Allegro.cc - Online Community

Allegro.cc Forums » Off-Topic Ordeals » 8.8 Earthquake in Japan

This thread is locked; no one can reply to it. rss feed Print
8.8 Earthquake in Japan
type568
Member #8,381
March 2007
avatar

That would end the unclear energy usage :)

Matthew Leverton
Supreme Loser
January 1999
avatar

gnolam said:

Also irrelevant.

You can order a new sarcasm detector from me. I have three left in stock.

Quote:

the lumen values and light bulb equivalence values are grossly inflated

They seem quite right to me. I use 13W bulbs. Maybe you crazy Europeans use 1W bulbs.

Quote:

as they take several minutes to warm up

Mine light up instantly. USA really is #1. :o

Thomas Fjellstrom
Member #476
June 2000
avatar

Yeah, even my old ass CFL bulbs only take a second to turn on. Now, that's a bit different if you're using one outside, and its -20c or so. Then it can take a few minutes for a normal CFL bulb to warm up.

--
Thomas Fjellstrom - [website] - [email] - [Allegro Wiki] - [Allegro TODO]
"If you can't think of a better solution, don't try to make a better solution." -- weapon_S
"The less evidence we have for what we believe is certain, the more violently we defend beliefs against those who don't agree" -- https://twitter.com/neiltyson/status/592870205409353730

OICW
Member #4,069
November 2003
avatar

Some of them aren't even capable of shining outside at temperatures below 0°C. Sure, newer ones are able to start nearly as fast as normal light bulb, but they still don't produce good light spectrum.

And still there are plenty of places where using CFL bulb is infeasible, yet the bureaucrats in Bruxells decided to outlaw lightbulbs.

[My website][CppReference][Pixelate][Allegators worldwide][Who's online]
"Final Fantasy XIV, I feel that anything I could say will be repeating myself, so I'm just gonna express my feelings with a strangled noise from the back of my throat. Graaarghhhh..." - Yahtzee
"Uhm... this is a.cc. Did you honestly think this thread WOULDN'T be derailed and ruined?" - BAF
"You can discuss it, you can dislike it, you can disagree with it, but that's all what you can do with it"

Thomas Fjellstrom
Member #476
June 2000
avatar

I think you can get a full spectrum CFL. Not entirely sure though. I bought myself a couple full spectrum incandescent bulbs recently. They are nice.

--
Thomas Fjellstrom - [website] - [email] - [Allegro Wiki] - [Allegro TODO]
"If you can't think of a better solution, don't try to make a better solution." -- weapon_S
"The less evidence we have for what we believe is certain, the more violently we defend beliefs against those who don't agree" -- https://twitter.com/neiltyson/status/592870205409353730

Matthew Leverton
Supreme Loser
January 1999
avatar

If everybody used CFL bulbs, we wouldn't need any of this unclear energy that Arthur speaks of. >:(

Dennis
Member #1,090
July 2003
avatar

If they have so many earthquakes over there, why don't they develop and engineer an earthquake driven power plant? It must be possible to catch, convert, store and use all that energy. Some genius just has to invent it.

type568
Member #8,381
March 2007
avatar

Dennis said:

If they have so many earthquakes over there, why don't they develop and engineer an earthquake driven power plant?

Absolute nonsense, but awesome!

Onewing
Member #6,152
August 2005
avatar

Perhaps I'm being a worry-wart, especially since the article I'm linking even says it's not a big deal, I'm still curious about the safety of my pregnant wife and the child. She drinks a lot of milk. A lot. Anyway, should I be observing closely what's happening to the radiation levels in milk (or when should I get concerned)?

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/42348512/ns/health-health_care/

------------
Solo-Games.org | My Tech Blog: The Digital Helm

Arthur Kalliokoski
Second in Command
February 2005
avatar

IIRC from 30+ years ago, dairy products from the state of Michigan had to be destroyed in the '60's due to fallout from A-bomb tests contaminating the grass the dairy cattle ate with cobalt-90, which substitutes for calcium quite nicely, and you'll have this radioactive element in your bones for a lifetime, but not so slowly that it's harmless. It seems to me that a reactor core that melted its way to a concrete floor isn't nearly so dangerous as a 20 mile wide mushroom cloud thousands of miles closer.

