Path: ...!weretis.net!feeder8.news.weretis.net!fu-berlin.de!uni-berlin.de!individual.net!not-for-mail
From: Roger Merriman <roger@sarlet.com>
Newsgroups: rec.bicycles.tech
Subject: Re: Suspension losses
Date: 14 Jan 2025 13:03:30 GMT
Lines: 120
Message-ID: <lun5l2FtkfmU1@mid.individual.net>
References: <7ee2ojpq2b75m6gsd5svace02b19qassrk@4ax.com>
 <beh2ojhsarrl8p37i446fenvlm4sa4tac8@4ax.com>
 <vlsfta$a60l$1@dont-email.me>
 <u1e8ojddts9edb9broi62iua1du7b01s8f@4ax.com>
 <vm1soq$1g6ul$2@dont-email.me>
 <4419oj9p6p9ft33ad1c8p9gv1vt73ogtnp@4ax.com>
 <jvb9ojhp5og9bu3pp4s876h2kh88j8ad24@4ax.com>
 <nkd9ojttriut6osfo3e9as9p7mpg2ff2ih@4ax.com>
 <vm363v$14sfp$7@dont-email.me>
 <vm3dfo$1rkhv$1@dont-email.me>
 <67gaojdl7qhg63omrrgnhie2pbhv1ms6eb@4ax.com>
 <vm3k8c$1sl3f$4@dont-email.me>
 <tkraojh9s67ejhrjee0qvi1b644hgk485f@4ax.com>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
X-Trace: individual.net vy4WClmm9r+Z37qbAOz6HQR98ylyo6qZWgYNDrAm1GXzLY7tZN
Cancel-Lock: sha1:OeOxSWDpPUEr5xGNGJYO1YcqNBs= sha1:eYSZ9rwlvllHBMXLqtyFwTLYyfQ= sha256:V3ZsYNu8MkZjbsNKvcsksuIPagul2drSrayuPOz0ckk=
User-Agent: NewsTap/5.5 (iPad)
Bytes: 6614

Wolfgang Strobl <news51@mystrobl.de> wrote:
> Am Mon, 13 Jan 2025 12:58:35 -0500 schrieb Frank Krygowski
> <frkrygow@sbcglobal.net>:
> 
>> On 1/13/2025 12:06 PM, Wolfgang Strobl wrote:
>>> Am Mon, 13 Jan 2025 11:03:03 -0500 schrieb Frank Krygowski
>>> <frkrygow@sbcglobal.net>:
>>> 
>>>> On 1/13/2025 8:57 AM, zen cycle wrote:
>>>>> On 1/13/2025 2:01 AM, Jeff Liebermann wrote:
>>>>>> On Mon, 13 Jan 2025 13:20:04 +0700, John B. <slocombjb@gmail.com>
>>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>> 
>>>>>>> But long before the days of transistors and "circuit boards" my folks
>>>>>>> had an electric blanket... used it all the rest of their lives. Is the
>>>>>>> modern one better?
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> Not really better, but certainly safer.  Electric heaters are all 100%
>>>>>> efficient.  Every watt you shove into the heating wires is turned into
>>>>>> heat.  There's no way to improve on 100% efficiency.
>>>>> 
>>>>> Nothing is 100% efficient
>>>> 
>>>> It's certainly true that 100% of the electricity consumed by an electric
>>>> blanket becomes heat.
>>> 
>>> But that 100% isn't efficiency, it's just a raw conversion rate for
>>> Electricity to heat in an isolated blanket.
>> 
>> ISTM a good definition of efficiency is "Desired output divided by 
>> input." Since the desired output is heat, I think it's 100% efficient.
> 
> "desired output" does some heavy lifting, here.  What about the desired
> input?
> 
> Textbook definitions from a specific context are often quite misleading,
> when used in a different context. Rolf Mantel just gave an example for
> that in <vm38of$1qe41$1@dont-email.me>, there are many more. 
> 
> 
>> 
>>> You, as a person, don't need or consume heat. Somewhat simplified, you
>>> need a certain range of temperatures.  In the ideal case, you don't need
>>> any additional energy, because your body already produces heat. A little
>>> bit of isolation, perhaps provided by that very blanket, might be
>>> sufficient.  
>> 
>> And, I suppose, we could do away with all home heating, and just wear 
>> very heavy clothing all winter. But I don't know of anyone doing that.
> 
> Actually, we added some isolation to our house, last year. The reduced
> energy consumption was quite noticeable and better than we expected. No
> heavy clothing necessary.  It's an old house, unfortunately some
> regulations prohibit doing more or would make it very expensive. Decades
> ago, a former colleague build a house according to current standards
> from that time, heated by a heat pump and geothermics. Compared to the
> quoted 100 % "efficiency" of your heated blanket, that heating is ~750%
> efficient. While riding over the land during in 2021ff, I saw not only
> many new collectors on the roofs, mostly photovoltaic now, people were
> isolating their freestanding houses to such an extent that you would
> hardly believe it if you hadn't seen it.
> 
>> 
>> 
>>> ->
>>> <https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S0301421514002638>
>>> 
>>> "A brighter future? Quantifying the rebound effect in energy efficient
>>> lighting"
>>> 
>>> <https://www.arquiled.com/en/avoiding-the-rebound-effect-when-transitioning-to-led/>
>>> 
>>> "In Portugal, the average amount of light has risen 120% in the last
>>> five years. It is urgent to prevent the energy savings associated with
>>> the transition to LED from being offset by unnecessary lighting"
>> 
>> I don't perceive that to be a serious problem, at least indoors. 
> 
> The difference between the expected and actual efficiency is independent
> of whether the lighting is installed indoors or outdoors.
> 
> But there is indeed another and additional problem caused by too much
> light outside: Both astronomers and wildlife are not happy about the
> increasing light pollution. And, to be honest, I don't like the fact
> that you can hardly see the stars anywhere these days either. 

I find it ranges a lot from dark and clear enough (weather conditions
permitting) to see the shape of the galaxy around my folks place, head up
out of the valley and there is zero visible light but the stars and it’s
quite spectacular hence that area has dark sky places for Tourists and so
on, though that’s generally on lower elevations that are easier to reach.

But can see a few stars even in london and more so once in the royal parks
even if can see the orange glow of the light pollution at the edges!

More commercial areas yes naff all to be seen even have huge lit billboards
near work which blots out frankly all but Venus and the moon! And must
consume many households worth of energy!
> 
> 
>> If the 
>> objective is to expend less energy, it's still been achieved.
> 
> If you are allowed to move the goalpost, the goal is already guaranteed.
> 
>> 
>> I'm not a fan of overly bright headlamps nor outdoor light pollution, 
>> but those seem to be separate issues.
> 
> That is true, but obviously no argument. Light pollution is just another
> detriment of wasting energy by unnecessary lighting.
> 
> 
I do like/need street lights as my balance system does need light to
function if on foot, on the bike I have lights to see with or rather I can
easily flick from low to high if needed. And choose lights that give a wide
beam shape to facilitate my balance systems.

Roger Merriman