Re: MAE-East still no generator
Original message <199609080429.XAA10713@westie.gi.net> From: Alan Hannan <alan@gi.net> Date: Sep 7, 23:28 Subject: Re: MAE-East still no generator
Howdy,
To stay in the tradition of the NANOG mailing list, I will take this subject a bit off topic. :-)
The common American household and business operates on Alternating Current mainly because of distance.
Over long distances, Alternating Current loses less energy in transferring energy than Direct Current. For proof, imagine the energy actually moving from point a -> point b (as in DC) or moving back and forth in millions of sets between points a and b. (and not moving as far) (as in AC).
The real reason that AC is more efficient to transmit is that transformers work on AC, and that means you can, with little effort, trade amps for volts. Then you get to transmit the power at high voltage, but low current draw. That means thin wires (saves copper) and less resistive loss (saves energy). Are we far enough off topic yet? -matthew kaufman matthew@scruz.net
Howdy, As a few folks have pointed out, my less than eloquent explanation of why AC is more economic than DC over distance is not as accurate as it could be. I could argue what I meant as opposed to what I wrote, but I'd still be a bit off :) Regardless, the point still stands that there's nothing inherently "modern" about AC as opposed to DC. The larger issue is having the appropriate pieces of telephony/routing/switching backed up w/ a reliable supply. Or mischievous hands moving power cables around :) -alan ......... Matthew Kaufman is rumored to have said: ] ] Original message <199609080429.XAA10713@westie.gi.net> ] From: Alan Hannan <alan@gi.net> ] Date: Sep 7, 23:28 ] Subject: Re: MAE-East still no generator ] > ] > ] > Howdy, ] > ] > To stay in the tradition of the NANOG mailing list, I will take ] > this subject a bit off topic. :-) ] > ] > The common American household and business operates on Alternating ] > Current mainly because of distance. ] > ] > Over long distances, Alternating Current loses less energy in ] > transferring energy than Direct Current. For proof, imagine the ] > energy actually moving from point a -> point b (as in DC) or ] > moving back and forth in millions of sets between points a and b. ] > (and not moving as far) (as in AC). ] ] The real reason that AC is more efficient to transmit is that transformers ] work on AC, and that means you can, with little effort, trade amps for volts. ] Then you get to transmit the power at high voltage, but low current draw. ] That means thin wires (saves copper) and less resistive loss (saves energy). ] ] Are we far enough off topic yet? ] ] -matthew kaufman ] matthew@scruz.net ] ] ]
participants (2)
-
Alan Hannan
-
matthew@scruz.net