[EDIT]

Quite a few 20 mile wide mushroom clouds.

They all watch too much MSNBC... they get ideas.

Thomas Fjellstrom
Member #476
June 2000
avatar

Onewing said:

Perhaps I'm being a worry-wart, especially since the article I'm linking even says it's not a big deal, I'm still curious about the safety of my pregnant wife and the child. She drinks a lot of milk.

Do you live next to the reactors in japan that are damaged? Or in an area that gets its milk from farmers around the reactors[1]? If your answer to those questions is false, then don't worry. Theres no way your milk will be affected.

References

  1. but then, farmers in the area have already been dumping that milk, so its unlikely it'll be sold anywhere, even if it is safe

--
Thomas Fjellstrom - [website] - [email] - [Allegro Wiki] - [Allegro TODO]
"If you can't think of a better solution, don't try to make a better solution." -- weapon_S
"The less evidence we have for what we believe is certain, the more violently we defend beliefs against those who don't agree" -- https://twitter.com/neiltyson/status/592870205409353730

Onewing
Member #6,152
August 2005
avatar

Gotcha, cool beans. I'm cautious because she seems to flirt with Death every time she gets near anybody somewhat sick. What a whore.

------------
Solo-Games.org | My Tech Blog: The Digital Helm

gnolam
Member #2,030
March 2002
avatar

What Thomas said.
The thing is that radionuclides are detectable in extremely minute quantities. So pretty much whenever radioactive material is released into the atmosphere, it will eventually be picked up by monitoring agencies all over the world (this is a big part of enforcing nuclear weapons testing ban treaties, BTW).
Remember this: you're surrounded by radiation every second of every day of your life. The world is a radioactive place. Everything you eat is, to a certain degree, radioactive. You are even quite radioactive yourself. :)

--
Move to the Democratic People's Republic of Vivendi Universal (formerly known as Sweden) - officially democracy- and privacy-free since 2008-06-18!

Arthur Kalliokoski
Second in Command
February 2005
avatar

I remember when I was in the 8th (?) grade or so, we had a Geiger counter to play with, and it said my left knee was considerably more radioactive than the rest of me. I was a bit worried at the time.

They all watch too much MSNBC... they get ideas.

Tobias Dammers
Member #2,604
August 2002
avatar

OK, light bulbs:

  • In cold areas, using low-energy bulbs is pretty much pointless. The energy you save on light also reduces the heating side effect of the bulb, which means you spend less on lighting and more on heating.

  • CFL bulbs these days light up instantly, but it still takes them a whole friggin' time to reach their full brightness (at least every single one I've seen so far has this problem)

  • CFL bulbs, even the full-spectrum ones, don't produce a continuous spectrum, but one or more sharp lines. In most cases, we don't see this, but combining them with other non-continuous-spectrum devices (such as LED or LED-backlit LCD screens) sometimes yields disgusting results

  • Specifying the light output in the Wattage of an equivalent conventional bulb is silly, but it seems to be the only way to get consumers to buy that stuff. I've even seen things like "13 W = 60 W" printed on the box.

---
Me make music: Triofobie
---
"We need Tobias and his awesome trombone, too." - Johan Halmén

Thomas Fjellstrom
Member #476
June 2000
avatar

In cold areas, using low-energy bulbs is pretty much pointless. The energy you save on light also reduces the heating side effect of the bulb, which means you spend less on lighting and more on heating.

I'm willing to bet that their efficiency is far less than the average furnace or space heater though, so really, its just wasting most of the heat.

--
Thomas Fjellstrom - [website] - [email] - [Allegro Wiki] - [Allegro TODO]
"If you can't think of a better solution, don't try to make a better solution." -- weapon_S
"The less evidence we have for what we believe is certain, the more violently we defend beliefs against those who don't agree" -- https://twitter.com/neiltyson/status/592870205409353730

type568
Member #8,381
March 2007
avatar

Now how a simple heater can be of varying efficiency?

Matthew Leverton
Supreme Loser
January 1999
avatar

The energy you save on light also reduces the heating side effect of the bulb, which means you spend less on lighting and more on heating.

If this point were valid, then you should use lightbulbs (or electricity) as your only source of heat.

