On Sat, 5 Oct 2002, Mike Miller wrote: > Uhh, I think it's the other way around. DC is more efficient for long > distance, high voltage. I believe that's why the Pacific Intertie is DC and > USSR set up DC nets. DC is more efficient because AC lines radiate an electromagnetic field, just like an antenna does. It takes power to create that field. The problem with DC is it can't be stepped up to high voltages or down to lower voltages with transformers like AC can, so for DC transmission lines the power has to be converted from AC to DC for transmission and then back to AC again at the other end. The conversion process is inefficient, so it doesn't pay off except for very long lines. _ _ __ _ _ _| | | | David M. Brodbeck (N8SRE) Ypsilanti, MI / _` | | | | | | +----------------------------------------------------- | (_| | |_| | | | @ cyberspace.org \__, |\__,_|_|_| "There is something ironic when the developers name |___/ housing development after what they bulldozed to build it, but I think you have to allow some latitude in naming, so that not every street is called "Suburban Drive." -- Jan Wolter |
Please note - During the past 17 years of operation, several gigabytes of
Vanagon mail messages have been archived. Searching the entire collection
will take up to five minutes to complete. Please be patient!
Return to the archives @ gerry.vanagon.com
The vanagon mailing list archives are copyright (c) 1994-2011, and may not be reproduced without the express written permission of the list administrators. Posting messages to this mailing list grants a license to the mailing list administrators to reproduce the message in a compilation, either printed or electronic. All compilations will be not-for-profit, with any excess proceeds going to the Vanagon mailing list.
Any profits from list compilations go exclusively towards the management and operation of the Vanagon mailing list and vanagon mailing list web site.