaic/msg/0d5d8096959e852f
    Then it's not a float charge, nitwit. Float charging is what you're
    supposed to do *after* absorption is finished. And if you really did
    want to extend absorption time, then you'd change the time setting,
    not raise the voltage.
    If you can't complete a proper absorption cycle (which is generally
    more like 1 or 2 hours, not the 6 you seem to have invented from whole
    cloth), then why do you believe that you have a good "design"? If you
    can't finish the recommended absorption stage, then why "subvert" the
    controller? Set it properly, and if and when it ever finishes an
    absorption cycle, the regulator will reduce to a normal float voltage.
    But it's not the case. You're simply making it up as you go along in a
    transparent attempt to disguise typical Ghinius bungling.
    15V is >1.5V above the battery maker's float recommendation, which is
    why *you* referred to your bungled settings as "subverting" the
    controller. As a trayned ritar, I'm sure you carefully considered the
    meaning of the words "float" and "subvert" when you wrote them.
    Their poorly-written description aside, it *does* describe your setup,
    but only *if* we believe that your batteries are fully-charged most
    days before noon. If you hadn't exaggerated that claim, then you
    wouldn't be in this pickle now.
    Where is the 6 hour cycle you claimed that they recommend?
    That's all pretty typical. They recommend a temperature compensated
    voltage of up to 2.5V per cell *for bulk/absorption*, not float, you
    nitwit. How is that a "power consultant's" controller needs
    "subverting" while many amateurs like me have no trouble completing a
    normal 3-stage routine and accumulating float time most days?

    Wayne
     
  19. Guest

    So true. Here are some great examples of somebody who can't escape his
    BS. http://www.citlink.net/~wmbjk/tbfduwisdumb.htm
    George, George, George. If you didn't lie about your numbers you
    wouldn't even need to be writing your silly defensive posts in the
    first place. Your M.O. is to invent fault, get called a hypocrite for
    your own exagerations and bungling, and then try to cover those up
    with BS. How's that working for you?
    The web page above describes you in terms of your own quotes. It's an
    accurate representation of your blunders, pig headedness, and
    incorrigibly deceptive nature.
    In the case at hand, we know that the daily load is <480Wh. Seems
    simple enough, and ever so much better than phony "audits" corrupted
    by 59/150W computers, 20 liters per week/2weeks fuel consumption, etc.
    Please post a list of these "flash" web sites that "offer the world",
    and quote the promises.
    I think you mean "be a nitwit like me". I predict that you won't get
    many takers, but by all means keep trying. Fresh material for
    http://www.citlink.net/~wmbjk/tbfduwisdumb.htm is appreciated.

    Wayne
     
  20. Guest

    Nobody needs to be like me, they should simply follow their equipment
    maker's recommendations.
    You don't seem to want to follow anyone's recommendations, not even
    your own. How's that solar-suction coming?
    What, no "y'all have a nice now"? Too funny.

    Wayne
     
Ask a Question
Want to reply to this thread or ask your own question?
You'll need to choose a username for the site, which only take a couple of moments (here). After that, you can post your question and our members will help you out.
Electronics Point Logo
Continue to site
Quote of the day

-