Posted on 02/22/2008 11:27:17 AM PST by blam
Energy produced by and combined with human activity. Sounds conservative to me. But, what, if a liberal doesn’t feel like like lifting or winding? Gotta get a government employee to come to your house to do the lifting and winding.
don’t laugh, the democrats are trying to figure out how to create “lost revenue” taxes for items which can’t be taxed in the traditional way. Thus this device would have a tax levied on it to offset the fact you DON’t use the electric grid.
Is the storage in those things a supercapacitor instead of a battery?
American ingenuity and innovation.
“Moving a 550 lbs weight 1 foot per second costs about 0.75 KWs”
Actually, “moving” a 550 lb weight is meaningless. On a frictionless surface it would require almost no energy. Do you mean “lifting” it 1 fps, or “accelerating” it at 1 fps/s? Or maybe applying 550 lbs of force over a 1 foot distance, in one second. Work = force * distance. Energy = work / time.
Yes, lifting a 550 lbs weight. Sorry.
FIFTY POUNDS TO FLIP EVERY FOUR HOURS!
It has a lot of aesthetic appeal.
You got that right!
“I’ve always wondered...what’s a Hokie?”
What is a Hokie? The origin of the word “Hokie” has nothing to do with a turkey. It was coined by O. M. Stull (class of 1896), who used it in a spirit yell he wrote for a competition.
Here’s how that competition came to be held. Virginia Tech was founded in 1872 as a land-grant institution and was named Virginia Agricultural and Mechanical College. In 1896, the Virginia General Assembly officially changed the college’s name to Virginia Agricultural and Mechanical College and Polytechnic Institute, a name so long that citizens shortened it in popular usage to VPI. The original college cheer, which made reference to the original name of the institution, was no longer suitable. Thus, a contest was held to select a new spirit yell, and Stull won the $5 top prize for his cheer, now known as Old Hokie:
Hoki, Hoki, Hoki, Hy.
Techs, Techs, V.P.I.
Sola-Rex, Sola-Rah.
Polytechs - Vir-gin-ia.
Rae, Ri, V.P.I.
Later, the phrase “Team! Team! Team!” was added at the end, and an “e” was added to “Hoki.”
Thanks. Good response.
I bet I could plug in a transformer and save the hassle of the fifty pound flip.
You’re right, the math doesn’t add up there. LEDs are efficient, but no so much so that 23 mw of power is going to give you the equivalent light to a 40w incandescant bulb.
[SFX: MASSIVE BONG HIT]
I didn't see at first that the weight was fifty pounds. Will we get credits towards our Universal Health Care for all the weight lifting involved? /s
AT LAST...a CURE for Global Warming.... /s
But the output is measured in lumens, not watts. An incandescent bulb consumes 40W to produce 600 lumens, non-directional ... but a vast amount of that power is used to generate heat.
Current LED technology is somewhere between 30-60 lumen/input watt which can be made directional.
According to this guy, "LEDs with datasheets claiming 150-600 lumens per watt are specifying lumens per watt of light output, not lumens per watt of electrical input."
It sounds like our friend's 600 lumens is referring to the light output, not the power input. I haven't checked your numbers, but your complaint seems legitimate.
To paraphrase an old joke, the Brits would make something just like this lamp if they could only figure out how to make it leak oil.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.