Loading ...
Sorry, an error occurred while loading the content.

FW: [renewable-energy] Watch this technology...

Expand Messages
  • Alex Kornich
    I believe it is very realistic thinking... Alex Kornich ... From: kirk [mailto:kirk@3rivers.net] Sent: Tuesday, July 03, 2001 08:49 To: Sue & Paul Bixby Cc:
    Message 1 of 9 , Jul 3, 2001
    • 0 Attachment
      I believe it is very realistic thinking...

      Alex Kornich

      -----Original Message-----
      From: kirk [mailto:kirk@...]
      Sent: Tuesday, July 03, 2001 08:49
      To: Sue & Paul Bixby
      Cc: Renewable-Energy
      Subject: RE: [renewable-energy] Watch this technology...


      I think a very good thought for all of us to remember is

      More to be feared than ignorance
      is the illusion of knowledge.

      I spent most of my working life in the persuit of electrons. As a person
      working with electronics
      I had little time to learn mechanical things and had a distrust of them. I
      find people who work
      with mechanical things distrust electrical ones. I suppose it is all
      familiarity.

      Now that I am sort of retired I have had a chance to pursue learning about
      new things, which is
      very interesting. I find mechanical workers measure efficiency differently
      than electrical people do.

      If I say a transformer is 95% efficient I mean 95% of the input power is at
      the output.
      A mechanical discussion does not relate to the total power. Processes have
      theoretical limits.
      Thermal have Carnot and things like turbines have limitations because you
      extract energy from the motion of something.
      You cannot stop that something as it has to go somewhere. So you can extract
      a portion and leave a portion as its transport mechanism.
      I believe the theoretical limit for a wind turbine is 57% but dorn't quote
      me on it. It may have been 67%. My memory is not so super anymore.
      Anyway, when someone says their turbine is 80% efficient it is 80% of the
      57% that is available. Not so good.
      A storage scheme using water pumped to an elevation and then dropped when
      needed is an example. We get .8x.57=.46 on the
      way out and when we put it in storage the motor has loss and the pump has
      loss. Not good at all.

      Batteries are typically 80% efficient. Does that mean you get .8 watt out
      for what you put in? No.
      .8 efficient in charge times .8 efficient in discharge means .64 watt for
      every 1 you put in.
      Then there are the losses in the battery charger and the inverter. Not good.

      I find we use design criteria of a century ago. Initial capitalization is
      the big nut to crack and then ther is familiarity.
      And investment in tooling. So when we want to extract energy from hydro we
      will probably see a pelton wheel installed.
      In wind turbine technology a Pelton wheel is a drag device. The force of the
      water hitting the bucket is reduced to the apparent velocity.
      That is because the bucket is receeding from the high pressure stream. At
      stall you have peak torque but no work because it is not moving.
      So when you plut torque and rpm probably the peak output is at half the
      water velocity. That means half of the energy is discarded.
      Not good. (Getting used to that? Not good?)

      We need to rethink our machines. I saw a recycled air conditioner compressor
      used in a solar Rankine cycle attempt at power generaton.
      When you look at the velocities required due to piston speed and the valving
      losses it becomes apparent why all the available energy was
      used just turning the engine at a few hundred rpm without any external load.
      Plus the engine is a thermal engine and it is constructed of metal, a very
      good thermal conductor.

      Wrong, wrong, wrong.

      We are conducting ourselves under the illusion of knowledge.

      We had best repent while there is time.

      Kirk







      -----Original Message-----
      From: Sue & Paul Bixby [mailto:snp@...]
      Sent: Monday, July 02, 2001 3:40 PM
      To: peter.thomas@...
      Cc: renewable-energy@yahoogroups.com
      Subject: Re: [renewable-energy] Watch this technology...


      Hi Mr. Peter Thomas,

      I love this kind of thinking. Let's just extend it onward toward
      solutions. Suppose that, in "filling the gap" we tie in to an electricity
      grid which itself, is 100% "green" power! Ah! how do we do this, --- I
      mean
      obtain an electric grid that provides 100% green power, --- especially
      since so much of green power needs the "wind to blow" or the "sun to
      shine"!

      By storage, --- of course! By storage of wind, solar, geothermal
      etc. output, --- from installed capacities that exceed demand by such
      margins that will allow capacites stored during the"prosperous" hours to
      fill in all the energy requirements during the "hours of energy
      famine", ---
      as well as "the hours of energy plenty" How on earth do we do this?

