[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: Wireless transmission of power,
- To: tesla@xxxxxxxxxx
- Subject: Re: Wireless transmission of power,
- From: "Tesla list" <tesla@xxxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Thu, 17 Mar 2005 11:57:46 -0700
- Delivered-to: testla@pupman.com
- Delivered-to: tesla@pupman.com
- Old-return-path: <teslalist@twfpowerelectronics.com>
- Resent-date: Thu, 17 Mar 2005 11:58:47 -0700 (MST)
- Resent-from: tesla@xxxxxxxxxx
- Resent-message-id: <EcwJkB.A.jrD.lNdOCB@poodle>
- Resent-sender: tesla-request@xxxxxxxxxx
Original poster: Ed Phillips <evp@xxxxxxxxxxx>
Ed, Re source of power. It would be the same sources you have now. The
efficiency of the system itself is where the power comes from-- a whole
lot
of our power just goes up in friction and smoke today. We are probably
able
to use only around about 10% of the energy manufactured, if that. That
is
why it is an economy of scale type of thing. The backwoods are still not
fully with civilization. Anon"
OK. I guess that what you are talking about is the efficiency of the
distribution of said power/energy, and you're wrong about that
efficiency. As someone has already pointed out, distribution systems
are designed on economic as well as electrical factors, but are far more
efficient than Tesla's system could possibly be. Providing power to the
back woods costs money (for the transmission lines and their energy
losses).
Ed