60s-70s Laudromat with FL washers and Closed TL Maytags

Automatic Washer - The world's coolest Washing Machines, Dryers and Dishwashers

Help Support :

Wind and Solar- Just Look At Texas

Do you have any idea how much energy it takes to desalinate just one gallon of water? Heat a nation in the middle of winter or cool it in record heat? To refine raw materials? Run the internet? Drive wheels on a car and its AC?

I'll let you in on a secret. There isn't enough wind and solar on earth to do it, let alone the entire nation's grid would trip off line every time a car hit a pole.

If you want a realistic example look at Texas. Daily news alerts about possible rolling blackouts, with forced power outages taking place several times a month. And that is with horribly inefficient quick start natural gas generators adding CO2 and NOx to the atmosphere.

Sadly, the rest of the US is not far behind as every state faces potential rolling blackouts this summer if weather forecasts turn out as predicted. There is also a small chance of a major blackout spanning several states this summer.



Keep in mind all this is taking place in 2022. Once every home and car becomes all electrical, forget about society surviving.
 
Reply #15

My Little Giant with a drain pump has the sluice programs enabled. The printed manual lists their capacity as "max 14.3 lbs (4.0 kg)", while cotton programs' capacity is listed as "max 14.3 lbs (6.5 kg)". So sluice capacity is same as cottons, or 61% of cottons, take your pick.
 
Nobody Wants Nuclear

You're right. After having to deal with designs that did not have containment domes or melted down when cooling pumps failed, I do not not blame opponents.

However, when 300 million people begin experiencing daily blackouts with all government, businesses, infrastructure, institutions, ect adding gas and diesel generators to their buildings to contain the rioting, disease, foot shortages and economic instability arising from unreliable electricity- 300 million people will demand nuclear power with great fervor.

When people realize modern generation 4 nuclear reactors are not capable of sustaining a run away reaction, melting down, producing weapons grade material, overheating, leaking, and will produce minimal waste with zero environmental pollution nuclear will become a no brainier.

This will become the new normal, only to get worse:



The cause:

https://www.utilitydive.com/news/ferc-nerc-power-outage-risks-summer-drought/624111/

CO2 is causing much hotter summers; while wind, solar and batteries in any amount simply can not provide any meaningful amount of power.

It boils down to simple science and economics.
 
Reply #19

Solar and wind help but couldn’t sustain the current population since the demand of electricity goes up and down and can’t make the wind turbines suddenly spin faster and the sun shine brighter to generate more power. Those who are against clean nuclear power simply are falling for what the oil companies and tycoons say since they do everything in their power to convince people nuclear is bad so they can sell more oil and such which means more $$$$ in their pockets. More people have died and have been displaced from the pollution from fossil fuel power plants than every nuclear disaster that’s happened and there’s only been about 5 or 6 through out history.
 
Its the Gas Industry If Anything

What people don't currently realize is when there isn't enough solar and wind, its tens of thousands of gas turbines that make up for it. Further, as coal, oil, and nuclear plants retire, natural gas is taking over for them.

Meaning that while 38% of all electricity comes from natural gas, coal 22%, 19% nuclear, 0.5% oil and 20% renewables, as other generating stations retire gas will rise to at least 80% of all electricity generation.

Because solar and wind rarely match load and can become completely unavailable due to weather, at least 90% of all generations assets will have to be natural gas to cover for a worse case renewable shortage.

Mass battery farms can at most can power the entire nation for hours, not days.

Lastly, you need spinning reverses. Meaning physics will not let you run 90% of the grid on just solar, wind and batteries alone unless you simultaneously have tens of thousands of large spinning masses evenly distributed through out the grid. In simple terms we'll have to leave the rotor and stator of every current power plant in place, just without the prime mover. So half the coast of a nuclear/coal/gas plant will still need to be invested even if we went with 100% solar/wind/battery.

This is because inverter based technology can not output sustained short circuit current, post disturbance dampening, and then the required surge output power to allow for stalled refrigeration compressor to trip their overloads once the fault is cleared.



https://www.eia.gov/tools/faqs/faq.php?id=427&t=3

https://www.eia.gov/energyexplained...y-in-the-us-generation-capacity-and-sales.php

So in the end nothing has or is changing in terms of CO2 emissions.