      The broad outlines of such a "wholely green energy system" are
      already clear, --- and already in partial use and in spotty use with such
      success as to suggest we need to clearly enunciate the particulars of the
      new "wholely green energy concept". Such a vision demonstrating that "it
      can be done" is a prime requirement for any movement that will get off its
      duff in time to avert the dire consequences, --- yes, avert the
      catastrophes
      which the laws of nature have in store for us!! --- if we fail to utilize
      nature's miraculous gift to Sapiens, his cerebral cortex! --- if we fail
      to
      pass the torch onward to the next Homo species who will have greater
      capacities than our own! --- and whom I am want to name Homo Altruistiens!
      We must be constantly aware that Sapiens is the only species left on the
      Homo genus train! Starting over again would seem a most sober destiny for
      us to design for our primate companions in life! --- and a base betrayal
      of
      nature's trust in our competence, our sporting blood, and our good will
      toward all living creatures!

      Thoughts for such a vision are offered here, below:

      !. Over a period of time phase out all fossil fuel power plant
      operations
      and install no more oil and coal power plants, starting now! Totally
      eliminate federal incentives for fossil fuel plants.

      2. Maximize, via national incentives, the construction of green power
      plants

      3. Allow the construction of natural gas power plants only to the extent
      they are required to make up the difference between maximum demand and the
      total of installed capacities after maximum acceleration of green power
      plant installation.

      4. Immediately start installation of such green power plants from those
      most likely renewable sources as operate all hours, or nearly all hours,
      of
      the day. For example: geothermal, biomass, OTEC, and even tidal.

      5. Immediately start a program of serious energy storage of all sizes, to
      include:

      a. Pumping water to higher elevations for energizing hydro-turbines
      during time of need.

      b. Hydrolyzing water to produce hydrogen for storage and for
      transmission via pipelines to a distributive system feeding fuel cell
      systems for both transport and stationary power plant utilization. This
      means automotive, water transport, rail transport, --- and all other
      transport which may prove feasible with time. It includes subsidies for
      R&D
      of the Fuel cell industry for providing small (home) to large (major power
      plant) fuel cell capabilities.

      c. Everywhere there are concentrations of automotive vehicles, for
      example Post Office, Military, or Municipal transport systems an
      opportunity
      exists to start up, demonstrate and perfect and harness the hydrogen
      energy
      system of the future to the energy needs of our evolving society. Same
      may
      well be true at shipping terminals and at every major nexus of our
      electric
      transmission systems.

      6. Since electric power represents in the world today only 17% of energy
      use, and since green power must be applied everywhere to reduce the CO2
      threat, --- then the urgent needs of the future demand the quick
      development
      not only for present day electric power demand, --- but the storage and
      transport of energy in such form as will serve the user devices of the
      future, --- to include industrial, agricultural, and residential. So when
      one calculates the green power demands of the future let's be reminded to
      multiply present thinking by a factor of 6!!

      Best wishes for success to you, Peter, --- and to all in
      this
      noble group!

      Paul Bixby







      -----Original Message-----
      From: peter.thomas@... <peter.thomas@...>
      To: renewable-energy@yahoogroups.com
      <renetherswable-energy@yahoogroups.com>
      Date: Sunday, July 01, 2001 4:24 AM
      Subject: [renewable-energy] Watch this technology...


      >I think all variable renewable energy systems need energy storage to
      >avoid being accused of using the electricity grid as a 'battery'.
      >
      >By this I mean that (fossil) generators have to fill in the 'gaps'
      >which costs more money than a nice constant load, and the
      >distribution system has to have remain the same capacity as if the
      >distributed generator wasn't there - result, no overall saving at the
      >user level.
      >
      >Here's one...
      >
      >http://groups.yahoo.com/group/electricalenergystorage/files/General/Va
      >nadium.pdf
      >
      >
      >==========================================================
      >THANK YOU FOR PARTICIPATING IN THE RENEWABLE ENERGY LIST.
      >----------------------------------------------------------
      >. Please feel free to send your input to:
      > renewable-energy@yahoogroups.com
      >. Join the list by sending a blank e-mail to:
      > renewable-energy-subscribe@yahoogroups.com
      >. To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
      > renewable-energy-unsubscribe@egroups.com
      >. To view previous messages from the list,
      > subscribe to a daily digest of the list,
      > or stop receiving the list by e-mail
      > (and read it on the Web), go to
      > http://www.yahoogroups.com/list/renewable-energy .
      >. This e-mail discussion list is managed by
      > the American Wind Energy Association:
      > http://www.awea.org
      >----------------------------------------------------------
      >
      >
      >Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
      >
      >
      >