Quote:

but it still takes them a whole friggin' time to reach their full brightness

The bulbs here in the great USA apparently are superior. :o

Johan Halmén
Member #1,550
September 2001

You can order a new sarcasm detector from me. I have three left in stock.

Keep them isolated from your posts. Otherwise the warranty is void.

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Years of thorough research have revealed that the red "x" that closes a window, really isn't red, but white on red background.

Years of thorough research have revealed that what people find beautiful about the Mandelbrot set is not the set itself, but all the rest.

Vanneto
Member #8,643
May 2007

In cold areas, using low-energy bulbs is pretty much pointless. The energy you save on light also reduces the heating side effect of the bulb, which means you spend less on lighting and more on heating.

I'm betting the money you save on electricity far outweighs the money you spend on the extra heating.

In capitalist America bank robs you.

Arthur Kalliokoski
Second in Command
February 2005
avatar

For a house using electrical resistance heating, bulbs would be just as efficient, except for disrupting the actual temperatures of particular rooms because of thermostat location. A house with a heat pump would see a rise in electrical usage due to the increased efficiency of heat pumps. For petroleum heated houses, no contest, bulbs are a terrible heating strategy.

They all watch too much MSNBC... they get ideas.

Bob
Free Market Evangelist
September 2000
avatar

I'm willing to bet that their efficiency is far less than the average furnace or space heater though, so really, its just wasting most of the heat.

It's been a long time since thermodynamics, but wouldn't that inefficiency result in heat dissipated (ie: the intended goal)?

--
- Bob
[ -- All my signature links are 404 -- ]

Arthur Kalliokoski
Second in Command
February 2005
avatar

Yes, but the point is that electrical resistance heating is far more expensive than alternatives.

They all watch too much MSNBC... they get ideas.

Thomas Fjellstrom
Member #476
June 2000
avatar

type568 said:

Now how a simple heater can be of varying efficiency?

Efficiency is basically the ratio of input to output in any given system. My forced air furnace, even though its 20+ years old, and probably running at 60% efficiency[1] is probably more efficient than the two 100W light bulbs I use to brighten up my living-room. At the very least, heating with gas here in alberta is far cheaper than using electricity, even with a proper electric heater.

Short story, when my furnace died a couple months ago, I used my oven temporarily a couple times to bring the temperature up to a liveable level before the repair guy came. Turns out it cost me $20-40 for the few hours I had been using it for heat. It managed to slightly warm up my living room, which was nice, but wasn't worth $40. Especially since my furnace can do the same job with $1-4 in fuel.

Bob said:

It's been a long time since thermodynamics, but wouldn't that inefficiency result in heat dissipated (ie: the intended goal)?

How long would it take a 100w lightbulb to heat my livingroom? And how much energy would it take as compared to my forced air natural gas powered furnace?

Note that most light bulbs don't include a circulating mechanism, so its also going to take a long time for the heat to distribute itself in the room.

References

  1. 60% of the energy going in, is actually being turned into useful heat

--
Thomas Fjellstrom - [website] - [email] - [Allegro Wiki] - [Allegro TODO]
"If you can't think of a better solution, don't try to make a better solution." -- weapon_S
"The less evidence we have for what we believe is certain, the more violently we defend beliefs against those who don't agree" -- https://twitter.com/neiltyson/status/592870205409353730

Arthur Kalliokoski
Second in Command
February 2005
avatar

I remember back in 1998, I lived in a house heated by electrical resistance, and left my computer on all the time. This is how the conversation went (in February)

Him: "You're leaving the computer on all the time! You're wasting electricity!"
Me: "The 'wasted energy' is just helping heat the house."
Him: "But it's wasting electricity!"
Me: "The heat helps warm this room, which has the thermostat in it. Therefore, leaving the computer running will cause the thermostat to turn off the heat faster and turn it on slower. The only effect is that the other rooms will be a bit cooler because the computer heat isn't blown into those rooms like the heating ducts do."
Him: "But you're wasting electricity!"

[EDIT]

I suppose the extremely slight amount of electromagnetic radiations emanating from this computer could be considered to be wasted energy. I kept the case on though, and the resultant trapping of the electrical waves would just make the case warmer.

They all watch too much MSNBC... they get ideas.



Go to: