|
In article , "Phil Kane"
writes: On 21 Mar 2004 20:58:48 GMT, N2EY wrote: That storm also involved damage that close roads and made simple things like getting fuel for generators very difficult. Was the "Piped" natural gas delivery interrupted? I'm a huge fan of "piped gas" fueled gensets rather than stored propane, CNG, or diesel. It's my understanding that the natural gas kept flowing. But that solution only works if you are close enough to a gas main to make installation of a service practical and affordable, and if the disasters encountered do not disrupt service. In earthquake areas, for example, I doubt you'd ant to depend on underground gas supply for emergencies. SNow and ice storms are a different game. 73 de Jim, N2EY |
In article , Mike Coslo
writes: As long as the cell phones are avaialble, they are obviously the preferred method because anyone so equipped can push 911 and report directly. I think this may be the confusion here also. A cell phone is great for localized small-scale problems. If everyone has one, then of course they will be great for calling 911. An accident happens and likely the next person ther will have a cell phone. One of the best reasons for having one of the otherwise evil little devices. AH, Mike, I see where you're going with this. And I agree! As the scale of problems gets bigger, then they become of less use, their usefulness being inversely proportional to the scale of the problem. Eventually, the cellular concept falls apart because of the massive support structure needed for the instruments use, and that often the same disasters that make emergency comms necessary take out that infrastucture. Even if the infrastructure is largely intact, it can be overwhelmed by the unexpected demand. I recall the pictures from the wildfires in San Diego last year showing people trying to use their cell phones without success. The look on many faces was one of surprise that the things weren't working. Because they'd never encountered that behavior before. 73 de Jim, N2EY |
|
(Steve Robeson, K4CAP) wrote in message . com...
(William) wrote in message . com... (Steve Robeson K4CAP) wrote in message ... Snipped. Here we are four days after I posted the original thread, and so far the only "answer" to the question as to why Brain cannot answer questions about assertions HE made have been a concerted effort by he and Lennie to mount a flood the NG with rhetoric" campaign. Oh well. Brain makes assertions of "fact", then calls those who call his "facts" into question "obnoxious", "nuts" or other perjoratives" that I am sure Lennie is feeding him. Brain Burke...class clown...with no class. Brain likes to make claims and assertions about Amateur Radio or other radio related topics that he can't/won't validate...Worse yet is taht most of those "assertions" are easily disproven. Oh well...that's how he "earned" the playful moniker "Brain". OK. Steve, K4YZ |
N2EY wrote:
In article , "Phil Kane" writes: On 21 Mar 2004 20:58:48 GMT, N2EY wrote: That storm also involved damage that close roads and made simple things like getting fuel for generators very difficult. Was the "Piped" natural gas delivery interrupted? I'm a huge fan of "piped gas" fueled gensets rather than stored propane, CNG, or diesel. It's my understanding that the natural gas kept flowing. But that solution only works if you are close enough to a gas main to make installation of a service practical and affordable, and if the disasters encountered do not disrupt service. In earthquake areas, for example, I doubt you'd ant to depend on underground gas supply for emergencies. SNow and ice storms are a different game. I don't live in an area which is prone to earthquakes. I weighed likely scenarios and noted that in many emergencies, gasoline and diesel fuel are the not always easily obtained. In some instances they are hoarded and the prices can skyrocket. In a prolonged power outage, many station have no power to pump the fuel. My solution was to buy a 3.5 KW gasoline generator and to purchase a kit to convert it to natural gas or propane operation. The generator is a Craftsman with a Briggs and Stratton engine. The conversion kit was only eighty dollars. It cost me another 30 dollars to purchase a high pressure rubber hose with brass pipe fittings on each end to avoid transmitting the vibration of the generator back to the house. This is much cheaper than purchasing a generator specifically made for use with natural gas. A major factor in making my decision is that I pay nothing for natural gas. Dave K8MN |
|
"Steven R. Adell - KF2TI" wrote:
In article , says... N2EY wrote: In article , "Phil Kane" writes: On 21 Mar 2004 20:58:48 GMT, N2EY wrote: That storm also involved damage that close roads and made simple things like getting fuel for generators very difficult. Was the "Piped" natural gas delivery interrupted? I'm a huge fan of "piped gas" fueled gensets rather than stored propane, CNG, or diesel. It's my understanding that the natural gas kept flowing. But that solution only works if you are close enough to a gas main to make installation of a service practical and affordable, and if the disasters encountered do not disrupt service. In earthquake areas, for example, I doubt you'd ant to depend on underground gas supply for emergencies. SNow and ice storms are a different game. I don't live in an area which is prone to earthquakes. I weighed likely scenarios and noted that in many emergencies, gasoline and diesel fuel are the not always easily obtained. In some instances they are hoarded and the prices can skyrocket. In a prolonged power outage, many station have no power to pump the fuel. My solution was to buy a 3.5 KW gasoline generator and to purchase a kit to convert it to natural gas or propane operation. The generator is a Craftsman with a Briggs and Stratton engine. The conversion kit was only eighty dollars. It cost me another 30 dollars to purchase a high pressure rubber hose with brass pipe fittings on each end to avoid transmitting the vibration of the generator back to the house. This is much cheaper than purchasing a generator specifically made for use with natural gas. A major factor in making my decision is that I pay nothing for natural gas. Aren't those 1/8th royalties great. Some folks took royalties and some took free gas, Steve. Whoever owned this place way back, took the free gas though it has a limit of 300,000 cubic feet yearly. We heat the barn through the winter and still have about 120,000 cubic feet left each year. The natural gas generator and the greenhouse lean-to we're putting on the back of the barn will help eat up some of that unused allotment. Now if I could just find a natural gas compressor, I'd work on converting the riding mower... Dave K8MN |
Subject: Why Can't N-ZERO-IMD Validate His Own Claims...?!?!
From: Dave Heil Date: 3/22/2004 2:53 PM Central Standard Time Message-id: Now if I could just find a natural gas compressor, I'd work on converting the riding mower... I know where you can find a natural gas disperser in Ohio, if you need one, Dave... nyuknyuknyuk.... 73 Steve, K4YZ |
N2EY wrote:
In article , Mike Coslo writes: As long as the cell phones are avaialble, they are obviously the preferred method because anyone so equipped can push 911 and report directly. I think this may be the confusion here also. A cell phone is great for localized small-scale problems. If everyone has one, then of course they will be great for calling 911. An accident happens and likely the next person ther will have a cell phone. One of the best reasons for having one of the otherwise evil little devices. AH, Mike, I see where you're going with this. And I agree! As the scale of problems gets bigger, then they become of less use, their usefulness being inversely proportional to the scale of the problem. Eventually, the cellular concept falls apart because of the massive support structure needed for the instruments use, and that often the same disasters that make emergency comms necessary take out that infrastucture. Even if the infrastructure is largely intact, it can be overwhelmed by the unexpected demand. Correct! Which makes it not a likely candidate for emergency services. If it works to let people know you're still alive or need help or whatever, of course you use it. But it is still very much a point to point solution. Which is to say, not a solution for large scale disasters. I recall the pictures from the wildfires in San Diego last year showing people trying to use their cell phones without success. The look on many faces was one of surprise that the things weren't working. Because they'd never encountered that behavior before. Indicative on not knowing how the little things work. No tower or power, no cell. - mike KB3EIA - |
| All times are GMT +1. The time now is 04:25 PM. |
Powered by vBulletin® Copyright ©2000 - 2024, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
RadioBanter.com