      ==========================================================
      THANK YOU FOR PARTICIPATING IN THE RENEWABLE ENERGY LIST.
      ----------------------------------------------------------
      . Please feel free to send your input to:
      renewable-energy@yahoogroups.com
      . Join the list by sending a blank e-mail to:
      renewable-energy-subscribe@yahoogroups.com
      . To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
      renewable-energy-unsubscribe@egroups.com
      . To view previous messages from the list,
      subscribe to a daily digest of the list,
      or stop receiving the list by e-mail
      (and read it on the Web), go to
      http://www.yahoogroups.com/list/renewable-energy .
      . This e-mail discussion list is managed by
      the American Wind Energy Association:
      http://www.awea.org
      ----------------------------------------------------------


      Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo! Terms of Service.



      ----------------------------------------------------------------------------
      --
      Incoming mail is certified Virus Free.
      Checked by AVG anti-virus system (www.grisoft.com).
      Version: 6.0.262 / Virus Database: 132 - Release Date: 6/12/2001



      ==========================================================
      THANK YOU FOR PARTICIPATING IN THE RENEWABLE ENERGY LIST.
      ----------------------------------------------------------
      . Please feel free to send your input to:
      renewable-energy@yahoogroups.com
      . Join the list by sending a blank e-mail to:
      renewable-energy-subscribe@yahoogroups.com
      . To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
      renewable-energy-unsubscribe@egroups.com
      . To view previous messages from the list,
      subscribe to a daily digest of the list,
      or stop receiving the list by e-mail
      (and read it on the Web), go to
      http://www.yahoogroups.com/list/renewable-energy .
      . This e-mail discussion list is managed by
      the American Wind Energy Association:
      http://www.awea.org
      ----------------------------------------------------------


      Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo! Terms of Service.



      ----------------------------------------------------------------------------
      ----
      Outgoing mail is certified Virus Free.
      Checked by AVG anti-virus system (www.grisoft.com).
      Version: 6.0.262 / Virus Database: 132 - Release Date: 6/12/2001




      [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
    • hugh piggott
      ... ... Oops. a force cannot be reduced to a velocity. ... not so. The energy capture is maximised. You have missed the point of
      Message 2 of 9 , Jul 3, 2001
      • 0 Attachment
        At 10:16 am -0700 3/7/01, Alex Kornich wrote:
        > I believe it is very realistic thinking...
        >
        > Alex Kornich
        >
        >-----Original Message-----
        >From: kirk [mailto:kirk@...]
        <a lot of dubious stuff>
        >In wind turbine technology a Pelton wheel is a drag device. The force of the
        >water hitting the bucket is reduced to the apparent velocity.

        Oops. a force cannot be reduced to a velocity.

        >That is because the bucket is receeding from the high pressure stream. At
        >stall you have peak torque but no work because it is not moving.
        >So when you plut torque and rpm probably the peak output is at half the
        >water velocity. That means half of the energy is discarded.

        not so. The energy capture is maximised. You have missed the point
        of the Pelton. It turns the water around and shoots it back at the
        speed of bucket movement, in other words stops it, and removes all
        the energy. There are losses, but the design is immaculate.

        >Not good. (Getting used to that? Not good?)

        take a closer look. (and what is the message?)

        >
        >We need to rethink our machines.

        OK good idea, but don't underestimate the thinking already there.
        First understand, and then start to criticise it.
        --
        Hugh

        http://www.ScoraigWind.co.uk
      • Alex Kornich
        ... From: hugh piggott [mailto:hugh.piggott@enterprise.net] Sent: Tuesday, July 03, 2001 12:10 To: microhydro@yahoogroups.com Subject: Re: [microhydro] FW:
        Message 3 of 9 , Jul 3, 2001
        • 0 Attachment
          -----Original Message-----
          From: hugh piggott [mailto:hugh.piggott@...]
          Sent: Tuesday, July 03, 2001 12:10
          To: microhydro@yahoogroups.com
          Subject: Re: [microhydro] FW: [renewable-energy] Watch this
          technology...