Also gas is not without its reliability problems either. Most gas in the US is transported via only a handful of major pipelines. Failure of one pipeline can lead to gas shortages in very hot or cold weather. This is already a concern in New England.
 
Why Electricity

If we were to go 100% carbon free, the only viable option would be to limit all combustion sources of energy.

That would have to be done at both the generator and consumer with all electric cars, buses, trains, heat pump furnaces, heat strips, electric dryers, electric water heaters, electric stoves and ranges, electric smelting, electric mining, electric manufacturing, and the like.

NYC and California has already set the ball in motion banning natural gas in new homes and businesses.
 
There are always hidden costs to everything. For example for wind and solar; panels, batteries, etc. have to be produced, resources have to be mined, etc. All these things; batteries, windmills, etc, also have a limited lifespan, requiring disposal. Even if some can be recycled, recycling isn't the perfectly lossless and impactless system idealists like to make it out to be. Virtually all the "green" stuff is being produced in China which doesn't care one bit about "green" energy, other than what they can profit off of it all by selling to "green" westerners. They will continue to pollute more and more providing greenies their pipe dream as their economy booms and western economies decline and collapse.

You can bet even if the West was to start producing their own panels, batteries, etc., and mining the precious minerals and all to do so, the Greenies would throw fits about all the damage they're doing to the environment.

So back to washers, I'll keep my top loader as long as it lasts. Around here water is a renewable resource, it comes from a well and goes into a septic where eventually it goes through its cycle all over again. It's not like in certain west coast states where when you use a gallon of water the universe is forever short that gallon. Physics just work differently on the West Coast, my clothes have never become thread bare from washing in a top loader, they wear out from work and use, but I suspect there are people on the West Coast with threadbare clothes who neither work nor wash.
 
Well this took a quick turn…

@bradforwhite If I may, as a power plant operator I can tell you solar and batteries (even wind) are not the answer. They are part of it, but just one part. For starters (without getting too technical) batteries/solar cannot not maintain grid voltage on their own. Online generators are required to do that (it fluctuates depending on grid load type, inductive vs resistive). In the summer its AC compressors running (inductive) in the winter heater coils (resistive). Those are the major factors for voltage fluctuations that batteries and solar cannot support. And let’s not forget what goes into making batteries (and solar panels), if we’re looking at our carbon footprint (and or offset), its not good.

That aside my plant is Natural gas which is the cleanest of the fossil fuel variety. And in the 20+ years I’ve been in the industry, there have been remarkable improvements in emissions and efficiency. I fully expect that continue over the decades. However, Nuclear is our best short-term bet to make a major dent in co2 emissions. It really is hard to beat when done right. And I think I speak for most when I say we all want to protect the planet. Overall, we need a mix of the most efficient technologies to get us closer to a greener power grid. That is until something revolutionary comes along. But at present, sorry to say it’s not solar & batteries.
 
Future power supplies for the US and world

I think the US is on a good course, natural gas will continue to be used in homes especially in the colder parts of the country and natural gas will continue to be used in power plants to generate electricity.

As Vince states large power plants are a necessary part of the power grid. However solar rooftop can do a lot as can wind energy.

I highly doubt a nuclear plant will ever be built at least in my lifetime in the United States it’s simply too expensive there’s no realistic way to get the cost down to be competitive with other sources.

The other major way to solve energy problems is to continue to become more energy efficient in homes and businesses we have just scratched the surface of what can be done to make homes run with less energy, with very little trouble I am living in a home that uses half as much electricity as I did 20 years ago without giving up any comfort or convenience.

My 42 solar panels on the roof also generate a little bit more power than I use on an annual basis.

John
 
Definately will John!

We had a 20 hour power failure here in late August following storms. A few around have standby generators. One house has solar panels on the roof, and they had lights on the entire time, so the batteries must store power gathered during the day. Diversifying energy sources is best.
 
Hey "bradfordwhite" while we're on environmentally friendly power sources, what's wrong with heating with renewable and sustainable wood in a modern efficient and clean-burning wood stove? Saves tons of money if you cut your own wood also. You may even be able to get wood stoves or furnaces that are controlled by your fancy smart phone.

It's preferable to sleeping with grizzly bears to keep warm!

:)

(https://www.automaticwasher.org/cgi-bin/TD/TD-VIEWTHREAD.cgi?91409_44)
 
Nothing wrong with

using wood or pellets if your community allows it. Some more densley populated areas may not, just like burning leaves or trash.
My in laws had a home in a rural area in the 80's with hot water heat, and also a wood burning stove on the lower level, and a fireplaces for saving the gas used by the boiler. A homeowner must also be aware the creosote from burning coal, wood, or other combustables builds up in chimneys and can start fires. I suspect condomimnium by laws, or a homeowner's association might prohibit it.
A condo garage burned last night and it not only destroyed the condo, but caught the detatched one next door on fire, and melted the vynil siding above the garage accross the street.
 
Yes, it takes some knowledge, care, and responsibility. But I think sometimes people forget that there are other answers and solutions, and that not everyone lives in west or east coast urban areas, and aren't all taught to fall in line and accept the same lifestyles and same beliefs as fact without question. While it's a way of life to me, and has been for people here for generations, I know not everyone has ready access to firewood or the ability to get it or store it. Probably many wouldn't even know how to start a wood fire without using dreaded "fossil" fuels. At least pellet stoves are more automated, but not quite the same.

I'm not sure I'd last much longer living in a condominium or homeowner's association than I would living with grizzly bears, just as I suspect the person who made the generous comparison of me to Grizzly Adams wouldn't last long out here. (Though, perhaps ironiocally, I kind of picture him more as a Timothy Treadwell type.)
 
Reply #28

“I highly doubt a nuclear plant will ever be built at least in my lifetime in the United States it’s simply too expensive there’s no realistic way to get the cost down to compete with other sources.”

I very politely beg to differ. The cost of building nuclear plants many years ago was expensive since most were large power plants built on many acres of land along with all the engineering along with research and development it took to build such plants but since small modular reactors are currently in the development process, we actually might see small nuclear power plants being built since it takes less space and money to build a small nuclear power plant as opposed to the large and clunky nuclear power plants of the past.

This video pretty much explains what a small modular reactor is, I suggest you check it out since it has none on the drawl backs of nuclear power plants from the past.

 
Reply #34

The cost hasn’t been figured out yet but will most certainly cost less to build than a full size nuclear power plant which costs a lot to build since there’s a lot of engineering as well as complexity in a larger nuclear power plant vs these small modular reactors that have everything contained in a single capsule essentially. The big difference between a traditional nuclear power plant vs small modular reactors is small modular reactors can be built in a factory while a traditional nuclear power plant has to have everything specifically designed for that particular plant and has very few interchangeable parts with other plants etc.
 
Interesting how the past generations have done so much that seemingly can't be done with the workmanship, affordability, time and other constraints today. We can't even seem to maintain the infrastructure they built.

But back in the real world (Wyoming), work has begun on the Natrium Reactor Demonstration project which is to be a nuclear power generation facility: https://www.terrapower.com/natrium-project-update/
 
Back to the OP

It looks as if that may not be a particularly busy laundromat, and maybe the owners are using the drought as an excuse to shut down some of their least profitable machines.

Given that the machines they are shutting down are Maytags they may be broken down the majority of the time anyway, maybe they think that putting signs on them making themselves out to be environmentally conscious is better than constantly having "out of order" signs on them, or having them constantly repaired.
 
No, that doesn't figure.

A front loader holds more than a top loader unless it's overloaded. No big agitator taking up volume in the basket.
A front loader cleans by scrubbing more than rolling the laundry in deep water. Thats why they take longer. They also save power, so that adds profitablility.
The induction motors pause between direction shifts, and just draw lower wattage.
 

Similar threads

W
The Maytag Neptune TL: The Washer that Caused Maytag’s Death
2 3
Replies
44
Views
2K
vacerator
V
S
Maytag Neptune TL FAV9800AWW
Replies
18
Views
717
hvtech42
H
mark_wpduet
Friend Called.. They got a new Maytag TL Washer
2
Replies
33
Views
1K
johnb300m
johnb300m
Renso Brite
FOCA in a TL HE??
Replies
9
Views
295
agiflow
A
J
Old Maytag Help
Replies
9
Views
89
maytag85
maytag85

Latest posts

Back
Top