          At 10:16 am -0700 3/7/01, Alex Kornich wrote:
          > I believe it is very realistic thinking...
          >
          > Alex Kornich
          >
          >-----Original Message-----
          >From: kirk [mailto:kirk@...]
          <a lot of dubious stuff>
          >In wind turbine technology a Pelton wheel is a drag device. The force of
          the
          >water hitting the bucket is reduced to the apparent velocity.

          Oops. a force cannot be reduced to a velocity.

          >That is because the bucket is receeding from the high pressure stream. At
          >stall you have peak torque but no work because it is not moving.
          >So when you plut torque and rpm probably the peak output is at half the
          >water velocity. That means half of the energy is discarded.

          not so. The energy capture is maximised. You have missed the point
          of the Pelton. It turns the water around and shoots it back at the
          speed of bucket movement, in other words stops it, and removes all
          the energy. There are losses, but the design is immaculate.

          >Not good. (Getting used to that? Not good?)

          take a closer look. (and what is the message?)

          >
          >We need to rethink our machines.

          OK good idea, but don't underestimate the thinking already there.
          First understand, and then start to criticise it.


          /* Dear Mr. Piggott,

          Sorry, but I don't understand for whom your comments are directed ?
          Why you don't to invite this man for discussion personally ?
          I forwarded his message to our group as an interesting sample
          (in my opinion at least) of not trivial thinking in the area of our
          professional interest.
          Best regards,
          Alex Kornich */
          --
          Hugh

          http://www.ScoraigWind.co.uk

          NOTE: The advertisements in this email are added by Yahoogroups who provides
          us with free email group services. The microhydro-group does not endorse
          products or support the advertisements in any way.

          More information on micro hydropower at
          http://geocities.com/wim_klunne/hydro

          To unsubscribe: send empty message to microhydro-unsubscribe@...

          Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
        • hugh piggott
          ... I reply to the writer, and also to you if you agree with him. ... I assume he is already on this list but I shall forward my comments now. ... I disagree
          Message 4 of 9 , Jul 3, 2001
          • 0 Attachment
            At 1:39 pm -0700 3/7/01, Alex Kornich wrote:
            >
            > /* Dear Mr. Piggott,
            >
            > Sorry, but I don't understand for whom your comments are directed ?

            I reply to the writer, and also to you if you agree with him.

            > Why you don't to invite this man for discussion personally ?

            I assume he is already on this list but I shall forward my comments now.

            > I forwarded his message to our group as an interesting sample
            > (in my opinion at least) of not trivial thinking in the area of our
            > professional interest.

            I disagree that it is not trivial. I think it is trivial and inaccurate.
            --
            Hugh

            http://www.ScoraigWind.co.uk
          • Brett Aubrey
            ... From: Alex Kornich To: Sent: Tuesday, July 03, 2001 1:39 PM Subject: RE: [microhydro] FW:
            Message 5 of 9 , Jul 4, 2001
            • 0 Attachment
              ----- Original Message -----
              From: "Alex Kornich" <alex.kornich@...>
              To: <microhydro@yahoogroups.com>
              Sent: Tuesday, July 03, 2001 1:39 PM
              Subject: RE: [microhydro] FW: [renewable-energy] Watch this technology...
              > -----Original Message-----
              > From: hugh piggott [mailto:hugh.piggott@...]
              > Sent: Tuesday, July 03, 2001 12:10
              > To: microhydro@yahoogroups.com
              > Subject: Re: [microhydro] FW: [renewable-energy] Watch this
              > [ s n i p]
              >> OK good idea, but don't underestimate the thinking already there.
              >> First understand, and then start to criticise it.
              >
              > /* Dear Mr. Piggott,
              > Sorry, but I don't understand for whom your comments are directed ?
              > Why you don't to invite this man for discussion personally ?
              > I forwarded his message to our group as an interesting sample
              > (in my opinion at least) of not trivial thinking in the area of our
              > professional interest.
              > Best regards,
              > Alex Kornich */

              I believe Mr. Piggot's comments are directed at all of us and I, for one,
              thank him for his time and insight. Sharing this type of dialog is a prime
              purpose of this and all other newgroups, Mr. Kornich. First understand,
              and then start to criticise newsgroups and participation, Mr. kornich.

              I also thank you, Mr. Kornich, for forwarding the initial message, but what
              is not better than getting responses - approving or not - to ideas? It is
              the
              way to further understanding of good ideas and keeping bad ideas in check.
              Regards, Brett Aubrey.

              > --
              > Hugh
            • Alex Kornich
              ... From: Brett Aubrey [mailto:brett.aubrey@home.com] Sent: Wednesday, July 04, 2001 06:32 To: microhydro@yahoogroups.com Subject: Re: [microhydro] FW:
              Message 6 of 9 , Jul 4, 2001
              • 0 Attachment
                -----Original Message-----
                From: Brett Aubrey [mailto:brett.aubrey@...]
                Sent: Wednesday, July 04, 2001 06:32
                To: microhydro@yahoogroups.com
                Subject: Re: [microhydro] FW: [renewable-energy] Watch this
                technology...


                ----- Original Message -----
                From: "Alex Kornich" <alex.kornich@...>
                To: <microhydro@yahoogroups.com>
                Sent: Tuesday, July 03, 2001 1:39 PM
                Subject: RE: [microhydro] FW: [renewable-energy] Watch this technology...
                > -----Original Message-----
                > From: hugh piggott [mailto:hugh.piggott@...]
                > Sent: Tuesday, July 03, 2001 12:10
                > To: microhydro@yahoogroups.com
                > Subject: Re: [microhydro] FW: [renewable-energy] Watch this
                > [ s n i p]
                >> OK good idea, but don't underestimate the thinking already there.
                >> First understand, and then start to criticise it.
                >
                > /* Dear Mr. Piggott,
                > Sorry, but I don't understand for whom your comments are directed ?
                > Why you don't to invite this man for discussion personally ?
                > I forwarded his message to our group as an interesting sample
                > (in my opinion at least) of not trivial thinking in the area of our
                > professional interest.
                > Best regards,
                > Alex Kornich */

                I believe Mr. Piggot's comments are directed at all of us and I, for one,
                thank him for his time and insight. Sharing this type of dialog is a prime
                purpose of this and all other newgroups, Mr. Kornich. First understand,
                and then start to criticise newsgroups and participation, Mr. kornich.

                /* I have understood, Mr.Aubrey. Here is not too much physic. Please,
                re-read my message. There is not any word about "criticise newsgroups
                and participation". My point is to discuss physic, not public relations.
                I am regret really with reference to your reaction.

                Yours,
                Alex Kornich */

                I also thank you, Mr. Kornich, for forwarding the initial message, but what
                is not better than getting responses - approving or not - to ideas? It is
                the
                way to further understanding of good ideas and keeping bad ideas in check.
                Regards, Brett Aubrey.

                > --
                > Hugh



                NOTE: The advertisements in this email are added by Yahoogroups who provides
                us with free email group services. The microhydro-group does not endorse
                products or support the advertisements in any way.

                More information on micro hydropower at
                http://geocities.com/wim_klunne/hydro

                To unsubscribe: send empty message to microhydro-unsubscribe@...

                Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
              • Brett Aubrey
                ... prime ... My humble and abject apologies Mr. Kornich. I could have sworn that your note to which I was responding stated something to the effect of:
                Message 7 of 9 , Jul 4, 2001
                • 0 Attachment
                  > -----Original Message-----
                  > From: Brett Aubrey [mailto:brett.aubrey@...]
                  > Sent: Wednesday, July 04, 2001 06:32
                  > To: microhydro@yahoogroups.com
                  > Subject: Re: [microhydro] FW: [renewable-energy] Watch this
                  > ----- Original Message -----
                  > From: "Alex Kornich" <alex.kornich@...>
                  > ... [snip header]
                  > > -----Original Message-----
                  > > From: hugh piggott [mailto:hugh.piggott@...]
                  > > ... [ s n i p header and content]
                  > >> OK good idea, but don't underestimate the thinking already there.
                  > >> First understand, and then start to criticise it.
                  > > /* Dear Mr. Piggott,
                  > > Sorry, but I don't understand for whom your comments are directed ?
                  > > Why you don't to invite this man for discussion personally ?
                  > > I forwarded his message to our group as an interesting sample
                  > > (in my opinion at least) of not trivial thinking in the area of our
                  > > professional interest. Best regards, Alex Kornich */
                  > I believe Mr. Piggot's comments are directed at all of us and I, for one,
                  > thank him for his time and insight. Sharing this type of dialog is a
                  prime
                  > purpose of this and all other newgroups, Mr. Kornich. First understand,
                  > and then start to criticise newsgroups and participation, Mr. kornich.
                  >
                  > /* I have understood, Mr.Aubrey. Here is not too much physic. Please,
                  > re-read my message.

                  My humble and abject apologies Mr. Kornich. I could have sworn that
                  your note to which I was responding stated something to the effect of:
                  "Sorry, but I don't understand for whom your comments are directed?"
                  But I obviously have erred very badly here.

                  > There is not any word about "criticise newsgroups
                  > and participation". My point is to discuss physic, not public
                  > relations. I am regret really with reference to your reaction.
                  > Yours, Alex Kornich
                  */

                  I suppose that I should have realised that you have very thoroughly
                  understood newsgroups and participation even though you directly
                  state the opposite and question (?) whom these newsgroup-related
                  comments are directed at (or was that a statement?). BTW,
                  Mr. Kornich, my "criticise newsgroups and participation" comment
                  was a somewhat tongue-in-cheek add-on to Mr. Piggott's similar
                  reference. It seemed that both you and the thread originator were
                  being just a tad flip, IMHO. However, I do feel compelled to note
                  that your response to Mr. Piggott's post did NOT, in fact, discuss
                  physics, but rather raised points on newsgroup communication and
                  protocol. Or perhaps I just missed the physics. Finally, you may
                  wish to try "implicit" at: http://www.m-w.com/cgi-bin/dictionary
                  Perhaps we should let the non-physics content of this thread die
                  a well-deserved death(?)

                  Yours in sack-cloth and ashes for taking your statement/question
                  literally. I will endeavor not to do so with any of your future posts.
                  Kindest regards, Brett Aubrey.

                  > I also thank you, Mr. Kornich, for forwarding the initial message, but
                  what
                  > is better than getting responses - approving or not - to ideas? It is the
                  > way to further understanding of good ideas and keeping bad ideas in check.
                  > Regards, Brett Aubrey.
                  > > Hugh
                • Alex Kornich
                  My humble and abject apologies Mr. Kornich. I could have sworn that your note to which I was responding stated something to the effect of: Sorry, but I don t
                  Message 8 of 9 , Jul 4, 2001
                  • 0 Attachment
                    My humble and abject apologies Mr. Kornich. I could have sworn that
                    your note to which I was responding stated something to the effect of:
                    "Sorry, but I don't understand for whom your comments are directed?"
                    But I obviously have erred very badly here.

                    > There is not any word about "criticise newsgroups
                    > and participation". My point is to discuss physic, not public
                    > relations. I am regret really with reference to your reaction.
                    > Yours, Alex Kornich
                    */

                    I suppose that I should have realised that you have very thoroughly
                    understood newsgroups and participation even though you directly
                    state the opposite and question (?) whom these newsgroup-related
                    comments are directed at (or was that a statement?). BTW,
                    Mr. Kornich, my "criticise newsgroups and participation" comment
                    was a somewhat tongue-in-cheek add-on to Mr. Piggott's similar
                    reference. It seemed that both you and the thread originator were
                    being just a tad flip, IMHO. However, I do feel compelled to note
                    that your response to Mr. Piggott's post did NOT, in fact, discuss
                    physics, but rather raised points on newsgroup communication and
                    protocol. Or perhaps I just missed the physics. Finally, you may
                    wish to try "implicit" at: http://www.m-w.com/cgi-bin/dictionary
                    Perhaps we should let the non-physics content of this thread die
                    a well-deserved death(?)

                    Yours in sack-cloth and ashes for taking your statement/question
                    literally. I will endeavor not to do so with any of your future posts.
                    Kindest regards, Brett Aubrey.


                    Dear Mr. Aubrey,

                    Telling the truth, it is difficult for me to make some comment
                    about your analysis. It isn't my "topic", it isn't my interest.
                    Everyone has right for yourselves own opinion and imagination
                    eventually...
                    My point is simple and clear: I am here in microhydro group for
                    discussion some professional things at least interested for me.
                    I am regret really if we are diverted from this course in any cases:
                    public relations, human relations, non relevant questions, etc.
                    So that, having been kept my way, I remain,
                    Yours,
                    Alex Kornich
                  • Denis Vincent
                    STOP ! I m not in the e-group in order to receive mail on personal conflicts ! I m in for professionnal reasons ! ... De : Brett Aubrey
                    Message 9 of 9 , Jul 5, 2001
                    • 0 Attachment
                      STOP !

                      I'm not in the e-group in order to receive mail on personal conflicts !

                      I'm in for professionnal reasons !

                      -----Message d'origine-----
                      De : Brett Aubrey [mailto:brett.aubrey@...]
                      Envoyé : jeudi, 5. juillet 2001 05:39
                      À : microhydro@yahoogroups.com
                      Objet : Re: [microhydro] FW: [renewable-energy] Watch this technology...


                      > -----Original Message-----
                      > From: Brett Aubrey [mailto:brett.aubrey@...]
                      > Sent: Wednesday, July 04, 2001 06:32
                      > To: microhydro@yahoogroups.com
                      > Subject: Re: [microhydro] FW: [renewable-energy] Watch this
                      > ----- Original Message -----
                      > From: "Alex Kornich" <alex.kornich@...>
                      > ... [snip header]
                      > > -----Original Message-----
                      > > From: hugh piggott [mailto:hugh.piggott@...]
                      > > ... [ s n i p header and content]
                      > >> OK good idea, but don't underestimate the thinking already there.
                      > >> First understand, and then start to criticise it.
                      > > /* Dear Mr. Piggott,
                      > > Sorry, but I don't understand for whom your comments are directed ?
                      > > Why you don't to invite this man for discussion personally ?
                      > > I forwarded his message to our group as an interesting sample
                      > > (in my opinion at least) of not trivial thinking in the area of our
                      > > professional interest. Best regards, Alex Kornich */
                      > I believe Mr. Piggot's comments are directed at all of us and I, for one,
                      > thank him for his time and insight. Sharing this type of dialog is a
                      prime
                      > purpose of this and all other newgroups, Mr. Kornich. First understand,
                      > and then start to criticise newsgroups and participation, Mr. kornich.
                      >
                      > /* I have understood, Mr.Aubrey. Here is not too much physic. Please,
                      > re-read my message.

                      My humble and abject apologies Mr. Kornich. I could have sworn that
                      your note to which I was responding stated something to the effect of:
                      "Sorry, but I don't understand for whom your comments are directed?"
                      But I obviously have erred very badly here.

                      > There is not any word about "criticise newsgroups
                      > and participation". My point is to discuss physic, not public
                      > relations. I am regret really with reference to your reaction.
                      > Yours, Alex Kornich
                      */

                      I suppose that I should have realised that you have very thoroughly
                      understood newsgroups and participation even though you directly
                      state the opposite and question (?) whom these newsgroup-related
                      comments are directed at (or was that a statement?). BTW,
                      Mr. Kornich, my "criticise newsgroups and participation" comment
                      was a somewhat tongue-in-cheek add-on to Mr. Piggott's similar
                      reference. It seemed that both you and the thread originator were
                      being just a tad flip, IMHO. However, I do feel compelled to note
                      that your response to Mr. Piggott's post did NOT, in fact, discuss
                      physics, but rather raised points on newsgroup communication and
                      protocol. Or perhaps I just missed the physics. Finally, you may
                      wish to try "implicit" at: http://www.m-w.com/cgi-bin/dictionary
                      Perhaps we should let the non-physics content of this thread die
                      a well-deserved death(?)

                      Yours in sack-cloth and ashes for taking your statement/question
                      literally. I will endeavor not to do so with any of your future posts.
                      Kindest regards, Brett Aubrey.

                      > I also thank you, Mr. Kornich, for forwarding the initial message, but
                      what
                      > is better than getting responses - approving or not - to ideas? It is the
                      > way to further understanding of good ideas and keeping bad ideas in check.
                      > Regards, Brett Aubrey.
                      > > Hugh



                      NOTE: The advertisements in this email are added by Yahoogroups who provides
                      us with free email group services. The microhydro-group does not endorse
                      products or support the advertisements in any way.

                      More information on micro hydropower at
                      http://geocities.com/wim_klunne/hydro

                      To unsubscribe: send empty message to microhydro-unsubscribe@...

                      Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
                    Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.